Telecom/1996-04-telecom-walnutcreek.iso/back.issues/1992.volume.12/vol12.iss101-150

Text File | 1992-02-19 | 906KB | 22,095 lines

Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa22578;
          1 Feb 92 18:08 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA08010
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 1 Feb 1992 16:27:57 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA23530
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 1 Feb 1992 16:27:36 -0600
Date: Sat, 1 Feb 1992 16:27:36 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #101

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 1 Feb 92 16:27:32 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 101

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Texas Universal Service Fund Surcharge Announcement (S. da Silva)
    Re: Texas Universal Service Fund Surcharge Announcement (David Niebuhr)
    Re: Texas Universal Service Fund Surcharge Announcement (H. Hallikainen)
    Re: Seeking Simple Telephone Line Simulator (Bob Turner)
    Re: Seeking Simple Telephone Line Simulator (Devon Davis)
    Re: 5ESS (R) Sold in Japan (Raymond N. Shwake)
    Re: 5ESS (R) Sold in Japan (Harold Hallikainen)
    Re: Part 68 Help! (Harold Hallikainen)
    Re: Part 68 Help! (Bob Danek)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Stephanie da Silva)
Subject: Re: Texas Universal Service Fund Surcharge Announcement
Organization: Taronga Park BBS
Date: Sat, 1 Feb 1992 09:22:45 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Bob Izenberg) writes:

> My January phone bill from Southwestern Bell contained an explanation
> of what they call the Universal Service Fund Surcharge.
> 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.

> 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.

I have used Relay Texas a number of times.  My sister is deaf and uses
it to call me (as well as anyone else she needs to call) and is
absolutely delighted by it.

One of her biggest frustrations in life has been that she has never
had the convenience of being able to use the phone.  (This is
something I really can't relate to since I'm phone-shy and I'll avoid
talking on the phone at all costs).  But to help you picture her
dilemma better, try an experiment.  Don't use the phone for an entire
day.  Try to get other people to make calls for you -- you'll find it
isn't as a very easy thing to do at all.  Thinking that you are
wasting your money because you'll never use the service is a very
short-sighted attitude.

How it works is she'll use her TDD to call up Relay Texas and that
will get her an operator.  The operator will then call me and act as a
go-between. I'll talk to the operator voice while s/he types to my
sister.  At first I found it rather awkward (and a little slow), but
after a while I got to the point where I now pretty much ignore the
operator and we'll find ourselves talking about personal things and
even having minor arguments -- the same as if two hearing people were
talking on the phone!  One time I put my two year old daughter on the
phone to say "Hi!" which amused all parties involved.  :-)

Is it worth it??  YES!!  I really can't believe that you're
complaining over a measly extra 34 cents.  When I saw that surcharge,
I was surprised that it was so small and I had to pay it three times
since I have three phone lines.  This service is worth that many, many
times over.


Stephanie da Silva      Taronga Park * Houston, Texas
[e-mail]     568-0480   568-1032

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

Date: Sat, 1 Feb 92 08:50:52 -0500
From: [e-mail] (david niebuhr)
Subject: Re: Texas Universal Service Fund


In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Bob
Izenberg) writes:

> 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.)

> 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.

I use the New York Relay Service quite frequently when I have to
communicate with my deaf computer operators at home be it either to
call them in early for a special shift or to take calls from them when
they're going to be absent.

As for the service, we've had it for several years and the cost of the
service is billed monthly in our basic charges so there's no telling
what it costs other than getting a copy of the tariff.

It's not a 900 number disguised as an 800 number at least in New York
since my employer has 900/976/etc. blocked on outgoing calls.

In addition, we have a TDD unit near our consoles and use that also
when communicating with the deaf operators.


Dave Niebuhr      Internet: [e-mail] / Bitnet: niebuhr@bnl
Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, NY 11973  (516)-282-3093

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

Date: Sat, 1 Feb 92 12:17:20 -0800
From: [e-mail] (Harold Hallikainen)
Subject: Re: Texas Universal Service Fund Surcharge Announcement
Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo


> 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

    Never thought I'd use the similar service here in California,
'til I hired a deaf employee.  It was nice to be able to "talk" to him
on the phone.


Harold Hallikainen              [e-mail]
Hallikainen & Friends, Inc.     [e-mail]
141 Suburban Road, Bldg E4      phone [phone] fax [phone]
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-7590  telex 4932775 HFI UI

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

From: [e-mail] (Bob Turner)
Subject: Re: Seeking Simple Telephone Line Simulator
Organization: Univ. of Dayton, School of Engineering
Date: Fri, 31 Jan 92 17:46:13 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Mike
Collinson) writes:

> 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.

Here is a post from last year regarding the same equipment you're
looking for.

Joseph Chan <[e-mail]> wrote:

I have a standalone fax machine and a fax modem (send/receive at 9600
baud) installed on my 286 machine.  There is no RS232 port on the fax
machine.  I have one phone line at home.  Here is what I am trying to
accomplish (i.e. use the fax machine as a scanner):

1. Connect the fax machine to the fax modem thru a regular telephone
cable.

(rest deleted ... describes how he wants to be able to send from the
fax modem to the fax machine, and vice versa, without going via a
regular phone line.)

Paul Cook responded:

This is easy to do with a CO line simulator, like the ones made by
Proctor & Associates.  They simulate regular central office lines,
with dialtone, ringback tone, ringing voltage and everything, and can
be used with any device that will work on a standard phone line.  The
four line unit is the model 49200, and it sells for $475.  It will
work with both rotary and tone dialing, and uses two digit dialing for
each line.

There is a new two line unit that is less expensive, the model 49250.
It sells for $259.95, and uses only tone dialing.  To dial the other
port, just dial the # key, or any seven digit number.

If the fax machines don't have to dial and don't need to hear dial
tone, one could get by really cheap with a ringdown circuit.  The
Proctor model 46220 sells for $179, and as soon as it detects an off
hook condition on one jack, it sends ringing to the other.

With any of these devices one can do anything that one would do with a
standard phone line.  Modems can talk to modems, fax boards can use
fax machines as printers, and phones can talk to other phones.

Proctor & Associates is at 15050 NE 36th St, Redmond, WA 98052-5317.
The phone number is 206-881-7000, and fax is 206-885-3282.  All
prices are FOB Redmond, WA, and Proctor accepts Visa or Master Card.

Paul Cook   Proctor & Associates
Redmond, WA  206-881-7000   [e-mail]

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

Bob Turner                    Network Manager, School of Engineering
513-229-3171                           [e-mail]
Univ. of Dayton, Engineering Computing Center-KL211, Dayton OH 45469

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

From: [e-mail] (Devon Davis)
Subject: Re: Seeking Simple Telephone Line Simulator
Organization: Fort Worth Research and Development Center, Motorola, Inc.
Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1992 21:13:54 GMT


A comany called Teltone produces a telephone line simulator (model TLS3)
for about $540.  The address is:

                Teltone Corporation
        22121-20th Avenue SE
        Bothell, Washington 98021
        U.S.A.
        Phone: [phone]
        or 206-487-1515
        Fax: [phone]

They require a 110 volt power supply.  There are two RJ11 jacks on the
front of the box.  One jack can call the other jack by dialing a two
digit preassigned phone number.  The box is meant to demo or test fax
machines, phones, and modems. I have worked with these boxes for over
a year and consider them a very useful tool.


Devon Davis
The opininions expressed here are not the opinions of any resonable
person.

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

From: media!ka3ovk!raysnec![e-mail] (Raymond N. Shwake)
Subject: Re: 5ESS (R) Sold in Japan
Date: 31 Jan 92 19:05:03 GMT
Organization: A/C International


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (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.

I recall AT&T's efforts in the mid 1980's to sell that first 5ESS
switch.  Reports indicated that those efforts stalled on the
insistence by the Japanese prospect that the full source code driving
the switch be provided.  So, it only took seven years for them to make
their first sale ... There's a story in there somewhere.


uunet!media!ka3ovk!raysnec!shwake    shwake@rsxtech

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

Date: Sat, 1 Feb 92 11:49:38 -0800
From: [e-mail] (Harold Hallikainen)
Subject: Re: 5ESS (R) Sold in Japan
Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo


> Hmm, maybe American switches will sell better than American cars over
> there ...

    Which side is the steering wheel on?

Harold

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

Date: Sat, 1 Feb 92 11:19:34 -0800
From: [e-mail] (Harold Hallikainen)
Subject: Re: Part 68 Help!
Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo


> 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.

    It seems to me that something that provides "adequate"
protection of the telephone network while appearing invisible
(provides loop current, regenerates ring, etc.) would be too
expensive.  Since this is a "high ticket item", how about using an
approved DAA from Cermetek or someone like that.  You can design your
own DAA and put it on the board, along with holes for an already
approved DAA.  Until your DAA is approved, buy the Cermetek ones and
solder them to the board.  When your DAA is approved, solder in your
components and stop buying the Cermetek.  I think that in small
quantities, Cermetek wants $30 to $50 for their DAA.

    This cost of FCC part 68 approval has been part of what
encouraged us to design our latest product around the AT bus.  We can
buy low cost FCC approved modems, fax modems, voice synthesizers, etc.
and just plug them in.  We still have to deal with part 15, but at
least the testing is cut down somewhat.

    In an existing product, we use the Cermetek CH1770 modem
module, which mounts on one of our boards.  This carries the
transferrable part 68 registration, just as the suggested DAA would.

    Something for DAA manufacturers to consider ... how about
including the RJ11 connector?  I'd like to see a DAA where we could
just punch a square hole in the rear panel of our product along with
two holes for mounting screws.  An appropriate number of .025 inch
square pins spaced on a 0.1 x 0.1 inch grid would stick out the bottom
of the thing.  We could then solder the module directly to our board
or run a mass terminated ribbon cable over to our board.

    Also, for more info on FCC part 15 and 68 approval, see the
Compliance Engineering Reference Guide from Compliance Engineering
magazine, 629 Massachusetts Ave, Boxborough, MA 01719.
Phone [phone].


Harold Hallikainen              [e-mail]
Hallikainen & Friends, Inc.     [e-mail]
141 Suburban Road, Bldg E4      phone [phone] fax [phone]
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-7590  telex 4932775 HFI UI

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Part 68 Help!
Date: 31 Jan 92 09:42:49 GMT
Organization: General DataComm, Middlebury CT


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Larry Rachman) writes:

> 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.

> 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

I think what your friend is looking for is something like a "DAA"
offered by Dallas Semi under the part number DS2249. This device
provides an interface to the public switched network which is
compliant with part 68.


Bob Danek

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #101
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa29348;
          2 Feb 92 15:39 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA14416
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 2 Feb 1992 13:08:27 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA14336
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 2 Feb 1992 13:08:05 -0600
Date: Sun, 2 Feb 1992 13:08:05 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #102

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 2 Feb 92 13:07:52 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 102

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Administrivia: Getting Through to JUNET (TELECOM Moderator)
    Are Acoustic Couplers Still Around? (Mickey Ferguson)
    DTMF Decoding by Ear (Rolf Meier)
    Answer Supervision on DMS-100 Central Offices (Vance Shipley)
    Toll Free Call For UNIX System V Source Code (Syd Weinstein)
    Indiana Bell Rate Increase (Doctor Math)
    BC Tel Newsletter (Nigel Allen)
    Data Voice Multiplexer Question (Peter Orban)
    The Waves of Fax (Jim Haynes)
    Radio Modem (Scott Loftesness)
    Telecom and Science Fiction (Rune Henning Johansen)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sun, 2 Feb 1992 12:35:14 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Subject: Administrivia: Getting Through to JUNET


Would someone please help JUNET get back on track where telecom is
concerned?  Those folks are rejecting all the comp.dcom.telecom
postings ... even the ones I send (which are the ones they should be
accepting).

And ... the people who have had articles in comp.dcom.telecom recently
are getting back notes from JUNET saying 'you are not authorized'.
Something strange is going on somewhere.


Patrick Townson

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

Date: Fri, 31 Jan 92 17:21:28 PST
From: [e-mail] (Mickey Ferguson)
Subject: Are Acoustic Couplers Still Around?
Organization: Rolm Systems


Does anyone know of any acoustic couplers available for modems?  The
specific problem I'm thinking of is when the business person travels
and stays at a hotel with all digital phones.  The idea of unplugging
the phone and plugging the wire into the modem won't work, because the
modem expects a regular analog line, not the digital line.

Two questions come to mind:

  1)  Are there any modems available which have the old acoustic couplers
      (you know, the kind with the foam rubber receptacles where you place
      the handset in it) which work at today's speeds and improved error
      correction rates, etc?

  2)  Does anyone make an acoustic coupler-to-telephone line connector so
      that the traveler can work with the phone, regardless of the type
      (analog or digital) and also whether or not it has a hard-wired
      connection or an RJ-11 jack?  (For you inventors out there, I would
      think this could be a potentially profitable venture...)  Remember,
      I said it here first! :)
       ______               _________                _________
      (  /\  )             |         |              |  . . .  |
        /  \---------------|         |--------------|_________|
       /____\              |_________|             /___________\

      Telephone             Black Box             Laptop with Modem
                        (Acoustic Coupler)        (RJ11 Connection)

      For the above picture, one would just place the handset into the
      acoustic coupler, and the black box would have no smarts in it at
      all, except to take the analog signal and output over a standard
      telephone wire to make a connection with the laptop's modem.

What do people think?  Does this exist?  Is it feasible?  This is all
off the top of my head at 7 PM on a Friday, so I may be completely
overworked and in desparate need of getting out of here! :)


Mickey Ferguson          Rolm Systems          [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Rolf Meier)
Subject: DTMF Decoding by Ear
Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1992 15:25:09 -0500
Organization: Mitel. Kanata (Ontario). Canada.


Has anyone out there developed the skill of decoding dtmf tones by
ear?  Ever hear of anyone who has?  How about MF?

Just curious.


Rolf Meier     Mitel Corporation

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

From: [e-mail] (Vance Shipley)
Subject: Answer Supervision on DMS-100 Central Offices
Organization: SwitchView Inc., Waterloo, Ontario
Date: Sat, 01 Feb 1992 17:05:37 GMT


As a follow up to the recent discussion regarding the availability of
answer supervision signaling on CO lines, here is the feature
description for the DMS-100 central office that applies.


Feature title:        Answer Supervision to PBXs for Toll Calls
Part of packages:    NTX008AB: PBX INTERFACE I
            NTX007AB: PBX INTERFACE II
Feature Number:        F2430

A typical network configuration has a PBX homing on a class 5 end
office which in turn homes on a class 4 CAMA center.  Both the PBX and
the class 4 CAMA provide call detail records of toll calls, hence both
require answer supervision.  The class 4 CAMA center sends a steady
off hook signal back to the DMS-100 class 5 end office as an
ANI-request (for ANI spill).  Return of answer supervision is not
normally required on an incoming CAMA connection.  This feature allows
the class 4 CAMA and the class 5 end office to retransmit answer
supervision back to the PBX.

In the case where the class 5 end office has LAMA, then the DMS-100 also
has the ability to provide answer supervision back to the PBX.  The
PBX-CO interface can be either:
    - Line card;
    - Two way DID/DOD analog trunk;
    - Two way DID/DOD digital trunk; or
    - Two way INWATS/OUTWATS digital trunk.

When this feature is provided, toll diversion and message registration
will not be supported.

Glossary:
        CAMA    Centralized Automatic Message Accounting
        LAMA    Local Automatic Message Accounting
        ANI    Automatic Number Identification
        DID    Direct Inward Dialing
        DOD    Direct Outward Dialing


Vance Shipley
[e-mail]   [e-mail]   ..uunet!watmath!xenitec!vances

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

From: [e-mail] (Syd Weinstein)
Subject: Toll Free Call For UNIX System V Source Code
Date: Sat, 1 Feb 92 22:58:22 EST
Reply-To: [e-mail]


In my local Bell of PA directory, which the latest issue came this
week I was flipping through the first few pages just to see what was
there, (actually looking to see if anyone listed a TDD listing after
all the fuss the intro pages made about them) and I came across AT&T's
listing.  Now, I am in a surburban Philadelphia white pages book, so I
wasn't expecting much, just the usual residential stuff, you know, LD,
conferencing, phones ... lo and behold ... one of the 800 numbers is
listed as "UNIX System V Source Code".

Gee, is the source code free for calling? :-)


Sydney S. Weinstein, CDP, CCP          Elm Coordinator - Current 2.3PL11
Datacomp Systems, Inc.                 Projected 2.4 Release: Mid?? 1992
[e-mail] or dsinc!syd      Voice: [phone], FAX: [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Doctor Math)
Subject: Indiana Bell Rate Increase
Date: Sat, 01 Feb 92 20:59:53 EST
Organization: Department of Redundancy Department


An article in the Digest some time ago mentioned that Michigan Bell,
our neighbor to the north, was going to institute local measured
calling for everybody whether they wanted it or not. Since MI Bell is
owned by the same parent company (Ameritech) as Indiana Bell, I've
been waiting for the same thing to happen here. An article in Friday's
local paper confirmed my worst nightmare.

Indiana Bell now claims that if they are not allowed to institute
local measured calling for everybody, they will seek (and get?) a rate
increase of 25%, which is about $5/month for the "average" residential
customer.  Under the measured calling plan, they intend to charge some
amount for each call over the first 400 in any given month, claiming
that this would only affect "about 6%" of the subscriber base. (Something
tells me that this 6% is probably distributing Usenet news  :-).

To most people, 400 calls/month probably sounds like quite a bit; in
reality, this breaks down to 13.333 calls/day. Upon hearing this, my
neighbor said, "I easily make more than 13 calls a day."  My feed site
would likely exceed its 400 call allotment in less than a week.

What is our PUC doing about it? Not much. They seem to be leaving that
to the Senate, which has passed a three-year ban on local measured
service.  The House version of the bill bans local measured service
forever. Each is waiting for the other to vote on its bill.

I've decided that if local measured service goes into effect, I'm
going to have all three of my lines disconnected, and I'm going to
tell them why.  I can get my news over NNTP at work, and probably get
a better rate on calls to my mother as well.

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

From: [e-mail] (Nigel Allen)
Date: 2 Feb 92 (03:59)
Subject: BC Tel Newsletter
Organization: Echo Beach, Toronto
Reply-to: [e-mail]


I though TELECOM Digest readers might enjoy reading this synopsis of a
typical "statement stuffer" from a Canadian telephone company.  Note
the way sales pitches are interspersed with informative articles and
public service announcements. (A suggestion: Ask friends or relatives
served by different telephone companies to save newsletters that are
enclosed with their utility bills. They can make interesting reading.)

Some highlights from Dialogue (January 1992), a newsletter from the
British Columbia Telephone Company inserted with telephone bills:

Wired for the future: The Pacific Place development on the former Expo
86 site on the Vancouver waterfront will be North America's "first
fully-operable fiber optics community." Pacific Place will feature
7,600 residences and three million square feet of development.

Outgoing calls only: B.C. Tel is "introducing outgoing-only service
throughout the province." [It isn't clear whether all pay phones would
become outgoing only, or just those where "loitering and illegal
activities" are a problem.]

Learning from a distance: Using ISDN and multi-media workstations
designed by B.C. Tel subsidiary MPR Teltech, the Open Learning Agency
and the Vancouver School Board have linked four adult learning centres
in Vancouver for a pilot project in distance learning. The project is
funded by the Canadian [federal] Department of Communications and the
British Columbia Ministry of Advanced Education. Two courses are
planned: Western Civilization and Mathematics.

Save on Fax: B.C. Tel's discounted long distance service for fax
messages, FaxCom.

Telephone Tips: Be sure to dial all 11 digits when you are calling a
1-800 number. Simply dialing the last seven digits, even if you are
within the local calling area, will not get you through to the party
you are calling.

Reminder: Directory assistance charges apply for numbers listed in
your local directory, even if they are long distance for you.

Call Alert is suspended when you make a 0+ call. You will not hear a
notification call of a second call and the calling party will hear a
busy signal.

Telecom Centre for Special Needs: equipment and services for people
with disabilities

Green Scene: If you don't need remittance envelopes included with your
phone bill, ask the business office to discontinue sending them.

Enquiry B.C.: a brief description of the British Columbia government
information service.

Questions about AIDS or HIV? Call the AIDS Vancouver Helpline at (604)
687-2437.

B.C. Winter Games: B.C. Tel is a corporate sponsor of the games in
Greater Vernon this year.


Canada Remote Systems.  Toronto, Ontario     NorthAmeriNet Host

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Data Voice Multiplexer Question
Date: 2 Feb 92 09:32:10 +0600
Organization: National Research Council


I have picked up a data-voice multiplexer in a surplus store.  It is a
Siemens SA820R. According to the user guide it can be used for
transparent data communication over a phone line with an other unit
installed in the "central office". It uses "time compression and
digital baseband modulation techniques with forward acting error
correction". The DTE/Network interface is "CCITT V.24/V.28; EIA
RS-232-C standard". I have hooked it up to my computer, and it works
in the local analog loopback test mode.  I would like to know if it
can be used for communication with other regular modems, or only with
another special anymal like this?  My initial guess is that it would
work only with another multiplexer, but I would like to hear others'
opinion. Has anyone used data-voice multiplexers, has anyone seen this
Siemens unit?

Thanks.


Peter Orban                             | Internet: [e-mail]
National Research Council of Canada     | Bitnet:   [e-mail]
435 Ellice Av. Winnipeg, MB.            | Phone:    [phone]
Canada, R3B 1Y6                         | Fax:      [phone]

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

From: Jim Haynes <[e-mail]>
Subject: The Waves of Fax
Date: 2 Feb 92 08:11:55 GMT
Organization: University of California, Santa Cruz


I've been wanting to prepare an article on the fax business; but I
don't know enough.  So I'll just outline what I've been thinking and
maybe others will fill in some of the blanks.

1.  One of the earliest successful fax applications was for distributing
photographs to newspapers.

    (a) before TV, pictures were very important competitive features in
    selling newspapers.

    (b) the technology involved photographic development (for receiving)
    and newspapers already had the necessary darkrooms and technicians.

2.  There have been periodic futuristic predictions that fax would
replace newspapers.  (These are in the same equivalence class as the
combination automobile-airplane-helicopter in every suburban garage.)
Hasn't happened yet.

3.  Another application is fax for weather maps, related to aviation
industry.  How long has this been going on and what technologies have
been used?

4.  Western Union did a lot of work on fax, including the Desk-Fax
machines put in customers' offices.  Invented Teledeltos, a dry
electrosensitive paper for recording.  Desk-Fax depended on private
wires between customer and WU office, and handling of message by WU
personnel; hence costly.

5.  In early to mid 60s we had Bell introducing switched-network
modems attachable to customer-provided equipment.  Principal fax
recording technology at the time was electrolytic marking on wet
paper.  Principal equipment makers were Hogan and Alden, and
Stewart-Warner was in there too.  At this time there were some
attempts to set up businesses handling messages by fax for the public,
using the switched network for transmission.  Carterfone decision
allowed customer-provided modems.

6.  56kb circuits became available, and Xerox got into the high-speed
fax business.  Progress in microelectronics allowed consideration of
encoding schemes to improve speed/bandwidth.  Technology of making
marks on paper moved along too; consider the T.I. hardcopy terminals
using heat-sensitive paper.  Personal computer industry led to a great
flowering of low-cost printing methods.

7.  Modern fax.  I imagine progress in office-copier technology has
something to do with it.  Is there any U.S. technology/manufacturing
or is it all Japanese?  Bell System breakup has driven down cost of
toll calls.  Microelectronics allows elaborate bandwidth compression.


[e-mail]      [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Scott Loftesness)
Subject: Radio Modem
Date: Sun, 2 Feb 92 07:19:21 PST
Organization: Glenbrook Systems, Inc.
Reply-To: [e-mail]


In TELECOM Digest V12 #98, Will Wong writes:

> 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?

You may want to contact Cylink Corp. in Sunnyvale, CA for information
on their radio modem.  It sounds like something very close to what
you're attempting to build.

Here's their address and telephone number information:

CYLINK
310 N. MARY AVE.
SUNNYVALE CA  94086

[phone]
[phone] fax


Scott Loftesness           Internet: [e-mail]
515 Buena Vista Avenue     Others: [e-mail]
Redwood City, CA 94061     [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Rune Henning Johansen FBA)
Subject: Telecom and Science Fiction
Organization: Norwegian Telecom Research
Date: 2 Feb 92 17:55:28


We're collecting information about the role of science fiction within
telecom.  We're investigating how authors and film makers describe
telecom networks, both technologically and sociologically -- and how
their views may have influenced the use and development of tele-
communications. One example is the picturephone in Asimovs "Naked
Sun". Any pointers to film, literature, software or whatever is
appreciated.

Proper credit will be given to all contributors if we find it
worthwhile to write a report or paper.


H&kon & Rune, Norwegian Telecom Research.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #102
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa07315;
          2 Feb 92 19:35 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA17022
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 2 Feb 1992 17:55:23 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA06910
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 2 Feb 1992 17:55:03 -0600
Date: Sun, 2 Feb 1992 17:55:03 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #104

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 2 Feb 92 17:55:01 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 104

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Supreme Court Action Restricts 900 Porn Services (Carl M. Kadie)
    Re: Supreme Court Action Restricts 900 Porn Services (Roy M. Silvernail)
    SUMMARY: Re: Rotary Dialers Go Home! (Dave Strieter)
    Re: France's Minitel Service (John Rice)
    Re: Centel For Sale (John Rice)
    Re: PIC's From RBOC Payphones (John David Galt)
    Re: Exchange Boundaries (Carl Moore)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: Re: Supreme Court Action Restricts 900 Porn Services
Organization: University of Illinois, Dept. of Comp. Sci., Urbana, IL
Date: Sun, 2 Feb 1992 16:20:24 GMT


[e-mail] (Stan Brown) writes:

> Quotes are from the newspaper article cited below.

> 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.

> 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."

In the long term, this Supreme Court decision not to hear this case is
a bad sign for electronic freedom of speech. Helms, himself, said that
he is trying to stamp out all pornography (which apparently means
anything "R-rated" or above.)  Helms offered this amendment only after
an amendment that banned all adult material from telephones was
overturned by the Court. To me, at least, it is clear that the main
purpose of this law is to reduce the access adults have to
Constitutionally-protected material. In my opinion, the mechanisms
required by the law are not only not the least restrictive, they are,
in fact, the most restrictive that Helms thought he could get away
with.


Carl Kadie -- [e-mail] -- University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

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

Subject: Supreme Court Action Restricts 900 Porn Services
From: cybrspc![e-mail] (Roy M. Silvernail)
Date: Sat, 01 Feb 92 15:14:37 CST
Organization: Villa CyberSpace, Minneapolis, MN


[e-mail] (Stan Brown) writes:

> 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.

A similar article appeared last week in the {Minneapolis Star-Tribune}.
Eight paragraphs in, there was this local color:

'Bennie Cohen, a U S West spokesman in the Twin Cities, said U S West
stopped offering the 976 service a while ago for business reasons.
There was no revenue growth involved," he said.'

I remember hearing that USWest had killed 976 just after the MFJ was
modified.  But I thought their excuse was some 'technical
difficulties' smokescreen.  This quote from Cohen would seem to
support the popular suspicion that the RBOCs want the IP trade all to
themselves.  The Twin Cities had _dozens_ of those 976 sex lines.  I
cannot believe there was "no revenue growth involved".  (No, I'm not
promoting phone-sex. It's just the most visible of the 976-type IP
services.)

> 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."

The RBOCs may like this turn of events, though.  They already have a
record-keeping system in place that could easily handle maintainence
of subscriber requests.

Beautiful solution, actually.  They kill 976 by local fiat, and
smother 900 under a mountain of paperwork.  That leaves RBOCs as the
only providers.  Don't you just love a level playing field?


Roy M. Silvernail |+|  [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Dave Strieter)
Subject: SUMMARY:  Re: Rotary dialers go home!
Organization: AG Communication Systems, Phoenix, Arizona
Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1992 21:08:57 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> I wrote:

>> 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"?

Thanks to all who replied via e-mail and postings.  No thanks to the
*one* person who found it necessary to flame me, but whatever turns
you on!  His accompanying response was interesting nonetheless.

 From the e-mail I received and the follow-up postings I saw, it
appears that the GTD-5 (to which, you'll notice, I limited my
comments) is enough different architecturally from the other digital
switches to result in different conclusions to the question.  Perhaps
a quick GTD-5 tutorial in this area is in order:

Standard line-interface circuits are packaged eight to a card (read:
circuit board.)  Each line interface circuit contains a device to
sense loop current.  This device is used for sensing on-hook/off-hook,
dial pulses if any, and provide ring trip in many cases.  These cards
plug into a line-unit frame which connects to one of the from-1-to-64
TCUs (Time Switch and Control Units) which contain a processor and
both originating and terminating time switch stages.  (It's a
time-space-time switching fabric.)

DTMF (and MF) receivers are packaged four to a card and plug into a
slot that could otherwise be occupied by a trunk-interface card (which
also contains four circuits) in the trunk-unit frame which also
connects to a TCU.  The GTD-5 assigns a receiver to a line/trunk on
origination and it remains connected until digit collection is
complete. If the subscriber's line is not marked for DTMF service then
the receiver is not connected. Thus, although the DTMF receivers *are*
"integrated" into the switch, they are add-on costs.  The telco can
buy as many DTMF receiver cards as it determines it needs from the
number of subscribers that have purchased DTMF service for their
line(s).  Every slot used for receivers is one more slot that is not
available for providing trunk access.  Eventually this causes the
telco to have to buy more facility interface frames and TCUs to
connect them to.

The DTMF receiver circuit (I went and looked at one) contains a lot
more than ``a couple of ICs (which is all that comprises that fabulous
"more expensive circuit")'' as John Higdon put it.  Perhaps the
receivers could be redesigned with current-state-of-the-art
components, but they would still need to be only four to a card or
else the interface frames would have to be redesigned too.  (Recall
that GTD-5, DMS-100, and 5ESS all have their roots in 10-year-old
designs.)  All this adds to the hardware cost of providing DTMF
service versus dial-pulse service.


In <[e-mail]> David G. Lewis wrote:

> If I recall correctly ...
> 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.

A local AT&T contact confirmed that your memory is intact.  The 5ESS
has an "originating register" (another replier's term) of sorts that
collects digits, whether DP or DTMF.  This argument certainly applies
in that case.  However, on the GTD-5 there are no originating
registers or register/senders in hardware.  The equivalent is the DTMF
receiver itself, which is only used for DTMF; DP sensing is built into
each line circuit.  And while I'm on that topic ...

In <[e-mail]> Bud Couch asked:

> 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.  :-))

Umm ... I knew.  I just wanted to see if you knew! :-) Caught me!  I
haven't worked on line circuits for quite some time and I knew the
multi-party ringing control card used the Hall-effect sensor but I
guess I slipped back into a previous system when I said that the
interface on the line circuit card used an optocoupler.  However, the
implication to this discussion is the same.  Every GTD-5 standard line
circuit uses the same sensor to detect on-hook/off-hook (and also
provide ring trip in many cases) as is used to detect dial pulses.
There is no additional hardware required to detect dial pulses, and no
hardware to be saved if there were no rotary-dial lines.  Therefore,
the DTMF receivers are still completely an add-on cost, hardware-wise.

                               -----

Now, regarding the on-going costs such as CPU time and non-billable
holding time, I asked the guy who's paid for figuring out such things.
His reply, all IMHO, usual disclaimer, etc., etc., and without doing
any extensive modeling and with some editing by me:

> DTMF does take less time to scan and therefore uses less CPU time for
> scanning.  But DTMF requires connection to a receiver which adds to
> the CPU time.  The extra work to select a receiver, connect a network
> path from the line to the DTMF receiver, and release the path between
> the line and the DTMF receiver is roughly equal to the extra work
> imposed by the longer scan time on DP.  When viewed as a percentage of
> the total processing time for a call, the difference is less than 1%.
> Of course, in the GTD-5's distributed system, there is a
> redistribution of how much work the different processors are doing.
> The shorter holding time, with DTMF, on software data tables
> collecting the digits would probably not be significant enough to
> eliminate even one memory board.

For a given TCU, the total percentage of CPU time occupied by call
processing functions is limited.  This includes scanning dial pulses,
setting up DTMF receiver connections, etc.  When this limit is
exceeded subsequent originations and terminations on that TCU will be
denied. But whether that all gets to be a problem depends on the
telco's engineering of the site (line concentration ratio, ratio of
lines to trunks in a given TCU, etc.)

In <[e-mail]> Gordon Woods writes that dial pulses
are a nightmare for digital loop carrier systems.  I can sure believe
it!  However, I've never worked on one, so I don't have first-hand
experience.  Again, my comments are limited to the GTD-5 (and
subscriber loops directly connected to it).

In <[e-mail]> Colin Plumb writes:

> 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!

Thanks!  You've just described how it works!  Tones (dial, MF digits,
busy, re-order (120IPM busy), audible ringback, *silence*, etc.) are
all pre-digitized and stored in a ROM in each terminating time switch.
("Terminating" here means the time switch which sends PCM out of the
switch.  It does not refer to the called party's end of the
connection, although there could be a GTD-5 TTS there too.)  All the
switch needs to do to play a tone to lines or trunks is poke the right
value into the time-switch control-memory locations for those lines
and trunks so that the PCM samples are fed to those codecs.


I've said my piece.


Dave Strieter,  AG Communication Systems,  POB 52179,  Phoenix AZ 85072-2179
*** These are not my employer's opinions.  They're my opinions, not my advice.
UUCP:..!{ncar!noao!asuvax | uunet!samsung!romed!asuvax | att}!gtephx!strieterd
Internet: gtephx![e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: France's Minitel Service
Organization: Teradyne Inc., Telecommunications Division
Date: Sat, 01 Feb 92 00:24:52 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Wolf
Paul) writes:

> 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.

> 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.

Could this be why USW is trying to make life dificult for BBS owners ?


John Rice         K9IJ     "Did I say that ?" I must have, but It was
[e-mail]      MY oppinion only, no one elses...Especially
(708)-940-9000 - (work)    Not my Employers....
(708)-438-7011 - (home)

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Centel For Sale
Organization: Teradyne Inc., Telecommunications Division
Date: Sat, 01 Feb 92 00:30:05 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, David Brightbill
<[e-mail]> 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.

   A friend at Centel Cellular tells me that the entire company is on
the block.


John Rice         K9IJ    "Did I say that ?" I must have, but It was
[e-mail]     MY oppinion only, no one elses...Especially
(708)-940-9000 - (work)   Not my Employers....
(708)-438-7011 - (home)

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: PIC's From RBOC Payphones
Date: Fri, 31 Jan 92 17:12:10 PST


Andy Sherman writes:

> 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 has an enormous lead on its competitors because so much of its
equipment was bought during its days of (morally wrongful) monopoly,
and was paid off before its competitors were allowed to exist.  Judge
Greene felt, and I agree, that AT&T should not be allowed to use this
unfair advantage to drive its competitors out of business.  STP pairs
are not unique as examples.

If AT&T were deregulated tomorrow, it would lower its prices to cost
for, say, one month -- and all its competitors would go bankrupt!


John David Galt

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

Date: Sat, 1 Feb 92 14:59:05 EST
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Exchange Boundaries


(Area code 516)

I found 292 to be a Hempstead exchange.  Was that a misprinted 282,
which is Yaphank?

Also, I find Selden exchanges 233 and 451.  Why were they omitted?

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #104
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa07360;
          2 Feb 92 19:37 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA16698
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 2 Feb 1992 17:15:23 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA12112
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 2 Feb 1992 17:15:06 -0600
Date: Sun, 2 Feb 1992 17:15:06 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #103

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 2 Feb 92 17:15:04 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 103

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: 900 Number From Payphone (Bill Huttig)
    Re: 900 Number From Payphone (Julian Macassey)
    900 Directory Assistance? (Steve L. Rhoades)
    Re: Most Expensive 900 Call? (Vance Shipley)
    Re: Another 800 Number That Bills You as 900 ([e-mail])
    Re: Another 800 Number That Bills You as 900 ([e-mail])
    Re: No Supervison on 900 Call (Harold Hallikainen)
    Re: Reverse Directory Information (Mark Brader)
    Re: Reverse Directory Information (mission![e-mail])
    Re: Tracing Calls, Then and Now (John David Galt)
    Re: Tracing Calls, Then and Now (Harold Hallikainen)
    Re: Tracing Calls, Then and Now (Colin Plumb)
    Re: Windsor, Ontario Routing (Tony Harminc)
    Re: CDMA Impact on Cellular Software (Ron Dippold)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Bill Huttig)
Subject: Re: 900 Number From Payphone
Date: 31 Jan 92 19:21:29 GMT
Organization: Florida Institute of Technology, ACS, Melbourne, FL


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Jeff
Garber) writes:

> I thought you could not access a 900 number from a payphone (unless it
> was a poorly programmed COCOT) ...

The 7-11's around this area advertise a few 900 game numbers.  When
dialed from the payphone it reroutes the call to a 800 or long
distance number and you then key in your Visa/Mastercard or LEC
calling card number. It says the call may appear as a 700 number on
your local phone bill (or a 900).

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

From: [e-mail] (Julian Macassey)
Subject: Re: 900 Number From Payphone
Date: 1 Feb 92 05:15:50 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Julian Macassey)
Organization: The Hole in the Wall  Hollywood California U.S.A.


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Jeff
Garber) writes:
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 97, Message 3 of 13

> 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) ...

> [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]

    I agree with Pat. Channel 9 TV is three miles away from me.
They run "National Equirer" type news. Their big thing is "Live
Reports" -- Talking Heads ten minutes away from the studio talking about
something that happened there hours ago.

    As an ex-gutter reporter, I think they are hopeless.

    KCAL TV claim they are in Norwalk CA, but are on Melrose
Avenue (On the Paramount lot) in Hollywood. No one can tell me why
they perpetuate this lie -- their transmitter is on Mount Wilson I
believe, along with all the other TV transmitters. But they are owned
by Disney, so maybe Mickey runs the news department.


Julian Macassey, [e-mail]  N6ARE@K6VE.#SOCAL.CA.USA.NA
742 1/2 North Hayworth Avenue Hollywood CA 90046-7142 voice [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve L. Rhoades)
Subject: 900 Directory Assistance?
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena
Date: Sat, 1 Feb 1992 04:40:52 GMT


Whilst roaming through the 900 network the other day, I came across an
interesting recording on [phone]:

"Due to a network architecture change, the 900 directory assistance
 number has been disconnected ..."

I remember back in the early days of 900 when they used to list the
current "Dial-It (tm)" numbers.  There were only about 5 or 6 "900"
services at the time.  I think they were operated by the Bell System.

As "900" grew they added about 30 different services to the recording.
The recording went from about 20 seconds in the early days to about four
minutes long the last time I heard it.

Hopefully, my recent calls to this number will be free.  (But wait,
calls to the "555" prefix are FREE ??! -- nah ... not this again ... :-)


Internet: [e-mail]           | Voice-mail: [phone]
UUCP: elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!tybalt!slr | USmail: Box 1000, Mt. Wilson, Ca.  91023

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

From: [e-mail] (Vance Shipley)
Subject: Re: Most Expensive 900 Call?
Organization: SwitchView Inc.
Date: Sat, 01 Feb 1992 01:26:50 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Robert J Woodhead) wrote:

> only pay $300 an hour if I could speak to DEAD Psychics, but ...

Not even close!  A friend of mine rented another friend's house in
Florida.  The babysitter he used while there made several calls to a
900 number that showed up as $250.00 a call.  The calls were only two
minutes long.


Vance Shipley
[e-mail]   [e-mail]   ..uunet!watmath!xenitec!vances

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

Date: Sat, 1 Feb 92 23:59 EST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Another 800 Number That Bills You as a 900 Number
Organization: CompuData Inc., DeLand


I got one of the cards, and just now decided to call the number.  No
charge for the call to 800/422-2313, of course, but it announces that
it is a special automated service, and that "You will be billed
separately by the sponsor for its use."


 ...!{bikini.cis.ufl.edu allegra uunet!cdin-1}!ki4pv!tanner

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

Subject: Re: Another 800 Number That Bills You as a 900 Number
Date: Fri, 31 Jan 92 11:30:40 -0600
From: [e-mail]


As of 10-45 on Friday, January 31, 800-422-2313 is still alive and
separating the sheep from the wool.  There is a payphone just upstairs
from where I work and I just had to give it a try.

     I dialed the number and it answered very quickly.  Since I didn't
have an award form, I just started randomly pressing digits when
prompted.  After about 12 digits, the original voice came back on the
line and introduced the reading back of the number I had entered.  A
truly brain-dead sounding synthetic voice read back each digit
followed by the first voice prompting me to enter a 1 if correct or 2
if not.  I entered a 1 and the system announced that this was not a
valid form number.  It asked me to enter it again.  I waited for about
five seconds and it prompted me once again.

I entered 12 more digits picked at random with the same results as
before.  When I entered a 1 to indicate correctness, the voice
politely said that their equipment could not verify my award number
and I would just have to send in the card.  It also said, "You won't
be billed for this call."  I knew that already.

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

Date: Sat, 1 Feb 92 12:11:19 -0800
From: [e-mail] (Harold Hallikainen)
Subject: Re: No Supervison on 900 Call
Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo


> 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.

    What is the purpose of this "interactive call routing"?  Why
not just assign a different phone number for each service?


Harold Hallikainen              [e-mail]
Hallikainen & Friends, Inc.     [e-mail]
141 Suburban Road, Bldg E4      phone [phone] fax [phone]
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-7590  telex 4932775 HFI UI

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

Date: Sat, 1 Feb 1992 13:59:00 -0500
From: [e-mail] (Mark Brader)
Subject: Re: Reverse Directory Information


>> ... Then I heard ring-no-answer for a whole minute.

> [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]

Um, Pat ... HOW many readers does comp.dcom.telecom have in the US?
My suggestion is that the free advertisement in comp.dcom.telecom
caused the service to be overloaded with callers!


[Moderator's Note: Flattery will get you everywhere!  :) At this time
I think comp.dcom.telecom has about 50,000 readers worldwide; I would
suppose the majority of those are in the USA.  I do like your idea
that this little newsgroup wields some influence somewhere. I never
really thought it mattered that much.   PAT]

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

From: mission![e-mail]
Subject: Re: Reverse Directory Information
Date: Thu Jan 30 18:33:13 1992


In Telecom 12.56, [e-mail] asks for a source to turn a phone
number into a name and address.  In Telecom 12.72, nin15b0b@lucy.
merrimack.edu supplies a 900 number.  When I've found strange phone
numbers on my bill, I just call the local telephone company.  They
call the company serving the number (if different) and ask them, then
let me know.  This is useful for resolving phone bills amongst
roommates.

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Tracing Calls, Then and Now
Date: Fri, 31 Jan 92 18:08:33 PST


This happened to a friend of mine at work, who was our house datacomm
wizard.  He would call all the local BBSes to download software; and
often he would make the calls from work (through our network modems,
so there's no way to pick up a phone and hear call progress).

One day, he heard about a new BBS (on another BBS) and decided to call
them up.  What he didn't know was that the BBS message which gave him
the number had two digits transposed -- and was in fact the
high-security dial-in line of a bank computer.

So my friend told the modem to dial this thing up, and got back NO
CARRIER.  (The bank computer used a non-standard carrier frequency.)
He told the modem to keep redialing, but gave up after an hour or so.
He tried again the next day, and the next.

One morning, my friend shows up for work, and three cops are waiting
for him and they arrest him.  Naturally (?), they won't say what he's
supposed to have done.  It was two or three days before things got
straightened out.

Moral:  A good Trace capability is no substitute for common sense.


John David Galt


[Moderator's Note: Absolutely. However, to hear the banks tell it,
they can do no wrong, and everyone else is always in the wrong. When
the First National Bank's fax machine misdialed a family in Germany
for two or three weeks running night after night, that was supposed to
be overlooked as a simple error.  PAT]

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

Date: Sat, 1 Feb 92 10:16:26 -0800
From: [e-mail] (Harold Hallikainen)
Subject: Re: Tracing Calls, Then and Now
Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo


> 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.

    Similar thing happens here.  Using a fax modem, I've been
trying to send a five page fax to Taiwan.  Using our normal LD
carrier, the call at first would fail about half way thru the first
page.  Retries would have the call fail during fax negotiation.
Running the call thru AT&T, it worked the first time.  We have had no
trouble running faxes thru this carrier on domestic calls, but
considerable trouble on international calls.  Talking with their
customer service, they suggested putting pauses at various places in
the dialing sequence (which makes no sense to me, since the call was
being answered at the other end).  The pauses did not fix the problem.
They then suggested trying their 10xxx access number (we usually go in
thru a 950 number).  This didn't work either.  They called back
yesterday wanting me to try it again, but I haven't had a chance yet.
I have no idea what carrier they are using to get the call to Taiwan.
Any ideas as to what the problem might be?


Harold Hallikainen              [e-mail]
Hallikainen & Friends, Inc.     [e-mail]
141 Suburban Road, Bldg E4      phone [phone] fax [phone]
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-7590  telex 4932775 HFI UI

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

From: [e-mail] (Colin Plumb)
Subject: Re: Tracing Calls, Then and Now
Date: Sat, 1 Feb 1992 03:25:35 -0500
Organization: Array Systems Computing, Inc., Toronto, Ontario, CANADA


All of the information available to a CO technician about a
currently-connected call is quite substantial.  I had an old friend
call me once a few years ago (but still past the demise of universal
MF signalling and 2600 Hz + KP + ... fun) from the states.  Why, I
asked, were we getting all this delay on the line?  Oh, that's because
he wasn't paying and the call was being sent via some outdated
equipment is Australia (!) where the technicians were all asleep!

(P.S. Did anyone see the recent issue of 2600, where they reproduced a
form banning the magazine from prisons, with page number references to
the construction of blue boxes and so on?  The kicker was that there
were five approved reasons for banning a publication -- liable to
incite riot, and the like.  Checked was (d) likely to cause sexual
deviancy among inmates.  As the editors said, 2600 has been called
plenty of things, but *this* is new!)


Colin

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

Date: Fri, 31 Jan 92 13:26:31 EST
From: Tony Harminc <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Windsor, Ontario Routing


[e-mail] (david niebuhr) wrote:

> Winsdor, Ontario is both South and East of Detroit; therefore, where
> does Windsor get its routing from, Detroit or from some point in
> Canada?

Windsor gets its routing the same way as every other Canadian city.
It is in NPA 519, homes on Toronto as Sectional Centre and Montreal as
Regional Centre.  Of course the significance of the hierarchy of toll
switches has decreased in recent years.

Why would Windsor's position to the southeast of Detroit make any
difference ?  A lot of southern Ontario is south of a lot of the US.
By the same token, does Detroit get its routing from Windsor ?  Of
course not.

There is a heavily used telecom border crossing at Windsor/Detroit,
mainly because it's geographically on the way from Toronto and east to
points in the US mid-west and west.


Tony H.

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

From: [e-mail] (Ron Dippold)
Subject: Re: CDMA Impact on Cellular Software
Organization: Qualcomm, Inc., San Diego, CA
Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1992 22:13:35 GMT


[e-mail] (Mitsutaka Ito) writes:

>   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.

"Impacts" is a bit fuzzy.  Basically, the software is far more
complex, if you mean as far as that goes.  FM is simple enough that
you can easily program the phone on a simple microprocessor in
assembly language.  Speaking as one of the CDMA programmers, I think
you could write a CDMA system in assembly, but I sure wouldn't want to
do it.  "Living hell" comes to mind.  We wrote everything in C (and
I'm sure we'll get some snide remarks about C being structured
assembly ...)

Comparing CDMA software to FM software is pretty much like comparing
the control software for a USR Dual Standard modem to a 300 bps modem.
You get far better performance in exchange for more complexity.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #103
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa09329;
          2 Feb 92 20:41 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA23050
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 2 Feb 1992 18:49:23 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA21104
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 2 Feb 1992 18:49:01 -0600
Date: Sun, 2 Feb 1992 18:49:01 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #105

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 2 Feb 92 18:49:00 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 105

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Stuff "For Sale" in Telecom (Jim Budler)
    Re: Stuff "For Sale" in Telecom (Doctor Math)
    Re: Stuff "For Sale" in Telecom (Ken Sprouse)
    Re: Posting Choices: Telecom-priv or Telecom (Peter da Silva)
    Re: Oregon PUC Hearing Summary (Joe Mann)
    Re: Wilmington (Del.) Directory (Carl Moore)
    Re: What is a Linebacker? (Jeff Hollingsworth)
    Re: Part 68 Help! (Patton M. Turner)
    Re: Background Regarding 206 Dialing Change (John David Galt)
    Re: Mu-law, A-law (Harold Hallikainen)
    Re: IRS Experiments With Filing by Phone (Brandon S. Allbery)
    Re: France's Minitel Service (Harold Hallikainen)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Jim Budler)
Subject: Re: Stuff "For Sale" in Telecom
Date: Sat, 01 Feb 92 08:47:30 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest)


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Todd
Inch) writes:

> 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.

But who is to review and decide what's proper?

Pat has said he is heavily loaded anyway, and he has chosen not to
accept for sale articles for such review.

If there is a real need for this perhaps someone will volunteer to
moderate a telecom for sale mailing list.


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


[Moderator's Note: I am hoping (admittedly it is a long shot) that
before long I will have a small source of income which will in effect
subsidize some of my work on this Digest, thus allowing me to spend
more time on it and made some badly needed changes.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Doctor Math)
Subject: Re: Stuff "For Sale" in Telecom
Date: Sat, 01 Feb 92 21:31:56 EST
Organization: Department of Redundancy Department


[e-mail] (Todd Inch) writes:

> I would like to see TELECOM related For Sale/Wanted articles in the
> Digest, but not datacomm stuff, especially common modems.

I second this. Modems can go anywhere, but when someone's got a 1A2
key system or a bunch of old WUTCO time clocks, there's no better
place than here.  Who else would want such things? :-)

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

Subject: Re: Stuff "For Sale" in Telecom
Date: 31 Jan 92 00:06:14 EDT (Fri)
From: [e-mail] (Ken Sprouse)


Pat,

    I would like to add my two cents to a message I saw a few days
ago saying the sender would like to see a continuation of telephone
related items for sale in TELECOM.  I would also like to see jobs
offered and wanted continue.  Just in case you have changed your mind
about the for sale items here is something I picked up from the Radio
and Electronics bulletin board on GEnie.  I thought it might be of
interest to this group.

               --- begin forwarded message ---

FOR SALE: Private Payphones - these phones take credit cards and have a
built in card reader.  They use a regular DTMF dial pad and are a wall
mount unit.  Great deal for someone who wants to learn about payphones
or you can use it as a regular phone in your home! Price is $80 each
plus $15 shipping.  E mail if interested.  Thanks.

Bill Rogers, 2030 E. Charleston Blvd., Las Vegas, NV. 89104
[phone]

I will be happy to send additional info to anyone interested in the
payphones.

               --- end of forwarded message ---

As of right now there is no gateway from the Internet to GEnie so if
you are interested you will have to commuincate via a phone call.
What a novel idea! :-)


Ken Sprouse / N3IGW        [e-mail]
GEnie mail KSPROUSE        Compu$erve 70145,426


[Moderator's Note: Only $80? I have to wonder about their quality. If
anyone invests in a unit, let us know how it works out.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Peter da Silva)
Subject: Re: Posting Choices: Telecom-priv or Telecom
Organization: Taronga Park BBS
Date: Sun, 2 Feb 1992 05:05:15 GMT


How about a new newsgroup for telecom-priv?


Peter da Silva. Taronga Park BBS.  [phone]|1032 2400/n/8/1.


[Moderator's Note: I think it is distributed to an alt group already.  PAT]

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

Date: Fri Jan 31 10:35:56 1992
From: [e-mail] (Joe Mann)
Subject: Re: Oregon PUC Hearing Summary


Let us not forget that US West is aggressively marketing it's new
service "COMMUNITY LINK" in two of it's states, and has plans to 'roll
it out' in others.

COMMUNITY LINK is US West's version of Prodity, or Compuserve.  It was
locally introduced at the SuperBowl, when US West installed thousands
of terminals around the Twin Cities hotels.

COMMUNITY LINK is delivered via a joint venture of US West and French
owned Minitel; the new partnership is named CLM for COMMUNITY LINK
/ Minitel.  CLM owns the 'switch' that routes the calls to the various
Information Service Providers or ISPs.  It also sells / rents the
terminals to the end users to access COMMUNITY LINK.

It should come as no surprise that the largest ISP is US West's
partner Minitel.  Minitel provides many services that would
potentially compete with the privately owned BBSs.

It now seems that in addition to 976 information providers, BBS owners
are on US West's 'harassment list'.  US West fought 976 providers in
much the same way, before the PUC's.  This action only two or three
years after actively promoting 976 Information Providers to 'get into
the business'.

The best way for US West to ensure success for COMMUNITY LINK, is for
it to pre-empt any competition before it starts the service.

I suspect that the BBS owners in Oregon are in for a protracted and
eventully losing battle.  After all it's tough to fight a 25 billion
dollar company's agenda.


[Moderator's Note: It has to be a little more involved than that.
Suppose all the BBS people said okay, and started paying business
rates. Then what?  The BBS' would still be out there competing with
Community Link. You think for a few dollars difference in the rate
each month telco would then be satisfied, if what you are saying about
the need to 'pre-empt any competition' is correct?  I think all telco
is trying to do is treat BBS lines the same as churches or any other
non-profit phone line; that is, if not strictly for personal use,
then the line is for business use. Those are the two (admittedly
poorly named) choices.  PAT]

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

Date: Fri, 31 Jan 92 9:43:05 EST
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Wilmington (Del.) Directory


I have received a message saying:

"I'm just curious, but why have all these non-traditional area codes
been assigned before 909?"

This apparently refers to area codes 510,410,310,210 (210 has been
announced for split of 512 in Texas, but is not in use yet).  In my
response, I guessed that California is growing rapidly and needed to
gobble up 909 relatively early ( 909 is also not in use yet).  Notice
that 510 is now in use elsewhere in California, in a place where 909
would not be as good a choice (510 is next door to 707). <-- Yes, I
know about area 705 and the future 416/905 split.

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

From: [e-mail] (Jeff Hollingsworth)
Subject: Re: What is a Linebacker?
Organization: University of Wisconsin, Madison -- Computer Sciences Dept.
Date: Sun, 2 Feb 1992 00:16:52 GMT


> However, wouldn't you think that the apartment owners are responsible
> for repairs of wiring inside your apartment?

> [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]

California has a new law (went into effect Jan. 1) that makes inside
wiring the responsibility of the landlord.  So it you are a renter in
CA with Linebacker, you now have overpriced insurance that covers
something that is not your responsibility.


Jeff Hollingsworth        Work: [phone]
Internet: [e-mail]    Home: [phone]
X.400: <pn=Jeff.Hollingsworth;ou=cs;o=uw-madison;prmd=xnren;c=US>
Home: [e-mail]

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

Date: Sat, 1 Feb 92 19:36:52 CST
From: Patton M. Turner <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Part 68 Help!


I installed a phone hybrid today that had an interesting comment in
the manual.  During the purchase of two of these units, involving two
calls to the manfuacturer's tech support number, we were never told,
nor was it ever stated in their catalog, that the hybrids were not
Part 68 approved.

This is only mentioned once in the manual:

<begin quoted text>

2.2 Send Equalization

The FCC requires 18 dB of attenuation at 4Khz. This is accomplished
by an eliptical low-pass filter with a 3Khz -3dB point.

<skipping non pertinant material>

2.5 Telephone Line Interface Circuit

The telephone line is buffered by a transformer ... Metal Oxide Varistor
blocking cap to keep DC voltages off the transformer.  Although the
TI-101 is not type-approved by the FCC for dirrect connection to the
phone line, it is completely protected should this occur.

<end quoted text>

I don't have the whole manual with me, but I read the whole thing (I
got real bored), and saw no other mention of any FCC requirements.
There was a mention in the appendix regarding DAA's and holding coils.

This is how at least one firm handled the problem.


Pat Turner    [e-mail]     KB4GRZ @ K4RY.AL.USA

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Background Regarding 206 Dialing Change
Date: Sat,  1 Feb 92 09:46:45 PST


[e-mail] (VLD/VMB) writes:

> 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!?)

There are lots of N0X/N1X prefixes in both 714 and 619.  Some
directories don't show them, because Pac Bell lists for you only those
prefixes which are (a) in your Service Area (LATA), and (b) are not
cellular phones or special uses such as 950 and 976.  619 is spread
across THREE Service Areas.

It would be nice if the complete lists were available.


John David Galt

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

Date: Sat, 1 Feb 92 10:27:11 -0800
From: [e-mail] (Harold Hallikainen)
Subject: Re: Mu-law, A-law
Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo


    I haven't studied mu and A encoding, so please excuse my
ignorance in this area.  I wonder, though, what running a nonlinear
encoded signal thru a band limited channel does to distortion.

    If we (for the moment) ignore the A/D and D/A, and we put a 1
KHz sine wave into a reversible nonlinear circuit (such as u-law or
A-law), we will get the 1 KHz out along with various harmonics.  When
we run that "distorted" signal back thru the "decoder", the original
signal (the 1 KHz sine) is re-formed (without distortion, ideally).

    If we put a low pass filter between the encoder and the
decoder (like the A/D anti-alias filter), we are removing the
harmonics created by the encode process.  I'd imagine that these
missing harmonics would create a distorted signal out of the decoder.

    So, it looks like the use of nonlinear encoding results in an
improvement in dynamic range in trade for poorer distortion
performance.  True?


Harold Hallikainen              [e-mail]
Hallikainen & Friends, Inc.     [e-mail]
141 Suburban Road, Bldg E4      phone [phone] fax [phone]
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-7590  telex 4932775 HFI UI

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

Date: Sat, 1 Feb 92 11:49:08 -0500
From: [e-mail] (Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH)
Subject: Re: IRS Experiments With Filing by Phone
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH)
Organization: North Coast Public Access *NIX, Cleveland, OH


As quoted from <[e-mail]> by [e-mail]
(Steven King, Software Archaeologist):

> [e-mail] (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.

I assure you it's not.  The IRS sent me a for 1040-TEL along with the
standard 1040EZ.  From the inside front cover:

"File by Phone using the 1040-TEL and TeleFile!

"You Can File by Phone if:

"- You have use of a touch-tone telephone.
"- You meet the requirements found on page 6 for filing Form 1040EZ.
"- Your name and address are correct on the IRS label that came with
   this booklet.  Your refund will be mailed to this address.

"All You Have To Do Is:

"1. FILL IN Form 1040-TEL

    "- Check the answers to questions A and B.
    "- Fill in the dollar amounts for lines C and D using your W-2
       form(s).  If you have more than one W-2, enter the totals for
       each line.
    "- If you have taxable interest, fill in the total dollar amount
       on line E from your 1099-INT form(s) or other statements.

    "IMPORTANT:  You must drop all cents when you enter dollar
    amounts.  For example, $65.75 becomes $65.  If you do not want to
    drop cents, do not use Form 1040-TEL.  Instead, file Form 1040EZ.

"2. CALL 1-800-829-5166 24 HOURS A DAY!  (No Charge)

    "- Before you call, be sure ot have your filled-in Form 1040-TEL,
       the IRS mailing label, and a pen or pencil.

    "- The TeleFile computer will ask you to enter each item from your
       filled-in 1040-TEL using your touch-tone phone.  TeleFile will
       read back each entry so you can correct any mistakes.

    "- For your security, TeleFile will ask for the two letters that
       appear before your social security number on your mailing label.

    "- Answer the Yes/No questions on lines A and B using 1 for Yes
      and 2 for No.

    "- Press the # key (called the pound key) after entering the
       dollar amounts on lines C, D, and E.

    "- TeleFile will tell you the amount of your refund or what you
       owe.  Write that amount on Form 1040-TEL.  TeleFile will also
       tell you your Adjusted Gross Income --- which you will need to
       complete your State of Ohio income tax return.

"IMPORTANT:  You must stay on the line until TeleFile tells you your
return has been accepted.  If you hang up befdore this, your return
and refund will NOT be processed.

"3. SIGN and MAIL Form 1040-TEL."

My next report on this is likely to be to RISKS, not to Telecom: I
plan to use this service, just to see how much of a security risk it
is.  Certainly their "security" described above doesn't seem very
secure ...


Brandon S. Allbery, KF8NH [44.70.4.88]        [e-mail]
Senior Programmer, Telotech, Inc. (if I may call myself that...)


[Moderator's Note: Hey, if someone wants to sign my return and pay my
tax for me, I won't complain. And if the refund (if any) is mailed to
the address on the form then how could that be tampered with?   PAT]

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

Date: Sat, 1 Feb 92 11:44:39 -0800
From: [e-mail] (Harold Hallikainen)
Subject: Re: France's Minitel Service
Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo


    I seem to remember that when Minitel was first announced, the
cost was justified by the savings of not having to print phone books
for every subscriber every year.  How does the actual cost of Minitel
compare with printing phone books?

    Once they gave away the terminals, who owns them?  Who is
responsible for maintenance?  As modem technology changes, are they
adopting the newer technologies, or staying with the old to maintain
compatibility (I seem to remember a lot of European stuff using FSK
modems with something like 1200 bps to the user and 150 bps from the
user).

    How do private information suppliers like the telephone
company competing with them?

    Is there an online telephone directory here in the US (that I
can call with my modem)?


Harold Hallikainen              [e-mail]
Hallikainen & Friends, Inc.     [e-mail]
141 Suburban Road, Bldg E4      phone [phone] fax [phone]
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-7590  telex 4932775 HFI UI


[Moderator's Note: Compuserve has an online directory. (GO PHONES).
Some telcos such as Illinois Bell sell directory assistance in bulk
via terminal and modem. Ours is called 'Directory Express' and it runs
a couple hundred dollars per month for a couple *hours* of time on
line. The main customers of this are credit/collection services.  PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #105
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa11938;
          2 Feb 92 21:41 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA08992
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 2 Feb 1992 19:50:16 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA18727
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 2 Feb 1992 19:49:59 -0600
Date: Sun, 2 Feb 1992 19:49:59 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #106

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 2 Feb 92 19:49:41 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 106

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: DTMF Decoding by Ear (Jacob R. Deglopper)
    Re: DTMF Decoding by Ear (Patton M. Turner)
    Re: 5ESS (R) Sold in Japan (Robert L. McMillin)
    Re: Question on NY Tel's Capabilities ([e-mail])
    Re: Indiana Bell Rate Increase (John Higdon)
    Re: Are Acoustic Couplers Still Around? (Harold Hallikainen)
    Re: Czech Connection to American BBS (Richard Budd)
    Re: When Did Western Union Start to Die? (Jim Haynes)
    Re: When Did Western Union Start to Die? (John R. Levine)
    Re: 800 OCN List (Linc Madison)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Jacob R. Deglopper)
Subject: Re: DTMF Decoding by Ear
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Jacob R. Deglopper)
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Date: Sun, 2 Feb 92 21:44:31 GMT


In a previous article, [e-mail] (Rolf Meier) says:

> Has anyone out there developed the skill of decoding dtmf tones by
> ear?  Ever hear of anyone who has?  How about MF?

This isn't quite the same, but it's close.  My rescue squad pagers are
tripped by a standard Motorola two-tone sequence broadcast over the
fire dispatch channel.  These are sequential tones, not simultaneous,
however.  These tones are transmitted before the voice messages, and
after a few years, people tend to decode the tone pairs in their
heads.  Even when the calls are for other stations, most of us
recognize the busier tone pairs, and those for "interesting" calls,
i.e.  hazardous materials, high-angle rescue team, and helicopter
tones.


 _/acob DeGlopper, EMT-A, Wheaton Volunteer Rescue Squad -- [e-mail]

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

Date: Sun, 2 Feb 92 18:12:04 CST
From: Patton M. Turner <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: DTMF Decoding by Ear


> Has anyone out there developed the skill of decoding dtmf tones by
> ear?  Ever hear of anyone who has?  How about MF?

I've seen one person do it.  She was the daughter of a CPE installer,
and could decode DTMF since she was in grade school.  Apparently the
idea of using touch tones to dial a phone number intrigued her, and
she would play with the phone for hours on end.  The tones were
usually about as long as the average person dialing.  In all fairness
I should mention that she now has a MA in music, and is an accomplished
violinist.

I really upset her one day with my HT DTMF pad, as she had never heard
the A-D DTMF digits before.


Pat Turner    [e-mail]     KB4GRZ @ K4RY.AL.USA

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

Date: Sun, 2 Feb 92 11:07:11 PST
From: rlm@ms_aspen.hac.com (Robert L. McMillin)
Subject: Re: 5ESS (R) Sold in Japan


> I recall AT&T's efforts in the mid 1980's to sell that first 5ESS
> switch.  Reports indicated that those efforts stalled on the
> insistence by the Japanese prospect that the full source code driving
> the switch be provided.  So, it only took seven years for them to make
> their first sale ... There's a story in there somewhere.

Yeah ... so the question is, did AT&T knuckle under to unreasonable
Japanese demands for technology in exchange for false promises of
market access, as did American television manufacturers in the
sixties, or did they hold their ground?


Robert L. McMillin                     | Voice:    [phone]
Hughes Aircraft/Hughes Training, Inc.  | Fax:      [phone]
Los Angeles, CA                        | Internet: rlm@ms_aspen.hac.com

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

From: [e-mail] (Owsla editor)
Subject: Re: Question on NY Tel's Capabilities
Organization: University of Rochester - Rochester, New York
Date: Sun, 2 Feb 92 19:47:14 GMT


In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (david
niebuhr) writes:

> In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Scott Barman) writes:

>> I was interested in looking into some option for my home phone.  Items
>> like Caller-ID, Last Call Redial...

>> ...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.

> 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.

    I too can attest to the "screwed up" service that NY Telephone
offers on Long Island.  My old phone number was in the 718 area code,
i.e. a New York City number, yet, my entire central office was totally
crossbar.  I was always amazed when I would call up a friend in some
remote locale and here the gentle "eet-eet" of the ESS busy signal
instead of the hard "AAAAAHHHHHT-AAAAAHHHHHT" of the XB one.

And something I always think when people who know nothing about
telephony are screaming that the goddamned liberals/libertarians in
NYC should let CLID through: I always slap my head knowing that it was
just recently that Manhattan, center of the earth, phased out its last
crossbar switch, and probably the real reason NY Tel didn't put up
CLID (and exorbinant charges for it, of course) faster than a
jackrabbit is they are still working on becoming digital.

As you can see by my message header, I have wisely moved to a place
that has already been attested to as having good service, though good
luck to anyone who wants to CLID me through our messed up ROLM
system ... you can't win, really ...

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

Date: Sun, 2 Feb 92 14:43 PST
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: Indiana Bell Rate Increase


[e-mail] (Doctor Math) writes:

> Indiana Bell now claims that if they are not allowed to institute
> local measured calling for everybody, they will seek (and get?) a rate
> increase of 25%, which is about $5/month for the "average" residential
> customer.

This is classic telco double-speak. On the one hand they claim that
measured service is harmless and innocuous but then they threaten very
annoying rate increases as an alternative. What Indiana Bell seems to
be saying is that a switch to measured service will increase revenues
by 25%. This would seem to indicate that the 6% of the subscriber base
referred to would bear a tremendous amount of the additional burden.

Once again, let us remember that the major cost in providing local
service is the upkeep of the installed plant. This upkeep cost is the
same regardless of the traffic. If the aforementioned "6%" were to
suddenly stop using the telephone altogether, Indiana Bell's costs
would not diminish.


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

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

Date: Sun, 2 Feb 92 12:33:58 -0800
From: [e-mail] (Harold Hallikainen)
Subject: Re: Are Acoustic Couplers Still Around?
Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo


> Does anyone know of any acoustic couplers available for modems?  The
> specific problem I'm thinking of is when the business person travels
> and stays at a hotel with all digital phones.  The idea of unplugging
> the phone and plugging the wire into the modem won't work, because the
> modem expects a regular analog line, not the digital line.

    I seem to remember just such an acoustic coupler for lap top
modems.  It was manufactured by Product R&D (I think), a manufacturer
of modems for lap tops.  I tried calling them, but no one is there
today (Sunday).  You might want to give them a try Monday.  They are:

    Product R&D
    1194 Pacific Street
    San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
    phone [phone]


Harold Hallikainen              [e-mail]
Hallikainen & Friends, Inc.     [e-mail]
141 Suburban Road, Bldg E4      phone [phone] fax [phone]
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-7590  telex 4932775 HFI UI

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

From: "Richard Budd" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Czech Connection to American BBS
Date: Sun, 2 Feb  92 17:06:18 EST


In TELECOM Digest V12 #100 [e-mail] wrote:

> I have been setting up an electronic link on BITNET between a
> gymnasium in Prague, Czechoslovakia and a high school outside of
> Poughkeepsie, NY.

A fellow IBMer asked me to define clearly a European gymnasium warning
me that Americans could confuse it with sports arenas and physical
education

In Europe, a gymnasium (pronounced gim-NAH-zyoom) is the equivalent of
four years of American high school education plus the first two years
of undergraduate school.  Students who attend the gymnasium are
preparing for further education in the University.  On the other hand,
a European high school is analogous to the American
vocational-technical school in which students learn a trade.  The
Gymnazium Libenska in Prague includes a computer science curriculum
for students who seek a career in programming or telecommunications.

> 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.

To make it easier to explain what is going on, below is a chart of the
communication system we are setting up between Poughkeepsie and
Prague.  (My apologies for not including it with the original posting.)

        USA                                        CSFR
    Poughkeepsie                                  Prague      A
               _                               _              c
     _________|M|<-Node                 Node->|C|_________    c
    |         |A|       BITNET/EARN           |S|  CZECH  |   o
    | MARIST  |R|<============================|P|ACADEMYOF|   u
    | COLLEGE |I|============================>|G|SCIENCES |   n
    |_________|S|                             |A|_________|  |t
    |__GJB1___|T|                             |S|_GYMNAZ__|<-'
      |     |<-Phone                      Phone->|       |
      |     |  Lines                      Lines  |       |
      |     |                                    |       |
     |_|   |_|<-Modem      _             Modem->|_|     |_|
     _|_   _|_            |W|                   _|_     _|_
    | P | | M |           |I|                  | L |   | P |
    | O | | A | BBS->_____|L|                  | I |   | R |
    | K | | R |     |     |D|                  | B |   | O |
    | E | | L |-----|ACORN|C|====/ \           | E |   | S |
    | P | | B |     |_____|A|    |_| <-|       | N |   | E |
    | S | | O |           |T|          |       |   |   | K |
    | I | | R |           |!|          |       |   |   |   |
    |_E_| |_O_|                   Telephone    |___|   |___|

Electronic Mail Accounts

GYMNAZ@CSPGAS11   VM/CMS
GJB1@MARISTB      VM/MUSIC

The question is whether it is possible for the Czech students to
communicate with the bulletin board service through the BITNET link
rather than directly by telephone (which would be expensive under
Czechoslovak rates)

Replies would be most appreciated.  Sorry not to have been clear the
first time.


Richard Budd             Internet: [e-mail]
VM Systems Programmer    Bitnet:   [e-mail]
IBM - Sterling Forest    Phone:    [phone]

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

From: Jim Haynes <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: When Did Western Union Start to Die?
Date: 2 Feb 92 07:45:12 GMT
Organization: University of California, Santa Cruz


I'm tempted to say 1880, when I hear W.U. was offered all the Bell
patents for $1 million and turned it down, saying telephones are
worthless.  They were right, of course, as anyone knows who has been
involved in a game of telephone tag.

I'll have to look up what's in the business press and see if any of
the business pundits have written on this subject.

The cost of labor has been increasing for a long time, and WUs
business has always been pretty labor intensive.  The telephone
business has been a lot more successful in reducing the labor content
of the business, e.g.  customer toll dialing and consolidating
operator services.  The continually dropping costs for ordinary
customer-dialed long distance service have kept heavy pressure on
other services based on private wire systems.  Legal changes (e.g. the
Carterfone decision) have made the switched network available for a
lot of uses that formerly required private wire systems.

Right after World War II the Bell System started putting in a lot of
transcontinental bandwidth.  The bandwidth needs of television
networks paid for a lot of the freight.  WUs efforts were much more
modest, so their bandwidth was always more costly than Bell's.
Perhaps WU should have done what MCI did later in competing with Bell
in microwave services, and in fighting the legal battles necessary to
get the local phone companies to connect their customers.

WU put a lot of efforts into fax; perhaps they did too much too soon.
There have been several waves of fax, and only the most recent has
been a howling success.

WU was in the satellite business for a while.  I wonder if they made
or lost money at it.

One of their last big projects that I'm aware of was Autodin for the
military.  I wonder if that was a money maker or a money loser -- you
can lose a lot of money very fast where computers and software are
involved.  I wonder if WU realized what was happening when packet
switching came in; should they have competed with Telenet, Tymnet, and
other value-added carriers?  There was also a time when WU was
dabbling in the computer services business, which put them into
competition with the likes of General Electric.

Will we be asking in a few years, "When did IBM start to die?"?


[e-mail]    [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: Or the unthinkable -- "when did AT&T start to
die?". And it will eventually. After all, who in 1930 would have
thought that Western Union, The Bell System and privately owned
railroad passenger trains wouldn't be around forever? Two of those
three have all but vanished ... will Digest readers in 2030 post
articles 'remembering AT&T'?    PAT]

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

Subject: Re: When Did Western Union Start to Die?
Organization: I.E.C.C.
Date: 2 Feb 92 16:13:22 EST (Sun)
From: [e-mail] (John R. Levine)


Pat asks:

> 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?

Really, I think it was the advent of direct distance dialing.  As soon
as phone calls became fully automated, it became practically
inevitable that the price of phone service would drop through the
floor.  So many people had a telephone that WUTCO's ability to deliver
messages in person to a non-subscriber became irrelevant.  Also, Most
people can talk faster than they can type, and there are a lot more
phones than there are telex machines, so for a similar price most
people would rather make the phone call, talk to the recipient in
person, and know that they got the message.

So quite a few years ago telex and telegrams stopped being very useful
for domestic communication.  It was still useful for international
communication, since it worked well across time zones between people
who didn't speak the same language.  Group 3 fax was the nail in the
coffin, because cheap fax machines have all the same advantages and
piggyback on the increasingly cheap phone network.


Regards,


John Levine, [e-mail], {spdcc|ima|world}!iecc!johnl

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

Date: Sat, 1 Feb 92 20:11:01 PST
From: [e-mail] (Linc Madison)
Subject: Re: 800 OCN List
Organization: University of California, Berkeley


I noticed several interesting trivia bits in the 800 listing.

(1) 1-800-ATT-xxxx is owned by MCI.
(2) 1-800-MCI-xxxx is owned by AT&T.
(3) 1-800-SPR-xxxx is also owned by MCI.
(4) 1-800-ITT-xxxx is owned by AT&T.
(5) 1-800-WUT-xxxx is also owned by MCI.
(6) 1-800-USS-xxxx is actually owned by U.S. Sprint!
(7) 1-800-GTE-xxxx is owned by GTE/Florida.
(8) every single prefix of the form N02 or N12 that is in use is owned
    by Radio Common Carrier Paging, which has no prefixes that do NOT
    fit this pattern.  In particular, 1-800-RCCP-xxx is owned by AT&T.


Linc Madison  ==  [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #106
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa13717;
          2 Feb 92 22:35 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA30258
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 2 Feb 1992 20:47:16 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA24753
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 2 Feb 1992 20:46:56 -0600
Date: Sun, 2 Feb 1992 20:46:56 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #107

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 2 Feb 92 20:46:54 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 107

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    MCI Billing via CD-ROM (Ken Dykes)
    AT&T No Longer Billing For Bogus 800 (David Ptasnik)
    US West and Minitel (Peter da Silva)
    One Fax Machine On Two Phone Lines? (John A. Weeks III)
    A New Switch (Dave Johnston)
    LEC Non-Subscriber Calling Cards (Nigel Allen)
    Bell ?? Cuts Superconductor Research? (John R. Ruckstuhl, Jr)
    New Cellular Phone User Seeks Advice (Dan Schein)
    Questions About Technophone PC 205 (Felipe Barousse)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sun, 2 Feb 92 12:51:32 EST
From: [e-mail] (Ken Dykes)
Subject: MCI Billing via CD-ROM


The following messages were found alt.cd-rom. Since it has not
migrated in a natural fashion to comp.dcom.telecom, I thought I'd pass
them on.  There are other messages in the thread, this is just a
sample.


ken

 From: [e-mail] (Pete Bergstrom)
 Subject: re: mci to put bills on CD
 Date: 30 Jan 92 19:50:03 GMT
 Organization: Honeywell Systems & Research Center

Edward Vielmetti writes:
> Communications Week (6 Jan 1992) p.17 reports that MCI will put
> bills for its biggest customers (who currently generate on the
> order of 100,000 pages/mo) on CD-ROM.  "MCI is using CD technology
> developed by Eastman Kodak Co, Rochester NY. [using] Kodak's
> Photo ID Imaging Workstation".

> A few questions -
> This has to be a one-off sort of system, since there's no way you'd
> go through the hassle needed to make many $2 duplicates of an
> ordinary CD-ROM.  But media for the ordinary one-write systems is
> expensive enough (what, $75? $100?) that I wouldn't think it would be all
> that economical to do.

How much does 100,000 pages cost to buy, print, and deliver?  Suppose
next that this can be simply produced as just another mainframe report
right onto a disk.  Maybe by investing a few thousand dollars
(<$10,000) in an excellent access system they give their clients real
accounting control.  I know that at the company I used to work for,
the LD bill for just one city was about 1,000 pages long.  Nobody in
their right mind liked to go through it, but it had to be done
quarterly.


Pete

 From: [e-mail] ("Mary E. Helms --UNMCVM", MHELMS)
 Subject: re: mci to put bills on CD
 Date: 31 Jan 92 14:20:06 GMT
 Reply-To: "Mary E. Helms --UNMCVM(MHELMS)" <[e-mail]>
 Organization: FUNET-NGW


I figure that it would cost at least $.01 per page to print, so when
you figure out time and shipping, you are talking over $100,000 to
bill!! Why would cd-rom be cost effective? Although pressimng a cd-rom
disk would certainly cost more that creating tapes, you could fit the
entire bill on one cd-rom, but you'd have to use more than one tape.
CD-roms would create ease of access for clients.

Mary Helms   University of Nebraska Medical Center
[e-mail]   or [e-mail]


 From: [e-mail] (Kevin Darling)
 Subject: Re: mci to put bills on CD
 Date: 1 Feb 92 07:35:49 GMT
 Organization: North Carolina State University

[e-mail] (Edward Vielmetti) writes:

> Yes, I know that paper is expensive to print out and to ship, but
> that technology is pretty well entrenched and not easy to make
> obsolete just with a little effort.  Aside from the central
> facilities costs of producing one-off cd-roms, there's the whole
> matter of ensuring that customer sites are prepared to
> read the disks and make some use from them.

A computer and a CDROM drive.  It's highly likely that sites receiving
thousands of pages of phone bill a month already own such equipment.

If not, the cost is nothing compared to the ability gained to track phone
usage.

Of course, the downside might be: no more sneaking in long distance calls
to relatives and girlfriends :)

best - kevin <[e-mail]>

 From: [e-mail] (Edward Vielmetti)
 Subject: Re: mci to put bills on CD
 Organization: MSEN, Inc. -- Ann Arbor, MI


In article <[e-mail]> "Mary E. Helms
 -- UNMCVM(MHELMS)" <[e-mail]> writes:

> I figure that it would cost at least $.01 per page to print, so when
> you figure out time and shipping, you are talking over $100,000 to
> bill!! Why would cd-rom be cost effective?

Yes, I know that paper is expensive to print out and to ship, but that
technology is pretty well entrenched and not easy to make obsolete
just with a little effort.  Aside from the central facilities costs of
producing one-off cd-roms, there's the whole matter of ensuring that
customer sites are prepared to read the disks and make some use from
them.  Assume that's going to cost a new $1000 machine plus a $300
reader plus another $200-$700 in software to analyze things, to
produce 250 of these disks and send them out might require $0.5M in
capital investment.  Sure, it pays off pretty quickly if all of the
costs are properly allocated, but it's still a sizable piece of money
someone has to sink into infrastructure.

What is interesting about the process as some correspondents described
it to me is that the Kodak equipment uses (will use?)  write-once
CD-ROM technology that's substantially cheaper than the existing
stuff, with blanks in the $20-30 range rather than the $75-100.
Naturally, your prices may vary, and since you'd typically be buying a
service rather than just blank disks the end user cost may be quite a
bit different.  You can make a lot more mistakes at $25/pop and still
come out ahead in the end ...

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

From: David Ptasnik <[e-mail]>
Subject: AT&T No Longer Billing For Bogus 800
Date: Sat, 1 Feb 92 23:13:36 PDT


It was recently reported that you could call an 800 number that would
bill your phone number like a 900 number, if you stayed on the phone
and pressed a few keys.  The 800 number was an AT&T number.  When AT&T
was questioned, they admitted that this was a service they were
offering to their 800 customers.  Many people felt that this was an
improper thing for AT&T to be doing, and a few of them complained.

As of today, when you call the number you are no longer told that the
call will be billed to your phone number (that's the good news).
Instead you are told that you will be getting a bill in the mail (you
can guess what that is).  This implies to me that the company is
getting ANI data including the name and address of the party
responsible for the phone line (not the same as the person making the
call), and now billing for themselves.  Presumably they will turn
people who don't pay over to collection agencies.

It is my STRONG feeling that this is an inappropriate use of 800 ANI
data (another reason to allow blocking of your phone number to 800
numbers, but I'll leave that for the caller ID/privacy mailing list).
It means that individuals and organizations who don't allow dialing of
900/976 can still get bills for abuse of their lines thru 800 numbers.
I think this still violates the basic principle that 800 calls are
free calls.  This one ought to get a few courtrooms buzzing,
particularly as it appears to be a telesleaze bogus contest/prize
company that is pulling this scam.  Payphone owners look out.  You'll
start getting bills in the mail for phone calls that won't appear on
your phone bill, and which will be essentially impossible to block.


Dave        [e-mail]

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

Subject: US West and Minitel
Date: 2 Feb 92 10:49:46 CST (Sun)
From: [e-mail] (Peter da Silva)


Here's an interesting pair of messages recently posted to TELECOM:

First:

> Subject: Oregon PUC Hearing Summary

> 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.

Second:

> Subject: France's Minitel Service

> 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.

This is perfectly consistent with past LOC activity, for example
Southwestern Bell's attempt at killing multiline BBSes in Houston by
charging business rates shortly before starting their SourceLine
service.

The thing that's really sad about this is that the quality of the
services they provided were pitiful in comparison with even the
low-budget free BBSes running on TRS-80s, and SourceLine died in short
order.


Peter da Silva. Taronga Park BBS.  [phone]|1032 2400/n/8/1.

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

From: [e-mail] (John A. Weeks III)
Subject: One Fax Machine On Two Phone Lines?
Date: 2 Feb 92 19:41:46 GMT
Organization: NeWave Communications Ltd, Lake Wobegon, MN


I have a FAX machine that needs to both send and receive FAXes.  I
currently have it on a regular phone line -- which works OK.

I also have a have a bank of outbound-only long distance telephone
lines that are much cheaper to use than a regular phone line.

Is there some kind of box available that can switch one FAX machine
between two phone lines?  It would be OK to have it switch to the long
distance line for all outbound calls, it would be better to have it
switch only when the outbound phone number starts with a 1.


 -john-

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

Date: 31 Jan 92 09:34 +0000
From: [e-mail]
Subject: A New Switch


We at Santa Rosa Junior College are in the throngs of a RFP for a new
switch to service ourselves as well as the K-12 school district in our
area.  We'll have over 1300 stations at 22 locations throughout our
realm.

We're on a VERY tight schedule for the process and I'm trying to do
whatever I can to speed the process along.  Here's where you can help.
I'd like to hear from Telecom'ers that have installations that are
over 600 stations and/or make use of Voice Networking via tie lines,
T-1 or PRI.  We're expecting responses from all of the major vendors
and some of the not-so-major vendors including:

AT&T    Northern Telecom   Fujitsu   NEC   Intecom   Rolm
Mitel   Toshiba   Ericsson   Pac Bell(Centrex)

I'd appreciate any comments you can make about how the product has
worked for you, how the support has been, how reliable it is and
whatever other comments you think would be helpful.

PLEASE respond to me directly rather than to the list as I'm sure PAT
has better things to do that wade through yet more responses.  If
there is sufficient response and interest I will compile the
information and make it available through FTP.

Thanks for your help.


David Johnston                              Santa Rosa Junior College
Supervisor, Campus Data/Telecommunications  1501 Mendocio Ave.
[e-mail]              Santa Rosa, CA  95401
Voice 707 527 4853                          Fax [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Nigel Allen)
Date: 1 Feb 92 (10:31)
Subject: LEC Non-Subscriber Calling Cards
Organization: Echo Beach, Toronto


Other people have mentioned the "non-subscriber" calling cards issued
by long-distance carriers to people (such as university students)
without exchange carrier telephone service in their own names.

In some areas, people without telephone service can get local exchange
carrier calling cards as well. In Bell Canada territory, a "deferred
applicant" calling card can only be issued with the approval of a
second-level Bell manager, and many residential service reps are
unfamiliar with the issuing procedure (or even with the fact that such
calling cards exist).

The British Columbia Telephone Company (B.C. Tel) will issue
non-subscriber calling cards as a matter of routine. The service reps
ask questions (much like those on a bank credit card application) from
an electronic script. You have to provide an address in British
Columbia, but this can be the address of a friend or relative.

I don't know whether Bell companies in the U.S. or non-Bell local
exchange carriers issue non-subscriber calling cards, but I suspect
that policies vary significantly between carriers.


Canada Remote Systems.  Toronto, Ontario   NorthAmeriNet Host

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

From: [e-mail] (John R Ruckstuhl Jr)
Subject: Bell ?? Cuts Superconductor Research?
Organization: EE Dept at UF
Date: Fri, 31 Jan 92 12:58:19 GMT


Sometime during the last week, I either saw on TV, or read in the {Wall
Street Journal}, a news report which indicated that somebody just made
a big cut in their superconductor research program.  Now I don't
remember if it was Bell Labs or Bellcore.  Who was it, please?

Thank you,


John R Ruckstuhl, Jr                    [e-mail]
Dept of Electrical Engineering          [e-mail], uflorida!ruck
University of Florida                   [e-mail], sphere!ruck

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

From: heimat!rehab1!rehab2![e-mail] (Dan Schein)
Subject: New Cellular Phone User Seeks Advice
Date: Fri, 31 Jan 92 14:59:45 EST


I am new to the world of cellular phones (OK, so I waited for the
price to drop ;-). Like all my toys I have the desire to know more.
Can anyone send me details on exactly how the communications work.
Things like how they pass ID's and what type of ID's are used. How
another system knows who I am when in 'roam' mode. How I tell what
system I am roaming in (on?). What all the various portions of a NAM
are. Details on the MID part works.  Basically everything you can tell
me will be appreciated.


Reading Rehabilitation Hospital
Dan Schein - Information Systems
RD 1 Box 250       Reading, PA 19607
[e-mail]   -or-   ....{uunet,rutgers}!cbmvax!rehab1!rehab2!dans


[Moderator's Note: Please respond direct to Dan, thanks.   PAT]

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

Date: Sat, 1 Feb 92 18:35:28 -0500
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Questions About Technophone PC 205


Hi all:

I just got a new celular (portable) phone. Curiously, I assume I
should not have the procedure to program new NAM's (Number Assignment
Module ??)  into my phone. The case is that I DO have such procedure
because of a mistake of the dealer; he had to tell it to me.

The phone is a Technophone PC 205. What I want to ask to you folks who
know about cellular technology, is what each of the following terms is
and what is it used for ?


NAM (Num. Assignment Module ?)
AMPS_A (or AMPS_B) (It asks which one is the default)
SID (System ID ?)
MIN2 (This has the country code and city code)
MTS ( Same as the above)
MIN1 (This parameter's value is the actual cellular phone number)
Number (That parameter has the actual cellular number)
ACCOLC (This has the value '10', I dont have an idea of what it is)
EX (This has just the number one '1' stored)
AREA (This is an alphanumeric field containing the name of my
       cellular area. Are cellular areas assigned names, or I can
       just write in this field any label? )
INT'L (This has the number I dial to get the celular operator)
Emerg (This has the emergency phone #, such as 911 in the US)
Oper (Another number to get the operator)


I would like to know what is the meaning of each one of these acronyms
and what is it used for. Also, if any of you has a Technophone (which
is made in the UK, by the way) and has some hints on how to use it or
program it, I would be more than glad to exchange some info with you.

One last thing: if any of you have a file about cellular telephony I
would like to see it. I am interested on how it works, standards,
techonlogies etc. (OR an ftp place where I could get this kind of
information.)

Thanks in advance for your help.

Regards.


Felipe Barousse
[e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: Please respond direct to Felipe, thanks.    PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #107
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa14745;
          2 Feb 92 23:12 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA04733
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 2 Feb 1992 21:29:28 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA10333
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 2 Feb 1992 21:29:11 -0600
Date: Sun, 2 Feb 1992 21:29:11 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Intel's High Speed Modem White Paper


Here is another submission of interest to readers involved in high
speed modem communications. It was too long to be included in a
regular issue of the Digest.

PAT


  From: [e-mail] (System Administrator)
  Subject: Intel's High Speed Modem White Paper
  Organization: Crash TimeSharing, El Cajon, CA
  Date: Sun, 02 Feb 1992 00:16:10 GMT


                  HIGH SPEED MODEM COMMUNICATIONS

A modem is essential for the well-connected PC.  And the right modem
can not only broaden your computer's horizons but save you time and
money, too.  If you're thinking of getting a modem, particularly a
high speed modem, this paper explains basic terms and concepts and
provides background information that can help you make an intelligent
choice.

o  Expanding the Reach of Your Computer

A modem is among the most useful items you can add to your PC or
Macintosh computer. With a modem, you can log on to your office
computer from across town or across the country. You can download
files, send electronic mail or play electronic chess with a partner on
the other side of the globe. A modem also offers a cost-effective way
to link local area networks (LANs) or access remote databases.

Today's high speed modems not only bring all these capabilities to the
desktop, but also offer faster data transfer speeds and more accurate
communications than ever before. Not surprisingly, they're the fastest
growing segment of the modem marketplace.

The word modem is a contraction of MOdulate and DEModulate. A modem
converts-or MOmodulates-a computer's digital signals into analog
signals that can travel over phone lines. On the other end of the
phone connection, a receiving modem DEModulates the analog signals,
converting them back to the digital form computers read.

How fast is a "high speed" modem?

Defining the term "fast" in the computer field is like trying to hit a
moving target. When PCs were introduced in the early 1980s, a modem
that could transmit data at 300 bits per second (bps) was considered
fast. Not long afterward, 2,400 bps became the norm for "high speed"
PC communications, and looked as if it would last indefinitely.

Even a few years ago, the technology to support modem communications
at 9,600 bps was expensive and difficult to implement. Worse, many
vendors of 9,600 bps modems used proprietary protocols, so if you
bought a high speed modem, you had no confidence it would communicate
with anything except another modem from the same vendor.

o  How Fast is Fast?

All that has changed. Today, for under $600, 9,600 bps modems have set
new expectations for fast, error-free communications. Most vendors now
support international standards, such as the V.32 standard for 9,600
bps modems, which ensure compatibility among different vendors products.
A new modem standard, V.32bis, is once again raising the "high speed"
flag to new heights-14.4 kbps (14,400 bps), or 50 percent faster than
V.32.

And, thanks to data compression techniques, effective throughput can
be as much as four times higher-up to 38.4 kbps, for a 9,600 bps V.32
modem, and up to 57.6 kbps for a 14.4 kbps, V.32bis modem. That's 192
times faster than the 300 bps modem of the early PC era.

o  Time Equals Money

Who needs a high speed modem?

A fast modem saves you time and money, particularly if you often
transfer large files -- if you're in a field such as desktop
publishing, computer-aided design, accounting, graphics or computer
programming, for example, or if you download files from bulletin board
services and data services. A faster modem also speeds up response
time during interactive sessions-accessing a computer from a computer
in another location. For example, if through remote control
communications software you're using another computer's word processor
or graphics editor, you'll spend less time waiting for screen updates.

In modem communications, time savings translate directly into money
savings-in long-distance phone charges and on-line service charges. In
fact, if you transfer a one-megabyte file once a week and pay
long-distance line charges of $0.24 per minute, a 14.4 kbps modem can
save you more than $800 over the course of a year compared to sending
the same file with a 2,400 bps modem.

             ** TIME = MONEY: SENDING  A 1MB FILE ONCE A WEEK **
 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Modem Speed  Transmission  Transmission   Transmission  Pay Back in Number of
and Average    Time/Week     Cost/Week     Cost/Year    Megabytes and Hours of
Throughput                                              File Transfer Usage
 _____________________________________________________________________________
2,400 bps      70 min         $16.80       $873.60       Mbytes     Hours
 _____________________________________________________________________________
9,600 bps
21.333 kbps     8 min         $ 1.92       $124.50         40        5.33
 _____________________________________________________________________________
14.4 kbps
32 kbps         5.25 min      $ 1.26       $ 65.52         44        3.85
 _____________________________________________________________________________

At those rates, a higher speed modem pays for itself within a matter
of hours.  A 14.4 kbps modem priced at $699 pays for itself in less
than four hours of file transfer usage. A 9,600 bps modem priced at
$599 pays for itself in around five hours.

o  Standards for Modems

Standards, such as those established by companies like Intel and IBM
for the PC industry, help ensure compatibility among products from
different vendors, offering users peace of mind and a more open
marketplace. For modems, as for many other communication and
electronics products, international standards are formulated by the
International Consultative Committee for Telephone and Telegraph. This
organization, sponsored by the United Nations, is known as the CCITT,
after the initials of the French form of its name.

Four CCITT standards are important for high speed modems:

    *  V.32 and V.32bis specify modulation techniques and other protocols for
       modem communications at 9,600 bps and 14.4 kbps, respectively. (bis
       indicates the second version of a specification.)

    *  V.42bis specifies data compression techniques that make it possible to
       transmit up to four times as much data in the same amount of time.

    *  V.42 specifies error control techniques that help ensure accurate
       transmissions even over noisy phone lines.


                   ** CCITT International Modem Standards **

 _____________________________________________________________________________
  Standard        Introduced              Specification for
 _____________________________________________________________________________
  V.32bis          Feb. 1991              14,400/12,000/9,600/7,200/4,800
                                          bps modulation
 _____________________________________________________________________________
  V.32               1984                 9,600/4,800 bps modulations
 _____________________________________________________________________________
  V.22bis            1981                 2,400 bps modulation
 _____________________________________________________________________________
  V.22               1978                 1,200 bps modulation
 _____________________________________________________________________________
  V.21               1964                 300 bps modulation
 _____________________________________________________________________________
  V.42bis            1989                 Data compression (4:1)
 _____________________________________________________________________________
  V.42               1989                 Error control
 _____________________________________________________________________________

o  High Speed Modulation: V.32 and V.32bis

A modem's speed depends on its baud rate-the measurement of how many
times per second a modem transmits and the number of bits of data sent
with each baud. It's a bit like a machine gun that fires a certain
number of times per minute but fires several bullets with each "shot."

For example, 2,400 bps modem runs at 600 baud and sends four bits with
each baud. Today's 9,600 bps and 14.4 kbps modems operate at 2,400
baud, but transmit four and six bits per baud, respectively.

Unlike fax modems, which are typically half-duplex devices that take
turns sending and receiving data, data modems are full duplex-two
communicating modems send and receive data at the same time.

At slower speeds, data modems handle full-duplex communications by
sending and receiving at different signal frequencies. This approach
doesn't work at 9,600 bps or higher because the bandwidth of ordinary
voice phone lines simply isn't wide enough. Instead, V.32 and V.32bis
modems use a sophisticated technique called echo cancellation. The
modem isolates and filters out the "echo," the interference that
occurs when a modem receives its own signal. That is, the modem
"listens" to what it is sending as well as to what it is receiving,
then subtracts out the tones it has sent. What remains are the
received tones, which the modem passes on to the host PC.

Two modems communicate at the fastest speed that the slower modem is
capable of. So that you can communicate with the large installed base
of slower modems, most high speed modems are backward compatible-they
can operate at a slower speed to match the modem on the other end of
the line.

o  Data Compression and Increased Throughput: V.42bis

Data compression techniques increase a modem's effective throughput.
With data compression, the sending modem "squeezes" the data by
scanning it for redundancies and encoding it in a more compact form.
The receiving modem restores the data to its original form.

The V.42bis standard compresses data by as much as 400 percent, which
means a modem can send up to four times as much information in a given
time period.  That results in a maximum data transmission rate of 57.6
kbps for a V.32bis modem, 38.4 kbps for a V.32 modem.

Another method of data compression is a de facto standard known as
Microcom Networking Protocol (MNP) Level 5. MNP 5 provides half or
less of the data compression capability of V.42bis-19.2 kbps maximum
throughput for a V.32 modem, and 28.8 kbps for a V.32bis modem.

The throughput gained from data compression varies depending on the
type of file. For example, print files, word processing files and
spreadsheet files are generally highly compressible and will show a
significant speedup, while .COM, .EXE and ARCed files have low
compressibility and show relatively little speedup.

Data compression can occur only when two communicating modems support
the same compression techniques. A modem that supports both MNP 5 and
V.42bis gives you the best chance of doing data compression with the
modem on the other end of your communication link.

o  Error Correction and Accuracy: TCM and V.42

Telephone lines were designed for transmitting voices, not data, and
the ordinary background noise or static on many phone lines can
introduce data errors. Noise is a particular problem during high speed
transmissions, because a second of noise at 9,600 bps, for example,
can damage 32 times more data than at 300 bps. In addition, because
phone lines are analog, signals tend to weaken and degrade over long
distances.

V.32 and V.32bis specify a sophisticated error correction mechanism
called trellis-coded modulation (TCM). TCM adds an extra bit to the
symbols transferred with each baud and uses that bit to identify
errors and attempt to repair them as they come into the modem.

When Trellis Coded Modulation isn't supported or is unable to repair
errors, two error detection schemes are available: the Link Access
Procedure for Modems (LAPM) specified in the V.42 standard, and the de
facto standard of MNP Levels 2-4. With both methods, the receiving
modem checks incoming data for errors and, if errors have occurred,
asks the sending modem to retransmit the data until no more errors are
detected. Both methods can be used with modems of any speed. LAPM is a
requirement for V.42bis.

In addition, some high speed modems can monitor the quality of the
phone connection and adjust their speed in response to line
conditions. The modem falls back (slows down) if too many errors are
occurring, and falls forward (speeds up) if line quality improves.
Modems that support this capability vary in how quickly they can
identify changes in line quality; a modem that recognizes and can
change speed quickly improves both accuracy and performance.

As with transmission rates and data compression, two modems use the
highest-level of error control that both support.

o  Intel's High Speed Modems

Intel Corporation markets a broad line of internal and external modems
and is one of the industry's largest suppliers of 2400 bps modem chip
sets. Intel's high speed modems, the 9600EX and the 14.4EX are
external modems that connect to the serial port of a personal computer
such as the IBM PC, XT, AT, PS/2 or Apple Macintosh.


                At a Glance: Intel's 14.4EX and 9600EX Modems
 ___________________________________________________________________________
Feature                    Benefits                         14.4EX    9600EX
 ___________________________________________________________________________
Full V.32bis compliance    14.4 kbps communications,
                            time and money savings,           XX
                            international compatibility
 ___________________________________________________________________________
Full V.32 compliance       9,600 bps communications,
                            time and money savings,           XX        XX
                            international compatibility
 ___________________________________________________________________________
V.42bis data compression   Up to 4x increase in effec-
                            tive throughput, compatibi-       XX        XX
                            lity with industry standards
 ___________________________________________________________________________
V.42, MNP 1-4 and TCM      Ensures accurate commu-
                            nications, even over noisy        XX        XX
                            phone lines
 ___________________________________________________________________________
Free Crosstalk             Reduces installation and
Communicator software       configuration time, saves         XX        XX
                            cost of communications
                            software
 ___________________________________________________________________________
Automatic speed            Provides maximum
optimization with          performance under adverse        200ms    8-12sec
fallforward and fallback   line conditions
 ___________________________________________________________________________
Quick connection feature   Reduces connection time
                            to under six seconds,
                            saves time and money             XX
 ___________________________________________________________________________
Automatic negotiation of   Ensures connection at
speed, error control and    highest common feature set       XX        XX
data compression
 ___________________________________________________________________________
Support for industry and   Flexibility to communicate
de facto modulation         with greatest number of          XX        XX
standards                   existing modems
 ___________________________________________________________________________
Automatic re-establishment Increases communications
of connection if carrier    reliability without user         XX        XX
loss or power disruption    intervention
occurs on leased lines
 ___________________________________________________________________________
MNP 5 data compression     Up to 2x increase in
                            throughput, compatibility        XX        XX
                            with older modems
 ___________________________________________________________________________
Synchronous and            Allows communication
asynchronous operation      with PCs, terminals,             XX        XX
                            host computers
 ___________________________________________________________________________
Hayes AT command set       Broad software compatibility      XX        XX
 ___________________________________________________________________________
Easy configuration         Ease of use, peace of mind
and installation                                             XX        XX
 ___________________________________________________________________________
3-year warranty,           Convenience, low cost of
free technical support     ownership, peace of mind          XX        XX
 ___________________________________________________________________________

                               -----------

UUCP:     crash!pro-gallup!samp           |  pro-gallup 2400/1200/300 24 hours
ARPA:     crash!pro-gallup![e-mail]  |                     [phone]












Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa18366;
          3 Feb 92 1:44 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA08623
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 2 Feb 1992 23:52:19 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA31034
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 2 Feb 1992 23:52:03 -0600
Date: Sun, 2 Feb 1992 23:52:03 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #108

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 2 Feb 92 23:52:00 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 108

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Ameritech Voice Mail Commands and Security Flaws (TELECOM Moderator)
    Re: 900 Number From Payphone (Harold Hallikainen)
    Re: PIC's From RBOC Payphone (Tim Gorman)
    Re: Decoding DTMF by Ear (Larry Rachman)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sun, 2 Feb 1992 23:13:53 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <telecom>
Subject: Ameritech Voice Mail Commands and Security Flaws


I recently had an occassion to discuss Ameritech's Voicemail service
in detail with one of the folks at the help desk. The equipment used
here is manufactured and maintained by Tygon Corporation, which is a
subsidiary of Ameritech. The service offered to residential phone
users is known as 'Message Minder".

The instructions given to residential users are very skimpy, and quite
a few commands are not documented at all. Apparently some of them are
only of real use to business subscribers, but others are present for
whoever finds some use for them.

It seems there is only one machine (?) for Chicago-area subscribers,
with several local dial-in numbers to retrieve messages. The dial-in
numbers are scattered around the LATA so that everyone gets a local,
toll-free number. The 'authorized' method for retrieving messages is
to call your assigned dial-in, and on request, enter your personal ID,
which is not the same as your phone number. We've found it is also
possible to retrieve your messages by (a) calling any of the dial-in
numbers and entering your ID, or (b) calling your own phone number --
with *70 prepended if necessary to force a busy condition -- and when
voicemail answers, entering # to go into 'user override mode',
followed by your ID. Still another method is to call the phone number
of *any user with Ameritech voicemail on the same machine* and when
voicemail answers, enter # to go into the override mode.  The system
apparently does not bother to match the calling phone number with the
ID entered, else why would it be possible to call the number of
another user then #-ID into your own account?

Once into 'user override mode', either by calling your assigned
dial-in number and entering your ID on request or by calling a mailbox
and entering # plus ID, several commands are possible, only a few of
which are documented for residential users.

All commands begin with zero on the Tygon machines:

011 retrieve new messages
012 retrieve saved messages

    3 to back up ten seconds in the message
   33 to back up to the start of the message
    4 to go forward ten seconds in the message
   44 to go forward to the end of the message

   After the message has played out, 5 to delete it; 7 to save it.

071 make a new outgoing message
072 make a new outgoing announcement

The difference here seems to be a message allows for incoming
messages, while an announcement is played out to the caller, but no
incoming messages are accepted.

The next set of commands are not documented:

050  Enable/disable Touchscan

     If this is enabled, then each message retrieved using 011 or 012
     will have the source of the message played first. Messages from
     another mailbox (more about this later) will identify the mailbox
     which sent the message. Messages from an incoming phone call will
     only be identified by the phrase 'Call Answering'.

051  Tone Response Mode
052  Expanded Voice Response Mode

     Either one turns off the other in the process. I am not sure what
     happens here but it seems there are very few voice prompts when
     tone response mode is on. I found it sort of confusing to use.

053  Enable/Disable Password Protection

     If disabled, entering 053 will cause a prompt for up to four more
     digits which then must be appended to the ID code when calling
     in. If enabled, then entering 053 will disable the password, and
     allow access using only the six-digit ID.

054  Enable/Disable Time Stamp

     Do you wish to know the time and date of incoming messages?

055  Enable/Disable Personalized Addresses

     This seems to only be available to business users. I am not sure
     how it works.

056  Group Code Maintainence

     Another business only feature, entering 056 puts you into a
     sub-level of commands which allow you to start/maintain a
     'mailing list' of addresses. When sending to another mailbox (see
     about this later) a 'group code' can be used instead to mail
     to everyone in the group.

     Group codes seem to run from 10 through 19. To add an address,
     press 1. To delete an address, press 2. There are a few other
     commands here also, to review the list, etc.

057  Enable/Disable Message Waiting Indicator

     For most of us, this is simply the stutter dial tone. If for
     some reason you don't want it, this will turn it off. If a lamp
     on your phone is the indicator, this will prevent it from
     lighting on messages. I wonder why anyone would want this
     disabled?

058  Enable/Disable Auto Touch

     This gives a fast start on playing out new messages. Instead of
     the system saying "you have X new messages, press 2 if you would
     like to receive them", once you have logged in with your ID the
     system simply starts playing out new messages, if any.

059  ???  "I'm sorry, your mailbox does not allow this special
     function code" was the response given both to my own ID and that
     of a demonstration business ID code I was permitted to try.

060  Enable/Disable Queue Link

     This apparently is a business only code, and has to do with the
     linking or unlinking of various mailboxes to a front end box.
     At least, I think so. Maybe someone will correct me.

061 through 068 returned "mailbox does not allow this special function
    code."

069  Enable/Disable Touch Off.

     I have no idea what this is.

070, and 073 through 098 brought the 'not allowed' message.
000 through 010 brought the 'not allowed' message.
013 through 049 brought the 'not allowed' message.

099  Plays out the system time.

The only command which does not begin with zero followed by two digits
is the one which says 'press 2 to receive messages' from the very
top menu if there are new or saved messages in the system, and as
noted above it can be eliminated in favor of auto touch (058) which
immediatly starts playing out messages.

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

I alluded to 'sending messages' a couple times above. Residential
voice mail, a/k/a Message Minder is configured only to *receive*
messages either from another mailbox or 'call answering'. The only
time the user is permitted to send a message is when a message in your
box came from another box on the system. In those cases, in addition
to the choices: Press 5 to delete the message, or
                Press 7 to save the message

a third choice will be offered:  "Press 8 to respond to the message".
But, the residential user cannot otherwise originate messages to other
boxes, unless another box sent to him first.

With business users, the situation is a little different. When a
business user calls in and presents his ID (and password, if it has
been enabled by 053 + four digits) his menu allows:

                Press 011 to recieve new messages
                Press 012 to receive saved messages
OR -- enter the mailbox you wish to send a message to.

Mailbox addresses are seven digits -- telephone numbers, in fact. The
'address' (telephone number) is valid if the telephone number is a
subscriber to voicemail. For example, entering any old seven digits
got me a response that the address was not valid. But when I entered
my own seven digit telephone number (from the demo business account I
was playing with), the system cheerfully accepted it and took my
dictated message which it then dropped in my (actual) mailbox. And
when I later accessed my own box, I heard the test message I had left
myself earlier, and was given an opportunity to "press 8 to respond to
the message."

Since telephone numbers never begin with 0 or 1, the functions all
begin with 0. It appears beginning an address with 1 causes the system
to look at the 'group codes' discussed above as the source.

A curious type of address I found was known as a 'network address'.
These all seemed to begin with 200-xxxx through 219-xxxx. Any seven
digit mailbox address beginning in that series was accepted and the
system referred to it as a 'network address'.  Does this imply that
the voicemail box can correspond with others of its own kind in other
places?

On the business side of things, when asked to enter an address to send
a message to, entering the # key brought this response:

"I'm sorry, your box does not allow outgoing calls to phone numbers".

 From the residential side, the # was simply taken as an invalid entry.

The * key always disconnected the call from the top menu; from
sub-menus such as setting up your group codes or when entering
addresses to send messages, the * aborts the current activity and
the caller moves up one level.

    ** How good is their security??  **

I have to wonder ... from a few simple experiments it seems to me they
did not even bother to change any of the demo ID numbers (all of which
seem to be the more powerful accounts with the ability to send
messages to other boxes). Maybe they did not even bother to change the
default root password for all I know!

Another thing is their claim that residential users may not use a DID
number to call into their own box. For example, I had asked for the
number I am sent to on busy/no answer forwarding in order that I might
simply call-forward to that number if I did not want to recieve calls
at all.

No can do, said the lady at the help line ... business users get a DID
number to do what you ask, residential users do not.

But I said there must be some number I am forwarding to on busy/no
answer. She admitted there was, but said if I were to call it direct
I'd *always* receive a message saying 'due to technical difficulties
voicemail is unable to take the call ... '

I found that curious, and set about looking for the DID number myself.
The folks at Ameritech voicemail seem to find it convenient to have
all their equipment in one easy to find place ... and a certain
exchange in the 312 area code is, shall we say, chock-full of voice
mail. The whole prefix is nothing but Tygon machines sitting there,
telling you so-and-so is not at his desk right now, to leave a
message, etc. A certain default ID worked on every one of them ...

A couple numbers were located which did indeed answer with the curious
message that 'voicemail is having technical difficulties ... if you
wish to leave a message, please wait for the tone, then enter the
seven digit number of the person you are trying to reach ..."
hmmmm...  "or, if you have a mailbox on this system, enter the mailbox
number" ... hmmm again ... and the default worked every time.

I've been vague on purpose in this message. I have no intention of
teaching people how to hack Ameritech voicemail. I don't want any part
of it, and it seems to me my own account is less than secure by virtue
of the fact a lot of folks could try the simple tests I did and *they*
might be inclined to go further.

So don't bother writing me asking what exchange all the equipment is
in, or for a few of the dial-in numbers, or what an ID code looks
like. That's for me to know and you to get elsewhere. But I do hope
Ameritech tightens up a little ... if someone like me, with an IQ
somewhere above 90 can figure it out, imagine if a really dedicated
hacker decided to work on it.


PAT

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

Date: Sun, 2 Feb 92 18:06:52 -0800
From: [e-mail] (Harold Hallikainen)
Subject: Re: 900 Number From Payphone
Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo


>    I agree with Pat. Channel 9 TV is three miles away from me.
> They run "National Equirer" type news. Their big thing is "Live
> Reports" -- Talking Heads ten minutes away from the studio talking about
> something that happened there hours ago.

>    As an ex-gutter reporter, I think they are hopeless.

>    KCAL TV claim they are in Norwalk CA, but are on Melrose
> Avenue (On the Paramount lot) in Hollywood. No one can tell me why
> they perpetuate this lie -- their transmitter is on Mount Wilson I
> believe, along with all the other TV transmitters. But they are owned
> by Disney, so maybe Mickey runs the news department.

    Years and years ago, the FCC assigned channel 9 to the
community of Norwalk (see FCC rule 73.606(b)).  At that time, stations
were required to put their main studio in their licensed community
unless they got a waiver of the rules (generally called an Arizona
waiver, after an early case).  Now, stations may put their main studio
anywhere in the licensed community or within the "city grade contour"
(between 74 and 80 dB above 1 uV/meter, depending on channel).  See
FCC rules 73.1125 and 73.685(a).

    Stations are to run a station identification on the hour.  The
station is to consist of the call letters followed immediately by the
licensed community.  The licensee name, channel number or frequency
may be inserted between the call letters and community, but nothing
else may.  See FCC 73.1201.

    So, KCAL's identification with Norwalk is probably just to
comply with FCC rules.  I seem to remember reading somewhere (probably
Broadcasting magazine) that KCAL may be interested in changing their
licensed community.


Harold Hallikainen              [e-mail]
Hallikainen & Friends, Inc.     [e-mail]
141 Suburban Road, Bldg E4      phone [phone] fax [phone]
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-7590  telex 4932775 HFI UI

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

Date: 02 Feb 92 21:01:11 EST
From: tim gorman <[e-mail]>
Subject: PIC's From RBOC Payphone


[e-mail] writes in TELECOM Digest V12 #104:

> AT&T has an enormous lead on its competitors because so much of its
> equipment was bought during its days of (morally wrongful) monopoly,
> and was paid off before its competitors were allowed to exist.  Judge
> Greene felt, and I agree, that AT&T should not be allowed to use this
> unfair advantage to drive its competitors out of business.  STP pairs
> are not unique as examples.

Hey folks, let's get our history right here. SS7 was just a glint in
someone's eyes at divestiture. Much of AT&T's facilities were still
analog at divestiture, they too have been upgraded since divestiture.
AT&T's 4ESS's, of course, were mostly in place, but with depreciation
on telecom equipment being what it is, there is no way it was "paid
for". It would appear to me, therefore, that much of AT&T's
infrastructure today has no monopoly basis.

In fact, I'm not sure that AT&T's existing investment couldn't be
considered more of a hinderance than a help. Competitors didn't have
existing investment (debt, stock, bond issues, etc.) to worry about in
putting their networks in place.

As Andy pointed out, it isn't cheap if you want to play in the game
and provide a quality network. There are facility carriers and
STP-network providers out there that have seen fit to provide quality
networks that anyone can buy use of. They apparently were not hindered
in their ability to "compete" with AT&T.


Tim Gorman - SWBT
*opinions are mine, any resemblance to official policy is coincidence*

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

Date: 02 Feb 92 21:05:55 EST
From: Larry Rachman <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Decoding DTMF by Ear


In a recent issue of TELECOM, Rolf Meier ([e-mail])
writes:

> Has anyone out there developed the skill of decoding dtmf tones by
> ear?  Ever hear of anyone who has?  How about MF?

Absolutely!! Back in the days of yore (homemade 2-out-of-6 tone
generators, etc ... ;-)), I knew at least two people who could do both
DTMF and MF in their heads quite well. I don't know that it was of
much value, except as a novelty; though it was great fun at parties.

Then again, many of us have the ability to a limited extent. I can't
decode the digits by ear, but when I reach for the pad without looking
and wind up using 789 as the home keys instead of 456, I know
something is wrong as soon as I hear the first digit.

I suspect one could cultivate the skill by making 'language' tapes to
play in the car while commuting. There is a fellow selling Morse Code
training tapes that consist of a constant rhythm-box beat in the
background with a vocal track reciting each letter of the alphabet
followed by an instrumental of the letter in morse, to the rhythm of
the background. I ran into this at an MIT flea market last fall ...
weird!!


Larry Rachman, WA2BUX        [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #108
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa18631;
          3 Feb 92 1:55 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA16669
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 3 Feb 1992 00:17:30 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA13142
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 3 Feb 1992 00:17:13 -0600
Date: Mon, 3 Feb 1992 00:17:13 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #109

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 3 Feb 92 00:17:11 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 109

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Telecom and Science Fiction (Ron Dippold)
    Re: PIC's From RBOC Payphones (John Higdon)
    Re: Seeking Simple Telephone Line Simulator (Stuart Lynne)
    Re: Supreme Court Action Restricts 900 Porn Services (John Higdon)
    Re: Are Acoustic Couplers Still Around? (Julian Macassey)
    Re: AT&T No Longer Billing For Bogus 800 (David G. Cantor)
    Re: DTMF Decoding by Ear (Harold Hallikainen)
    Is There a List of 213 and 310 Prefixes (John R. Levine)
    Answer Supervision on DM (Tim Gorman)
    Cellular and IN Service (Mitsutaka Ito)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Ron Dippold)
Subject: Re: Telecom and Science Fiction
Organization: Qualcomm, Inc., San Diego, CA
Date: Mon, 3 Feb 1992 03:07:06 GMT


[e-mail] (Rune Henning Johansen FBA) writes:

> We're collecting information about the role of science fiction within
> telecom.  We're investigating how authors and film makers describe
> telecom networks, both technologically and sociologically -- and how
> their views may have influenced the use and development of tele-
> communications.

The most obvious example is Arthur C. Clarke, the inventor of the
telecommunications satellite.  A week after Hiroshima, he wrote an
article proposing a network of such satellites at 22000 miles altitude
above the equator.  22000 miles so they'd remain fixed over the same
spot on the Earth.  This piece was published in {Wireless World},
October, 1945.

He said that he didn't think that celestial mechanics would ever be
turned into anything commercially feasible (yet another example of
underestimating the speed of technology), so he didn't even attempt to
patent it.  However, he did keep plugging the idea in his books and
short stories.

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

Date: Sun, 2 Feb 92 18:58 PST
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: PIC's From RBOC Payphones


[e-mail] writes:

> AT&T has an enormous lead on its competitors because so much of its
> equipment was bought during its days of (morally wrongful) monopoly,
> and was paid off before its competitors were allowed to exist.  Judge
> Greene felt, and I agree, that AT&T should not be allowed to use this
> unfair advantage to drive its competitors out of business.

Each and every day that goes by, this becomes a weaker and weaker
argument. Yes, AT&T had an initial advantange. But time marches on,
technology advances, and if AT&T just sat back on its installed base,
it would be very quickly surpassed by the competition. Example: AT&T
did not have a fully digital long distance network in place at
divestiture. It spent untold sums putting one on line on the heels of
Sprint's competition.

> If AT&T were deregulated tomorrow, it would lower its prices to cost
> for, say, one month -- and all its competitors would go bankrupt!

This is pure nonsense. AT&T is spending vast sums upgrading its
network just like everyone else. The past eight years have brought
tremendous changes in the telephone industry. To sit there and claim
that the head-start AT&T had at the beginning of divestiture is much
of a factor today unduly lets the competition off the hook for
responsibility of its own destiny. Remember, a lot of the things (such
as coin service) that AT&T is solely capable of doing today are the
result of the competition's lack of interest.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Stuart Lynne)
Subject: Re: Seeking Simple Telephone Line Simulator
Organization: BC News and Mail
Date: Mon, 03 Feb 1992 03:40:19 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail].
mot.com (Devon Davis) writes:

> A comany called Teltone produces a telephone line simulator (model TLS3)
> for about $540.  The address is:

For not too much more you can get a new 8 line Panasonic PBX. It
handles eight handsets and three outside lines.

Very flexible, very easy to use.

You can sometimes pick them up used for a song (<$250).


Stuart Lynne      Computer Signal Corporation, Canada
  !van-bc!sl 604-937-7785 604-937-7718(fax) [e-mail]

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

Date: Sun, 2 Feb 92 19:18 PST
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: Supreme Court Action Restricts 900 Porn Services


[e-mail] (Carl M. Kadie) writes:

> In the long term, this Supreme Court decision not to hear this case is
> a bad sign for electronic freedom of speech. Helms, himself, said that
> he is trying to stamp out all pornography (which apparently means
> anything "R-rated" or above.)  Helms offered this amendment only after
> an amendment that banned all adult material from telephones was
> overturned by the Court. To me, at least, it is clear that the main
> purpose of this law is to reduce the access adults have to
> Constitutionally-protected material.

I agree with your opinions. However, you should realize that porn
services (as well as most others) will eventually leave 900. While the
above mentioned action will hasten the departure of the "adult"
programs, most everyone else as well will migrate to "direct billing"
arrangements. The reason is simply that the telcos and the IECs are
out-sleazing everyone in their collection and recharge policies. When
these services go "direct", they will be completely out from under the
telcos, the IECs, and even Jesse Helms. They will be untouchable. They
will be able to account for and keep all the money they make, and will
not be content-censored in any way.

cybrspc![e-mail] (Roy M. Silvernail) writes:

> Beautiful solution, actually.  They kill 976 by local fiat, and
> smother 900 under a mountain of paperwork.  That leaves RBOCs as the
> only providers.  Don't you just love a level playing field?

What the telcos do not realize in all of their collective brilliance
is that by the time all of the independent providers are gleefully
billing their customers directly, 900/976 will have such a foul
reputation that no self-respecting person would use the telco provided
services anyway.  In essence, the telcos are whizzing in their
Wheaties to drive out the IPs. What will be left will not be worth
worrying about by the time the pros are gone. The death of 900/976 is
at hand, but do not credit Mr. Helms with that state of affairs.
Instead, you may attibute it to the greed and dishonesty of the telcos
and IECs, as well as the creative workarounds that will be devised by
the IP industry.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Julian Macassey)
Subject: Re: Are Acoustic Couplers Still Around?
Date: 3 Feb 92 04:34:15 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Julian Macassey)
Organization: The Hole in the Wall  Hollywood California U.S.A.


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Mickey
Ferguson) writes:
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 102, Message 2 of 11

> Does anyone know of any acoustic couplers available for modems?  The
> specific problem I'm thinking of is when the business person travels
> and stays at a hotel with all digital phones.  The idea of unplugging
> the phone and plugging the wire into the modem won't work, because the
> modem expects a regular analog line, not the digital line.

    A the curse of cheesy "digital" phones. Not many of these in
hotels, although some of the swanky ones in Beverly Hills have the
Lexar. The original poster I note is from ROLM. Hoist with his own
petard?

    I have recently posted my travelling solution, but as Mickey
notes, this does little when the phones do not supply real Tip and
Ring. You can often find old acoustic couplers and acousticly coupled
modems at swap meets (boot sales U.K.). Never pay more than $5.00 for
these, that is all they are worth.

    If you want a shiny new one, and one that will fit the ugly
handsets on ROLM, Lexar etc, you can still get them. I recall that Rat
Shack used to carry them -- no longer in their catalogue.

    A company called Computer Products Plus Inc, carries a "fits
any handset" acoustic coupler. They claim it works with high speed
modems - I doubt it. They want $150.00 for it (yes, the modem is
extra). If you really want one of these here are the details:

    These people also carry an electronic coupling device that
connects to the handset plug of digital and electronic phones. This
device costs $100 and is smaller than the coupler. It is called CP+
Connection II.

    Telecoupler  $149.95.
    CP+ Connection II $99.95

    Computer Products Plus Inc
    16351 Gothard Street
    Huntington Beach
    California 92647

    Phone [phone]
    Phone [phone]
    FAX   [phone]

    I have not tested, or even held any of these devices.


Julian Macassey, [e-mail]  N6ARE@K6VE.#SOCAL.CA.USA.NA
742 1/2 North Hayworth Avenue Hollywood CA 90046-7142 voice [phone]

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

Subject: Re: AT&T No Longer Billing For Bogus 800
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Date: Sun, 02 Feb 92 20:56:21 -0800
From: David G. Cantor <[e-mail]>


In TELECOM Digest, Vol. 12, Issue 10, David Ptasnik reports that when
certain 800 numbers are called, you will be told that the call will be
billed to you as if it were a 900 number.

A question, a comment, and another question:

1.  Can I play such a recording to the pesky salestypes who call me on
    my home telephone number or (even more appropiately) my personal 800
    number and then bill, etc.?

2.  If I receive such a bill when the call was not made by me or my wife
    (perhaps froms calls made when a relative or "friend" is visiting),
    I will happily ignore it and the followups from the sleazy credit
    agency, until I'm validly served.

3.  Perhaps a suit along these lines will help resolve who is responsible
    when an unregulated company charges for calls made from a telephone,
    assuming that the person making the calls agrees to the charges.
    Is it conceivable that the one who so agreed might be the responsible
    party?


David G. Cantor     Department of Mathematics  University of California
Los Angeles, CA 90024-1555   Internet:  [e-mail]

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

Date: Sun, 2 Feb 92 18:34:16 -0800
From: [e-mail] (Harold Hallikainen)
Subject: Re: DTMF Decoding by Ear
Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo


In a previous article, Jacob DeGlopper wrote:

>> Has anyone out there developed the skill of decoding dtmf tones by
>> ear?  Ever hear of anyone who has?  How about MF?

> This isn't quite the same, but it's close.  My rescue squad pagers are
> tripped by a standard Motorola two-tone sequence broadcast over the
> fire dispatch channel.  These are sequential tones, not simultaneous,
> however.  These tones are transmitted before the voice messages, and
> after a few years, people tend to decode the tone pairs in their
> heads.  Even when the calls are for other stations, most of us
> recognize the busier tone pairs, and those for "interesting" calls,
> i.e.  hazardous materials, high-angle rescue team, and helicopter
> tones.

    This reminds me of something I heard about Sam Morse's
telegraph.  I don't know if it's true, but sounds reasonable.  First
off, apparently he did not know too much about electricity.  His first
electromagnet did not work because he wound it with uninsulated wire.

    Once that problem was worked out, his receiving mechanism used
a roll of paper that was dragged under a pen driven by the
electromagnet.  When there was loop current, the pen would "mark" the
paper.  When there was no loop current, it would leave a "space".
(sound familiar to datacom and Teletype people?).  The telegraph
operator would read the "dots and dashes" on the paper to decode the
telegram.  Telegraphers soon grew accustomed to the sound of the
mechanism and could tell what the telegram said without looking at the
tape.  Once this became common practice, it sure simplified telegraph
"sounders" (at least until the teleprinter came along).

    Finally, I was intrigued by the other posting of a telco
company employee's daughter who could decode DTMF by ear.  The fact
that she went on to get an MA in music was a perfect ending!


Harold Hallikainen              [e-mail]
Hallikainen & Friends, Inc.     [e-mail]
141 Suburban Road, Bldg E4      phone [phone] fax [phone]
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-7590  telex 4932775 HFI UI

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

Subject: Is There a List of 213 and 310 Prefixes
Date: Sun, 2 Feb 92 23:47:51 EST
From: John R. Levine <[e-mail]>


I'm finally recopying my dog-eared old personal personal phone list
(computers are nice but they don't fit in my pocket.)  A lot of the
numbers are in Los Angeles and many have been moved from 213 to 310.
Is there anywhere a list of which prefixes stayed in 213 and which
ones are now in 310?

Similar lists for other recent splits, e.g. 301/410, would also be nice.


Regards,

John Levine, [e-mail], {spdcc|ima|world}!iecc!johnl


[Moderator's Note: Some of these splits are annoted in detail in the
Telecom Archives. Use anonymous ftp to lcs.mit.edu.  I know that is
difficult in your case, not being on the Internet, but perhaps someone
will pull those files for you.   PAT]

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

Date: 02 Feb 92 21:00:56 EST
From: tim gorman <[e-mail]>
Subject: Answer Supervision on DM

[e-mail] (Vance Shipley) writes in TELECOM Digest V12 #102
about DMS100 features NTX008AB and NTX007AB which say line side answer
supervision is available.

I have not yet checked out BCS33 doc's, but the BCS32 and earlier
doc's on these features are mangled. The document writer appeared to
have tried to port these over from some Meridian PBX documentation and
did not do a very good job. The feature description talks about answer
supervison on line cards but when you go to the line card
documentation, there is no description whatsoever about this
capability. Nowhere in any of the call processing documentation is
there any mention of answer supervision on the line side of the
switch.

We now have BCS33 doc's available so I will recheck this and if
anything has changed will make another posting. In the meantime, based
on past experience, I will continue to take this with a BIG grain of
salt until other documentation confirming the capability is available
for the DMS100.


Tim Gorman - SWBT
*opinions are mine, any resemblance to official policy is coincidence*

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

Subject: Cellular and IN Service
Date: Mon, 03 Feb 92 14:29:02 +0900
From: [e-mail]


I would like to get any information on the relations between cellular
service and Intelligent Network service.

I will appreciate any information (past, current, future, commercial,
technological, operational) on the topic.


Thank you in advance.

Name:            Mitsutaka Ito
Country/Company: Japan/NTT
Address:         1-9-1 Konan Minato-ku Tokyo 108 Japan
Tel/Fax:         [phone]/+81=3-3740-5740
E-Mail:          [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #109
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa08518;
          4 Feb 92 0:30 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA13258
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 3 Feb 1992 22:20:51 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA24963
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 3 Feb 1992 22:20:25 -0600
Date: Mon, 3 Feb 1992 22:20:25 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #110


TELECOM Digest     Mon, 3 Feb 92 22:20:21 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 110

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Competition for South Africa's Telco (Business Day via Morgan Govender)
    When a Phone Is a Menace (L.A. Times Editorial via Randall C. Gellens)
    WATS Capacity Exceeded? (Bruce McCulley, RISKS via Tom Perrine)
    800-Number Foulup by One Digit (Carl Moore)
    IP Connection via ISDN (Ernst Kloecker)
    US West Invests in Telecommunications in Hungary (Connexion via R. Lindh)
    Call Forwarding "Courtesy Ring" on Cellular Systems (John R. Covert)
    John is Kidding About PACBELL (Dennis G. Rears)
    U. Georgia Housing Switches to Sprint; Students Can't Get AT&T (G. Leavell)
    "Calling Card" Charges and Advertising (Edward Gehringer)
    On-Line CCITT Standards (Matt D. Nguyen)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Govender)
Subject: Competition for South Africa's Telco
Organization: Electrical Engineering, University of the Witwatersrand
Date:  3 Feb 92 06:44:29 GMT


South Africa's state run telephone monopoly is at last getting
competition.

Unfortunately the competitive service will be limited to international
calls only. A US company, International Discount Technology, is to
offer a service whereby South African subscribers will dial a
pre-assigned New York number and let it ring once and then hang
up. They will then be rang back by IDT's computer and connected to a US
dial tone enabling them to call anywhere in the world at about half
the prevailing rate to make the same call from South Africa. We pay
$3.57 per minute for international calls at present.

Subscribers will pay $250 a month link up fees for the service making
it feasible only for corporate and well-heeled users. However there is
an opportunity for some entrepeneur who is willing to carry the link
up fees and charge the public 60%-75% of the going rate to make
international calls.  Furthermore this will also give South Africans
access to US 800 and 900 numbers.

Reported in {Business Day} 1-Feb -1992


Morgan Govender    University of Witwatersrand   Johannesburg,South Africa

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

Date: Mon, 3 Feb 92 06:36 GMT
From: Randall C Gellens <[e-mail]>
Subject: When a Phone Is a Menace (L.A. Times Editorial)


The {L.A. Times} Orange County Edition, January 28, carried an
editorial "When a Phone Is a Menace" (captioned Orange County
Perspective):

Pay telephones are a lifeline for families in some low-income
communities.  But when they are used for drug dealing, prostitution or
other criminal activity they are a neighborhood menace.

Santa Ana, in adopting a welcome new ordinance on pay phones, plans to
take its cue from local communities as well as police when deciding
whether a pay phone is a serious problem.  When there are continuing
neighborhood and law enforcement complaints, the city will have in
place an innovative way to remove a phone that is attracting the wrong
sorts of customers.

During the debate on the recently adopted ordinace ... the City
Council was divided on whether removal of problem phones might end up
hurting those it is intended to help.  Many low-income areas depend on
pay phones for emergencies as well as day-to-day communication.

But the proceess ... is designed to fully include the community in the
decision to take out a phone.

The city will first ask the telephone vendor to take actions that
would impede criminals' use of a phone.  These include moving a phone
to inside a store, blocking incoming calls and replacing tone dialing
with rotary dialing so that drug dealers can't use their pagers [how
does pulse dialing impede pagers? -- RCG].  If conditions don't
improve after such steps are taken, the legal process aimed at
removing the phones would ensue.

Police Chief Paul M. Walters said some pay phones have become "outdoor
offices for drug dealers and prostitutes."  They also have become
gathering places for lowlifes who use the phones for other illegal
activities.  ...

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: Mon, 3 Feb 92 09:21:17 PST
Subject: WATS Capacity Exceeded?
Reply-To: [e-mail]


This little tidbit from the RISKS Digest:

 Date: Thu, 30 Jan 92 11:51:03 -0500
 From: [e-mail]
 Subject: Confusing Telephone System Overload Message

On Tuesday night (1/29/92), after President Bush's State of the Union
address I happened to tune into the CBS television network as they
were announcing a novel poll.  They claimed nothing like it had ever
been attempted before, and it sounded interesting so we stayed with
them for awhile, and even tried to participate.

The basis for the poll was an interactive telephone system set up at a
site in Omaha, Nebraska, with an (800) WATS line to allow toll-free
access from anywhere in the US.  Early in the show CBS announcer
Charles Kuralt reported that the telecommunications center was capable
of handling thousands of calls per minute, "so there should be no
problem".  HA!

Participation required a touch-tone phone, so that callers could
respond via keypad entry to the canned questions posed by the
automated response system.  Although we live in a rural area with old
mechanical switch gear, my phones all can switch between rotary and
touchtone mode, so I could dial up using pulse mode and then switch to
tone for the response.

After watching a few minutes to see what additional explanations were
given, I decided to try accessing the poll.  At the time they seemed
to be running at a couple of thousand calls per minute.  My initial
attempt to call them resulted in a very long dead interval, followed
by a message saying "Your call cannot be completed as dialed, you must
supply more digits in the number dialed."

That seemed strange, so I tried redialing several times, more
carefully, with similar results.  Since the map showing calls received
was showing nothing from our area of New England (New Hampshire and
Maine were both showing null), I wondered if there was a problem with
the WATS routing or something, that might have caused the strange
error message.  So I called the operator, and when I started to say I
was having trouble dialing an (800) number she immediately asked if it
was the one that had been given on TV.  When I said it was, I was told
that the lines were flooded.

Apparently the volume of calls was either forcing the long-distance
system into some strange failure mode in which it thought more digits
were required in the number being called, or there was a mismatch
between the particular error condition and the error message being
used.  I suspect, based on my limited knowledge of the telephone
network, that there may have been some timeout or connection loss or
contention or something that inadvertently truncated the routing
information string, due to the huge volume of calls.

Shortly afterward, with the display showing about 125,000 calls
processed, Dan Rather reported on the air that AT&T was estimating
there had been about 7,000,000 call attempts!  Obviously their
throughput was a little below the capacity requirements ...

BTW, using redial, I was able to access the number on a subsequent
attempt, and did get my response included in the poll.  At that time
they were reporting about a hundred thousand calls processed.  From
the ratio of call attempts reported by AT&T to calls processed it
looked to me like the ratio was upwards of 70 to 1.  It took me only
about ten tries or so, so I guess I was lucky.

The risk seems obvious, experimenting with a novel application in a
live production environment requires some careful system analysis and
planning to avoid unexpected errors.

One thing I'm curious about, wonder what their phone bill was?


bruce mcculley

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

Forwarded by:
Tom E. Perrine (tep)     | [e-mail]  |Voice: [phone]
Logicon - T&TSD          | sun!suntan!tots!tep   |  or : [phone]
4010 Sorrento Valley Blvd|                       |  FAX: [phone]
San Diego CA 92121

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

Date: Mon, 3 Feb 92 8:43:27 EST
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject: 800-Number Foulup by One Digit


Word arrived this morning on KYW news-radio (I couldn't stick around
for more detail) that a car dealer sent out an apology because an
advertised 800 number was off by a digit, causing customers to call a
900 sex line.  That is a Philadelphia station.

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

From: [e-mail] (Ernst Kloecker)
Subject: IP Connection via ISDN
Organization: Techn. University of Berlin, Germany
Date: Mon, 3 Feb 1992 13:16:06 GMT


Now that ISDN services are becoming more and more available, there
should be a way to establish an IP connection via ISDN, using a method
similar to SLIP or PPP on serial lines.

Does anybody know about such methods? Are they in any way standardized?
Is it possible to use the two 64 K B-channels for o n e IP connection
to achieve a transmissionrate of 128 Kbit/s altogether?


Ernst Kloecker      phone: ++49-30-6181635      e-mail: [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Robert Lindh)
Subject: US West Invests in Telecommunications in Hungary
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Ericsson Telecom AB
Date: Mon, 3 Feb 1992 18:04:17 GMT


"WESTEL, the mobile network operator, is a joint venture between HTC
(51%) and US West International Holdings Inc (49%). Its service went
on stream in October 1990, expecting to sign up 2500 subscribers in
its first year.  By September 1991, the number had exceeded 6000."

Source: magazine CONNEXION, issue 23. Published by Ericsson Telecom AB,
        S-126 25 Stockholm, Sweden

Standard disclaimer: "Only my personal opinion, of course."

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

Date: Mon, 3 Feb 92 13:23:10 PST
From: John R. Covert  03-Feb-1992 1620 <[e-mail]>
Subject: Call Forwarding "Courtesy Ring" on Cellular Systems


After putting a Motorola Micro-Tac (model F09HGD8432CG) into service
recently to replace my Nokia P-30, I discovered that NYNEX Mobile
provides a "courtesy ring" when you have your cellular phone number
forwarded.

I'm curious to find out what other systems have this feature.  Note
that unless you are certain that your cellular phone supports giving
you an indication of this, you will be unable to tell me "No, my
system doesn't support it."

The courtesy ring, on the Micro-Tac, is one looooonnnnngggg ring,
provided just as the call comes through the switch.

The phone clearly knows the difference between a courtesy ring and a
real ring, since the phone does not turn on the "call in absence"
indicator as it does with a real unanswered call or a failed page.

It's quite useful when you're in a fringe area where calls can't be
set up reliably.  You forward your calls to a landline phone, and you
know that after you hear the courtesy ring, the next call on the
landline phone will be for you.


john


[Moderator's Note: A neat thing about the CT-301 Radio Shack phone is
if *71 or *72 (plus a number) is transmitted by the phone to
Ameritech, then the triple-beep tone acknowlegement from Ameritech
causes the CT-301 to remember that busy/no answer or immediate call
forwarding is in effect, and from time to time plus whenever the phone
is powered up the display will show *71 or *72 as a reminder. When you
send *73 to cancel either type of forwarding, the triple beep tone
acknowlegement from Ameritech turns off the *71/*72 display in the
window on the phone. The *71/*72 reminder is stored even if the phone
is off for a couple days ... when you power up again, the reminder is
there. I like that!    PAT]

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

Date: Mon, 3 Feb 92 17:42:46 EST
From: "Dennis G. Rears " <[e-mail]>
Subject: John is Kidding About PACBELL


  I just got back from a trip to San Diego.  Being interested in
telecom I opened up the white pages.  I can now start to appreciate
why John is harping on PACBELL.  In additional to standard hopup
charges they want an additional charge of $3.00 (residential) or $5.00
(business) for touch tone installation.  After I saw additional
surcharges to pay for 911 service, and universal service I had to make
sure I was not reading from a COCOT phone book.  Local toll rates are
incredible.  California is a beautiful state but there telephone
policies (as well as some of the regulations I saw) are an order of
magnitude worse than anything I have even seen before.


Dennis

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

From: [e-mail] (Glenn F. Leavell)
Subject: U Georgia Housing Switches to Sprint; Students Can't Get AT&T
Organization: University of Georgia Economics Department
Date: Mon, 3 Feb 1992 22:35:33 GMT


The housing department at the University of Georgia recently switched
their primary long distance provider from AT&T to U.S. Sprint.  There
are many, many students here with AT&T calling cards who want to dial
the 10ATT0 or 10ATT1 prefixes to choose AT&T over Sprint.  The problem
is, it doesn't work.

The housing department has made statements that the problem lies
within the local phone system; they claim that it can't distinguish a
'1' from a '0' at the end of a 10xxx prefix, so they've completely
blocked out the ability to dial such a prefix at all.

Of course, AT&T customers can dial the AT&T 1-800 number, but AT&T
does not yet provide a tone at that number; you are automatically
connected to an operator.

An interesting note is that many AT&T customers who don't understand
all the ins and outs of long distance service in general think that
the problem is with Sprint!  From their point of view, things worked
great when housing provided AT&T, but now it doesn't work since
they've changed to Sprint.

My question is: does this seem plausible?  Are there indeed systems
which can't distinguish a '1' from a '0' at the end of a 10xxx prefix?


Glenn F. Leavell  Systems Administrator  [e-mail]  404-542-3488
University of Georgia Economics Department. 147 Brooks Hall. Athens, GA 30602

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

Date: Mon, 3 Feb 1992 19:35:02 -0500
From: [e-mail] (Edward Gehringer)
Subject: "Calling card" Charges and Advertising


I used to rely on ITT/Metromedia for long-distance service.  For
various reasons, I make a lot of personal long distance calls from my
office, as well as on trips.  They used to provide "calling card"
service at a rate that was only slightly higher than their dial-1
service.

However, after the Metromedia takeover, they began to raise these
rates, starting last February.  There have been three rate increases,
totaling about 18%-75%, depending on the time of the call and the
distance.  My bill has gone up by 50%-60%.

After several discussions with Metromedia supervisors, the following
points remain at issue:

1.  Metromedia has begun advertising a "New NO-SURCHARGE Calling
    Card" [emphasis theirs].  They say there is no surcharge,
    because there is no set fee that is added to each call.
    I contend that the higher rates do in fact amount to a
    surcharge, one that is levied minute by minute.  The public
    expects that "no surcharge" means the customer does not pay
    extra.  Thus, their advertising is misleading, and I will
    complain to the FTC unless someone on the net can convince me
    that I should not.

2.  The rate increases bear no relationship to the cost of providing
    the service.  Certainly, it does not cost 75% more to complete
    a night/weekend call than it did a year ago.  There may be some
    additional cost associated with providing "credit-card" service,
    but nowhere near that much.  Indeed, before "equal access," all
    non-AT&T calls were "credit-card" calls, made by punching in an
    access number.  Yet the other long-distance carriers were
    consistently able to undersell AT&T!

    After the breakup, the FCC required that one service not subsidize
    another.  However, people who use access codes are now subsidizing
    those who use dial-1 service.  Shouldn't rates like those
    Metromedia has filed be rejected?

I would appreciate thoughts on how to proceed.  This is not a trifling
matter to me, since it amounts to hundreds of dollars a year.


Ed

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

From: [e-mail] (Matt D. Nguyen)
Subject: On-Line CCITT Standards
Organization: Southwestern Bell Technology Resources, St.Louis, MO
Date: Tue, 4 Feb 92 00:09:46 GMT


Does anyone know of the sites and procedures to access on-line CCITT
standards?  Please email the info directly to [e-mail].
Your help is greatly appreciated.


Thanks,

Matt Nguyen


[Moderator's Note: Didn't we discuss this recently and discover the
files had been taken off line?    PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #110
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa12569;
          4 Feb 92 2:16 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA25420
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 4 Feb 1992 00:05:34 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA13388
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 4 Feb 1992 00:05:06 -0600
Date: Tue, 4 Feb 1992 00:05:06 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #111

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 4 Feb 92 00:04:55 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 111

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Oregon PUC Hearing Summary (Peter da Silva)
    Re: Oregon PUC Hearing Summary (John David Galt)
    Re: Oregon PUC Hearing Summary (Bob Izenberg)
    BBS = Business? (Bob Ackley)
    Re: AT&T No Longer Billing For Bogus 800 (John Higdon)
    Re: Telecom and Science Fiction (Jamie Hanrahan)
    Re: Supreme Court Action Restricts 900 Porn Services (John De Armond)
    Re: Centel For Sale (Steve Gaarder)
    Re: Are Acoustic Couplers Still Around? (Ed Greenberg)
    Re: Posting Choices: Telecom-priv or Telecom (Bob Clements)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Peter da Silva)
Subject: Re: Oregon PUC Hearing Summary
Organization: Taronga Park BBS
Date: Mon, 3 Feb 1992 14:22:21 GMT


Our esteemed Moderator writes:

> Moderator's Note: It has to be a little more involved than that.
> Suppose all the BBS people said okay, and started paying business
> rates. Then what?

Then, within a month or two, most of the BBSes go offline. They are,
by and large, run by individuals as a hobby out of their own pockets.
The difference between residential and business rates is large enough
to kill any marginal BBS ... and most of them *are* marginal.

Most of the ones remaining will be for-pay BBSes, which they think
they can more effectively compete against. In fact it's unlikely that
a Minitel service will work: look what happened to SourceLine.

It's funny that Southwestern Bell quit harassing BBSes in Houston
after SourceLine flopped, isn't it?


Peter da Silva. Taronga Park BBS.  [phone]|1032 2400/n/8/1.


[Moderator's Note: Oh, I don't think 'within a month or two' anyone
would go off line who hadn't planned on it in the first place, let
alone 'most of the BBSes'. Somehow I think they would survive.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Oregon PUC Hearing Summary
Date: Mon,  3 Feb 92 12:08:59 PST


The Moderator writes:

> ... I think all telco is trying to do is treat BBS lines the same as
> churches or any other non-profit phone line; that is, if not strictly
> for personal use, then the line is for business use. Those are the two
> (admittedly poorly named) choices.  PAT]

Those are, indeed, the two choices.  But the telcos are making a wrong
analogy.  A BBS system that does not charge, and is used mostly for
discussion among friends, is much more like a home where the owner
holds a lot of parties than like a business of any kind.  (The closest
businesses I can think of are a bar or hotel, and charging is what
makes them businesses.)

How would you feel if someone who hosts, say weekly parties (and does
not make problems for the neighbors) were told to shut down the
parties because his home is not zoned for "commercial" use?


John David Galt

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

From: [e-mail] (Bob Izenberg)
Subject: Re: Oregon PUC Hearing Summary
Date: Mon, 3 Feb 92 0:56:17 CST


TELECOM Moderator wrote:

In reply to a message by [e-mail]:

>  [Moderator's Note: It has to be a little more involved than that.
>  Suppose all the BBS people said okay, and started paying business
>  rates. Then what?  The BBS' would still be out there competing with
>  Community Link.

Not in the numbers that they're around today.  Faced with the choice
of paying business rates for a free system or moving on to another
hobby, how many people would choose to pay more to their local
telephone company?  The potential loss of local systems wouldn't be
the worst of it.  There would be an added cost to "networked" BBSes
(Fidonet, WWIVnet, et cetera) if they find themselves dialing long
distance to reach their nearest neighbor.  This would be of no
consequence to any telco: It will gladly accept the revenue from your
long distance bill until the cost outweighs the benefit and you cease
operation.

Our Moderator recently said that he anticipates an influx of revenue
which will allow him the time to do more that he wishes to do with the
Digest.  If this situation were reversed and it would cost him more
money to produce it ... not in his time spent, but in a check that
he'd have to write to Illinois Bell each month, would we see more or
less TELECOM Digest, and for how long?


Bob


[Moderator's Note: Maybe you have forgotten or did not know that when
I assumed responsibility for the Digest from Jon Solomon in 1988, I
was using facilities at Boston University (bu.edu) because that is
where Jon had the mailing list set up. I worked for three months via
PC Pursuit between Chicago and Boston. When PC Pursuit was down for
some reason or during hours it was not operational, I used AT&T to
dial direct to bu.edu.  Because my phone bill and Telenet bill were
quite high, I gratefully accepted the generous offer made to me by
Northwestern University to establish the Digest at their site, and I
have worked from here since February, 1989.

Not once back in 1988-89 did it occur to me to blame IBT, AT&T,
Telenet or anyone else for the costs involved. Not once did it occur
to me telco owed me or this Digest anything other than a clean
connection I was paying for.  People spend their money as they wish. I
chose to make the changes required in the way I handled the Digest to
lessen my expenses; I didn't ask telco for any charity!  PAT]

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

Date: Fri, 31 Jan 92 05:32:44 cst
From: [e-mail] (Bob Ackley)
Subject: BBS = Business?
Reply-To: bob.ackley@ivgate..omahug.org


        With regard to the recent court proceedings on the West Coast
between U.S. Pest and a BBS SYSOP, re: business rates for his BBS.
U.S. Pest claims that it costs more for them to support his (and
anyone else's) BBS because of the large number of incoming calls and
the traffic level.  One has to wonder precisely the cost of all of the
extra equipment that U.S. Pest had to install to handle the additional
load caused by his BBS, since it occurs to this non-expert that the
local carrier's actual cost of connecting each call to him (and to any
other BBS) is (a) minimal and (b) paid by the caller.


msged 1.99S ZTC
Bob's Soapbox   , Plattsmouth Ne  (1:285/2.7)

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

Date: Sun, 2 Feb 92 23:44 PST
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: AT&T No Longer Billing For Bogus 800


David Ptasnik <[e-mail]> writes:

> It is my STRONG feeling that this is an inappropriate use of 800 ANI
> data (another reason to allow blocking of your phone number to 800
> numbers, but I'll leave that for the caller ID/privacy mailing list).
> It means that individuals and organizations who don't allow dialing of
> 900/976 can still get bills for abuse of their lines thru 800 numbers.
> I think this still violates the basic principle that 800 calls are
> free calls.

The call IS free. It is the associated service that you are being
charged for. No, I am not being flippant about this. If I pick up a
telephone and dial an 800 number and order $10,000 worth of computer
equipment, is that a $10,000 phone call? The difference is that in the
case of the latter, I can make the call and order the merchandise in
YOUR name and you will get the bill. With the service you seem to feel
is inappropriate, I would have to have direct, physical access to your
telephone.

> Payphone owners look out.  You'll start getting bills in the mail
> for phone calls that won't appear on your phone bill, and which will
> be essentially impossible to block.

No, but the service provider can block the call. And he will if there
is a probability that he will not be able to collect. The fact that
the caller's number is known and verified greatly simplifies the
extension of credit by non-standard means. Not long ago, participants
in this very forum decried the fact that unless one had a telco, Visa,
MC, or other major credit card, he was shut out of a number of
convenience purchasing situations.

I have been instrumental in setting up some 800 number ordering
systems that are able to use credit flexibility that has heretofore
never existed. One of the key elements is the verification of the
simple matter of the caller being who he claims to be. If the
information presented does not agree with the ANI, an operator gives
him a chance to explain. But there are many cases of a transaction
occurring that otherwise would not without ANI.

Caller number delivery is a great boon to commerce. How many times
during the year do you have to show identification to someone? How
would you do this over the phone? Since businesses have a new tool to
cut losses, they are more willing to provide conveniences never before
possible. Removing the cloak of telephonic anonymity has its positive
side. As a customer, I welcome the ability to shop by phone without
all of the red tape that has been customary, even with major cards.

Every new (ANI is hardly new) technology brings out anti-technology
jitters in the public. It was not too long ago that computers
themselves were regarded as a threat to our very way of life.  I
understand concern about the 'P'-word (we do not talk about that in
this forum), but generally speaking the more data available in
business and commerce, the better.


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

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Telecom and Science Fiction
Date: 3 Feb 92 13:51:30 PST
Organization: Kernel Mode Consulting, San Diego CA


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Ron Dippold) writes:

> [e-mail] (Rune Henning Johansen FBA) writes:

>> We're collecting information about the role of science fiction within
>> telecom.  [...]

> The most obvious example is Arthur C. Clarke, the inventor of the
> telecommunications satellite.  [...]

At best, Clarke may be described as "conceiver of the idea of the
Earth-geosynchronous-orbit telecom satellite".

In the first place, I don't think you can claim to have "invented"
something unless you have actually built it and made it work.  Just
jotting down some ideas does not count.  (Some Patent Office decisions
 -- I'm thinking of the one that took credit for the visible-light
laser away from Schawlow (sp?), et al, at Bell Labs -- may be viewed
as contradicting this notion.)

In the second place, George O. Smith's "Venus Equilateral" stories,
set on an interplanetary relay station orbiting the sun in one of
Venus's Trojan points, predate Clarke's 1945 article by several years.
Clarke wrote the introduction to the latest collection of these
stories (_The Complete Venus Equilateral_, Ballantine), and in it
said:

   "... George Smith was the probably the first writer -- certainly
   the first technically qualified writer -- to spell out [the use
   of space satellites] for space communications.  It is therefore
   quite possible that these stories influenced me subconsciously when
   [...] I worked out the principles of synchronous communications
   satellites..."

By the way, any readers who have even a mild tolerance for science
fiction and a liking for tech-oriented stories will likely find that
the "Venus Equilateral" stories are well worth reading.  Mind you,
George Smith completely failed to foresee the miniaturization
revolution that would take place in electronics, so these stories are
filled with vacuum tubes, and the bigger, the better: There is one
priceless scene where a crew of men cracks open an air valve, then
opens a hatch, walks inside a tube, and changes a spent cathode with
the aid of a winch ...

Nevertheless, the fun of engineering is better portrayed here than in
anything else I've read, up to and including _The Soul of a New
Machine_.  The Ballantine paperback is still available in well-stocked
bookstores.  Highly recommended.


Jamie Hanrahan, Kernel Mode Consulting, San Diego CA
Internet:  [e-mail], [e-mail], or [e-mail]
Uucp:  ...{crash,eisner,uunet}!cmkrnl!jeh

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

From: [e-mail] (John De Armond)
Subject: Re: Supreme Court Action Restricts 900 Porn Services
Date: Mon, 03 Feb 92 15:46:51 GMT
Organization: Dixie Communications Public Access.  The Mouth of the South.


[e-mail] (John Higdon) writes:

>> Beautiful solution, actually.  They kill 976 by local fiat, and
>> smother 900 under a mountain of paperwork.  That leaves RBOCs as the
>> only providers.  Don't you just love a level playing field?

> What the telcos do not realize in all of their collective brilliance
> is that by the time all of the independent providers are gleefully
> billing their customers directly, 900/976 will have such a foul
> reputation that no self-respecting person would use the telco provided
> services anyway.  In essence, the telcos are whizzing in their
> Wheaties to drive out the IPs.

This is correct.  Indeed the maddest scramble I've ever seen, even
madder than in the heady days of AOS, is the scramble for direct
billing.  One of my clients is a 900 IP who has just finished a direct
billing system and is offering this service to other IPs.

I've never really understood the 900 concept in the first place.  The
IP gets ANI from the trunk.  He has the online time from his
equipment.  He can match phone numbers to billing addresses using the
services of any number of credit reporting services.  All the phone
company added was some convenience but at what a cost!  Looks like
technology is going to outfox the bureaucrats yet again.

BTW, the hottest 900 service at the moment is astrology/horoscopes to
the Spanish speaking market.  Hotter even than sex lines.  Even
better, the customers tend to want to hear the same stuff over and
over so you don't have the expense of creating new materials.

One thing not yet commented on regarding this situation is what it
bodes for the future.  What we've seen is the BOCs killing their
golden goose with pure, unadulterated greed.  Greed to the point where
providing direct billing services to IPs at $1.50 a call is considered
a bargain.  Greed to the point where no service other than sex and
similiar lines can make any money.  Greed in the back office in the
form of having customer service default to telling customers they have
to pay regardless.

Do we really want this kind of greed involved in new areas like cable
TV or information services?  The BOCs have effectively killed consumer
ISDN with greed.  Anyone agree that we need to keep the BOCs OUT of
the IP arena?

BTW, the Supreme court lack-of-ruling may be a blessing in disguise.
It may break us from the terrible habit of allowing Congress to get
away with murder while relying on the SC to overturn them.  Maybe
we'll wake up and get mad enough to kick the bums out!


John De Armond, WD4OQC       Rapid Deployment System, Inc.
Marietta, Ga        [e-mail]

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

Date: Mon, 3 Feb 92 08:18:22 EST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Centel For Sale


John Rice writes:

> A friend at Centel Cellular tells me that the entire company is on
> the block.

Well, what are we waiting for?  Let's pool our resources!


Steve Gaarder    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Ed Greenberg)
Subject: Re: Are Acoustic Couplers Still Around?
Date: Mon, 03 Feb 92 19:08:21 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest)


Radio Shack has a P/N 26-3818 that is an accoustic coupler.  I haven't
found one in a store yet.  They go for about $50.  My US Robotics
Worldport 2400 baud modem is said to be able to use this at 1200 baud,
which I will believe when I see.

It'd be handy for getting online from a payphone with my HP-95LX.


Ed Greenberg         | Home: [phone] | [e-mail]
P. O. Box 28618        | Work: [phone] | DoD#: 0357
San Jose, CA  95159    | Fax:  [phone] | KM6CG (ex WB2GOH)

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

Subject: Re: Posting Choices: Telecom-priv or Telecom
Date: Sun, 2 Feb 92 21:52:13 EST
From: [e-mail]


In article <[e-mail]> TELECOM Moderator noted:

> [Moderator's Note: I think it is distributed to an alt group
already.  PAT]

You keep saying this, Pat, but you never give the group name and
no-one ever confirms it.  Please stop making the claim unless you have
the specifics.


Bob Clements, K1BC, [e-mail]


[Telecom-Priv Moderator's Note:  Right now no. I know this sounds like
vaporware but tomorrow I will putting out a new CFD for comp.soc.privacy.
In three weeks a CFV.  After that a new newsgroup.  The list and
newsgroup will be gatewayed together.    Dennis]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #111
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa13953;
          4 Feb 92 2:45 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA26477
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 4 Feb 1992 00:43:54 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA11980
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 4 Feb 1992 00:43:36 -0600
Date: Tue, 4 Feb 1992 00:43:36 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #112

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 4 Feb 92 00:43:37 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 112

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: DTMF Decoding by Ear (Tad Cook)
    Re: Bell ?? Cuts Superconductor Research? (Steve Mueller)
    Re: Detirmining if a Call Was Answered (Dick Rickert)
    Re: Phone Number Parser Wanted (Carl Wright)
    Re: NXX to CLLI Conversion Tables Wanted (Carl Wright)
    Re: Toll Free Call For UNIX System V Source Code (Roger B.A. Klorese)
    Re: Supreme Court Action Restricts 900 Porn Services (Stan Brown)
    Re: Windsor, Ontario Routing (was Point Roberts, Wa.) (Dave Leibold)
    Canada Direct (Dave Leibold)
    TouchTone Charges? (Jim Redelfs)
    Looking For Number Which Tells me my Phone Number (Jeff Haferman)
    714/619 Using N0X/N1X? (was Background Regarding 206 Change) (Carl Moore)
    540,000+ Cellular Subscribers (6.6% of Sweden's Population) (Robert Lindh)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Re: DTMF Decoding by Ear
From: [e-mail] (Tad Cook)
Date: 3 Feb 92 06:43:00 GMT


[e-mail] (Rolf Meier) writes:

> Has anyone out there developed the skill of decoding dtmf tones by
> ear?  Ever hear of anyone who has?  How about MF?

My friend Tim Schneebeck can do it.  He is blind, and is a ham
(K7QMI).  He shows off this special talent on the 146.96 MHz repeater
in Seattle when someone is using the autopatch.

I don't know if he can do it with MF or not.  I doubt that he would
admit to knowing what MF sounds like.  :)

He has also listened to a funny sound (over the phone!) that my
washing machine was making, and sent me down to Appliance Parts
Wholesalers to buy a specific part to fix it!


Tad Cook     |  Phone:  [phone]             |   MCI Mail: 3288544
Seattle, WA  |  Packet: KT7H @ N7DUO.WA.USA.NA   |   [e-mail]
             |  USENET: [e-mail]          or...sumax!ole!ssc!tad

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Mueller)
Subject: Re: Bell ?? Cuts Superconductor Research?
Organization: Southwestern Bell Tech Resources
Date: Mon, 3 Feb 92 19:00:53 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (John
R Ruckstuhl Jr) writes:

> Sometime during the last week, I either saw on TV, or read in the {Wall
> Street Journal}, a news report which indicated that somebody just made
> a big cut in their superconductor research program.  Now I don't
> remember if it was Bell Labs or Bellcore.  Who was it, please?

Bellcore.  They're funded by the telephone company parts of the RBOCs
and it's their ratepayers who ultimately pay for Bellcore research.
The PUCs keep an eye on this and like to have evidence that ratepayers
are going to benefit directly if the costs of research are to be
included in the rate base.  Furthermore, they often feel these
benefits should be made evident in the near future, if not
immediately.

No doubt many factors were at work in the decision to cut back on
superconductor research, but I wouldn't be surprised to find that
funding for this research was a hard sell at some of the PUCs.  This
is not meant to be a judgment of the PUC point of view.  It's just to
point out where their perspective differs from ours.

And of course, these are my own opinions and not those of Southwestern
Bell Corporation or its subsidiaries.  For crying out loud, they
better be ... I've worked hard enough at having them.

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

Date: Mon,  3 Feb 92 15:20:47 EST
From: [e-mail] (R M Rickert)
Subject: Re: Detirmining if a Call Was Answered
Organization: AT&T


Tim Gorman wrote:

> 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.

The reason for no polarity guard (and no diode) was cost.  Phone lines
were supposed to be fixed polarity.


Dick Rickert  AT&T Consumer Products Laboratory

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

From: [e-mail] (Carl Wright)
Subject: Re: Phone Number Parser Wanted
Date: Mon, 03 Feb 92 21:06:35 EST
Organization: UMCC - Ann Arbor, MI  USA


[e-mail] (Edward C. Bennett) writes:

> 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.

There is at least one commercially available software product to
handle dialed digits streams. It is called DIGITERP and available from
my company.

I won't evaluate it because I'm very biased. You are welcome to call
or write for information. Afterward a dialin demo is available.


Carl Wright                     | Lynn-Arthur Associates, Inc.
Internet: [e-mail]        | 2350 Green Rd., #160
Voice: 1 313 995 5590 EST       | Ann Arbor, MI 48105

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

From: [e-mail] (Carl Wright)
Subject: Re: NXX to CLLI Conversion Tables Wanted
Date: Mon, 03 Feb 92 21:12:57 EST
Organization: UMCC - Ann Arbor, MI  USA


polari![e-mail] writes:

> 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.

You can get this information from the following commercial companies
in electronic form: International DataBases, CCMI, Valucom, Teletech,
NECA.

It is equivalent to the paper AT&T Tariff #4.


Carl Wright                     | Lynn-Arthur Associates, Inc.
Internet: [e-mail]        | 2350 Green Rd., #160
Voice: 1 313 995 5590 EST       | Ann Arbor, MI 48105

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

From: [e-mail] (Roger B.A. Klorese)
Subject: Re: Toll Free Call For UNIX System V Source Code
Organization: QueerNet
Date: Tue, 4 Feb 92 05:26:17 GMT


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

> In my local Bell of PA directory, which the latest issue came this
> week I was flipping through the first few pages just to see what was
> there, (actually looking to see if anyone listed a TDD listing after
> all the fuss the intro pages made about them) and I came across AT&T's
> listing.  Now, I am in a surburban Philadelphia white pages book, so I
> wasn't expecting much, just the usual residential stuff, you know, LD,
> conferencing, phones ... lo and behold ... one of the 800 numbers is
> listed as "UNIX System V Source Code".

> Gee, is the source code free for calling? :-)

Naaah ... they cross-bill it as a 900 number ... $75k for the first
minute ...


ROGER B.A. KLORESE        +1 415 ALL-ARFF
[e-mail]  {ames,decwrl,pyramid}!mips!unpc!rogerk

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

From: [e-mail] (Stan Brown)
Subject: Re: Supreme Court Action Restricts 900 Porn Services
Date: Mon, 3 Feb 92 15:18:38 EST


In last week's article, I said in part:

> But by declining to review the decision, the Justices sent a pretty
> clear signal that they considered the law constitutional.

Two persons (so far) have written to tell me I'm wrong, and I agree
with them.

The Supreme Court may have declined to review the appeals court's
decision for any of a number of reasons.  But though the Justices
didn't review _this_ decision, for all we know they could review a
later one on the same issue, and find the law unconstitutional.

We can't draw valid inferences from the Supreme Court's denial of any
particular petition for review.


Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Cleveland, Ohio, USA   [e-mail]

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

Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1992 23:28:28 -0500
From: [e-mail] (Dave Leibold)
Subject: Re: Windsor, Ontario Routing (was Point Roberts, Wa.)


[e-mail] (david niebuhr) writes:

> Winsdor, Ontario is both South and East of Detroit; therefore, where
> does Windsor get its routing from, Detroit or from some point in
> Canada?

Windsor, being Bell Canada territory, would likely keep most routing
within Canadian soil. Much of the action, say to Toronto or elsewhere
in Canada, would presumably go through London, Ontario, where most of
area code 519 would be handled. Anything going to the States could be
sent across the creek to Detroit; I think Bell Canada does have a
major U.S. gateway via Windsor/ Detroit, considering that I've had
some not-in-service messages for some 800 numbers terminate on a 313
switch.

Incidentally, calls between Windsor and Detroit are long distance, not
local. Long distance also applies across the border along the Niagara
Frontier (Buffalo, Niagara Falls NY and Niagara Falls, St Catharines,
Fort Erie ON). Cross-border local calling does exist at one point in
northwest Ontario to a small Minnesota exchange, plus I think Fort
Covington NY has a local call across the border. A number of local
calling areas are set up along the New Brunswick/Maine border as well.
BC Tel no longer list Point Roberts WA as a local call from Vancouver
BC.


Dave Leibold - via FidoNet node 1:250/98
INTERNET: [e-mail]

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

Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1992 23:23:29 -0500
From: [e-mail] (Dave Leibold)
Subject: Canada Direct


Teleglobe/Telecom Canada has the Canada Direct service, for calling
Canadian operators from overseas points. The idea of "home direct"
services such as this is to allow for billing of domestic rates for
calls from overseas, in order to bypass charges of overseas carriers
that are often more expensive. Having domestic operators handle the
calls as opposed to operators of another language is helpful, too.
Charges can be done with an ordinary calling card.

Information on Canada Direct can be obtained by calling 1 800 561.8868
(within Canada at least).

Access numbers at overseas locations are:

Australia         0014 881 150
Austria           022 903 013
Bahamas           1 800 463 0501
Bahrain           80 01 00
Belgium           11 00 11
Bermuda           1 800 623 0383
Brazil            000 8014
Chile **          00 ~ 0318
Colombia          980 19 0057
Denmark           80 01 00 11
Dominican Rep.    1 800 333 0111
Finland           9800 1 0011
France            19 ~ 00 16
Germany (western) 01 3000 14
Guatemala         198
Haiti             001 800 522 1055
Hong Kong *       008 1100
Hungary           00361111
India             [designated telephones]
Indonesia         00 801 16
Israel            177 105 2727
Italy             172 1001
Japan             0039 (~) 161   [second dial tone may be required (~)]
Liechtenstein     046 05 83 30
Macao *           0800 100
Netherlands       06 ~ 0229116
New Zealand       000919
Norway            050 12111
Philippines       105 12
Portugal          05 017 1 226
Qatar             [designated telephones]
Singapore *       800 1000
South Korea *     009 0015
Spain             900 99 00 15
Sweden            020 799015
Switzerland       046 05 83 30
Taiwan            [designated telephones]
Trinidad & Tobago [designated telephones]
United Kingdom    0800 89 0016


Symbols used:

* also at designated telephones in places like airports, hotels,
tourist areas, etc.

** calling card billed as person to person only.

~ wait for second dial tone.

Note that some hotels may add surcharges.


Dave Leibold - via FidoNet node 1:250/98
INTERNET: [e-mail]

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

Date: Thu, 30 Jan 92 17:25:39 cst
From: [e-mail] (Jim Redelfs)
Subject: TouchTone Charges
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Macnet Omaha


John Higdon wrote:

> ...in California, touch tone service is now accepted as a standard
> method of subscriber signaling and does not carry any premium
> charges. Now if the rest of the country would come around...

It has been years (10 +/- ?) since an extra charge for TTS was allowed
in Nebraska.  The story, as I recall hearing, went something like
this:

The PUC ordered Northwestern Bell Telephone Company to provide
documentation enumerating their COST for providing TouchTone service --
a $1.20/month option.  The best they could come up with was 7-cents!!

The rap of a gavel and stroke of a pen and, presto!  Everyone gets TTS
for "free"!

(It would AMAZE you the number of subscribers I encounter that have
their CheapieChirpers set to PULSE!!)


JR    Tabby 2.2  MacNet Omaha [phone]  -  O.M.U.G. On-Line (1:285/14)

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

From: jlhaferman@t_ecn09.icaen.uiowa.edu (Jeff Haferman)
Subject: Looking For Number Which Tells me my Phone Number
Date: 3 Feb 92 15:47:44 GMT


How can I determine the phone number that tells me the phone number of
the number I am calling from (ANI number)?


Jeff Haferman                            internet: [e-mail]
Department of Mechanical Engineering     DoD 0186  BMWMOA 44469  AMA 460140
The University of Iowa
Iowa City, IA  52242                                 '76 R90S


[Moderator's Note: This ancient venerable question pops up once again!
I get a one or two of these weekly, and in most instances I go ahead
and give the stock answer which is, "you can't detirmine it" ... at
least not in a forum like this since the number differs from one
central office to the next -- if it is available in your central
office at all. You might try 200 plus four more digits and see what
happens. That one is common, as are otherwise unused prefixes in your
area code. If anyone knows the routine in Iowa City, perhaps they will
write Jeff with the details.   PAT]

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

Date: Mon, 3 Feb 92 15:17:29 EST
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject: 714/619 Using N0X/N1X? (was Background Regarding 206 Change)


Well, that means I'll have to look up phone books for southern
California again.  I do not have 714 and 619 listed as having N0X/N1X
prefixes.  I do have the 714/619 split listed as occurring back in
November, 1982, apparently without N0X/N1X prefixes then.  When did
the change in dialing occur?  I take it that 714 and 619 had 7D for
local calls and NPA + 7D for long distance, with NPA + 7D giving way
to 1 + NPA + 7D (as was done elsewhere in California in 213/818/310
and in 415/510).

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

From: [e-mail] (Robert Lindh)
Subject: 540,000+ Cellular Subscribers (6.6% of Sweden's Population)
Organization: Ericsson
Date: Mon, 3 Feb 1992 17:55:39 GMT


The statistics comes from the largest cellular operator (Televerket)
and describe their number of cellular subscribers in Sweden.

Roaming work automatically in Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway and
Sweden.  It does not matter in which country you are a subscriber, you
can use the cellular in the other countries as well (both make and
receive calls).  In total this system (called NMT) today have 1.2
million subscribers.


Standard disclaimer: "Only my personal opinion, of course."

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #112
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa23907;
          4 Feb 92 21:37 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA08611
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 4 Feb 1992 19:29:39 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA04517
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 4 Feb 1992 19:28:55 -0600
Date: Tue, 4 Feb 1992 19:28:55 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #113

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 4 Feb 92 19:28:48 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 113

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Dutch Hackers Arrested; Now in Jail! (Rop Gonggrijp)
    213/310 Split Script (Robert L. McMillin)
    Those Elusive Staple Guns (Bill Garfield)
    Connecting Accessories to Hotel Phone (Todd Inch)
    NPA Split Planned For 803? (David Esan)
    Party Not Answering Phone (Michael Rosen)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Rop Gonggrijp)
Subject: Dutch Hackers Arrested; Now in Jail!
Date: 4 Feb 92 17:11:19 GMT
Organization: Hack-Tic Magazine


                      DUTCH POLICE ARRESTS HACKERS


The facts:

At 10.30 Monday morning, 27 January 1992, Dutch police searched the
homes of two hackers. In the city of Roermond, the parental home of
the 21-year old student H.W. was searched and in Nuenen the same
happened to the parental home of R.N., a Computer Science engineer,
age 25.  Both were arrested and taken into custody. At both sites,
members of the Amsterdam Police Pilot Team for computer crime were
present, alongside local police officers and representatives of the
national organisation CRI (Criminal Investigations Agency). Both
suspects were transported to Amsterdam. The brother of one of the
suspects was told the suspects could receive no visits or mail. All of
this has happened more than one week ago and the two are still in jail
as we write this.


The charges:

A break-in supposedly occurred at the bronto.geo.vu.nl site at the VU
University in Amsterdam. This UNIX system running on a SUN station (IP
130.37.64.3) has been taken off the net at least for the duration of
the investigation. What happened to the actual hardware is unknown at
this time.

The formal charges are: forgery, racketeering and vandalism. The
police justify the forgery part by claiming that files on the system
have been changed. The vandalism charge is valid because the system
had to be taken off the net for a period of time to investigate the
extent of the damage.  By pretending to be regular users or even
system management the hackers committed racketeering, the police says.

Both suspects, according to the Dutch police, have made a full
statement.  According to a police spokesman the motive was "fanatical
hobbyism".  Spokesperson Slort for the CRI speakes of the "kick of
seeing how far you can get".


Damages:

According to J. Renkema, head of the geo-physics faculty at the VU,
the university is considering filing a civil lawsuit against the
suspects.  "The system was contaminated because of their doing and had
to be cleaned out. This cost months of labour and 50.000 guilders
(about US$ 30,000).  Registered users pay for access to the system and
these hackers did not.  Result: tens of thousands of guilders in
damages." Renkema also speaks of a 'moral disadvantage': The
university lost trust from other sites on the network. Renkema claims
the university runs the risk of being expelled from some networks.

Renkema also claims the hackers were discovered almost immediately
after the break-in and were monitored at all times. This means all the
damages had occured under the watchful eyes of the supervisors. All
this time, no action was taken to kick the hackers off the system.
According to Renkema all systems at the VU were protected according to
guidelines as laid down by CERT and SurfNet BV (SurfNet is the company
that runs most of the inter-university data-traffic in The
Netherlands).


What really happened?

The charge of 'adapting system-software' could mean that the hackers
installed back-doors to secure access to the system or to the root
level, even if passwords were changed. New versions of telnet, ftp,
rlogin and other programs could have been compiled to log access to
the networks.

What really happened is anybody's guess. One point is that even the
CRI acknowledges that there were no 'bad' intentions on the part of
the hackers. They were there to look around and play with the
networks.


About hacking in general:

In the past we have warned that new laws against computer crime can
only be used against hackers which are harmless. Against the real
computer criminals a law is useless because they will probably remain
untraceable.  The CRI regularly goes on the record to say that hackers
are not the top priority in computer crime investigation. It seems
that hackers are an easy target when 'something has to be done'.

And 'something had to be done': The pressure from especially the U.S.
to do something about the 'hacking problem' was so huge that it would
have been almost humiliating for the Dutch not to respond. It seems as
if the arrests are mainly meant to ease the American fear of the
overseas hacker-paradise.


A closer look at the charges and damages:

The VU has launched the idea that system security on their system was
only needed because of these two hackers. All costs made in relation
to system security are billed to the two people that just happened to
get in. For people that like to see hacking in terms of analogies: It
is like walking into a building full of students, fooling around and
then getting the bill for the new alarm-system that they had to
install just for you.

Systems security is a normal part of the daily task of every system-
adminstrator. Not just because the system has to be protected from
break-ins from the outside, but also because the users themselves need
to be protected from each other. The 'bronto' management has neglected
some of their duties, and now they still have to secure their system.
This is not damages done, it's work long overdue.

If restoring back-ups costs tens of thousands of guilders, something
is terribly wrong at the VU. Every system manager that uses a legal
copy of the operating system has a distribution version within easy
reach.

'Month of tedious labour following the hackers around in the system'.
It would have been much easier and cheaper to deny the hackers access
to the system directly after they had been discovered. 'Moral damages'
by break-ins in other systems would have been small. The VU chose to
call the police and trace the hackers. The costs of such an operation
cannot be billed to the hackers.

Using forgery and racketeering makes one wonder if the OvJ (the
District Attorney here) can come up with a better motive than 'they
did it for kicks'. If there is no monetary or material gain involved,
it is questionable at best if these allegations will stand up in
court.

As far as the vandalism goes: there have been numrous cases of system
management overreacting in a case like this. A well trained
system-manager can protect a system without making it inaccesible to
normal users. Again: the hackers have to pay for the apparent
incompetence of system management.

This does not mean that having hackers on your system can not be a
pain.  The Internet is a public network and if you cannot protect a
system, you should not be on it. This is not just our statement, it is
the written policy of many networking organizations. One more
metaphore: It's like installing a new phone-switch that allows direct
dial to all employees. If you get such a system, you will need to tell
your employees not to be overly loose-lipped to strangers. It is not
the callers fault if some people can be 'hacked'. If you tie a cord to
the lock and hang it out the mail-slot, people will pull it. If these
people do damages, you should prosecute them, but not for the costs of
walking after them and doing your security right.


Consequences of a conviction:

If these suspects are convicted, the VU makes a good chance of winning
the civil case. Furthermore, this case is of interest to all other
hackers in Holland. Their hobby is suddenly a crime and many hackers
will cease to hack. Others will go 'underground', which is not
beneficial to the positive interaction between hackers and system
management or the relative openness in the Dutch computer security
world.


Public systems:

If you are not a student at some big university or work for a large
corporation, there is no real way for you to get on the Internet. As
long as there is no way for some people to connect to the net, there
will be people that hack their way in. Whether this is good or bad is
besides the point. If there is no freedom to explore, some hackers
will become the criminals that government wants them to be.


                 "Our system is perfectly secure !"

        (and if you prove it's not, we'll have you put in jail)


Felipe Rodriquez ([e-mail])  &  Rop Gonggrijp ([e-mail])


Rop Gonggrijp ([e-mail]), editor of        | fax:   [phone]
Hack-Tic Magazine (only on paper, only in Dutch) | VMB:   [phone]
the best magazine for staying in touch with the  | snail: Postbus 22953,
the Techno-Underground. Mail to [e-mail]  |        1100 DL Amsterdam


[Moderator's Note: I printed this for the news content involving the
arrests rather than the editorial content they included ... but I try
to give everyone an even break around here. I wonder why the authors
seem to feel access to the Internet is some sort of right instead of a
*privilege*, which is what it really is. If everyone has a right to
Internet access, then it follows that everyone has a right to a
computer and modem with which to access the net ... so maybe the next
time we hear from the folks at Hack-Tic it will be a report on how
someone was arrested for stealing a computer and modem to use on the
network they feel they are entitled to invade at will.  After all,
what good is a network without a computer on each end, right? :)  PAT]

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

Date: Tue, 4 Feb 92 02:21:09 PST
From: rlm@ms_aspen.hac.com (Robert L. McMillin)
Subject: 213/310 Split Script


Here's a Bourne shell script that should parse a list of phone numbers
and correctly return the right area code if the old area code was/is
213.

 From: [e-mail] (Paul Eggert)
 Subject: program to update phone lists for the 213 area code split
 Organization: Twin Sun, Inc
 Date: Sun, 27 Oct 1991 20:04:53 GMT

The following Unix shell program copies standard input to standard
output, updating telephone numbers in the 213 area code that will be
moved to the 310 area code starting November 2.

Does anybody have a similar list of prefixes for the Bay Area split?


This program is in the public domain and has no warranty.

    ---- cut here -----
#!/bin/sh

#       $Id: 213fix,v 1.1 1991/10/27 19:47:54 eggert Exp $

# area codes
from=213
to=310

sedsed='{
        s@[     ]@@g
        s@.*@s/\\([^0-9]\\)'$from'\\([-).        ]*&[-.  ]\\)/\\1'$to'\\2/g@
}'

# Compute sed script from area codes and prefixes to be changed.
# This 213-to-310 prefix list is taken from GTE CA 5596 (rev);
# beware of earlier notices, which contain errors.
sed_commands=`
        sed "$sedsed" <<'EOF'
                [26]0[1-9]
                21[024-9]
                220
                24[67]
                27[013-9]
                28[0-24-9]
                297
                30[1256]
                31[2-9]
                32[02-9]
                33[0-8]
                348
                35[245]
                36[34]
                3[79][0-9]
                40[1-46-9]
                41[024679]
                4[2-579][0-9]
                51[02-9]
                52[1-479]
                5[349][0-9]
                55[36-9]
                568
                57[0-8]
                61[568]
                63[0-57-9]
                6[49][0-9]
                65[279]
                67[0-79]
                71[59]
                76[1-47-9]
                78[1-578]
                79[1-9]
                80[1-4679]
                81[2-46]
                8[236][0-9]
                84[0-2]
                85[4589]
                886
                898
                90[2-8]
                914
                9[248][0-9]
                967
                97[038]
EOF
`

exec sed '
        /'$from'/{
                s/^/ /
                '"$sed_commands"'
                s/^ //
        }
'
------------------------------

Subject: Those Elusive Staple Guns
From: [e-mail] (Bill Garfield)
Date: 3 Feb 92 20:49:00 GMT
Organization: Ye Olde Bailey BBS - Houston, TX - 713-520-1569
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Bill Garfield)


Some months back I recall a thread about how and where to obtain
staple guns for fastening down inside wire (IW) or station wire.
Replies from various ends of the continent all suggested the commonly
available {ARROW T-25} and suggested numerous sources from where one
could be obtained.

The problem, of course, as anyone who has ever done telecom wiring for
a living knows, is that the "T-25" is not the proper tool unless the
installer is attaching CATV or 4 and 6 pr. phone wire. Regular 2-pr,
"quad", or red/green/black/yellow IW fits poorly and the job takes on
a sloppy appearance when attached with 1/4" i.d.staples shot from a
T-25.

Thus the 'ne-plus ultra' tool of choice becomes the {ARROW T-18} which
uses .1875 i.d. staples that are an exact fit around standard 2-pr IW.
I've never seen the T-18 in any telecom tool catalog but I do know for
a fact that it, as well as any other staple gun from any of your
wildest hullucinations, can be readily obtained from DAVENPORT SCALE &
STAPLE Co., 916 W. 2nd, Davenport, IA 52802 [phone].  A
personal visit to DS&S is, for a staple tool enthusiast, the
equivilent of a ham radio junkie's first trip to Dayton.  My friend,
If they don't have it, it doesn't exist.

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

From: [e-mail] (Todd Inch)
Subject: Connecting Accessories to Hotel Phone
Organization: Maverick International Inc.
Date: Tue, 04 Feb 92 21:20:28 GMT


Regarding connecting accessories to "phone lines" you don't own or
have ready modular access to (e.g. Hotel, Payphone, Key system phone)
I've had very good luck simply connecting that modular-to-aligator-
clip cheater cord to the two contacts you find when you unscrew the
microphone from the phone.  This is instead of connecting directly to
the phone line itself.

IMPORTANT: It must be a carbon-type microphone.  If the microphone
cover twists off and the microphone element is round and drops out
from spring-contacts in the handset, it probably is carbon, especially
if it sounds like it's full of sand if you shake it and listen
carefully (carbon granules.)  If it's another type of microphone, I
doubt you'll hurt anything by trying this, but [insert favorite
disclaimer.]

This works to connect a speakerphone (line powered, no less) to our
Iwatsu Omegaphone III electronic key system (multiline phones) here at
work, but most "modern" electronic key phones don't use carbon
microphones.

It probably won't work if your accessory pulse-dials, may not work
with some line-powered equipment, and yes, you have to manually pick
up/hang up the phone, but in a pinch ...

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

From: [e-mail] (David Esan)
Subject: NPA Split Planned For 803?
Date: 4 Feb 92 21:50:50 GMT
Organization: Moscom Corp., E. Rochester, NY


I have heard a rumor that the 803 area is scheduled to split next
year.  Has anyone else heard that?

If so, what is the new NPA? (Not that there is a whole lot of choice
left).


David Esan      [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Michael Rosen)
Subject: Party Not Answering Phone
Organization: Extended Bulletin Board Service
Date: Tue, 4 Feb 1992 16:51:32 GMT


Several times when I have tried to call my local radio station's
request line I have gotten a strange intercept recording.  When
calling 1-800-321-WHFS (9437), sometimes if I let the phone ring for a
while (maybe a few minutes) without anyone answering, I get an
operator recording saying something to the effect of, "Your party is
not answering the telephone.  This call will be disconnected now."  I
don't remember the exact recording, but it's close.  Has anyone heard
of something like this before?


Mike


[Moderator's Note: It is quite common. AT&T now breaks the connection
after a few minutes if the called party has not answered and the
calling party does not disconnect voluntarily. The main reason this
was started was because radio talk-person Larry King ripped off AT&T
for many thousands of dollars in network resources by encouraging his
listeners over the air to dial his talk show call-in number 'and just
let it ring until we get ready to answer; that way no one has to pay
the phone company for the time they were on hold ...'. What was
happening was he was letting the incoming lines ring for 30-40 minutes
at a time; AT&T circuits were in use all that time on a non-revenue
basis; and AT&T finally got tired of King's abuse of the network. When
AT&T started their new policy, King blasted them over the air and told
his listener/participants how to dial the call using Sprint. I guess
he thought this would somehow punish AT&T and reward the other
company. His idea to transfer all that lousy, money-losing traffic to
the other carrier caused a few snickers at AT&T. ('Gee, we're sorry to
lose your business, Mr. King; your thirty minute connections which
generated three minutes of revenue ...')  PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #113
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa26519;
          4 Feb 92 22:49 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA01437
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 4 Feb 1992 20:31:30 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA06646
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 4 Feb 1992 20:30:44 -0600
Date: Tue, 4 Feb 1992 20:30:44 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #114

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 4 Feb 92 20:30:41 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 114

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Phone Service to Cuba (David Lesher)
    New Undersea Cable for Caribbean (Andy Sherman)
    New England Telephone Refiles for CLASS Without Caller ID (John R. Covert)
    Problem With Airport Telephone and VISA Card (Brian Litzinger)
    Need Reviews: "Centigram" Voicemail System (Laird P. Broadfield)
    Ring Trip - How do They do it? (was Rotary Dialers Go Home!) (M. Harriss)
    Paging Format Information Wanted (Ron Williams)
    Minitel and US West (Peter Marshall)
    Re: Supreme Court Action Restricts 900 Porn Services (Bob Yazz)
    Re: Seeking Simple Telephone Line Simulator (Macy Hallock)
    Re: DTMF Decoding by Ear ([e-mail])
    Re: DTMF Decoding by Ear (Rolf Meier)
    Re: Centel for Sale (Andrew Lie)
    Re: When Did Western Union Start to Die? (Kenneth Freeman)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: David Lesher <[e-mail]>
Subject: Phone Service to Cuba
Date: Tue, 4 Feb 92 19:53:16 EST
Reply-To: [e-mail]  (David Lesher)
Organization: NRK Clinic for habitual NetNews abusers - Beltway Annex


AP is reporting that the USG will relax the trade embargo with Fidel
enough to allow use of the new cable linking Cuba to the Florida Keys.

C.D.T. readers may recall previous discussions on this subject.  The
condensed-book version goes like this:

Cuba used to have a cable to the Keys, but it eventually failed.
Since then, service [such as it is] has been provided by a
tropo-scatter station located at Florida City, {near Homestead} FL.
But several years ago, someone {who?} installed a new fiber link. The
rub was, Cuba needed $$$ to startup and run their end. Because of the
trade embargo, this amounted to stalemate. Meanwhile, Bell South
reportably wanted the tropo station GONE, because it interfered with
cellular service {a large profit center} in the Keys.

Now the Bush administration seems to have softened its position
regarding the embargo. I can speculate about three things that might
account for this:

a) The tropo equipment IS getting older. But it is rather hard to
imagine a quality-of-service lower than what it offers now.

b) BS is getting antsy and it IS an election year, after all.

c) The collapse of the USSR leaves Cuba virtually alone. Change of
some form is a virtually certainty; the only question is when. And it
wouldn't hurt to be able to talk to either the government of Cuba or the
diplomats at the U. S. Interest Section. [Talk in this context means
"being able to hear and understand the other end" ;-]

In any case, new facilities will bring sharply increased call volumes,
and might even bring IDD to the US side.


[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Andy Sherman)
Subject: New Undersea Cable for Caribbean
Date: Tue, 04 Feb 92 10:17:55 EST


 From a recent AT&T press release:

AT&T, Cable & Wireless, Telefonica Larga Distancia of Puerto Rico and
US Sprint announced today they intend to build one of the world's
largest capacity undersea fiber-optic systems in the Caribbean.  This
$17 million "Taino-Carib" system -- named for Indians who originally
inhabited the islands -- will link Puerto Rico, St. Thomas and
Tortola.  It will be ready for service this fall.  The 186-kilometer
(112-mile) Taino-Carib system will extend from Isla Verde and Miramar
in Puerto Rico through a branching unit to Magens Bay, St. Thomas
(U.S. Virgin Islands), and Chalwell Station, Tortola (British Virgin
Islands).

Specifically designed for short distances, the new AT&T Bell
Laboratories-designed cable is half the diameter of existing
transoceanic cables and consists of six repeaterless fiber pairs.
Each of the fiber pairs will operate at 560 megabits per second,
resulting in a total capacity equivalent to about 225,000 simultaneous
phone calls.  The Taino-Carib construction contract has been awarded
to AT&T Submarine Systems Inc., a strategic business unit subsidiary
of AT&T that designs, engineers and installs cable systems worldwide.


Andy Sherman/AT&T Bell Laboratories/Murray Hill, NJ
AUDIBLE:  [phone]
READABLE: [e-mail]  or att!ulysses!andys
What? Me speak for AT&T?  You must be joking!

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

Date: Tue, 4 Feb 92 07:28:24 PST
From: John R. Covert  04-Feb-1992 1015 <[e-mail]>
Subject: New England Telephone Refiles For CLASS Without Caller ID


As a result of the Massachusetts DPU's order requiring free per-line
blocking, New England Telephone has refiled for three of the original
four "PhoneSmart" (CLASS) features in the original filing.

N.E.T. proposes to offer Call Trace, Return Call, and Repeat Call, but
not Caller ID or any of the other features that are part of CLASS such
as Incoming Call Blocking, Selective Call Forwarding.  The last two
were not part of the original filing.

N.E.T. had proposed a monthly fee for Call Trace as well as a charge
for each use; the DPU ordered that it be provided free on all lines
with only a per-use charge.

Call Trace will provide the needed protection from annoyance calls
without the privacy problems.


john

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

From: [e-mail] (Brian Litzinger)
Subject: Problem With Airport Telephone and VISA Card
Date: Tue, 4 Feb 1992 08:32:12 GMT


I was in the Glendale/Pasadena/Burbank CA airport ready to fly home
when I realized I didn't have enough money to get my car out of the
parking garage at the other end of my flight.

I resolved that I would call my wife and have her go to the garage and
deposit $20 in the car.

I figured I didn't have enough change to make the LD call, so I looked
for alternatives.  There were six sets of intructions for placing a
call using various methods listed on the public phone I came accross.
I settled on one that wasn't on the list.

I ran my VISA card through the card scanner, and when it said go, I
couldn't remember my wife's work number, so I hung up.  A few minutes
later I had reasoned out her number and, at another phone, zipped my
card through again and dialed 10288 + 1 + xxxyyyzzzz, to which the
phone popped and whirred and clicked and gave up.  It told me to take
my card out.

I re-ran the card and the phone said 'please use another card.'  I
didn't have another card, so I tried some more.  I tried other phones
to no avail.  All I got in response to zipping my card was an
immediate 'please use another card.'

I put a quarter in the phone and dialed 10288 + 1 + xxxyyyzzzz and it
wanted 80 cents to route the call.  By God, I actually had exactly 80
cents in my pocket!  How did it know this?  8-)

When I got home I ran my card through a merchant machine and it was
perfectly happy to read the numbers from it.

So what is the deal?  When I violated the six rules of phone dialing
was the entire airport network of phones immediately put on alert for
my card?

After the failed attempt I was really going to follow the instructions
 ... honest officer. 8-)


[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Laird P. Broadfield)
Subject: Need Reviews: "Centigram" Voicemail System
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Laird P. Broadfield)
Date: Wed, 05 Feb 1992 00:07:06 GMT


If anybody can give me feedback on Centigram's voicemail systems, I'd
appreciate it.  We are looking at the possibility of a new Centigram
instead of upgrading our Octel, so if anyone has experience with both,
that's particularly welcome.

Reply directly to me, of course; if anyone wants copies of the
received info, let me know.


Laird P. Broadfield
UUCP: {ucsd, nosc}!crash!lairdb
INET: [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Martin Harriss)
Subject: Ring Trip - How do They do it? (was Rotary Dialers Go Home!)
Reply-To: bdsgate![e-mail] (Martin Harriss)
Organization: Beechwood Data Systems
Date: Tue, 4 Feb 92 15:36:50 GMT


In an excellent article <[e-mail]> strieterd@gtephx.
UUCP (Dave Strieter) writes about the GTD-5 dial pulse and DTMF
detection.  In doing so, he also mentions, in passing, the ring trip
function, and it is about this that I have a question.

The question is, exactly how is ring trip done, without using relays?
I am familiar with ring trip circuits using relays, but ringing
voltage is nasty and there didn't used to be many semiconductor
devices that would withstand the voltage.

And, assuming you can use semiconductors to switch the ring current,
how do you detect the steady DC when the phone is answered, and not be
bothered by the ring current?

Enquiring minds want to know!


Martin Harriss    uunet!bdsgate!martin

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

From: [e-mail] (Ron Williams)
Subject: Paging Format Information Wanted
Organization: <<Eskimo North (206)-FOR-EVER>>
Date: Tue, 4 Feb 1992 02:56:04 GMT


Could someone tell me were to get some information on pager formats.
Both analog and digital please.  Thanks.

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

Date: Mon, 3 Feb 92 12:19:08 PDT
From: [e-mail] (peter marshall)
Subject: Minitel and US West


Responding to an earlier post about Minitel, John Rice, noting their
joint venture with US West in CLM(Community Link Minitel), asks in his
2/1 post, "Could this be why US West is trying to make life difficult
for BBS owners?"

Indeed, as others have noted in various forums, that just might have a
bit to do with it. Maybe it also may have something to with the
appearance that US West has also gone about its strategy somewhat
smartly.  For example, they have so far pretty much gotten to do their
thing within a little formal complaint case, where they also get to
appear to be doing battle with one little sysop. Pretty low-profile.
Just an isolated mini-case, as these things go. Thus, no great
uprising would be likely; nothing like COSUARD; nothing like that
earlier great fracas with the FCC.

And, probably, for similar reasons, not much organized, much less
effective, opposition to be predicted in little 'ol Oregon, either.
CPSR-Portland, for example, seems preoccupied with the Caller ID case
there; and this little complaint case wouldn't seem to fit the Oregon
CUB's priorities, on the other hand.  Nor is the Oregon PUC staff much
in view on this matter. After all, US West didn't file anything to
initiate this with the PUC.  A nice deal if you can get it.  But if
they do get it, the Oregon outcome in this low-profile affair is just
for starters.  No slouches, those US West boys ...


Peter Marshall    ([e-mail])
"Lightfinger" Rayek's Friendly Casino: 206/528-0948, Seattle, Washington.

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

From: [e-mail] (Bob Yazz)
Subject: Re: Supreme Court Action Restricts 900 Porn Services
Date: Tue, 04 Feb 1992 06:55:25 GMT


<Humorous anecdote after next three paragraphs.>

I fail to see why sexually stimulating children verbally should be
legal if it is done over the phone, if it would be obviously illegal
when done in person!  Doing this to a child for money hardly ennobles
the situation.

Telephone technology makes it much harder for the seller of an adult
product to determine whether a customer is a child or an adult.  Who
should have to pay the price of this burden?  The consenting adult
customer with his inconvenience, the seller with his lost profits or
the child with his innocence?

I don't really give much of a damn, as long as it's not the child.
The distinction between whether adult 900 access should require
written or verbal pre-authorization is trivial compared to the
protection of children.  Any freedom -- economic, speech or what have
you -- is utterly debased if you have to pay for it with the innocence
of children.

Do I know personally of any children who have been "harmed" by 900
porn services?  Yes!  About a year ago I received a call on my
residential 800 number from a woman in Alabama who described herself
as "a concerned parent" who wanted to know just what kind of services
I was providing and why I was providing them to children including her
14-year-old daughter!  At the time, my answering machine greeting
contained the 70's hit "Yes We Can Can" -- a song about Love, Peace,
Brotherhood, and so on.

Well, I'd never even Flown Over the great state of Alabama so I called
the woman back up to see just what the fuss was about.

It didn't take very long to explain what a residential 800 number was,
and that I had no idea where Daughter had gotten mine from.  And Mom
saw nothing about my musical greeting even slightly offensive.  Well,
she explained, her daughter had rung up several hundred dollars worth
of 900 number sex calls the month before.  After Mom lowered the boom
at home, Daughter apparently switched from 900 to 800 numbers.

My randomly-dialed 800 number was the unlucky recipient.  Mom had
found a list of many 800 numbers in daughter's room, and mine had had
many check-marks next to it.  The 14-year old had mistaken the vocal
stylings of real-life sisters Judith, Ruth, Bonnie and Anita Pointer
 -- women who learned to sing growing up in Church, for God's sake --
for a porn line.  She had left multiple "filthy" messages on my
machine, which I had shrugged off with an eyeroll Heavenward.  I was
pretty surprised that those messages had come from a 14-year old.

I told the woman that I thought her daughter was sexually obsessed
with telephones as a result of her recent 900 experiences.  Mom
assured me that her daughter was sexually obsessed only with teen
pop-idols, "The New Kids on the Block" and I did not engage her in
debate.

I guess I was most surprised when I learned the woman had agreed to
pay the 900 number charges!


== Bob Yazz ==

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

Date: Mon, 3 Feb 92 22:23 EST
From: fmsys![e-mail] (Macy Hallock)
Subject: Re: Seeking Simple Telephone Line Simulator
Organization: The Matrix


A couple other simple telephone line simulators:

Viking Electronics (in WI);

Cambridge Electronics (in MA);

This is a smaller company with the same name as a larger orginization
somewhere else.

Both are simple ringdown type devices to ring line B when line A goes
off hook.  Cost is about $130.00 each.


Macy M Hallock Jr N8OBG 216.725.4764 [e-mail] [e-mail]
[No disclaimer, but I have no real idea what I'm saying or why I'm telling you]

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

From: [e-mail] (System Administrator)
Subject: Re: DTMF Decoding by Ear
Organization: Crash TimeSharing, El Cajon, CA
Date: Tue, 04 Feb 1992 12:17:14 GMT


In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Rolf
Meier) writes:

> Has anyone out there developed the skill of decoding dtmf tones by
> ear?  Ever hear of anyone who has?  How about MF?

When I taught in Clovis, NM, one of the sopranos in my church choir, a
Marilyn Harmon, had perfect pitch and remembered phone numbers by
their 'tune'. If she wanted to call me, she would play my 'song' on
the touch tone keypad. She claimed to have some difficulty remembering
the actual digits, and hated to use rotary dials.


UUCP:     crash!pro-gallup!samp           |  pro-gallup 2400/1200/300 24 hours
ARPA:     crash!pro-gallup![e-mail]  |                     [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Rolf Meier)
Subject: Re: DTMF Decoding by Ear
Date: Tue, 4 Feb 1992 11:08:47 -0500
Organization: Mitel. Kanata (Ontario). Canada.


Thanks to all those who replied.  I was overwhelmed by email response.
The consensus was that there are, indeed, many people who can decode
DTMF by ear.  Not surprisingly, many of these were either visually
impaired or musically inclined.


Rolf Meier        Mitel Corporation

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

Date: Tue, 4 Feb 92 08:56:53 CST
From: [e-mail] (Andrew Lie)
Subject: Re: Centel For Sale


I just read the January 27, 1992 issue of {Telecommunications
Reports}.  It was reported that Centel is indeed trying to explore
strategic options, including possible sale of the company.


Andrew K. Lie          Any opinions expressed are mine.
[e-mail]    They do not represent the views
                       of my employer, NEC America, Inc.

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

From: [e-mail] (Kenneth Freeman)
Subject: Re: When Did Western Union Start to Die?
Organization: People-Net [pnet12], Del Mar, CA
Date: Tue, 04 Feb 92 21:56:09 GMT


Here's an excellent cultural gauge: When did movie mothers stop
receiving dire telegrams and start receiving dire calls, and how long
did the interregnum last?


INET: [e-mail]  UUCP: ucsd!serene!pnet12!kfree

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #114
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa00208;
          5 Feb 92 0:29 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA05014
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 4 Feb 1992 21:50:39 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA14430
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 4 Feb 1992 21:50:11 -0600
Date: Tue, 4 Feb 1992 21:50:11 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #115

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 4 Feb 92 21:50:08 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 115

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Oregon PUC Hearing Summary (Peter da Silva)
    Re: Another 800 Number That Bills You as a 900 Number (Bob Yazz)
    Re: Exchange Boundaries [Added LATA and NPA Boundaries] (David B. Whiteman)
    Re: No Supervison on 900 Call (Andy Sherman)
    Re: PIC's From RBOC Payphones (Andy Sherman)
    Re: The Waves of Fax (Lars Poulsen)
    Re: Detirmining if a Call Was Answered (Terry Kennedy)
    Re: 800-Number Foulup by One Digit (William J. Carpenter)
    Cellular Phones and Safety (Dineh Davis)
    McGraw-Hill Sells BIX to Delphi's Owners 02/03/92 (Newsbytes via J.Miller)
    Incoming Calls Problem (Lance Sanders)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Peter da Silva)
Subject: Re: Oregon PUC Hearing Summary
Organization: Taronga Park BBS
Date: Wed, 5 Feb 1992 03:08:50 GMT


> [Moderator's Note: Oh, I don't think 'within a month or two' anyone
> would go off line who hadn't planned on it in the first place, let
> alone 'most of the BBSes'. Somehow I think they would survive.   PAT]

You could be right. But I don't think so. I think I'd quit rather than
pay business rates for a hobby ... it just isn't worth the hassle. I'd
keep my system up for myself and personal friends as an electronic
answering machine, but it'd be strictly private.

But whether you're right or I'm right isn't really the point. It's what
Southwestern Bell believed, and what US West evidently believes. The timing
of this change is just too pat, just as it was for SWBell. You'll see more
of this sort of thing in the future, too. Just watch as the "BBS business
rates" and "LOC data services" threads continue in lockstep ...


Peter da Silva. Taronga Park BBS.  [phone]|1032 2400/n/8/1.

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

From: [e-mail] (Bob Yazz)
Subject: Re: Another 800 Number That Bills You as a 900 Number
Date: Tue, 04 Feb 1992 05:24:41 GMT


[e-mail] writes:

> ... I just started randomly pressing digits when prompted.  The
> system announced that this was not a valid form number.

Maybe I'm just lucky!  My own choice of random digits proved "correct"
the first time.

When they asked me to enter my phone number, I gave them 800-222-0300.


== Bob Yazz ==

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

From: [e-mail] (David B. Whiteman)
Subject: Re: Exchange Boundaries [Added LATA and NPA Boundaries]
Organization: Crash TimeSharing, El Cajon, CA
Date: Tue, 04 Feb 1992 13:43:36 GMT


In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (david
niebuhr) writes:

> 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.

I have decided to muddy the waters even more to describe some even
more strange boundaries that I have found:

Just north of where I live in Buena Park is the boundary between
Orange County and Los Angeles County and which is coincidentally the
border between the area codes of 310 which in that area is served by
GTE and 714 which in that area is served by Pacific Bell.  The border
looks like a staircase: it goes north about tenth of a mile then east
a tenth of a mile then north a tenth of a mile forming about four
steps.

Because of a new growth State Route 39, Beach Blvd, now runs on a
diagonal thru these borders several times.  Thus if you are walking
down one side of the street you will pass thru both area codes a few
times.  Two of the strip malls have both GTE and Pac Bell payphones as
well as being in both area codes, and different stores in the same
mall have different sales tax rates.  Perhaps in honor of this strange
boundary arrangement, but most likely coincidentally, the Telephone
Pioneers of America Silverado Council has volunteered to adopt this
stretch of highway and help Caltrans with maintenance costs.

I have also found one case in which an LATA and an NPA consists of two
separate areas: At the northwestern corner of San Diego County is Camp
Pendleton Marine Base.  All military phones in the base are in the San
Diego LATA and the 619 area code; however, some of the nonmilitary
businesses that are leasing space from the Marines are in the Los
Angeles LATA and 714 area code.  Therefore one area code and LATA
completely surrounds a disjointed portion of another area code and
LATA.

Another example of a split LATA is the Palm Springs LATA which looks
like two islands within the Los Angeles LATA.  The Palm Springs LATA
consists of Palm Springs and some of the neighboring cities at the
northern side of the Salton Sea.  Several miles away is the city of
Indio which entirely surrounded by the Los Angeles LATA, but is in the
Palm Springs LATA.

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

From: [e-mail] (Andy Sherman)
Subject: Re: No Supervison on 900 Call
Date: Tue, 04 Feb 92 10:30:13 EST


[ I wrote describing an AT&T 800 / 900 based service where the network
provided a voice menu and routing facility.  This is noticable to the
telecom aware by the fact that the call does not get answer
supervision until after it is routed from the menu. ]

[e-mail] (Harold Hallikainen) then inquired:

> What is the purpose of this "interactive call routing"?  Why
> not just assign a different phone number for each service?

Why is it better to use a bunch of extra 800 numbers?  Here's an
application: Vendor XYX, Co. wants to have a single 800/900 number for
all customer support.  That way you can pick up any of their manuals
or literature and the number you find there will work.  When you call
that number, a voice menu will then prompt you for the product or
product line for which you need support.  If XYZ adds a product to
their offerings, there is no need to get new 800 service.  Rather they
just change the menu and the routing tables, and all prior investment
in publicizing the 800 or 900 number is leveraged onto the new
product.

Obviously, implementing this in the network is only one possible way
to do it.  People also do that with their voice mail systems.
Consider the 800/900 service offered by AT&T (and for all I know by
other IXCs) to have the same relationship to a voice mail
implementation as Centrex has to a PBX.  There are advantages on
either side, depending upon the customers' needs.


Andy Sherman/AT&T Bell Laboratories/Murray Hill, NJ
AUDIBLE:  [phone]
READABLE: [e-mail]  or att!ulysses!andys
What? Me speak for AT&T?  You must be joking!

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

From: [e-mail] (Andy Sherman)
Subject: Re: PIC's From RBOC Payphones
Date: Tue, 04 Feb 92 11:17:49 EST


> AT&T has an enormous lead on its competitors because so much of its
> equipment was bought during its days of (morally wrongful) monopoly,
> and was paid off before its competitors were allowed to exist.  Judge
> Greene felt, and I agree, that AT&T should not be allowed to use this
> unfair advantage to drive its competitors out of business.  STP pairs
> are not unique as examples.

This argument ignores the fact that much of the infrastructure has
been built or substantially upgraded since divestiture.  This was not
paid for with pre-competition dollars.  The AT&T long distance network
underwent a complete overhaul to make it virtually all digital.  This
was paid for by a succession of charges to prematurely write down the
undepreciated value in what was already there.  Note that what was
already there was not fully depreciated in the late 1980's so this is
hardly stuff that was paid off with pre-competition dollars.

As for the characterization of pre-divestiture AT&T as immoral,
perhaps it would be instructive to consider both the external
environment and the internal ethic of the Bell System before picking
up all those stones to throw.  According to a recent book, "The Rape
of Ma Bell", the ethic of the pre-MFJ Bell System was "One Company,
One Network, with Universal Service".  I can't imagine how trying to
make sure that everybody can have at least basic telephone service is
such an immoral activity.  It seems like a way to serve the public
good while still making money for the millions of owners
(shareholders) of the company.

For a long time the FCC and the courts bought into this ethic and
pronounced it good with some limitations.  Examples: Bell Labs results
had to be made public.  Accomodation had to be made for interconnection
with those areas having independent local phone companies.  Rates were
tightly regulated.  Yes there were things wrong with the way things
were, but a lot of things worked well and benefitted the average
consumer.

> If AT&T were deregulated tomorrow, it would lower its prices to cost
> for, say, one month -- and all its competitors would go bankrupt!

Last I heard, the anti-trust division of the U.S. Department of
Justice (which is not the rate regulatory stuff of the FCC) was alive
and well, even in a Republican administration.  Such behavior would
attract their attention.


Andy Sherman/AT&T Bell Laboratories/Murray Hill, NJ
AUDIBLE:  [phone]
READABLE: [e-mail]  or att!ulysses!andys
What? Me speak for AT&T?  You must be joking!


[Moderator's Note: Its a shame we can't have lower long distance rates
because that might drive some competitor out of business, isn't it ...
If AT&T can justify lower rates, then I think they should be allowed
to lower them ... in fact there should be demands to that effect.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Lars Poulsen)
Subject: Re: The Waves of Fax
Organization: CMC (a Rockwell Company), Santa Barbara, California, USA
Date: Tue, 4 Feb 92 17:35:37 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Jim
Haynes) writes:

> 7.  Modern fax. ... Is there any U.S. technology/manufacturing
> or is it all Japanese?

Believe it or not, in almost every fax machine imported to the USA
from Japan or Singapore, is a modem chip set designed in Newport
Beach, CA and manufactured in El Paso, TX. The other major players in
FAX modems are European.

The Data Communications Division of Rockwell International is a market
leader in modems.  You are just now beginning to see the impact of the
next chipset: A V.32/V.32bis/V.42/V.42bis "data pump".

So why don't you see Rockwell modems in the stores? Actually, you do.
Rockwell will sell you chips and "piggyback boards". A customer
application group will provide (for a negotiated fee) consulting up to
and including complete electrical and mechanical design. And the plant
in El Paso will contract to build the modems for you, too. But when
they do, they will put the customer's name on the unit. It is a strict
policy that the DCD group will not compete with its customers.

But your order had better be big. They don't like to set up the
assembly line for orders of much less than 20,000 units.

While I work for a company owned by Rockwell, my only relation to them
modem people has been as a customer. None of the above has been
cleared with any Rockwell information or marketing outfit -- I just
thought some of you might find it interesting in this time of
flag-waving.


Lars Poulsen, SMTS Software Engineer     CMC Rockwell  [e-mail]

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

From: "Terry Kennedy, Operations Mgr" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Detirmining if a Call Was Answered
Date: 4 Feb 92 12:56:34 GMT
Organization: St. Peter's College, US


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (R M
Rickert) writes:

> The reason for no polarity guard (and no diode) was cost.  Phone lines
> were supposed to be fixed polarity.

  I think that's backwards. The old AT&T / Western Electric operation
would gladly spend reasonable sums of money to improve reliability. A
polarity guard as a standard feature would have added complexity for
no real benefit (since lines were wired properly, for the most part)
and would have made the sets unusable on longer distance loops (due to
the loss in the diode net).


Terry Kennedy        Operations Manager, Academic Computing
[e-mail]    St. Peter's College, Jersey City, NJ USA
[e-mail]    [phone]

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

Date: Tue,  4 Feb 92 22:30:54 GMT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: 800-Number Foulup by One Digit
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories


Carl Moore wrote:

> Word arrived this morning on KYW news-radio (I couldn't stick
> around for more detail) that a car dealer sent out an apology
> because an advertised 800 number was off by a digit, causing
> customers to call a 900 sex line.  That is a Philadelphia
> station.

The dealer is Freehold Automotive Group, Freehold NJ.  The wrong
number was distributed as part of a recall notification (Hyundai).
About 1000 customers are being sent follow-up notices with the correct
number.

[Got all this from the TV news of some NY station.  I paid attention
because I happen to live in Freehold.  Beats me if the story is true.]


Bill                      [e-mail]        or
[phone]            attmail!bill   or   att!pegasus!billc
AT&T Bell Labs / AT&T EasyLink Services               LZ 1E-207

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

Date: Tue, 4 Feb 1992 15:42:03 HST
From: Dineh Davis <[e-mail]>
Subject: Cellular Phones and Safety


Could someone tell me if any studies have been conducted on the
relationship between driver safety and the use of cellular phones in
cars?  I know there are several bills pending in various states to
regulate the use of phones in moving vehicles.  Beyond that, I'm
drawing a blank.  Any information will be appreciated.


Dineh Davis    Dept. of Communication  University of Hawaii
     [e-mail] Fax:[phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (J. Philip Miller)
Subject: McGraw-Hill Sells BIX to Delphi's Owners 02/03/92
Date: Tue, 4 Feb 92 20:17:36 CST


Excerpts from a {NewsBytes} release:

CAMBRIDGE, MA, U.S.A., 1992 FEB 3 (NB) -- McGraw-Hill, the owner of
the Byte Information eXchange (BIX) has announced it has sold the
online service to General Videotex Corporation (GVC), the parent of
Delphi, another online system.

I guess that this means that, despite what was announced earlier, BIX
will not be joining Internet mail connectivity :-(



     J. Philip Miller, Professor, Division of Biostatistics, Box 8067
     Washington University Medical School, St. Louis MO 63110
         [e-mail] - Internet  [phone]
uunet!wuarchive!wubios!phil - UUCP [phone](FAX)  C90562JM@WUVMD - bitnet


[Moderator's Note: Well maybe ... but I am of the opinion those folks
are beginning to slowly come around to the realization that universal
email networking is all-important.  I think they will eventually
figure out that the only losers are themselves and their users. When
that single truth sinks in, they'll become part of the greater
network.  PAT]

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

Date: Tue, 4 Feb 92 17:10 CST
From: [e-mail] (Lance Sanders)
Subject: Incoming Calls Problem


   A friend recently complained by email that I never answered the
phone anymore, and moreover, why did I take the answering machine
offline? While reading the transmission (in my bedroom and off-line),
I heard an extremely brief blip from my phone, picked up, and took a
call.

   Thinking the ringer was screwed-up, and I'd simply need a new
phone, I switched it with the downstairs trimline to make sure, and
called from upstairs (two separate lines). It rang loud and clear. I
called the operator from upstairs w/ the dowstairs phone and asked for
a call-back. Again, just the faintest blip of a ring. When I picked
up, the connection was normal.  There are no problems with outgoing
calls on the upstairs line; and from the caller's end, the line rings
normally. No in OR out problems on the downstairs line (I live in an
apartment).

   With the phone set functioning properly, no physical damage to the
lines, etc., and a normal incoming connection made should I pick-up
(despite not hearing a ring) during a test call, how is it possible
that my phone doesn't ring (except for that occassional brief blip)???
Can't my answering machine (also functioning properly) pick-up, even
though the rings aren't audible? Can the _strenth_ of an incoming
signal (call) be diminished so the bell doesn't ring, but no other
aspect of the service is affected?? Is this a common service problem?
I've never had it happen to me before.

   Before I call 611, I'd like to "get a clue", and maybe some answers to
compare w/ the service person's explanation (or God forbid, lackthereof).

   Help!!


Lance "How many calls have I missed??" Sanders
[e-mail]   GE Mail: L.Sanders6   Voice: [phone]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #115
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa23510;
          6 Feb 92 18:46 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA12444
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 6 Feb 1992 07:40:28 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA23340
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 6 Feb 1992 07:40:08 -0600
Date: Thu, 6 Feb 1992 07:40:08 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #116

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 6 Feb 92 07:39:58 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 116

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Plain Paper Fax/Modems (Ian Spence)
    Bell Atlantic Shoots Themselves in the Foot (John R. Levine)
    BBB's 900 Number (Michael Schuster)
    High Speed Modems and PSTN (Bill Garfield)
    COCOT Information Wanted (Stan Voket)
    NJ Bell Wiring State for Fiber (Peter Marshall)
    Newsgroups We Ought to Have (Peter da Silva)
    Information Wanted on History of Muzak (Mathew Zank)
    Telecommunications Brokers and Suppliers (R. Patrick MacKinnon)
    Re: Paging Format Information Wanted (Jacob R. Deglopper)
    Re: Minitel and US West (Tim Russell)
    Re: Phone Service to Cuba (Tony Harminc)
    Re: Another 800 Number That Bills You as a 900 Number (Ken Weaverling)
    Re: *611 and *711 Calls Are Free? (Robert J. Stratton III)
    CBS Live Tele-Poll (Joshua E. Muskovitz)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Ian Spence)
Subject: Plain Paper Fax/Modems
Organization: Dept. of Psychology, University of Toronto
Date: Wed, 5 Feb 1992 14:13:58 GMT


I am interested in purchasing a fax or fax modem that connects to a
laser printer directly, thus providing plain paper faxes.  The
advantage is that the computer need not be on to receive faxes.

I know of two products:

JetFax II from JetFax, Inc. (about $1000);
OmniLink/Laser from Technology Concepts (about $450).

I would appreciate hearing of others and of any experiences, good or
bad, with this type of equipment.  I will summarize responses.


Ian Spence, Department of Psychology        [e-mail]
University of Toronto                       [e-mail]
Toronto, Ontario                            [phone]   (Voice)
Canada M5S 1A1                              [phone]   (FAX)

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

Subject: Bell Atlantic Shoots Themselves in the Foot
Date: Wed, 5 Feb 92 13:14:26 EST
From: John R. Levine <[e-mail]>


{Newsbytes} reports that Bell Atlantic admits having funded an
advocacy group "Small Businesses for Advertising Choice" to oppose HR
3515, a bill regulating the RBOCs' entry into info services.
Tennessee Democrat Jim Cooper, the sponsor, called it a "clumsy
Astroturf campaign," meaning fake grass roots.

Republican co-sponsor Dan Schaeffer was a target of a similar campaign
by US West, in which telco employees were encouraged to call their
representatives on company time to oppose the measure.

The bill is HR 3515.  To get a copy, call the House Documents Room at
202 225 3456 and ask for a copy.  It's free (more accurately, you've
already paid for it.)


Regards,

John Levine, [e-mail], {spdcc|ima|world}!iecc!johnl

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

From: [e-mail] (Michael Schuster)
Subject: BBB's 900 Number
Date: Tue, 4 Feb 1992 21:32:26 GMT
Organization: PANIX - Public Access Unix Systems of NY


Well, 900 numbers IMHO have reached a new low.  Here in New York, the
Better Business Bureau has set up a 900 number (85 cents per minute)
through which you can check the record of a company you intend to do
business with, or file a complaint.  In the past, wasn't this free?


Mike Schuster
NY Public Access UNIX: [e-mail]        | [e-mail]
The Portal (R) System: [e-mail]   | MCI Mail,GEnie: MSCHUSTER


[Moderator's Note: Yes, in the past it was free. Likewise, the
corporate records telephone look-up service offered by most state
governments was free, as was the public library telephone reference
service for lookups from the local criss-cross directory in most
towns. Many phone look-up services are now using 900 numbers.  PAT]

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

Subject: High Speed Modems and PSTN
From: [e-mail] (Bill Garfield)
Date: 4 Feb 92 19:51:00 GMT
Organization: Ye Olde Bailey BBS - Houston, TX - 713-520-1569
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Bill Garfield)


I am beta testing some high end V.32bis (14.4K bps) asynchronous dial
up modems for a major (U.S.) manufacturer. These are of course
intended to be used over PSTN circuits.

In real life testing, I'm seeing some vexing problems that the
manufacturer is having difficulty identifying and emulating in their
lab.  Specifically, whenever both ends of the call terminate in the
same exchange (5ESS), the modems either refuse or experience great
difficulties in training up at top speed.  Ditto on across town links
many C.O.'s apart, except then it's pot luck.  Frequently across town
calls link up flawlessly, other times they won't even attempt to
synchronize at any speed.

I'm not talking about presence or absence of error-correction, as both
ends use V.42 (MNP/LAPM) -- it's not a noise problem. The lines aren't
noisey (not to the naked ear, at least).  I'm in Houston where much of
the city is interconnected by fiber and several new digital C.O.'s
abound.

With both modems calling intra-office, inside a Mitel SX2000SG, (also
a digital machine) the two modems work flawlessly with each other,
never missing a beat.  Between two networked Mitel SG's on copper
T-1's using Mitel's version of ISDN (MSDN), we still do not see any of
the symptoms.

Only when venturing out on the PSTN do the problems begin to randomly
show up.  I'm lost as to what could be happening, and the modem
manufacturer is beginning to question the credibility of our beta
reports.

Could some 'Telecom-Learned soul' enlighten me as to what could be
going on here?


Bill Garfield  |  Associated Technical Consultants  |  [phone]

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

From: gaboon![e-mail] (Stan Voket)
Subject: COCOT Information Wanted
Organization: gaboon, New Fairfield, CT
Date: Tue, 04 Feb 1992 21:32:16 GMT


Though COCOT's have received "bad press" in this group, I'm in the
position of wanting one to install in a small shopping plaza here in
central Connecticut that my relatives own. The goal here is to provide
a service for the patrons of the plaza and hopefully make a few
dollars.

I have virtually no knowledge of where to get info on equipment, costs
etc. so I thought I'd post the question to the experts here.

Any information will be greatly appreciated. Email or post replies if
they are of general interest.

Thanks very much,


Stan Voket, asv@gaboon - OR - ...uunet!casey!gaboon!asv
Voice: [phone] - FAX [phone] TELEX 4996516


[Moderator's Note: Have you considered contacting your local telco and
asking them to establish payphone service on a commission basis around
the plaza?  You'd still make money from the phones, and have a lot
fewer complaints from customers.   PAT]

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

Date: Tue, 4 Feb 92 11:42:12 -0800
From: [e-mail] (Peter Marshall)
Subject: NJ Bell Wiring State for Fiber


According to a 1/19 NYT article, "New Jersey Bell Gets Permission to
Rewire State for Fiber Optics,":

Gov ... today [1/17] signed legislation that would allow New Jersey
Bell to rewire the state with fiber-optic cable. The plan would create
thousands of jobs and dozens of new telephone services and also would
open the way for the telephone company to compete directly with the
state's newspapers.

Sponsors said it [the bill] deregulated the telephone company so
that it could keep up with technological advances and competition.

The new law will allow the State Board of Regulatory Commissioners to
approve alternative regulation for companies seeking to apply new
technologies, like a fiber-optics network, said the Assembly minority
leader.

But the executive director of the New Jersey Press Association
said the organization was disappointed that the bill was signed.
"The real issue," he said, "was that there are tens of thousands of
people in businesses that this is going to impact on: newspapers,
cable companies, television stations. No one looked at the fact of how
many jobs people may lose eventually."

Concluding, the NYT article indicates that:

Within the next few months, New Jersey Bell is expected to ask the
board to let it begin work on a network expected to be finished by
2010. The company plans to rewire the entire state.

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

From: [e-mail] (Peter da Silva)
Subject: Newsgroups We Ought to Have
Organization: Taronga Park BBS
Date: Wed, 5 Feb 1992 03:29:47 GMT


While we're talking about new telecom related newsgroups, how about
one for all the MODEM TAX and BBS BUSINESS RATE discussions? My first
thought was a new misc.activism group ... but I'm wondering if a
misc.activism.telecom would have a wide enough interest base. How
about misc.activism.consumers?


Peter da Silva. Taronga Park BBS.  [phone]|1032 2400/n/8/1.


[Moderator's Note: It seems to me misc.consumers is already the place
for consumer activists, judging from the messages I've seen there.
Someone else can start these specialized groups if they want; not me,
as I am already too busy.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Mathew Zank)
Subject: Information Wanted on History of Muzak
Date: Wed, 05 Feb 92 05:31:42 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest)


Does anyone know about the history of Muzak, the service that brings
office music?  All I know is that it is on a sub-channel of a local
FM radio station.


Matthew Zank * Eau Claire, Wisconsin
Internet [e-mail] -or [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (R. Patrick MacKinnon)
Subject: Telecommunication Brokers and Suppliers
Organization: University of Western Ontario
Date: Wed, 5 Feb 1992 04:18:39 GMT


I am looking for the names, and numbers of telecom equipment brokers
and suppliers.  Particularly in the telephone industry, but
radiotelecom equipment may also prove useful.  I am trying to compile
a directory.  Any help with company names and addresses would be
appreciated.

Thanks for the time.


[e-mail] (R. Patrick MacKinnon)
Western Business School  --  London, Ontario

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

From: [e-mail] (Jacob R. Deglopper)
Subject: Re: Paging Format Information Wanted
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Jacob R. Deglopper)
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Date: Wed, 5 Feb 92 03:51:08 GMT


In a previous article, [e-mail] (Ron Williams) says:

> Could someone tell me were to get some information on pager formats.
> Both analog and digital please.  Thanks.

I think you might have some luck writing to companies ... Motorola,
mostly.

Analog pagers (tone or tone/voice) pagers use several formats to trip.
These include DTMF, Motorola two-tone (two audio tones, about .5 sec
long), where the pager beeps as long as the second tone sounds.  A
burst of five audio tones taking about one second, after which the
pager beeps, and other companies versions of two-tone.  Plectron comes
to mind, with their early-80's Motorola pager clone, using their own
tones.

Voice pagers have the circuitry needed to produce audio out of a
speaker, and open the squelch after the tones cease.  These include
things like the Minitor I and II (with a real squelch circuit for
monitoring, as well), Director IV, Pageboy III, all from Motorola.

These are just what I've had experience with working with the rescue
squads and fire departments.


 _/acob DeGlopper, EMT-A, Wheaton Volunteer Rescue Squad -- [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Tim Russell)
Subject: Re: Minitel and US West
Organization: University of Denver, Dept. of Math & Comp. Sci.
Date: Wed, 5 Feb 92 03:58:02 GMT


[e-mail] (peter marshall) writes:

> Responding to an earlier post about Minitel, John Rice, noting their
> joint venture with US West in CLM(Community Link Minitel), asks in his
> 2/1 post, "Could this be why US West is trying to make life difficult
> for BBS owners?"

    Hmm.  Well, here in Omaha, where CommunityLink is still (I think)
running, US West certainly hasn't done anything to stifle BBS
competition.  We have a very vibrant BBS community, as I'm sure Jack
Winslade will tell you.

    However, I think that if USW did really want CommunityLink to
prosper, the only way they could do it would be to shut down all the
local BBS's, and even then Prodigy or Genie would be a better value
many times over, even with the cost of buying a PC to run it figured
in.

    When CL was first being started up, our ACM chapter spent a
meeting being shown the system, and we were impressed.  Then the
system came out, and I saw the prices and what was being offered.  In
many cases, such as the Joslyn Art Museum's listings, information that
could be viewed on a board outside the museum cost $.10 per minute to
receive on CL.  That price was pretty much the lowest of any service
that offered much of anything, and as anyone can see, works out to
$6/hr.

    US West is paying, though.  Last month they closed the big office
they had in a local mall and moved to a small suite in some office
building.  I daresay CL will be shut down soon.  It's a shame, because
with anything even approaching reasonable prices, I think it would
have been a great thing.


Tim Russell    Omaha, NE    [e-mail]

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

Date: Wed, 05 Feb 92 00:09:15 EST
From: Tony Harminc <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Phone Service to Cuba


David Lesher <[e-mail]> wrote:

> Cuba used to have a cable to the Keys, but it eventually failed.
> Since then, service [such as it is] has been provided by a
> tropo-scatter station located at Florida City, {near Homestead} FL.

> In any case, new facilities will bring sharply increased call volumes,
> and might even bring IDD to the US side.

Canada has had "IDD" to Cuba for some years, as I'm sure have other
countries.  How are these calls handled?

There is a cable linking Canada to Bermuda, which then goes on to some
Caribbean points.  Does this include Cuba?  Why can US carriers not
use this route?


Tony H.

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

From: [e-mail] (Ken Weaverling)
Subject: Re: Another 800 Number That Bills You as a 900 Number
Date: 5 Feb 92 05:13:25 GMT
Organization: University of Delaware


Will we little kiddies ever learn?  First it was playing with the {USA
Today} number, now it is the sweepstakes 800 number.

I called it a few days ago, and entered a random 12 digit number. It
told me it was an invalid number.  I tried again, and the system
informed me that it was sorry and I would not be billed for the call.

Well, glory be, last night I got my own prize notification!  I ran to
my local COCOT and dialed again. This time I listened closely to the
message. I am pretty sure the message has changed, since it clearly
said that the phone call was free. However, it also said "you will be
billed directly for the automated service, at a rate of $3.90/minute."

So, how do they bill?  Well, they have your address, and what might be
a unique award number.  When you punch in that award number, they bill
to the address they have on file.

Just a theory, of course. But how many of us will be getting pesky
bills, and if you fake a number, will you be causing a bill to be sent
to an unsuspecting person whose award number you guessed and got lucky
with?


Ken Weaverling   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Robert J. Stratton III)
Subject: Re: *611 and *711 Calls Are Free?
Organization: Express Access, Greenbelt, Maryland USA
Date: Tue, 4 Feb 1992 22:31:21 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Doctor
Math) writes:

> [e-mail] (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.

My OKI 692 will do it (RCL # #) regardless of whether it's activated.
If I were looking for a wireline/non-wireline carrier, I'd probably
have to set it to B only, or A only before I did the RCL # #, but the
display is reliable regardless of the phone's activation status.


Bob Stratton           | SMTP: [e-mail], [e-mail]
Express Access         | PSTN: [phone]
Greenbelt, Maryland    | For info on Express Access, write "[e-mail]".

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

Date: Tue, 4 Feb 92 09:37:07 EST
From: "Joshua E. Muskovitz" <[e-mail]>
Subject: CBS Live Tele-Poll


Someone asked, "I wonder how big their phone bill was?"

The answer is simple!  $0.00!  They'll just charge all of the calls
back as 900 calls.  You *did* say the carrier was AT&T, didn't you? ;-)


Josh Muskovitz

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #116
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa13922;
          7 Feb 92 4:19 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA19640
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 7 Feb 1992 02:06:37 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA18888
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 7 Feb 1992 02:06:11 -0600
Date: Fri, 7 Feb 1992 02:06:11 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #118

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 7 Feb 92 02:06:00 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 118

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    V&H Tape Statistics (David Esan)
    New High Speed Network Makes Debut (Jon Havel)
    C&P Tries to Overcharge Customers (Washington Post via Craig Neidorf)
    Ultimate Unified Scalable Heterogenaic System (Yechezkal Shimon Gutfreund)
    900 Idea of the Future (Edward Floden)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (David Esan)
Subject: V&H Tape Statistics
Date: 6 Feb 92 15:08:01 GMT
Organization: Moscom Corp., E. Rochester, NY


Once a quarter I receive the BellCore V&H tape.  Using this
information I can total the number of exchanges in each area code.
The twenty most populous area codes are listed below.  After the
written text of this article I have included the count for each of the
area codes, one sorted by NPA, the other sorted (in reverse) of the
number of exchanges in a given NPA.

The tape is dated 15 January 1992.  I am not responsible for the
information supplied in this tape.

The list this time included many billing numbers, including a whole
series with nxx's less than 200.  While I included them the last time,
I did not include them this time.  This accounts for some small
changes, for example 501 has fallen off the list, and 713 seems to
have lost an exchange.

I have not included the 52? series of area codes that are in use for
Mexico, since they are not yet dialable from the US.  (Note: Don't ask
me when they will be dialable, I don't know, although I will guess
sometime after 1995.)

I have not included the 82? series of area codes which include many
more Mexico exchanges, as well as the non-dialable locations in the
NANP.

The new tape included information for two new NPA's, 706, 917,
although there are only two exchanges listed for 917.  They are included
below.


The fields are:
                        ------------ rank last quarter
          213: 736 (1, 7)
  area code --^^^  ^^^     ^------- number of new exchanges
                    |-------------- total number of exchanges

213: 755 (1, 10)  512: 670 (6, 0)    602: 614 (12, 5)    703: 576 (18, 10)
301: 716 (2, 13)  205: 657 (7, 5)    215: 612 (11, 2)    713: 572 (17, -1)
415: 709 (4, 23)  416: 655 (8, 5)    714: 605 (13, 7)    708: 571 (20, 17)
404: 708 (3, 6)   919: 647 (9, 6)    206: 600 (14, 3)    604: 564 (19, 4)
212: 685 (5, 7)   313: 647 (10, 9)   403: 597 (15, 1)    216: 554 (26, 15)


Of the top 20 NPA's we can note:

#1. 213 - Split to 310 is in progress.
#2. 301 - Split to 410 is in progress.
#3. 415 - Split to 510 is in progress.
#4. 404 - Split to 706 will begin in May 1992.
#5. 212 - due to have pressure reduced by 917 and the movement of some NXX's
      to 718.
#6. 512 - Split to 210 will begin in November 1992.
#7. 205 - no plans to split at this point.  Intra-NPA calls require the
      dialing of the NPA.
#8. 416 - due to split to 905 in 1993.  Intra-NPA calls require the dialing
      of the NPA.
#13. 714 - will split to 909 beginning November 1992.

Some one asked what happened to the top 20 last quarter.  Here they are:

 1. 213 - Still #1.            11.    215 - Now #12.
 2. 301 - Still #2.            12.    602 - Now #11.
 3. 404 - Now #4.            13.    714 - Still #13.
 4. 415 - Now #3.            14.    206 - Still #14.
 5. 212 - Still #5.            15.    403 - Still #15.
 6. 512 - Still #6.            16.    501 - Now #22.
 7. 205 - Still #7.            17.    713 - Still #17.
 8. 416 - Still #8.            18.    703 - Now #16.
 9. 919 - Still #9.            19.    604 - Now #19.
10. 313    - Still    #10.            20.    708 - Now #18.

201: 410  304: 335  406: 345  508: 376    612: 538  714: 605  816: 459
202: 260  305: 471  407: 400  509: 243    613: 291  715: 316  817: 493
203: 494  306: 444  408: 317  510: 328    614: 410  716: 384  818: 380
204: 348  307: 162  409: 288  512: 670    615: 539  717: 477  819: 310
205: 657  308: 201  410: 392  513: 462    616: 384  718: 413  901: 225
206: 600  309: 262  412: 423  514: 487    617: 387  719: 162  902: 264
207: 343  310: 417  413: 131  515: 420    618: 330  801: 343  903: 271
208: 284  312: 447  414: 481  516: 383    619: 507  802: 177  904: 503
209: 346  313: 647  415: 709  517: 322    701: 353  803: 525  906: 110
212: 685  314: 533  416: 655  518: 258    702: 303  804: 473  907: 405
213: 755  315: 256  417: 199  519: 349    703: 576  805: 286  908: 326
214: 512  316: 367  418: 363  601: 405    704: 339  806: 261  912: 334
215: 612  317: 442  419: 335  602: 614    705: 269  807: 105  913: 433
216: 554  318: 331  501: 541  603: 235    706: 276  808: 265  914: 339
217: 361  319: 332  502: 342  604: 564    707: 185  809: 514  915: 305
218: 291  401: 135  503: 546  605: 346    708: 571  812: 278  916: 436
219: 358  402: 409  504: 338  606: 267    709: 260  813: 503  917: 2
301: 716  403: 597  505: 321  607: 168    712: 275  814: 262  918: 293
302: 119  404: 708  506: 177  608: 249    713: 572  815: 300  919: 647
303: 532  405: 522  507: 272  609: 276

This is the list of NPAs sorted by number of exchanges.  There are 20
entries in a column, and I have include a line break after each five
lines.

213: 745  405: 553  513: 457  310: 382    419: 336  218: 291  315: 256
301: 703  216: 549  816: 450  716: 378    318: 331  613: 288  608: 251
404: 702  503: 540  306: 447  508: 371    319: 330  805: 284  509: 241
415: 686  615: 536  317: 438  818: 370    618: 328  208: 283  603: 232
212: 678  612: 527  312: 437  316: 364    304: 328  812: 279  901: 224

512: 670  314: 527  916: 431  418: 363    912: 326  712: 276  417: 199
205: 652  303: 523  913: 430  217: 359    908: 320  609: 275  308: 199
416: 650  803: 522  412: 423  219: 355    517: 319  507: 270  706: 184
919: 641  619: 504  515: 418  701: 352    715: 317  705: 269  707: 180
313: 638  809: 502  718: 411  204: 348    918: 316  903: 267  506: 176

215: 610  813: 501  907: 408  519: 347    505: 316  606: 267  802: 175
602: 609  904: 500  402: 408  605: 345    905: 311  202: 266  607: 168
714: 598  214: 494  614: 407  406: 343    819: 309  902: 265  307: 162
206: 597  817: 492  201: 403  209: 343    915: 308  806: 263  719: 160
403: 596  203: 490  601: 401  207: 342    408: 308  808: 262  401: 135

501: 576  514: 485  407: 391  914: 340    510: 306  309: 261  413: 131
713: 573  414: 477  410: 388  801: 340    702: 299  814: 260  302: 114
703: 566  717: 475  617: 385  502: 340    815: 296  709: 260  906: 109
604: 560  804: 468  616: 382  704: 336    409: 293  518: 258  807: 105
708: 554  305: 468  516: 382  504: 336


David Esan      [e-mail]

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

From: uuhare![e-mail] (Jon Havel)
Subject: New High Speed Network Makes Debut
Organization: The Rabbit Network
Date: Fri, 07 Feb 92 02:39:10 GMT


* * * P R E S S   R E L E A S E * * *

February 6, 1992, MT. CLEMENS, MI - The newest entry into the computer
internetworking industry announced today that its first two points of
presence (POP's) will be online by June 1 of this year. THE RABBIT
NETWORK, INC. announced that the first two terminal servers on its
high speed network will be in Detroit and Mount Clemens, MI.

Jon Havel, Technical Support Director for the company, said that one
of the main problems in this area of the country is the lack of
availability of cheap local phone service. "Many companies in this
area have offices and shops spread around the Metropolitan Detroit
area and often times, they need to exchange computer data between
these various facilities", Havel said.  "The problem is, that if one
facility is outside the local calling area of the other, the meter is
running as soon as the data connection is established. These fees can
be anywhere from 5 cents a minute up to 25 to 30 cents a minute". "Its
ridiculous -- Detroit, for instance, is only a few miles from Mount
Clemens, yet a call from Eight Mile Road (on the northern edge of
Detroit) to 15 Mile and Gratiot is considered long distance, even
though its only seven miles down the road!" Havel says that the
company plans on installing terminal servers in strategic areas of
southeastern Michigan so as to form a "blanket" over the entire area,
making phone charges for data calls as inexpensive as a fixed-rate
local call.

Here is how it will work: A customer with several facilities will
obtain an account on each of the terminal servers in the local areas
in which their facilities are located.  Each facility then dials up
the terminal server in their area, linking that facility's LAN (Local
Area Network) into the Rabbit Network. At this point, data can be
exchanged between the customer's facilities over The Rabbit Network.
The company plans on working closely with a network consulting firm to
assist customers in obtaining and configuring the necessary software
for connection to the network. Costs for access to each terminal
server will be based on a fixed monthly rate and will not depend on
how much data is exchanged.

The network will use hardware and software from Telebit Corporation
and Cisco Systems, as well as UNIX(tm) based systems for extended
features. Access to the global computer conferencing network, known as
USENET will also be available to the network's customers as well as
electronic mail within the network as well as access to global
electronic mail on the national Internet.  Each access code for a
terminal server gets the customer his own dialup number, thereby
eliminating any possibility of busy lines.  The network backbone
speeds will be upgraded as needed and will range anywhere from 56kbps
(56,000 characters/second) up to T3 (3 million characters per second).
Telebit T3000 modems, the newest models, will provide users with
reliable dial-up access via 14.4kb (14,400 characters/second) V.32bis
links.

The company is also planning on connecting its network with the
national Internetwork some time within the next year.  This would give
customers access to a global network and would greatly enhance the
connectivity of any national organizations which have offices around
the country.

Although only two terminal servers are scheduled to make their debut
in June, Mr. Havel predicts that as many as ten small to medium
Michigan cities will be online by the end of the year.  "Where we
locate our POP's and terminal servers will be dependent on customer
demand", Havel said. Customers are encouraged to contact the company
and let them know what kind of service they would like to see and in
what areas of the state they would like to see access points. "We
aren't limiting our growth to Michigan", Havel added, saying that "We
could cross the border into other states as soon as customer demands
warrant it".

Interested parties can contact The Rabbit Network at [phone],
or can FAX at [phone]. The Rabbit Network main office is
located at 34486 S. Gratiot Ave, Suite 200, Clinton Township, Michigan
48043.

"UNIX" is a registered trademark of AT&T Bell Labs.

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

Date: Wed, 5 Feb 92 13:04:47 PST
From: [e-mail] (Craig Neidorf)
Subject: C&P Tries to Overcharge Customers


Excerpt of the first three paragraphs only ...

C&P Asks D.C. Commission To Reconsider Rate-Cut Order   February 4, 1992
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
by John Mintz {Washington Post} (Page C1)

Chesapeake & Potomac Telephone Co. yesterday asked the Distict Public
Service Commission to reconsider its order for a rate reduction,
saying the commission had made a series of computational errors and
unfair decisions.

The company said in its application for reconsideration that
commission officials made some mathematical errors in computing
certain formulas and that, intead of the 8.6 percent decrease in rates
that the PSC ordered, C&P actually deserved an increase of just under
one-half a percentage point.

C&P, which originally had asked for a 21 percent increase in rates,
said in the appeal that it has been "irreparbly harmed" by the
commission's actions.  If the commission rejects C&P's appeal, as is
expected, the company could take its case to the D.C. Court of
Appeals.  But the court has rarely overturned PSC decisions.

                          - - - - - -

Seem a little strange that C&P now admits they only need a half of one
percent increase in rates, but when they approached the PSC last week,
they asked for a 21 percent increase?  All the RBOCs are alike;
fraudulent, deceptive, and full of selfish intentions.


Craig Neidorf ([e-mail])

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

From: [e-mail] (Yechezkal Shimon Gutfreund)
Subject: The Ultimate Unified Scalable Heterogenaic System
Date: 5 Feb 92 20:21:01 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: GTE Laboratories, Waltham MA


My apologies to my friends at Bellcore, but it's Adar and I couldn't
contain myself:

MORRISTOWN, NJ., Feb 3 - Researchers at BellCore (Bell Communications
Research) announced today a new networking and computation
architecture, called INAPIZZA. One researcher here explained the name:
"Well, we were sorta dissapointed in the lack of scope and vision of
the other BellCore groups working in this area. The Piscataway folks
first created something called IN, and now a newer ObjectOriented
thing called INA. Now here at Morristown we are the advanced research
group.  IN and INA look to us like big engineering kludges. They are
commitee driven architectures that try and be all things to all
people. So we wanted to come up with one unified compact
metaphor/achitecture.  So one day while out to lunch we figured out
where all this IN and INA was leading -> IN, INA, INAPIZZA. Why a
pizza you ask? Well, why we were at lunch we noticed that pizzas are
really the perfect metaphor for distributed computation and
communications.

Everyone likes it. It provides a common uniform architecture and
platform. On top of that one can place all sorts of heterogenous
applications. One big problem with hetergeous architectures is
establishing a pricing structure. But, everyone who has gone to
college knows how to divide the costs of a heterogenous pizza.

Pizza customization occurs at all levels and time periods. The basic
architecture is established at order time. But run-time enhancements
(pepper, hot peppers, etc.) can even be delayed till right before
binding time (with one's mouth).

Scalability you need? Pizzas are one of the few engineering artifacts
that have adapted to almost every new techinque. New spices, new
toppings, even new architectures such as sicillian and deep-dish.

It is perfectly suited for ATM applicatons. Just like ATM channels,
you can slice it to give you just the ammount of bandwidth you need,
and you can consume it bite-wise (cell-wise) based on demand of the
application.

We are currently prototying the transport mechanism which we are
calling DOMINOS, and hope to present our work both at TINA '93 and the
New York Food Festival."


Yechezkal Shimon Gutfreund           [e-mail]
GTE Laboratories, Waltham MA     harvard!bunny!sgutfreund


[Moderator's Note: Thanks for a very clever posting! Really, it
brightened my day. The flip side of the coin for our friends at the
Labs was the report in the business news section of the papers on
Thursday saying approximatly 3000-3500 more non-union workers will be
laid off by AT&T and associated companies during March as part of a
scaling down of personnel to meet present day realities. Apparently
this will not be based entirely or even mostly on seniority: One of
the spokespersons for the company said there are some senior employees
with large salaries on the way out; they'll be keeping many employees
who earn less money.  Sad news, indeed, from an organization which in
another era *never* laid off anyone. Hundreds of thousands of old
timers from the first half of this century spent a lifetime in the
System.  :(    PAT]

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

Date: Wed, 5 Feb 92 17:59:52 CST
From: [e-mail] (Edward Floden)
Subject: 900 Idea of the Future
Organization: The Get-a-Life Foundation for Chronic Trekism


There I sat, reading TELECOM Digest, and wondering just what new scam
would be perpetrated under the guise of a 900 number service. And then
I thought of it.

Recently, new videophones have been introduced. AT&T has one, for
about $1500 (?). So what if someone buys a few of these, and caters to
the whims of the other first buyers -- who obviously have a few bucks
to throw around? Can't you see it now?

        Videophone Sex.

Remember, you heard it here first ... :)


Internet: [e-mail] | TechRen User Group
UUCP: crash!pro-ren!edward       | ProLine: edward@pro-ren


[Moderator's Note: Cute ... but not first, I'm afraid. There's already
a phone sex purveyor trying it with slow-scan video. I think the
company is in Florida. They even supply the video display units to
their customers. But it is on regular phone lines, not 900, and the
billing (there's always a catch!) is via your VISA/MC.   PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #118
******************************










Received: from [129.105.5.103] by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa04265;
          7 Feb 92 14:17 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA08814
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 7 Feb 1992 01:25:18 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA07967
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 7 Feb 1992 01:24:51 -0600
Date: Fri, 7 Feb 1992 01:24:51 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #117

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 7 Feb 92 01:24:46 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 117

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    New Cellular Phones Raise A National Security Debate (NYT via C. Mingo)
    Bell Labs Radio Astronomy A Casualty of Downsizing (Science via J.Haynes)
    Sprint Sold to United Tel (John R. Levine)
    Telecom in Puerto Rico (Jim Rees)
    Politics and Telephones (David Niebuhr)
    Emergency Phones on Coast Urged After Three Drownings (Randall C. Gellens)
    UNIX to DOS Communication (Art Lekoff)
    Tax on Information Proposed? (David Gast)
    2600 Magazine (Robert S. Helfman)
    Looking for TDD Info (Steve M. Hoffman)
    Neighbor's Phone Calls Ring MY Phone! (Scott Coleman)
    Residential 800 Service (Michael Rosen)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Charlie Mingo)
Date: 06 Feb 92  15:16:14
Subject: New Cellular Phones Raise A National Security Debate


By John Markoff in {The New York Times}, February 6, 1992 at D1

     Advocates of privacy rights are challenging the nation's most
clandestine intelligence-gathering agency over how much
confidentiality people will have when communicating via the next
generation of cellular telephones and wireless computers.

     The issue has emerged at meetings this week of an obscure
committee of telecommunications experts that is to decide what kinds
of protections against eavesdropping should be designed into new
models of cellular phones.  People concerned with privacy are eager to
incorporate more potent scrambling and descrambling codes in equipment
to prevent the eavesdropping that is so easy and so common in the
current generation of cellular phones.

    But privacy advocates contend that the industry committee has
already decided not to adopt the maximum level of protection because
of pressure from the National Security Agency, whose intelligence
gathering includes listening in on phone conversations in foreign
countries and intercepting data sent by computers.  The privacy-rights
faction contends that the security agency opposes codes that are hard
to crack because the equipment might be used overseas.

    "The NSA is trying to weaken privacy technology," said Marc
Rotenberg, Washington director of Computer Professionals for Social
Responsibility, a public advocacy group organized by computer
scientists and engineers.  "At stake is nothing less than the future
of our privacy in the communications world."

    The standards setting group is made up of cellular telephone
equipment manufacturers and service providers.

    The National Security Agency is the Defense Department Agency in
charge of electronic intelligence gathering around the world for use
by many other branches of the government.  Officials of the agency,
who have been participating in the meetings as observers, said their
only interest in the matter was insuring that the government's own
secure telephones were compatible with the new cellular phones.  They
said that agency officials have specifically been told not to
participate in the standards-setting effort, and indeed some engineers
attending the meetings said they have felt no outside pressure.

     But other engineers involved in the standards process said the
agency's presence had loomed large in earlier technical meetings
during the past two years.  "I would talk to people and they would
say, 'The NSA wouldn't like this, or wouldn't like that,'" said one
committee member, who spoke on the condition that he not be
identified.

The Agency's Long Reach

    The debate is important, the privacy advocates say, not just for
cellular phones but for many other emerging technologies that
communicate using radio signals, which are easier to intercept than
information sent over conventional telephone lines.  These include
wireless "personal communicators" that transmit and receive data, and
portable "notebook" computers.

    But the dispute also illustrates that even as the cold war ebbs,
the National Security Agency is still wielding influence over many
United States high-technology industries.  Indeed, executives from a
number of high-technology companies say the agency is hampering their
efforts to compete for business overseas by forcing them to make
products for foreign markets that are different from products sold
domestically.

   The agency exercises this power in evaluating some of the
applications by companies to export high-technology products.  In that
role, critics say, the agency has opposed exports of equipment fitted
with advanced encryption systems that are increasingly vital to modern
business.

Buyers Can Shop Elsewhere

    The agency's critics say it is almost impossible to contain the
proliferation of encryption technologies and that customers who are
deterred from buying it in the United States will simply shop abroad
or steal the technology.

    "The notion that you can control this technology is comical," said
William H. Neukom, vice president for law and corporate affairs at
Microsoft Corporation, the big software publisher.

    Critics also say that it is ludicrous that encryption systems used
in popular software programs receive the type of Government scrutiny
that might be expected for weapons.  "The notion that our our products
should be classified as munitions, and treated that way just doesn't
make sense at all," Mr. Neukom said.

    Privacy advocates have also challenged the committee's intention
not to publish the algorithm on which the encryption technology is
based.  Traditionally, cryptographers have said that the best way to
ensure that encryption techniques work is to publish the formulas so
they can be publicly tested.

    The committee has said that it will not disclose the formula
because it does not want to criminals an opportunity to crack the
code.  But publishing the formula is only a danger only if the formula
is weak, said John Gilmore, a Silicon Valley software designer, and
privacy advocate.  If the formula is strong, disclosing it publicly
and letting anyone try to crack it would simply prove it works.

    The code, however, is simple to break, say a number of engineers
who have examined it.  Several committee members said they realized
that the security agency would never permit the adoption of an
unbreakable privacy scheme.

    "The cynics in the bar would say that you're never going to get
anything by the NSA that they can't crack trivially anyway," said
Peter Nurse, chairman of the authentication and privacy subcommittee
of the standards committee and an engineer at Hughes Network Systems.

NSA Role Denied

   But a number of engineers who worked on the technical standard
insist that the agency has had no overt role in setting it.  "The
standard was based on the technical deliberations of some of the best
experts in North America," said John Marinho, chairman of the
standards committee and an executive at AT&T.  He said the committee
relied on the NSA only for guidance on complying with United States
regulations.

   He also said that the new standard would offer far more privacy
protection than is available under the present cellular telephone
system.  Today, although it is against the law to eavesdrop on a
cellular telephone conversation, many individuals modify commercial
radio scanners so they can receive the frequencies on which cellular
calls are transmitted.

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

From: Jim Haynes <[e-mail]>
Subject: Bell Labs Radio Astronomy A Casualty of Industrial Downsizing
Date: 5 Feb 92 21:34:19 GMT
Organization: University of California, Santa Cruz


This is from the 24 January 1992 issue of {Science} magazine.

"The Nobel Prize-winning radio astronomy program at AT&T Bell Labs,
renowned as the facility where scientists detected one of the first
signs of the Big Bang, will soon be gone or transformed beyond
recognition.  This action, which began a year ago and neared
completion last week with the departure of all but one of AT&Ts radio
astronomers, ...

(Stuff about history going back to Karl Jansky in 1928 discovering
radio emissions from space, current director Robert Wilson and lab
V.P.  Arno Penzia won Nobel prize for their 1965 discovery of uniform
background radiation.  Wilson is the only one still left in radio
astronomy, his colleagues having gone to academia.  Penzias says radio
astronomy is only being phased down because of aging equipment and
less need for satellite communication research.)

"But another top AT&T executive, director of communications research
Robert Lucky, finds the program's fate more disturbing.  Lucky says
the move is a usre sign that basic industrial research is becoming
much harder to justify against the corporate bottom line.  For
instance, he notes, AT&T must compete with MCI, which spends nothing
at all on research."


[e-mail]   [e-mail]

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

Subject: Sprint sold to United Tel
Date: Wed, 5 Feb 92 13:07:16 EST
From: John R. Levine <[e-mail]>


UPI reports that GTE sold their remaining 19.9% of US Sprint to United
Telecom for $250M in cash, and $280M due July 1, concluding a deal
previously announced.

United Tel will change their name to Sprint, now that Sprint is their
largest line of business.  GTE is concentrating on local exchange
service, the quality of which, as many Digest readers will testify, is
legendary.  GTE is now the largest local exchange carrier in the
country, bigger than any of the RBOCs.


Regards,

John Levine, [e-mail], {spdcc|ima|world}!iecc!johnl

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

From: [e-mail] (Jim Rees)
Subject: Telecom in Puerto Rico
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: University of Michigan IFS Project
Date: Thu, 6 Feb 92 03:55:27 GMT


I recently noticed that the phone system in Puerto Rico is like that
of a foreign country.  No equal access, and the long distance access
codes are things like 137 and 138.  Are they not bound by the MFJ and
Bellcore rules?

On a recent trip to New Mexico, however, things were just like they
are here in the U.S.  (That's a joke; I just read a newspaper story on
how many Americans think New Mexico is a foreign country).

What are things like in Guam?


[Moderator's Note: The Puerto Rico Telephone Company is not bound by
the MFJ or Bellcore rules.   PAT]

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

Date: Thu, 6 Feb 92 07:04:46 -0500
From: [e-mail] (david niebuhr)
Subject: Politics and Telephones


In yesterday's {Newsday} there was a short article about the attempts
to get Gov. *Cuomo* (New York) on the ballot in the New Hampshire
primaries.  It seems that the number they advertised up was
1-800-XXCOUMO.

It turns out that the owner of the COUMO number was receiving calls
destined for the non-candidate.  The total so far was about $77 in
charges.

Just another part of the silly season.


Dave Niebuhr      Internet: [e-mail] / Bitnet: niebuhr@bnl
Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, NY 11973  (516)-282-3093

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

Date: Thu, 6 Feb 92 05:54 GMT
From: Randall C Gellens <[e-mail]>
Subject: Emergency Phones on Coast Urged After Three Drownings


The {L.A. Times} for February 4 carried a story on three drownings off
the rocky Palos Verdes Peninsula, an area popular because of its
ruggedness and solitude.  Since there are only lifeguards during the
busy summer months, L.A. County Sheriffs are looking at ways to
improve emergency response, including installing telephones along the
coast or staffing the area with volunteer ham radio operators.

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

From: [e-mail] (Art Lekoff)
Subject: UNIX to DOS Communication
Organization: CompuData Inc.
Date: Thu, 6 Feb 1992 15:10:53 GMT


Hello Netters,

I am working on a project that involves a UNIX machine (using pcomm)
uploading (manually) a word processing file (formatted and
un-formatted) to a DOS machine running Smartcom Exec.

Smartcom answers pcomm, but will not allow it to interact with it. Is
there some sort of script file that Smartcomm expects from pcomm? The
settings for each machine are the same (both 2400 baud modems, 8-N-1).

Any help would be greatly appreciated. Please e-mail your response to
this account. I will summarize your answers if there is enough
interest.


Thank you!

Arthur LeKoff at CompuData, Inc., Home of Brother John!
10501 Drummond Road     UUNET:  {dsinc,uunet}!cdin-1!art
Philadelphia, PA 19154  INTERNET:  [e-mail]
[phone] ext.263   C$ERVE:  [e-mail]

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

Date: Thu, 6 Feb 92 16:41:39 -0800
From: [e-mail] (David Gast)
Subject: Tax on Information Proposed?


A friend reports that Bush is proposing to tax information, apparently
as a tax on modem and/or fax communications when billed and/or carried
by a telecommunications firm.  I don't have the details.  He says he
read it in the LAT, but I missed the article.  Has anyone else seem
something on it?


David

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

From: [e-mail] (Robert S. Helfman)
Subject: Information Wanted About 2600 Magazine
Organization: The Aerospace Corporation, El Segundo, CA
Date: Thu, 6 Feb 1992 01:02:31 GMT


I saw a reference to a magazine called "2600", which I assume is for
phone-phreaks. Can anyone provide a subscription address. It sounds
like a hoot!

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve M. Hoffman)
Subject: Looking For TDD Information
Organization: Motorola Inc., Cellular Infrastructure Group
Date: Thu, 6 Feb 1992 20:28:37 GMT


I'm looking for details on TDD.  I'm interesting in writing some
software to emulate a TDD device so I can talk to a deaf friend
without the use of a relay service via my computer.


Steve Hoffman    Software Engineer - Motorola Inc.
email: [e-mail]   International Subscriber Division GSM
ph:  1.708.632.2588  All opinions are my own.  Big corporations have none.
fax: [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Scott Coleman)
Subject: Neighbor's Phone Calls Ring MY Phone!
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Wed, 5 Feb 1992 21:48:31 GMT


OK, here's something I've never heard of before that I'm hoping one of
you telecom.experts can explain:

I've lived in the same apartment for almost two years now. During my
stay several of the other apartments in the building have had tenant
turnover. Recently, new tenants moved into the apartment next to mine.
Shortly thereafter I began to notice that one of my phones has begun
to "ring" - I enclose the word in quotes because it's not a *real*
ring, but rather a very soft ring. This phone has an electronic
ringer, and has three settings (Off, Low, and High). The ringer on
this phone is always set to OFF, and yet the phone continues to
produce this soft ring. The soft ring is lower in volume than the ring
would be were it in the Low position.

At first I assumed that the phone installer had crossed wires
somewhere when installing my neighbor's phone line, so the next time
it soft-rang I picked it up. I got a dial tone, so I'm assuming it's
nothing so simple as a cross connection between my line and my
neighbor's.

Other data points:

    o I have two phone lines, one voice and one data. Neither line
appears to be affected with crosstalk or other interference that I
have noticed.

    o None of the other phones in the house exhibit this soft ring
behavior, although I suppose it COULD be happening and I have just not
noticed it.

    o Inside the electrical box behind the phone is a big
multi-pair cable, two pairs of which split off and go to my wall jack,
while the rest simply terminate in the box and are not connected to
anything.

    o Although the apartment next to mine has changed hands at
least three times since I've lived here, this problem has never shown
up before now.

So what's going on here? Is my phone somehow inductively picking up
the ring signal from an adjacent pair and transferring it to my phone,
even though the righer switch is turned off? How do I get rid of this
problem?  Must I do it myself, or should I call in the phone company?

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

From: [e-mail] (Michael Rosen)
Subject: Residential 800 Service
Organization: Extended Bulletin Board Service
Date: Thu, 6 Feb 1992 17:35:35 GMT


Pardon my ignorance, but what exactly is a residential 800 line?  I
just saw an ad for Sprint's "Personal 800" last night for the first
time.  It's a service where a student's (or any child's) parents can
have an 800 number for their kid(s) to call home on.  How does this
work exactly?  Do they ad a new line or does the 800 number ring
through to their existing phone line?  Would you have to switch to
Sprint in order to take advantage of this?


Mike


[Moderator's Note: This is intended as a low volume 800 service for
residential users. I have such service and it runs me about $20 per
month for my two 800 numbers. Usually it is set up so the 800 number
just rings on your existing line. You usually have to suscribe to the
one-plus service of the carrier offering the 800 deal, but not always.
I have mine through Telecom-USA but my one-plus through AT&T.  PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #117
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa17085;
          9 Feb 92 2:42 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA29406
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 9 Feb 1992 00:36:36 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA05492
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 9 Feb 1992 00:36:10 -0600
Date: Sun, 9 Feb 1992 00:36:10 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #119

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 9 Feb 92 00:36:00 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 119

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Oregon PUC Hearing Summary (John Higdon)
    Re: Oregon PUC Hearing Summary (Bill Cattey)
    Re: Oregon PUC Hearing Summary (Linc Madison)
    Re: New Undersea Cable for Caribbean (David E. Martin)
    Re: When a Phone Is a Menace (L.A. Times Editorial) (Max Rochlin)
    Re: When a Phone is a Menace (L.A. Times Editorial) (Bob Miller)
    Re: NPA Split Planned For 803? (Carl Moore)
    Re: NPA Split Planned For 803? (David Esan)
    Re: 213/310 Split Script ([e-mail])
    Re: Information Wanted on History of Muzak (Jim Haynes)
    Re: Information Wanted on History of Muzak (Gil Kloepfer Jr.)
    Re: Toll Free Call For UNIX System V Source Code (Dave Levenson)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Tue, 4 Feb 92 19:34 PST
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: Oregon PUC Hearing Summary


On Feb 4 at  0:05, TELECOM Moderator writes:

> People spend their money as they wish. I chose to make the changes
> required in the way I handled the Digest to lessen my expenses; I
> didn't ask telco for any charity!  PAT]

Nor are the BBS operators. They are simply asking the telco and the
PUCs to go by the existing rules. I have read the Oregon and
California tariffs governing the matter most thoroughly and there is
no contortion of reality that can justify regrading residential BBS
lines to business service. You, US West, and anyone else may come up
with hundreds of justifications why BBSes should not enjoy residential
status, but the tariff will not back you up. From a legal standpoint,
the move is bogus.

What we have here is an agenda based on marketing necessity.
Non-commercial BBSes have been around since the late seventies. Does
it not seem just a bit strange that it has taken a decade and a half
for this issue to hit the fan? Up to now, telcos had no interest in
the matter one way or another. With the current prospect of the telcos
getting into the biz, as it were, it has become a forefront matter of
concern. Telcos were most willing to allow private BBSes to
proliferate and build an audience that it just might take over. Based
upon the doctrine of laches, it would seem that the matter is
suspicious.

And finally, it is known by all technical people that there is zero
cost to the telcos for "additional traffic" being delivered to a
residential line during off-peak hours. From a technical standpoint,
or a "cost of providing service" aspect, this regrading of residential
BBSes is unjustified.

Now, do you still maintain that BBSes are whiners that just want
something for nothing? Since I can see no legal, ethical, or technical
justification for charging them more than residential rates, I must
disagree with your stance on this. BTW, given that the Oregon and
California tariffs regarding residence service are quite similar, why
is Pac*Bell not going after the hundreds and hundreds of private BBSes
here in Silicon Valley alone?


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

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

Date: Wed,  5 Feb 1992 15:12:51 -0500 (EST)
From: Bill Cattey <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Oregon PUC Hearing Summary


The situation with BBS's in Oregon fits with the Telephone Company as
Monopoly theory:

Clearly it is in The Phone Company's best interest to force all BBS's
to either pay for business service or go out of business, so it can
offer its OWN bboard service.

Just because one such service, Source Line, failed does not mean that
all future services will fail.  Once The Phone Company decides it
WANTS to be in a business, it does a LOT to stay there.  (The
acquisition of NCR by ATT also fits the monopoly theory as part of a
process to go to extreme ends to stay in a business that is currently
not working out that The Phone Company WANTS to be in.)

Mind you, I'm not saying that the Monopoly theory is valid, just that
certain unpleasant or extreme actions on the part of the various
dismembered parts of what was once THE Phone company, can fit with
such a theory.


Bill Cattey

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

Date: Thu, 6 Feb 92 00:31:28 PST
From: [e-mail] (Linc Madison)
Subject: Re: Oregon PUC Hearing Summary
Organization: University of California, Berkeley


In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Bob
Izenberg) wrote:

> There would be an added cost to "networked" BBSes
> (Fidonet, WWIVnet, et cetera) if they find themselves dialing long
> distance to reach their nearest neighbor.  This would be of no
> consequence to any telco: It will gladly accept the revenue from your
> long distance bill until the cost outweighs the benefit and you cease
> operation.

I don't follow your argument about "added cost to networked BBS's if
they find themselves dialing long distance to reach their nearest
neighbor."  Long distance rates for standard residential service and
for standard commercial service are EXACTLY IDENTICAL everywhere in
the United States.  The only differences are that, in many areas,
business lines are not offered unmeasured LOCAL service, and business
lines may not be eligible for certain residential long-distance
calling plans (the kind that charge $x for the first hour of long
distance each month, plus $y per minute over that).  However, there
are abundant long-distance plans for businesses.


Linc Madison  ==  [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (David E. Martin)
Subject: Re: New Undersea Cable for Caribbean
Date: 5 Feb 92 16:17:54 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory,  Batavia, IL,  USA


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Andy
Sherman) writes:

> From a recent AT&T press release:

> Specifically designed for short distances, the new AT&T Bell
> Laboratories-designed cable is half the diameter of existing
> transoceanic cables and consists of six repeaterless fiber pairs.
> Each of the fiber pairs will operate at 560 megabits per second,
> resulting in a total capacity equivalent to about 225,000 simultaneous
> phone calls.

6 * 560 Mbps / 225,000 calls = 14.9 Kbps.  This is a heck of a
compression rate.  Is this correct?


David E. Martin
National HEPnet Management                      Phone: [phone]
Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory           FAX: [phone]
P.O. Box 500; MS 234; Batavia, IL 60510  USA    E-Mail: [e-mail]

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

From: gupta![e-mail] (Max Rochlin)
Subject: Re: When a Phone Is a Menace (L.A. Times Editorial)
Organization: Gupta Technologies Inc
Date: Wed, 5 Feb 92 19:12:39 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Randall C Gellens) writes:

> These include moving a phone to inside a store, blocking incoming
> calls and replacing tone dialing with rotary dialing so that drug
> dealers can't use their pagers [how does pulse dialing impede pagers?

Simple, to send a pager user a message you call the pager number and
then enter a numeric message using a touchtone phone.  Pager systems
use DTMF tone and don't understand rotery clicks.  Typically, one
enters the phone number that you want the pager wearer to call.  This
can't be done from a rotary phone.  Hence ... pager message blocking.

(Easy work-around, go to Radio Shack and buy a DTMF portable dialer.)


[e-mail]     Max J. Rochlin     [e-mail]

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

Date: Thu, 6 Feb 92 09:24:20 PST
From: Bob Miller <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: When a Phone is a Menace (L.A. Times Editorial)


> The city will first ask the telephone vendor to take actions that
> would impede criminals' use of a phone.  These include moving a phone
> to inside a store, blocking incoming calls and replacing tone dialing
> with rotary dialing so that drug dealers can't use their pagers [how
> does pulse dialing impede pagers? -- RCG].  If conditions don't
> improve after such steps are taken, the legal process aimed at
> removing the phones would ensue.

> Police Chief Paul M. Walters said some pay phones have become "outdoor
> offices for drug dealers and prostitutes."  They also have become
> gathering places for lowlifes who use the phones for other illegal
> activities.

While they are at it why don't they dig up the roads and sidewalks so
that the drugdealers, prostitues and other lowlife can't drive their
cars or walk.  We all know that drug dealers, prostitutes, and other
lowlifes lack the intelligence to find alternatives.

Bravo for Chief Walters, he will involve the community before he
unilaterally removes the phones.

There is no valid reason for needing a payphone at 2:00 AM when the
stores are closed.  Anyone travelling by car should have a cellular
phone, and who really cares about the low-income families if they have
an emergency in the middle of the night.


Bob Miller / Digital Equipment of Canada Ltd.
The views expressed above are not mine or Digital's.

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

Date: Wed, 5 Feb 92 8:33:22 EST
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: NPA Split Planned For 803?


How high up on the list is 803 w/r to number of exchanges?  I don't
even have it listed as having N0X/N1X prefixes.

803 is in South Carolina, whose neighbor states have had to program
for N0X/N1X prefixes:

404, Georgia, Oct 1989?
 (1+NPA+7D on all toll calls; optional in 912)
 (to become 404/706)

919, North Carolina, 2 Mar 1990
 (1+NPA+7D on all toll calls; also applies to 704)

813 is found along the Florida Gulf coast.  Notice that 305/407 split
in Florida was done in 1988 without the use of N0X/N1X prefixes;
occurring that same year, also without N0X/N1X prefixes, were 303/719
(Colorado) and 617/508 (Massachusetts).  I also am NOT aware of
N0X/N1X prefixes being used in 813 area.

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

From: [e-mail] (David Esan)
Subject: Re: NPA Split Planned For 803?
Date: 6 Feb 92 13:42:18 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail] (David Esan)
Organization: Moscom Corp., E. Rochester, NY


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (David Esan)
writes:
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 113, Message 5 of 6

> I have heard a rumor that the 803 area is scheduled to split next
                                 ^
My mind said 813, my fingers typed 803.  Sorry.  I meant 813, SW
Florida.


David Esan      [e-mail]

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

Date: 5 Feb 92 11:32:00 EST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: 213/310 Split Script


I don't mean to be picky, and I might have over looked it, but I'm
quite sure 396 was left off the list of exchanges changing area codes
from 213 to 310.  I know for sure it's changing over 'cause my brother
made a big deal about it in Santa Monica (CA) the day of the switch
(even though I made everyone aware of it a few months earlier, but
hey, my brother loves big productions, so I didn't say anything).

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

From: Jim Haynes <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Information Wanted on History of Muzak
Date: 6 Feb 92 19:27:49 GMT
Organization: University of California, Santa Cruz


This doesn't exactly answer your question, but might be interesting
anyway.  Circa 1950 I was visiting my uncle who was a broadcast
engineer in Austin, TX.  One time we were at the station's studio, in
a downtown bank building, and then we went a short walk to a room in
the basement of some building nearby where there was a console with
two or three turntables and a man sitting there playing records.  My
uncle explained that the man had a background music business, and the
music was distributed to his subscribers over telephone private lines.
I don't remember if he played only 78 RPM records or if he had some of
the 16" 33-1/3 RPM "transcriptions" like the broadcast stations used.


[e-mail] [e-mail]

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

Date: Thu, 6 Feb 1992 16:41:52 -0600
From: "Gil Kloepfer Jr." <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Information Wanted on History of Muzak
Organization: Southwest Systems Development Labs, Houston, TX


In his article [e-mail] (Mathew Zank) writes:

> Does anyone know about the history of Muzak, the service that brings
> office music?  All I know is that it is on a sub-channel of a local
> FM radio station.

Well, I can't tell you a lot, but I can say that it's on what's termed
the 67KHz SCA (subsidiary communications authorization) subcarrier for
certain FM stations.  This subcarrier sits somewhere near the FM
stereo pilot signal, if I'm not mistaken (I'm not yet a ham radio
enthusiast).

It seems to have been around a long time this way -- I built a
receiver from an article in Elementary Electronics magazine back I'm
not sure HOW long ago (at least the late 70s, early 80s).  Basically
the device consisted of a phase locked loop demodulator circuit that
was connected to a FM radio in a spot before the signal was otherwise
demodulated by the radio.  Probing around inside a transistor radio
with the device usually brought you to a place where it would work.
The output was to be connected to an audio amplifier where you could
listen to whatever you got.

The program material was even more interesting: I've heard all kinds
of music from popular music to typical annoying elevator music ...
they've had international musical programs and news on it, a program
called PRN (Physician's Radio Network) complete with advertisements
for drugs, all the way up to a program which read various newspapers
and periodicals to blind people (or is that now "visually impared"?:).
I've found it fascinating ... although I haven't really had time to
explore what programs are available in Houston.  The ones I just
mentioned were in the Long Island area.

As I recall from the article, FM stations are allowed to broadcast
either two or three different programs in the SCA subcarrier area (but
I'm not sure what the extents are).  Most stations have one program,
but I received one station which had two.

Because of the bandwidth of the SCA signal, and the fact that the main
program material is pretty strong, the SCA signals don't decode into
nice clean signals usually.  I've found it usually is ridden with
static and such ... but it's kind of like sitting with a short wave
radio and probing around for anything you can hear.


Gil Kloepfer, Jr.            [e-mail]     ...!ames!limbic!gil


[Moderator's Note: Most long-time Digest readers know that I have been
associated with the Chicago Public Library as a volunteer at various
times in the past. For ten years now, I've produced programs on
Chicago history which are aired three times weekly on the SCA they
operate called <C>hicagoland <R>adio <I>nformation <S>ervice, or CRIS
for short. CRIS operates on the sub-carrier of WBEZ, the National
Public Radio outlet here, owned until recently by the Chicago Board of
Education. CRIS operates 24 hours per day, seven days per week
primarily to serve visually handicapped and print handicapped persons
in northern Illinois. Readers working in 30 minute or one hour shifts
read several newspapers and periodicals on a regular schedule. The
local Chicago papers occupy much of the day, along with the {Christian
Science Monitor} and the {Wall Street Journal}. Readings are verbatim
as they appear in the print media.

Evenings are devoted to various magazines and local community
newspapers. The {New York Times} operates its own reading service and
sends a feed over satellite to numerous organizations like CRIS all
over the United States. We use the NYT feed a couple times for an hour
or so each day. Special programs such as mine, which is called 'Traces
of Chicago' are interspersed with other stuff. CRIS gives SCA
receivers free to qualified listeners. We recieve no tax money (other
than office/studio space in the Cultural Center -- the old central
library building) and survive on private philanthropy, including
generous corporate gifts from AT&T and Illinois Bell.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Dave Levenson)
Subject: Re: Toll Free Call For UNIX System V Source Code
Date: 5 Feb 92 18:16:28 GMT
Organization: Westmark, Inc., Warren, NJ, USA


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Syd
Weinstein) writes:

> In my local Bell of PA directory ... one of the 800 numbers is
> listed as "UNIX System V Source Code".

> Gee, is the source code free for calling? :-)

This listing also appears in the local NJ Bell white pages in Morris
County.  The toll-free number listed with this name is 828-UNIX, which
will get you to the people who provide source licenses to this
product.  The call is toll-free.  The source license is not!


Dave Levenson        Internet: [e-mail]
Westmark, Inc.        UUCP: {uunet | rutgers | att}!westmark!dave
Warren, NJ, USA        Voice: 908 647 0900  Fax: [phone]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #119
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa20177;
          9 Feb 92 3:50 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA16519
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 9 Feb 1992 02:04:54 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA19729
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 9 Feb 1992 02:04:34 -0600
Date: Sun, 9 Feb 1992 02:04:34 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #121

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 9 Feb 92 02:04:25 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 121

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Incoming Calls Problem (Jim Redelfs)
    Re: Incoming Calls Problem (Tom Gray)
    Re: Telecom in Puerto Rico (Mike Olson)
    Re: Telecom in Puerto Rico (Martin Weiss)
    Re: Minitel and US West (Peter Marshall)
    Re: Minitel and US West (Mark Martin)
    Re: Ring Trip - How do They do it? (was Rotary Dialers Go Home!) (Tom Gray)
    Re: Rotary Dialers Go Home! (Jeff Sicherman)
    Re: Answer Supervision on Lines (Tim Gorman)
    Re: Answer Supervision on DM (Alan L. Varney)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Thu, 06 Feb 92 21:13:20 CST
From: [e-mail] (Jim Redelfs)
Subject: Re: Incoming Calls Problem
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Macnet Omaha


Lance Sanders wrote:

> A friend recently complained...that I never answered the phone
> anymore, and moreover, why did I take the answering machine offline?
> ... I heard an extremely brief blip from my phone, picked up, and
> took a call.

> ...I switched [the set] with the downstairs trimline to make sure,
> and...Again, just the faintest blip of a ring. When I picked up, the
> connection was normal. There are no problems with outgoing calls...
> and from the caller's end, the line rings normally.

> ...how is it possible that my phone doesn't ring (except for that
> occassional brief blip)??? Can't my answering machine (also
> functioning properly) pick-up, even though the rings aren't audible?

> Can the _strenth_ of an incoming signal (call) be diminished so the
> bell doesn't ring, but no other aspect of the service is affected?

Yes.  This same problem befell my service immediately after I added
FIVE, new sets (four 2500s and one 2554) to my already burgeoning
collection.

The most likely cause of your problem is TOO MANY ringers bridged
across the line.  This condition will also cause your answering
machine to NOT pick-up a call since it is triggered by ringing
current.

The central office only has so much "poop" with which to ring your
line.  Generally, five "ringers" is considered the max.  Of course,
the distance from the C.O. is a factor, as is the "R.E.N." total for
the line.

Every device (telephone, answering machine, modem, security system,
etc.)  has an R.E.N. -- a Ringer Equivalence Number.  That number can
be found on the registration tag somewhere on the device.

When the equipment manufacturing field was opened to competition, the
F.C.C.  wisely agreed with the Bell System that some form of STANDARD
should be adopted.  The two-bell ringer found in the old fashioned
desk phone (model 500 [rotary] or 2500 [TouchTone]) was established as
the standard.  Those telephones have a R.E.N. of 1B or one bell.  The
amount of current required to "ring" other devices are rated in
comparison to that standard and are tagged accordingly: .7B or 1.4B,
etc.

Shortly after plugging-in my five, "new" sets, I was sitting by one,
reading the paper when I heard a faint groan-like sound coming from
the device.  I picked it up to find a caller on line, none the wiser.

The cause was (to me) immediately apparent: I had SO MANY ringers on
the line that the central office could not properly ring them all.

The telco doesn't care if you have a "million" telephone devices
attached to the line since it is likely you will not have more than
one or two of them off-hook at the same time.  Ringing them all is
another matter.

The solution for MY situation was simple: I had to physically
disconnect the ringer inside enough telephones so that the rest of
them would ring.

The solution for you may not be so easy since it is just as likely as
not that you do NOT have telephones that come apart easily or are
worked on easily.  With the new, electronic telephones, I am not sure
if simply switching the ringer OFF will do the trick.  I suspect it
will not.

If you do NOT have a BUNCH of telephone devices on your line, then the
culprit is likely a single set that is defective and drawing WAY too
much ringing current.  Disconnect one phone/device at a time and have
a friend ring your number after each change.  Note the performance.
You should be able to isolate the offending set quite easily.

> Is this a common service problem?  I've never had it happen to me before.

No.  Fortunately it is rare.  The new generation of phones do not
require nearly as much current to "ring" as do the old ones.

I had a customer with a "Quarry Horn" (AC-powered, phone-line
triggered "ringer" -- truly a loud enunciator designed to be heard
above the noise of construction equipment) on the outside of her
(fortunately) rural residence.  It rattled the windows.  One day, all
phones quit ringing.  I traced the problem to her latest acquisition:
an imported Italian antique telephone that, by itself, PEGGED my ohm
meter!  It must've sucked-up 3-4 bells of ringing current.

I explained that it was either the Italian "boat anchor" (VERY ugly
phone) or the Quarry Horn that had to go.  She had me silence the
phone.  To this day, neighbors for a mile around know whenever she
gets a call (she never had us install a switch for the horn!).


JR  Tabby 2.2  MacNet Omaha [phone]  -  O.M.U.G. On-Line  (1:285/14)

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

From: [e-mail] (Tom Gray)
Subject: Re: Incoming Calls Problem
Date: Thu, 6 Feb 1992 15:09:20 -0500
Organization: Mitel. Kanata (Ontario). Canada.


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Lance Sanders) writes:

> A friend recently complained by email that I never answered the
> phone anymore, and moreover, why did I take the answering machine
> offline? While reading the transmission (in my bedroom and off-line),
> I heard an extremely brief blip from my phone, picked up, and took a
> call.

This is called "pre-trip". The transients on the loop from the
application of ringing are causing the line circuit to falsely think
that the telephone is off hook. The transients are of a duration
and/or magnitude to simulate DC supervision to the CO.

Probably one of the telephones on the loop has a defctive ringer.

However if you call 611, saying that you have a "pretrip" problem will
probabaly result in understanding.

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

From: [e-mail] (Mike Olson)
Subject: Re: Telecom in Puerto Rico
Date: Fri, 07 Feb 92 15:59:19 PST


Jim Rees writes:

> I recently noticed that the phone system in Puerto Rico is like that
> of a foreign country.

I have a brother stationed in Puerto Rico with the Navy.  He doesn't
have a phone at home, so I call him at work when I need to talk to
him, and arrange for him to call me back when his duty shift ends.

About two months ago, I needed to talk to him, but I had a
reproduceable (and frustrating) problem: when the phone on base was
answered, I could hear them, but they couldn't hear me.  After
screwing around with the Puerto Rico telephone service and the
military, I called AT&T (my long distance carrier) to see if they
could help me out.

It turned out that due to a programming error, answer supervision was
not being returned to the caller, so AT&T was (quite reasonably) not
establishing a voice path from me to the person who answered the phone
in Puerto Rico.  The AT&T tech told me that it was the on-base PBX
that was the culprit.

The most interesting lesson here is that for at least two weeks (the
duration over which I know for a fact the problem existed), the base
PBX wasn't supervising when a phone was picked up.  No one in Puerto
Rico noticed this problem, until I had AT&T whack on them.  The number
I was calling was the main base number, and was used by people in San
Juan, as well as folks calling from outside the city (like me).  It
makes you wonder how the Puerto Rico phone company's billing works,
doesn't it?  I'm not a phreak myself, but if I were, I think I could
have an interesting Caribbean vacation.

I have my standard high praise for AT&T -- it took them two days to
get this fixed, even when they were dealing with the US military and a
foreign carrier.  When the AT&T tech figured out that I understood
telecom jargon, he gave me the low-down on the problem and its
resolution.


Mike Olson   UC Berkeley

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

From: Martin Weiss <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Telecom in Puerto Rico
Date: 7 Feb 92 14:47:09 GMT
Organization: University of Pittsburgh


Pat is right.  However, they are in the process of implementing equal
access anyway.  My parents live there and they have had the
opportunity to select their long distance carrier recently.

The government has been trying to sell PRT, which is owned by them.
There had been several bidders, but evidently the goverment didn't get
what they were expecting, so they postponed the deal.  There was also
considerable pressure from the employees and unions to cancel the
sale.  As I recall, GTE and/or Bell South were interested.


Martin Weiss
Telecommunications Program, University of Pittsburgh
Internet: [e-mail] OR [e-mail]
BITNET: mbw@pittvms

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

Date: Fri, 7 Feb 92 11:06:01 -0800
From: [e-mail] (Peter Marshall)
Subject: Re: Minitel and US West


Tim Russell's recent post on this topic seemed realistic and balanced,
although it would help to have some backup for his assertion that US
West has supposedly not attempted to "stifle" Omaha BBSs. One would
hope not, of course; on the other hand, Tim's statement would seem to
be of the "far-as-I-know" kind. It would also help to have some
fill-in about the Nebraska tariff and rates currently charged BBSs
there, keeping in mind in particular, recent posts here suggesting
problems in LincolnTel-land.


Peter Marshall

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

From: [e-mail] (Mark Martin)
Subject: Re: France's Minitel Service
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: CETIA, France
Date: Fri, 7 Feb 1992 14:41:15 GMT


[e-mail] (Harold Hallikainen) writes:

> Once they gave away the terminals, who owns them?  Who is
> responsible for maintenance?  As modem technology changes, are they
> adopting the newer technologies, or staying with the old to maintain
> compatibility (I seem to remember a lot of European stuff using FSK
> modems with something like 1200 bps to the user and 150 bps from the
> user).

They weren't given away, they are on zero-cost loan and belong to
France Telecom.  If broken FT in principle should fix them if you take
them back, but from last year the free version is becoming
increasingly scarce and it >seems< to be FT policy that if you want
Minitel now you will have to rent one of the newer models (for about
200$US/year!).

The cheap model can/could also be bought for around 350 $US.

The Minitels still use mixed 1200/75 bps.  However, there are X.25
pads you can dial for access to the network at 2400/2400, though this
is really for computer buffs.

The Minitel network provides several different charge bands and many
different services.  In particular the directory search facility (the
"raison d'e^tre") is free for the first three minutes, usually
adequate for finding a name or business.

Telephone subscribers have the option of not having a Minitel lent to
them (or not paying rental if there are no free models available at
the time) and instead get the local directory on paper.  The yellow
pages are still provided free printed to all users.


Mark M Martin        [e-mail]
Cetia, Toulon, France    inria!cetia!mmm

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

From: [e-mail] (Tom Gray)
Subject: Re: Ring Trip - How do They do it? (was Rotary Dialers Go Home!)
Date: Thu, 6 Feb 1992 15:00:05 -0500
Organization: Mitel. Kanata (Ontario). Canada.


In article <[e-mail]> bdsgate![e-mail]
(Martin Harriss) writes:

> In an excellent article <[e-mail]> strieterd@gtephx.
> UUCP (Dave Strieter) writes about the GTD-5 dial pulse and DTMF
> detection.  In doing so, he also mentions, in passing, the ring trip
> function, and it is about this that I have a question.

> The question is, exactly how is ring trip done, without using relays?

The simple answer is to place a capacitor in the switch hook detector
circuit when ringing is applied. This produces a low pass filter which
eliminates the AC from DC supervision circuit.

The nasty effects of switching ringing can be eliminated by switching
only at a zero current crossing. This can be accomplished by using a
ringing voltage detector with time delay for the expected phase delay
of the current or by using a true zero crossing semiconductor switch
such as a triode.

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

Date: Thu, 6 Feb 92 10:37:28 -0800
From: Jeff Sicherman <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Rotary Dialers Go Home!
Organization: Cal State Long Beach


  The inability or unfriendliness of ACD's to rotary phones raises a
question to me with regard to ANI delivery.

  It would seem that is the tone/pulse calling method could be
delivered to the called party by either ANI or within Caller-ID
'packets' (and let's not get sticky about the definitions at this
point) then answering machines and ACD's could tailor their behavior,
prompts, options, etc.  to the capabilities of the calling party and
eliminate some of the extra instructions for rotary callers or putting
them through menus that they will never be able to use.

  Do CO's sense/capture this condition so that it is/could be
forwarded in the ANI data ?

  Of course, if someone uses rotary dialing with a tone capable phone
he will be misdirected by this method, but perhaps the receiving end
could initially prompt for the caller to hit a tone button *if it is
informed that the caller pulse dialed* to handle the cases where tone
generation is available to the caller.

  On the other hand, maybe the ommission of this feature is all a
nefarious plot by the telco's to get everyone to switch to DTMF :-)


Jeff Sicherman

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

Date: 06 Feb 92 09:45:25 EST
From: tim gorman <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Answer Supervision on Lines


I have done an exhaustive search of the Northern Telcom documentation
concerning the reception of answer supervision on line side terminated
services. Following are the three line options I have identified:

RMR - Remote Message Register/Local. Must be used on an IBN line (i.e.
not available for residence lines).  Used on hotel/motel lines to
indicate a charge is due for a local call.  Typically used to increment
a call counter for use in billing customers.

RMT - Remote Message Register/Toll. Must be used on an IBN line (i.e.
not available for residence lines).  Used on hotel/motel lines to
indicate a charge is due for a non-local call, e.g. toll, operator,
DDD, etc. Care must be used with this since operator calls do not
provide true far end answer supervision, the answer supervision is
provided by the operator system.

LRA - Line Reversal on Answer (International Loads Only). On calls
originating from a PBX line, the call is routed and connected as a
regular call. When the far end answers and the line has the LRA line
option, reversal is applied to the line.

As noted, NTI provides this option only on international software
loads, not domestic US software loads, at least according to my issue
of their documentation.

I do not know which, if any, RBOC's offer message register service in
conjunction with hotel/motel service. This would appear to be the only
way to get answer supervision in the US out of a DMS100 machine. I
suspect this may be an expensive option, at least when compared to
ordering DOD service from the trunk side of the local CO. Of course,
PBX costs to interface the DOD service would have to be considered
also.


Tim Gorman - SWBT
*opinions are mine, resemblance to official policy is purely coincidental*

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

Date: Fri,  7 Feb 92 10:05:11 CST
From: [e-mail] (Alan L Varney)
Subject: Re: Answer Supervision on DM
Organization: AT&T Network Systems


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(tim gorman) writes:

> [e-mail] (Vance Shipley) writes in TELECOM Digest V12 #102
> about DMS100 features NTX008AB and NTX007AB which say line side answer
> supervision is available.

   I don't want to start a "me-to" flurry, but will mention that
"Calling Line-Side Supervision (CLSS)" is available on the 5ESS(rg)
Switch as well.  See the latest TG-5 document for information,
Division 2, Section 4A.  The feature provides both answer and
called-party-disconnect indications.  I do not know if the operation
is in any way similar to NTI's, nor am I aware of any Bellcore
requirements for the capability.


Al Varney - the above is my opinion of the facts, and one should
            not blame AT&T or anyone/anything else for it.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #121
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa21435;
          9 Feb 92 4:21 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA26230
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 9 Feb 1992 02:38:02 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA06224
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 9 Feb 1992 02:37:38 -0600
Date: Sun, 9 Feb 1992 02:37:38 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #122

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 9 Feb 92 02:37:33 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 122

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Information Wanted on History of Muzak (Andrew Green)
    Re: Newsbytes on the Oregon BBS Rates Case (Walter Scott)
    Re: High Speed Modems and PSTN (David Moon)
    Re: Information Wanted About 2600 Magazine (Russ Latham)
    Re: Information Wanted Ahout 2600 Magazine (Brad Dolan)
    Re: Looking For TDD Information (Peter M. Weiss)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sat, 08 Feb 1992 14:24:04 CST
From: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Information Wanted on History of Muzak


[e-mail] (Mathew Zank) writes:

> Does anyone know about the history of Muzak, the service that brings
> office music?  All I know is that it is on a sub-channel of a local
> FM radio station.

Here are two articles on the history of Muzak from "The Straight Dope"
and "More of The Straight Dope", both by Cecil Adams. For those of you
who haven't seen his column of the same name, the pseudonymous Mr.
Adams answers questions on anything and everything in his column.  I
highly recommend both books; my copies are paperbacks published by
Ballantine Books.

A reader of "The Straight Dope" writes (in the first book):

"I would like to get a little info about what's involved in making the
'music' that's sold by Muzak, which is impossible to avoid if you go
into any McDonald's, elevator, etc. It's all around us, but so
mysterious. I'm told that it's made in Japan, by heavily sedated
Oriental musicians." -- Bob F., Los Angeles

Cecil responds:

"Muzak is recorded by studio musicians, so we may safely deduce that a
good deal of it is produced under the influence of drugs. The
corporation claims to use recording facilities 'all over the world',
so we might also wish to conjecture that some of it is made in Japan.
Basically, though, the people who make Muzak are the same musical
free-lancers who do commercial and pop-record sessions. They crank it
out at a clip of roughly 200 new tunes per year, and the company
maintains a library of some 10,000."

"Founded in the 1920s and now part of the Westinghouse group, the
Muzak Corporation offers two basic programming services -- one for
office environments and one for industrial. The music (I use the term
loosely) is arranged, produced, and on rare occasions even written to
company specifications -- measures deemed necessary to ensure the
proper 'stimulus progression' -- and is programmed, with the aid of a
computer, to counteract the vicissitudes of the typical worker's daily
routine.

"According to Muzak theory, the average Joe's spirits slacken around
10:30 AM, pick up in midday, and decline again around 3:00.
Accordingly, Muzak gets pretty bouncy in mid-morning and
mid-afternoon, and downright perky around midnight for the bleary-eyed
boys on the graveyard shift.  It is programmed in blocks of 15
minutes, with the peak excitement (another loosely-applied term)
coming at the end of each segment. In most places -- have you ever
noticed? -- it's on for 15 minutes and off for 15. I know of no
scientific study proving that people can be driven stark raving mad
by, say, 17 continuous minutes of Muzak, but for some reason the
company thinks it's better this way."

In "More of The Straight Dope", another reader adds further details:

"[...] You know that in most places Muzak is on for 15 minutes and off
for 15 minutes, which the company says is 'better' in some undefined
way. Actually, '15 minutes on/15 minutes off' is the result of some
early technical limitations."

"Until recently, Muzak programming was distributed in large reels of
tape to franchises around the world. Tapes were programmed with music
appropriate to the time of day, but early tape players were not
terribly accurate at holding constant speed over an eight-hour period
(the length of the tape). Slow or fast machines would start to creep
the 'dayparts' backward or forward, and after several days, lunchtime
music might be heard at breakfast time."

"To prevent this, the tapes were programmed in 14-minute segments, and
a 25-cycle tone after the last tune made the playback machine 'park'.
The next 14-minute segment started when a 15-minute clock closed a
switch. A slow machine might play the segment in 14 1/2 minutes, while
a fast machine might get through it in only 13 1/2 minutes. A fast
machine would 'park' longer than a slow machine, but overall 8 A.M.
music would be heard at 8 A.M. worldwide."

"Three Muzak programs were offered: an 'office' program, an
'industrial' program, and a 'public area' program. The first and third
segments of each hour's tape were uptempo; the second and fourth
segments were more relaxed. Office subscribers had their feeds
switched on for only the second and fourth segments, while the
industrial subscribers received only the first and third segments.
(The originators of this system loved clock switches.) 'Public area'
subscribers received all segments."

"In some larger cities a separate playback machine with all up-tempo
segments fed 'industrial' subscribers during the second and fourth
segments (assembly line workers are more productive with bouncy
music), but in most places 15 minutes of silence was fed on your line
if your program segment wasn't being played by the master tape. There
were some complaints about the long periods of silence, so the
advertising department 'discovered' through 'psychological tests' that
music interspersed with periods of silence was more beneficial than
continuous music." -- Jerry M., Hollywood, California.


Andrew C. Green
Datalogics, Inc.      Internet: [e-mail]
441 W. Huron          UUCP: ..!uunet!dlogics!acg
Chicago, IL  60610    FAX: [phone]

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

Subject: Re: Newsbytes on the Oregon BBS Rates Case
From: [e-mail] (Walter Scott)
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Date: Fri, 07 Feb 92 06:11:58 PST
Organization: The 23:00 News and Mail Service


     On 2-5-92, reporter Dana Blankenhorn released a copyrighted
exclusive story for Wendy Wood's {Newsbytes} covering the Oregon BBS
rates case. What follows is an abstract of that story.

     Blankenhorn writes: "US West has launched a campaign before the
Oregon Public Utility Commission which would force all bulletin board
systems (BBSs) in that state to pay business rates on their phone
lines." The Newsbytes exclusive also asserts that US West "wants the
Oregon PUC to reinterpret its tariff so as to define any phone not
answered by a human voice as a business line."

     Blankenhorn quotes extensively from an apparent interview with
SysOp Stewart Anthony Wagner while summarizing the chronology of
events in the case. Some folks here might find the chronology and
alleged facts to be a bit different from what has been reported in the
past.

     According to Blankenhorn, Portland, Oregon SysOp Tony Wagner
attempted to subscribe to extra phone lines so as to expand his BBS
from two lines to four, as well as make arrangements for a TDD. It was
at this point Wagner was informed he would have to pay business rates
on all lines by US West. According to Blankenhorn, US West relented on
the voice and TDD lines while maintaining that the BBS lines would
have to be classified as business lines. Wagner filed what Blankenhorn
calls an "appeal" at the Oregon PUC "for the BBS".

     Wagner is reported to have closed his BBS almost immediately
because he "can't afford it" at business rates, which Blankenhorn
states to be around $50 (presumably per month) on each line. Before
closing his system, Wagner says he alerted regional SysOps via FidoNet
to his plight.  Wagner points out that some SysOps chipped in to pay
for a lawyer. Blankenhorn quotes Wagner on a so-called "compromise
proposal" that "they (US West) come up with a residential data line
rate, as an alternate form of service." Wagner's proposal apparently
included a guarantee of data quality at a rate that Wagner seems to
assess at $5.00 above standard residential rates. Wagner asserts the
proposal was rejected.

     Wagner's comments on the hearing display optimism as he offers
the thought that "the hearing went quite well.  The tariff says a
residential line is for social or domestic purpose. They ignored the
social, they talked only about domestic. The BBS is as social as you
can get."

     In a series of quotes from Wagner on what he believes US West is
doing, a grim picture is painted for more than BBS operators. For
example: Wagner states "there is no question they want to apply this
to all SysOps. Their position is that if it's not answered by a human
voice, it's a business. A fax machine is a business, to them. So's an
answering machine."

     Wagner spoke of what he might consider a silver lining in his
cloudy future as a SysOp when he told Blankenhorn that publicity must
be bad for US West. He reinforces this idea by noting "one thing that
hurt them (US West) badly was that they picked on me. I'm very hard of
hearing. Most of my users are disabled. A large percentage of our
SysOps here are disabled. And Mr. Holmes (US West's attorney in the
Wagner case) was unprepared for that."

     Blankenhorn talked with Judith Legg in the hearings section at
the Oregon Public Utility Commission concerning the Wagner Case. He
reports Legg told him "a hearing was held on the case in January, and
US West has already submitted a 17-page brief supporting its
position."  Hearings Officer Simon Fitch was attributed as informing
Newsbytes that Wagner "has until March 3 to file his own brief, after
which reply briefs will be sought from both sides." Fitch is also
reported to have said a decision in the case is due in late March or
early April with final oversight from the Commissioners.

     Attempts, by Blankenhorn, to contact attorney Steven Holmes at US
West were unsuccessful. Apparently, no one else in the company was
available for comment. Thus, the {Newsbytes} article contained no
synopsis of US West's side of the issues in the Wagner case.
Blankenhorn left the door open to a future update by noting
information requested from US West would be reported as soon as that
information is made available to Newsbytes.

So much for the abstract ...

A FEW OBSERVATIONS: It seems that Blankenhorn must not have been able
to obtain a copy of US West's brief before going to press. Otherwise,
Blankenhorn would realize, and could have noted, that US West's
comments have no impact on FAX or answering machines. BBS operation in
general, and Wagner's BBS in specific, are the myopic focus of the
brief. Blankenhorn also could have asked about and cleared up what
appears to be a discrepancy between Wagner's apparent indication that
he was running his BBS on 2 phone lines at the time he requested new
lines, and the repeated references in the US West brief to Wagner's
"3" BBS phone lines. Finally, I called Judith Legg myself on 2-6-92
and asked her about the actual timing of the hearing. She informed me
that the hearing was indeed in December. In Blankenhorn's defense,
Legg admits that she was under the mistaken impression that the
hearing took place in January, and that this is probably what she told
Blankenhorn. A check of the Oregon PUC's computerized schedules was
necessary to clarify the actual hearing date.


Walter Scott
The 23:00 News and Mail Service - [phone] - Seattle, WA USA
                         PEP, V.32, V.42bis
                  +++ A Waffle Iron, Model 1.64 +++

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: High Speed Modems and PSTN
Date: 7 Feb 92 09:44:03 GMT
Organization: General DataComm, Middlebury CT


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Bill Garfield) writes:

> I am beta testing some high end V.32bis (14.4K bps) asynchronous dial
> up modems for a major (U.S.) manufacturer. These are of course
> intended to be used over PSTN circuits.

[stuff deleted]

> With both modems calling intra-office, inside a Mitel SX2000SG, (also
> a digital machine) the two modems work flawlessly with each other,
> never missing a beat.  Between two networked Mitel SG's on copper
> T-1's using Mitel's version of ISDN (MSDN), we still do not see any of
> the symptoms.

> Only when venturing out on the PSTN do the problems begin to randomly
> show up.  I'm lost as to what could be happening, and the modem

Well, one possibility (which has been discussed here before) is
digital frame slips. These look like huge phase hits to the modem.

Slips are caused by improper synchronization of digital transmission
facilities or switches. They are usaully imperceptable on voice calls.
About the only way to prove that they are happening is to put a TIMS
(transmission impairment measuring set) on both ends of the connection
and look for phase hits greater than 40 degrees.

The average telco craftsperson probably won't know what you're talking
about. Try to get to the telco engineers.

Of course there are other possibilities: very high or low signal
levels, poorly designed hybrid in the modem, etc.

Do several different brands of modem have the same problem? How about
FAX? If the problem is slips it should cause errors in FAXs.

Good luck!


David Moon               Internet: [e-mail]
General Datacomm, Inc.   ATTMail:  !dmoon
Middlebury, CT 06762
[phone]           FAX: [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Russ Latham)
Subject: Re: Information Wanted About 2600 Magazine
Date: Fri, 7 Feb 92 10:09:32 CST


> I saw a reference to a magazine called "2600", which I assume is for
> phone-phreaks. Can anyone provide a subscription address. It sounds
> like a hoot!

The magazine is not directed towards 'phone-phreaks'.  It is a
magazine that I would say is for 'hackers'.  As an example, one of the
back issues has an article on how to crack passwords on a UNIX based
system, via an automated program.  Some of the followup letters (to
the editor) about the article showed that a lot of system
administrators were using it to check the security of their local
system.

They list an email address in their magazine as:
      [e-mail]

I sent a request for info about subscriptions, and the following is
what I received:

2600 Magazine is published quarterly, 48 pages per issue.
Subscriptions are $21 U.S. for a year in the U.S. and Canada,
$30 overseas. Corporate subscriptions are $50 and $65 respectively.
Back issues are available for $25 per year, $30 per year overseas
and they go back to 1984. Our address is: 2600, PO Box 752,
Middle island, NY 11953. Phone number: 516-751-2600. FAX: [phone].

[Individual issues from 1988 on are $6.25 each.]


russ latham       [e-mail]
motorola, inc                   - or -
ft worth, texas   !uunet!mailbox.fwrdc.rtsg.mot.com!rlatham


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

Date: Fri, 7 Feb 92 21:15:57 GMT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Information Wanted Ahout 2600 Magazine


Try:

2600 Magazine
P.O. Box 752
Middle Island, NY  11953

If you're in New York, you can drop by and meet with 2600 subscribers, staff,
FBI agents, etc.  They meet the first Friday of each month at the Citicorp
Center, from 5 to 8 p.m. in the lobby near the payphones.

[ I, of course, know nothing about these evil, commie hackers.  I just saw
this information somewhere ;-) ]

Brad Dolan   B.DOLAN GEnie  N4VHH

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


Organization: Penn State University
Date: Friday, 7 Feb 1992 07:15:37 EST
From: Peter M. Weiss <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Looking For TDD Information


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Steve M.
Hoffman) says:

> I'm looking for details on TDD.

The telecom-archives contains the following file that points you to
other files in that archive.

Pete ([e-mail])

Volume 10, Issue 102 of the Digest, dated 2/14/90 is devoted mostly to
a discussion of TDD machines and services. Most of the information in
this issue was provided by Curtis Reid, himself a deaf person. Also
see issues 93, 96, and 98 for a few other articles on TDD's.  Then,
see issue 123 for a further followup, and a dissent on the quality of
AT&T's service to deaf persons via 800-855-1155.

P. Townson
TELECOM Moderator
2-23-90

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #122
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa23326;
          9 Feb 92 5:09 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA04506
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 9 Feb 1992 01:15:32 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA07385
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 9 Feb 1992 01:15:08 -0600
Date: Sun, 9 Feb 1992 01:15:08 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #120

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 9 Feb 92 01:15:03 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 120

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: BBB's 900 Number (Steve Forrette)
    Re: BBB's 900 Number (William Kucharski)
    Re: Looking For Number Which Tells me my Phone Number (Pete Tompkins)
    Re: Are Acoustic Couplers Still Around? (John De Armond)
    Re: DTMF Decoding by Ear (Robert S. Helfman)
    Re: Cellular Phones and Safety (Steve Forrette)
    Re: TouchTone Charges (Richard Foulk)
    Re: Question on NY Tel's Capabilities (Gil Kloepfer, Jr.)
    Re: IP Connection via ISDN (Jim Rees)
    Re: Rotary Callers Go Home! (Bill Nelson)
    Re: France's Minitel Service (Wolf Paul)
    Re: COCOT Information Wanted (John R. Levine)
    Re: Party Not Answering Phone (Jon Krueger)
    Re: CDMA Impact on Cellular Software ([e-mail])
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Thu, 6 Feb 92 15:39:10 pst
From: Steve Forrette <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: BBB's 900 Number
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA


In article <[e-mail]> is written:

> Well, 900 numbers IMHO have reached a new low.  Here in New York, the
> Better Business Bureau has set up a 900 number (85 cents per minute)
> through which you can check the record of a company you intend to do
> business with, or file a complaint.  In the past, wasn't this free?

> [Moderator's Note: Yes, in the past it was free. Likewise, the
> corporate records telephone look-up service offered by most state
> governments was free, as was the public library telephone reference
> service for lookups from the local criss-cross directory in most
> towns. Many phone look-up services are now using 900 numbers.  PAT]

Another troubling 900 number I saw the other day was one that, for
only 95 cents a minute, would tell you all about USPS rates and
regulations.  I'm not sure if this was run by the USPS itself or by
Pitney-Bowes, but there must be a lot of uninformed people out there
for this to make money.  After all, the USPS operates their "Postal
Answer Line" automated system in most cities that has hundreds of
categories of information available, all for a local call.  And they
even have real people at the post offices that you can call to ask
questions!  (Imagine that!)


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (William Kucharski)
Subject: Re: BBB's 900 Number
Organization: Solbourne Computer, Inc., Longmont, CO
Date: Thu, 6 Feb 1992 23:53:12 GMT


While reading article <[e-mail]>, I noticed that
[e-mail] (Michael Schuster) said the following:

> Well, 900 numbers IMHO have reached a new low.  Here in New York, the
> Better Business Bureau has set up a 900 number (85 cents per minute)
> through which you can check the record of a company you intend to do
> business with, or file a complaint.  In the past, wasn't this free?

I guess the real question I'd like answered is whether this 900 number
is the ONLY way to get that information from the BBB, or whether it's
just made more convenient.  The BBB is a very helpful agency, and if
you call most BBB offices they'll look up information for you, but it
usually takes a while if the phone isn't busy.

It would be really nice if the 900 number has multiple operators with
actual computer terminals rather than the standard employee checking a
file cabinet.


William Kucharski, Solbourne Computer, Inc.     | Opinions expressed above
Internet: [e-mail]   Ham: N0OKQ   | are MINE alone, not those
Snail Mail: 1900 Pike Road, Longmont, CO  80501 | of Solbourne Computer, Inc.

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

Date: Wed, 5 Feb 92 10:18:30 PST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Looking For Number Which Tells me my Phone Number


As was discussed here awhile back, 10732-1-404-988-9664 repeats back
the ANI.  It adds an '8' to the end, at least for my phones in
Southern California (310 area code).  Presumably, 10732 is a special
use AT&T access code, which according to one or more people in the
Digest, is unbilled.  My calls are recent enough that I have not seen
a telephone bill to confirm that.


Pete Tompkins

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

From: [e-mail] (John De Armond)
Subject: Re: Are Acoustic Couplers Still Around?
Date: Wed, 05 Feb 92 21:15:49 GMT
Organization: Dixie Communications Public Access.  The Mouth of the South.


[e-mail] (Ed Greenberg) writes:

> Radio Shack has a P/N 26-3818 that is an accoustic coupler.  I haven't
> found one in a store yet.  They go for about $50.  My US Robotics
> Worldport 2400 baud modem is said to be able to use this at 1200 baud,
> which I will believe when I see.

A company called Konexx makes a series of very slick couplers that
will do up to V.32 under good conditions (ie, electronic microphone in
the handset.)

The model 203 sells for $149 and is about the size of the receiver.
It supplies loop current from a nine volt battery for those modems
that need it.

Though they only guarantee 2400 bps through a payphone, I have a
client who regularly uses his with payphones and a v.32 modem.  Phone
numbers are 619 277 3300 or 619 277 3305 (FAX).


John De Armond, WD4OQC       Rapid Deployment System, Inc.
Marietta, Ga                 [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Robert S. Helfman)
Subject: Re: DTMF Decoding by Ear
Organization: The Aerospace Corporation, El Segundo, CA
Date: Thu, 6 Feb 1992 00:56:52 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Rolf Meier) writes:

> Has anyone out there developed the skill of decoding dtmf tones by
> ear?  Ever hear of anyone who has?  How about MF?

There was a blind computer science student at UC Riverside back in the
1970's who had perfect pitch and could not only recognize the DTMF
combinations, he could whistle them (one at a time, of course).

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

Date: Wed, 5 Feb 92 17:27:17 pst
From: Steve Forrette <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Cellular Phones and Safety
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA


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

> Could someone tell me if any studies have been conducted on the
> relationship between driver safety and the use of cellular phones in
> cars?  I know there are several bills pending in various states to
> regulate the use of phones in moving vehicles.  Beyond that, I'm
> drawing a blank.  Any information will be appreciated.

About five years ago, the California Highway Patrol and the California
Department of Transportation (CalTrans) did a study on just this
subject.  The result was that people with cellular phones on average
drove about twice the number of miles per year as the average person,
and were involved in about half as many accidents.  I believe that
this was attributed to the type of person that, generally speaking,
owned a cellular phone, rather than that talking on the phone actually
improving driving skill.  But it convinced the legislature that if
they wanted to improve highway safety, that going after cellular users
was not the way to go.

As far as my personal expreiences go, I find that I tend to get
distracted when talking on the handset while driving.  I have to make
it a point to pay attention to driving.  It is interesting to note
that this does not happen when I use the hands-free.  After all, I can
talk to passengers while driving just fine.  I think it is more
related to being accustomed to not paying attention to what I'm
looking at when holding the landline phone at home or office.


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

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

Date: Wed, 5 Feb 92 16:52:39 HST
From: [e-mail] (Richard Foulk)
Subject: Re: TouchTone Charges
Organization: Pegasus,  Honolulu


>> ...in California, touch tone service is now accepted as a standard
>> method of subscriber signaling and does not carry any premium
>> charges. Now if the rest of the country would come around...

> It has been years (10 +/- ?) since an extra charge for TTS was allowed
> in Nebraska.  The story, as I recall hearing, went something like
> this:

> The PUC ordered Northwestern Bell Telephone Company to provide
> documentation enumerating their COST for providing TouchTone service --
> a $1.20/month option.  The best they could come up with was 7-cents!!

If anyone else has anecdotes or information on this topic I'd
appreciate hearing from you.  Hawaiian Tel is still charging
$1.65/month for Touch Tone service -- it would be nice to stop that
sillyness.

(I just called them recently about their $1.10/month charge for
maintaining a "non-published listing".  They gave more the story that
all the non-pub entries had to be typed in once each month by
warm-bodies ...)

Is Touch Tone really cheaper than pulse as some have said?


Richard Foulk        [e-mail]

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

Date: Wed, 5 Feb 1992 20:52:47 -0600
From: "Gil Kloepfer Jr." <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Question on NY Tel's Capabilities
Organization: Southwest Systems Development Labs, Houston, TX


In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Scott Barman) writes:

> ...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.

Where are *YOU* on Long Island????  At least in many spots on L.I., at
least where I used to live, we were running on DMS-100s.  I know that
Central Islip was on a 5ESS.  I remember the day they cut-over to the
DMS-100 at my parents' house in Islip.  I picked up the phone and got
a dial tone which sounded "different" (and there was no background
hum).  I remember telling my parents about the fact "we were digital
now" and they seemed very unimpressed ...

As I recall, you can dial the first three-digits of your phone number
with 9901 on the end (ie. NNX-9901) and in most exchanges you get a
recording telling you the exchange and type of equipment (for example,
dialing [phone] will say, "You have reached the Bay Shore DMS
serving [blah blah blah].")  This may have changed since I moved to
Texas a year and a half ago.


Gil Kloepfer, Jr.    [e-mail] ...!ames!limbic!gil

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

From: [e-mail] (Jim Rees)
Subject: Re: IP Connection via ISDN
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: University of Michigan IFS Project
Date: Thu, 6 Feb 92 03:43:50 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Ernst Kloecker) writes:

> Now that ISDN services are becoming more and more available, there
> should be a way to establish an IP connection via ISDN, using a method
> similar to SLIP or PPP on serial lines.

There is no standard yet.  Some people are advocating PPP.  We're
using IP over frame relay here.  No one has seriously suggested SLIP.

You can use as many B channels as you have access to.  We generally
use one or two.  We can also configure the lines so that the
connection gets torn down after some period of inactivity, and set up
again the next time a packet gets queued up to go out.  Setting up a
connection is very fast, usually less than a second, but that's within
the same switch (a 5ESS).

There's an "IP over ISDN" mailing list for people working in this
area.  I don't have the address right here.

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

From: [e-mail] (bill nelson)
Subject: Re: Rotary Callers Go Home!
Date: 5 Feb 92 23:44:45 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Company, Corvallis, Oregon, USA


[e-mail] (Peter da Silva) /  6:44 am  Jan 13, 1992 / writes:

>> And where will that leave my 235G three-slot rotary coin phone? I'll
>> have to go shopping for a rotary-to-tone converter!

> You will probably be able to buy them as surplus from the phone
> company by then, if you're willing to provide the undoubtedly weird
> electrical environment they expect.

Probably not that weird. Most telco equipment runs on -48vdc. You
would probably be able to find power supplies as surplus also.


Bill

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

From: [e-mail] (Wolf Paul)
Subject: Re: France's Minitel Service
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Wolf Paul)
Organization: Alcatel Austria - Elin Research Center, Vienna
Date: Thu, 6 Feb 1992 08:28:19 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Harold Hallikainen) writes:

> Once they gave away the terminals, who owns them?  Who is
> responsible for maintenance?  As modem technology changes, are they
> adopting the newer technologies, or staying with the old to maintain
> compatibility (I seem to remember a lot of European stuff using FSK
> modems with something like 1200 bps to the user and 150 bps from the
> user).

Actually, 1200/75. Still being used for services like Minitel, Prestel
(UK), and BTX, but 1200/1200 and 2400/2400 is also available most
places, for those who use more advanced dedicated terminals or their
PCs to access the services. 1200/75 still makes sense when you use a
terminal which has no upload capability anyway.

> How do private information suppliers like the telephone company
> competing with them?

What private information suppliers? The telecom industry in much of
Europe is still monopoly-oriented, and there are few private
information suppliers. The ones that exist use Minitel/Prestel/BTX, as
well as X.25, as the medium through which customers can access their
services.

Now of course there are lots of people who dislike the monopoly
situation for one reason or another, but that's a different issue.


Wolf N. Paul, Computer Center         [e-mail]
A  L  C  A  T  E  L
Alcatel-Elin Research Center  [phone] (w)  [phone]  (fax)
Ruthnergasse 1-7
ELIN RESEARCH  A-1210 Vienna-Austria/Europe   [phone] (h)

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

Subject: Re: COCOT Information Wanted
Organization: I.E.C.C.
Date: 6 Feb 92 16:44:55 EST (Thu)
From: [e-mail] (John R. Levine)


> Though COCOT's have received "bad press" in this group, I'm in the
> position of wanting one to install in a small shopping plaza here in
> central Connecticut that my relatives own.

Isn't Connecticut one of the few sensible states that have outlawed
COCOTs?  I know I've never seen one there.


Regards,

John Levine, [e-mail], {spdcc|ima|world}!iecc!johnl

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

Date: Thu, 6 Feb 1992 18:44:44 -0800
From: [e-mail] (Jon Krueger)
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Ingres Division, ASK Computer Systems.
Subject: Re: Party Not Answering Phone


In article <[e-mail]> TELECOM Moderator notes:

> [Larry King] was letting the incoming lines ring for 30-40 minutes
> at a time; AT&T circuits were in use all that time on a non-revenue
> basis; and AT&T finally got tired of King's abuse of the network.

I admit to ignorance here, please enlighten me.  What exactly that
AT&T owns is tied up and unavailable to sell to someone else when the
phone is ringing but no one picks it up?


Jon Krueger   [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: What is unavailable all that time is the common
equipment in the central office used for ringing and switching of
calls. A certain amount of equipment is shared among subscribers for
the purpose of call set up. In addition, circuits between central
offices are shared by all subscribers. If one subscriber is on the
line, (whether actually talking or waiting for an answer or hearing a
busy signal and getting ready to disconnect) then other subscribers
cannot use that circuit or equipment.  PAT]

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

Subject: Re: CDMA Impact on Cellular Software
Date: Fri, 07 Feb 92 13:28:37 +0900
From: [e-mail]


[e-mail](Ron Dippold) writes:

> Comparing CDMA software to FM software is pretty much like comparing
> the control software for a USR Dual Standard modem to a 300 bps modem.
> You get far better performance in exchange for more complexity.

If this is true, I can say that,

  1)  the size of CDMA software  is pretty bigger than FM software;
  2)  As consequence, the memory of CDMA hardware have to be bigger than
      that of FM;

1) and 2) concludes that the CDMA mobile phone is bigger than that of
FM.  This is inconvenient for users.

As for FM software, base station software must manage the frequency
resource, but CDMA needs not. I can conclude that FM is more complex
than CDMA.  Why is CDMA software more complex than FM software?


ito

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #120
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa29031;
          10 Feb 92 2:00 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA27439
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 10 Feb 1992 00:05:18 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA17517
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 10 Feb 1992 00:05:07 -0600
Date: Mon, 10 Feb 1992 00:05:07 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #123

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 10 Feb 92 00:04:57 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 123

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Massachsetts DPU Approves ISDN (Middlesex News via Adam M. Gaffin)
    Michigan Gets CLASS (Ken Jongsma)
    900 Phone Guide Magazine (Ken Jongsma)
    Czechoslovakia Joins the Internet (Richard Budd)
    NY Telephone Horrors (Steve Baumgarten)
    411 is Now a Profit Center in Texas (Gregg E. Woodcock)
    Availability of SAW Correlators? (Ben Moore)
    CB RFI Prevents Datacomm (mission![e-mail])
    Bell Canada Employee Newspaper (Nigel Allen)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Adam M. Gaffin)
Subject: Massachusetts DPU Approves ISDN
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Sat, 8 Feb 1992 20:02:41 GMT


Here are some of the charges reflected in the story that follows:

NETel wanted to charge $8 a month for 9600-baud access. The DPU
lowered that to $6.60. There's a marginal cost of $3.30. For the
high-speed line, NET wanted to charge $75 a month, which the DPU
lowered to $50 (with a marginal cost of $38). The DPU reduced monthly
rates for circuit-switched data from $22 to $5 (and ordered the same
reduction for "alt. voice/ data").

The DPU made a couple of other minor changes in the company's proposed
rates for various services, but basically agreed with NET's rate
request. Unfortunately, I don't know what the DPU did with per-minute
or per-packet rates, since I couldn't drive into Boston, and I hard a
hard enough time getting them just to fax me the three pages of
monthly base charges (DON'T talk to me about certain Massachsetts
state agencies :-) )


Middlesex News, Framingham, MA. 2/8/92

By Adam Gaffin
NEWS STAFF WRITER

     FRAMINGHAM - State officials yesterday (Friday) approved a
proposal by New England Telephone to offer a high-speed data network
to customers in Framingham and Marlboro.

     Known as an "integrated services digital network," the system
offers transmission speeds of more than 5,000 characters a second and
allows customers to tap into the power of phone-company central
offices.  The two communities will be among the first in the state to
get the new service.

     The system has another, cheaper line built in that can transmit
data at speeds of around 1,000 characters per second. This compares to
the roughly 240 characters per second that can be transmitted by the
modems most commonly in home use.

     The department ordered the company to reduce its monthly rate for
the lower-speed component, the one most likely to be used by consumers,
 from $8 to $6.60 a month. It also ordered steep reductions in proposed
rates for certain high-speed services more likely to be used by larger
companies.

     The ruling represents a partial victory for critics who had
charged the company would be making an exorbitant profit at the
expense of the public and competitors.

     The company's original rate request was opposed by Prodigy
Services Corp. of White Plains, N.Y., which runs a national
consumer-oriented computer network, and the Electronic Frontier
Foundation of Cambridge.  Both argued that, while ISDN is a valuable
technology, New England Telephone's proposed rates would have priced
it out of the consumer market.

     The phone company argued that few consumers would likely want to
connect to the service because ISDN converter boxes currently cost
upwards of $700; critics said the price would drop rapidly, similar to
what has happened with modems, with availability of high-speed all-
digital service. The Electronic Frontier Foundation is pushing for
creation of a national ISDN sytem.

     The company will be able to offer the service through existing
phone lines. In addition to high-speed data transmission, ISDN will
let companies do such things as using phone-company central-switching
computers as switchboards, rather than having to buy their own.


Adam Gaffin
Middlesex News, Framingham, Mass.
[e-mail]
Voice: [phone]. Fred the Middlesex News Computer: [phone].

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

Subject: Michigan Gets CLASS
Date: Sat, 8 Feb 92 12:55:59 EST
From: Ken Jongsma <wybbs![e-mail]>


According to an AP article, parts of Michigan will soon have CallerID
along with the other usual CLASS features. Michigan Bell is taking
advantage of the State's new telecommunications bill which greatly
limits the PUCs ability to regulate MiBell activities.

Caller ID will be offered for $6.50 per month. Per call blocking only
will be allowed. The MiBell PR rep was quoted as saying that although
only calls originating within the LATA (and from MiBell) will be
displayed initially, "... long distance companies are very interested
in this."

Detroit will get CLASS on March 1, followed later by Jackson and Ann
Arbor. Grand Rapids will not be upgraded until some time in 1993.

MiBell expects between one and seven percent of its customers to sign
up for CallerID and calls that "popular." No mention of the split
between business and residential subscribers.


Ken Jongsma                      [e-mail]
Smiths Industries           [e-mail]
Grand Rapids, Michigan  [e-mail]

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

Subject: 900 Phone Guide Magazine
Date: Sat, 8 Feb 92 18:22:29 EST
From: Ken Jongsma <wybbs![e-mail]>


I received an interesting "magazine" in the mail today. It's about the
size of a {TV Guide}, 54 pages long. On the cover is a picture of Bart
Simpson shilling his Happy Birthday line.

About 90% of the content is advertising for various Information
Providers ranging from Hilton Hotels "Weekend" line, to Global Releaf
($5), to the usual Astrology, Weather, Dow Jones, and other types of
lines.

The cover has a price of .95 per quarterly issue. The editorial
content is heavily slanted towards the "try this number" article, but
one story did go into the departure of Sprint from providing billing
and the demise of Telesphere.

Interestingly enough, there was no reference to any of the "adult"
lines. Those came in a catalog from Leisure Time Industries that I
also received today! Almost all of those lines were 800 types that
required a credit card number.

The number for Phone Guide is 818 347-9902, published by Stephan Simon
in Woodland Hills, CA.


Ken Jongsma                      [e-mail]
Smiths Industries           [e-mail]
Grand Rapids, Michigan  [e-mail]

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

Date: Sun, 09 Feb 92 14:13:57 EST
From: Richard Budd <[e-mail]>
Subject: Czechoslovakia Joins the Internet


There will be a ceremony February 13 in Prague to inaugurate Internet
service in Czechoslovakia.  Steve Goldstein reported this today in the
EUEARN-L discussion group.  The Federal Science and Education Network
has been working to bring the CSFR's university computer network,
CSEARN into the Internet.

When I posted last week my request for information about Prague
students connecting to an American BBS, there were many questions
about whether Czechoslovakia had Internet.  Neither the Hudson Valley
schools nor the Prague gymnasia have Internet yet, but it is certainly
a future objectiv especially with this announcement.

BTW, the Poughkeepsie/Prague Electronic Exchange went on-line today
with two high schools in the Hudson Valley establishing a connection
with one gymnasium in Prague.  The Prague school had been on-line
since November, 1991.


Richard Budd              | E-Mail: [e-mail]
VM Systems Programmer     |         Bitnet  [e-mail]
139 South Hamilton Street | Phone:  Daytime -[phone]
Poughkeepsie, NY 12601    |         Evening -[phone]
Coordinates:   LAT 41d 41m 30s N  LONG 73d 56m 00s W
Node Location: Marist College, Poughkeepsie, New York

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

Date: Sun, 9 Feb 92 19:39:15 EST
From: [e-mail] (Steve Baumgarten)
Subject: NY Telephone Horrors


As a resident of Brooklyn, I concur with the recent messages about the
horrific state of NY Telephone's physical plant.  Yet as if to add
insult to injury, we are bombarded day and night with commercials
about the New York Telephone Regional Calling Area, and just how
wonderful it is.  According to the commercials, we can call from
Manhattan to Montauk and have our call serviced entirely by New York
Telephone.

Personally, I don't understand why NY Tel is allowed to waste our
money on these pointless advertisements; after all, it's rather like
Con Edison telling us that we can use any electrical appliance we like
and all the electricity will be provided by Con Ed.  Since we can do
nothing about this situation, and have no choice in the matter, who
really cares?  Yet NY Tel persists in throwing our money away on
expensive television and print advertising.

Worse still, anyone even remotely knowledgable about telephone rates
knows that just calling from Brooklyn to the middle of Long Island
(perhaps 20 miles away) costs more than calling from Brooklyn to Los
Angeles (and likely Nova Scotia and probably even Moonbase Alpha once
we finally start colonizing the outer worlds).

On occasion, NY Tel likes to remind us that they have enough fiber
optic cable to stretch around the world three times, or something
equally as pointless.  This may well be true, but I suspect that all
that cable is just lying in a heap in a warehouse somewhere, as there
is certainly no fiber optic cable anywhere near *my* neighborhood.

I will refrain from posting the typical NY Tel horror stories about
getting additional lines, or getting existing lines serviced in a
halfway intelligent fashion.  About the best I can say is that when
things get really rough, a quick call to the Public Service Commission
always gets a speedy and obsequious response.

Caller ID will be something for my children to worry about; in the
meantime, I pay nearly as much for dialtone as I do for basic cable
television.  Now let's see how that works: Time Warner Cable strung
brand new wire into my neighborhood and my apartment just a few years
ago and now charges me just about the same as the telephone company
does for service over wire that was laid in 1904.  I don't pretend to
understand the economics of the situation, except to note that
Congress is currently thinking of regulating the cable industry
because of its outrageous prices.  This leads me to believe that the
RBOCs have invested more in their lobbying efforts than the cable
industry; it warms my heart to know that some of my $18 basic monthly
phone bill is going to help regulate my cable company.

I suspect that once someone allows Time Warner to offer dialtone,
they'll have to work overtime to sign up half the disgruntled
ratepayers from Manhattan to Montauk ...


Steve Baumgarten    [e-mail]

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

From: "Gregg E. Woodcock" <[e-mail]>
Subject: 411 is Now a Profit Center in Texas
Date: Fri, 7 Feb 1992 13:38:23 -0600


After many months (years?) of negotiations with the PUC about how to
fix the spiraling costs of directory assistance, SouthWestern Bell has
done something seemingly futile but incredibly successful!  They had
planned to start charging (10 cents?) from payphones to make up for
the losses incurred but were turned down so they tried something else.
Expect to see this appear in your area within the next month or two
since this feature could probably be programmed in two or three days.

The feature works like this: After reading you the number you
requested, you are prompted with the following message, "If you want
to have this number dialed automatically without hanging up press 1
now.  You will be charged thirty cents."  This is paraphrased, of
course, but you get the idea.  The truly amazing thing is that in the
few weeks since the feature has been introduced, they are averaging a
usage rate of 14,000 per day.  A radio blurb I heard said they expect
to earn $10 million a year!!!  I dialed a number that had been changed
and was not prompted to push 1 to automatically dial the new number
but I expect that will change soon!

This is quite a sad commentary on how lazy our socity has become (I
know, maybe you don't have pen/paper handy, maybe you are blind ...)

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Availability of SAW Correlators?
Date: 7 Feb 92 16:31:44 GMT
Organization: University of Limerick, Ireland


I am currently developing a Spread Spectrum Receiver for a System
using Direct Sequence Modulation. Does anybody have any information
regarding Surface Acoudtic Wave (SAW) Correlators and their
availability. Most SAW companies dont seem willing to supply such
devices.

Thanking you in advance.


Ben Moore    University of Limerick
Limerick     ireland
Tel :- [phone]   FAX :- [phone]
Email :- [e-mail]

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

From: mission![e-mail]
Subject: CB RFI Prevents Datacomm
Date: Fri Feb  7 15:24:40 1992


Thanks for everyone who responded (personally and in Telecom) to my
post regarding my friend's plight.  As it turns out, the CB was
powered-down and in the shop, and the CBer on a scallop boat, and yet
my friend still couldn't even get 300 baud to work.

He called C&P repair, and they came out and said there was nothing
wrong with his inside wiring, and they'd check out the outside lines.
A few days later he gets four messages on his machine from C&P repair
 -- two saying they found nothing wrong, and two saying they were
replacing the drop wire to his house.

After the drop wire was replaced, he noticed very bad crosstalk.  (He
figures he just couldn't hear it over the static before.)  Repair then
replaced the line from the pole to the street (they said there were
two squirel-chewed holes), and the noise problems are better, but not
gone.

The other day, he came home and found his landlord had let C&P repair
in to his apartment, and they had replaced a cheapo phone he had in
the kitchen, and left him a bill for $60!  The phone was crap, but he
rarely used it and it wasn't causing any problems (repair has already
determined that).  He is trying to get this mess straightened out as
well as the noise problems.

One odd thing is that he hears the noise much worse than his callers,
and if he dials in to MCI Mail (for example) he can send a message
that has no junk in it, but he can't read it or the MCI prompts -- all
he sees on his screen is garbage.  Why would that be?  Also, he says
the noise is worse when he calls a local number served by the same
switch.

Again, thanks for all the helpful suggestions.  If anyone has any
additional help, my friend would really appreciate it.


Randy

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

Date: Fri, 7 Feb 1992 10:29:48 -0500
From: [e-mail] (Nigel Allen)
Subject: Bell Canada Employee Newspaper
Reply-to: [e-mail]


Reading a telephone company's staff newspaper offers some interesting
perspectives on the company's internal propaganda efforts, and
sometimes provides advance information before the general public gets
to hear about a new telephone company initiative. (For example, Dave
Leibold found out about the 416/905 area code split through a Bell
Canada employee newspaper well before Bell Canada announced it
officially.)

Bell Canada publishes two employee newspapers, both called Bell News.
The Ontario edition can be picked up at some Bell buildings in Toronto
and elsewhere in Ontario. (Bell's Ontario Region Public Affairs
department ignored my request to be added to the mailing list for Bell
News. I think Bell has serious problems with Ontario Region Public
Affairs.)

However, subscriptions to the Quebec edition of Bell News are available
free of charge. Just write to:

 Bell News
 Bell Canada
 Tour Bell Canada, 2S2
 700, rue de La Gauchetiere ouest
 Montreal, Quebec
 Canada H3B 4L1
 telephone [phone]
 fax [phone]

French-speaking readers may prefer to request the French-language
Journal Bell from the same address.


Nigel Allen - via FidoNet node 1:250/98
INTERNET: [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #123
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa01285;
          10 Feb 92 2:52 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA19942
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 10 Feb 1992 01:07:26 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA12836
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 10 Feb 1992 01:07:15 -0600
Date: Mon, 10 Feb 1992 01:07:15 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #124

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 10 Feb 92 01:07:05 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 124

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Class Codes (John Gilbert)
    What the ^&$%# is Going on With Sprint!?? (Jack Winslade)
    Low-Cost Voice Synth Chip Needed (Douglas Scott Reuben)
    Query For a Friend (Jack Decker)
    Telecoms in Eastern Europe (Julian Macassey)
    Low-Bandwith Free Info Transfer? (Yanek Martinson)
    Information Wanted on "Smart Phone" (Alec Isaacson)
    Telephone Company Creates Bad Neighbor Feelings (Thomas Lapp)
    Tele-Scum (They're Back ...) (Steven Rezsutek)
    Question From a D.A. Operator (Carl Moore)
    Serving You Better (Stephanie da Silva)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (John Gilbert)
Subject: Class Codes
Organization: Motorola, Inc. LMPS
Date: Sat, 8 Feb 1992 05:42:14 GMT

Here are some old and some new commands for activation of telephone
features.

LASS and Custom Calling Feature Control Codes:
(These appear to be standard, but may be changed locally)

*57 Customer Orignated Trace (COT) Activation
*60 Selective Call Rejection (SCR) Activation
*61 Selective Distinctive Alerting (SDA) Activation
*62 Selective Call Acceptance (SCA) Activation
*63 Selective Call Forwarding (SCF) Activation
*65 ICLID Activation (caller ID)
*66 Automatic Recall (AR) Activation
*67 Call Privacy Toggle
*68 Computer Access Restriction Toggle
*69 AC Activation
*70 Call waiting disable
*71 Ring, no-answer forward activation
*72 Call forwarding immediate Activation
*73 Call forwarding Deactivation
*74 Speed call 8 program
*80 SCR Deactivation
*81 SDA Deactivation
*82 SCA Deactivation
*83 SCF Deactivation
*85 ICLID Deactivation
*86 AR Deactivation
*89 AC Deactivation


John Gilbert                                  KA4JMC
Secure and Advanced Conventional Sys Div      Astro Systems Development
Motorola Inc, Land Mobile Products Sector
Schaumburg, Illinois                          [e-mail]

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

Date: Fri, 07 Feb 92 23:26:29 CST
From: [e-mail] (Jack Winslade)
Subject: What the ^&$%# is Going on With Sprint!??
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: DRBBS Technical BBS, Omaha


About three years ago I established a 'second carrier' account with
Sprint.  The primary reason was that at the time the AT&T connections
to Harrisburg were flaky at best for 9600bps connections.  (Back then
it sounded like they had some older analog equipment in that path.)
Sprint worked fine to Hbg and since then I've used it for most of the
data calls.

We poll a site in Iowa City, about 250 miles to the east, every night
at 2300 or so.  Wednesday night I was sitting in the 'throne room'
when I heard the modem dial out.  (No, I cannot decode touch-tones by
ear, but I can recognize strings of numbers if they are repeated many
times. ;-) I knew something was wrong when I was jolted from my seat
with a raucous dee-dee-dee-dee-beeeeeeeeeee-SCREEEEEEEECH-BBBUZZZZzzzzz-
SCREEEEECH ... instead of the normal v.32bis train and connect.  I saw
that the modems were continuously retraining so I killed the session
and started it again.  Same thing.  I quickly edited the carrier code
in the dialing script to send the call through AT&T.  That time the
session was perfect.

I kind of dismissed it as one of those things.  I changed the script
back to the Sprint code and called it the next night.  Thursday night
shortly after 2300 I walked in and found the modem in a seemingly
infinite retry-and- retrain loop polling the Iowa City site.  Again, I
had good luck with AT&T.  I figured I should report this to Sprint.
This was the first time I have ever had reason to deal with Sprint's
customer service.

This morning I phoned the Sprint customer service line.  After the
mandatory MOH, I explained that I was having difficulty with the
quality of calls between Omaha and Iowa City, but that I would like to
speak to a technical person directly to explicitly explain the
problem.  At first the rep balked but I insisted, so she said that a
technician would call me shortly to discuss the problem.  She asked me
the number the failed calls were from <fine>, a number at which I
could be reached <fine>, and the number I was calling on the failed
call. <oops -- back at home in the dialing script> I explained that I
could give her the area code and prefix now, but I would have to hunt
down the line number and could either call back with it, give it to
the technician, or they could look it up in the call records.  I also
explained that both sub-CO loops were fine, since I had repeated the
calls with AT&T and got a perfect connection each time.  I also
asserted that I wanted to get the order going on this call and did not
want to call back, wade through the menu, listen to MOH, etc.  The
rest of the call went something like this ...

      repeat
        say('I cannot enter this report without that information')
      until (customer_threatens_to_switch_to_AT&T);

      then say('Yes, sir.  We'll have a technician call you shortly');

Ahhhh, Yes!  The magic word to break out of the loop is 'AT&T'. :-(

1600: I realized that nobody had returned my call, so I phoned Sprint
to see what was going on.  (No MOH this time <SHOCK!> must be a slow
Friday afternoon.)  I was first told that no technician could be found
to handle the problem.  As the call progressed I was told that the
order could not be processed because it was incomplete.  When I noted
the fact that the earlier rep had entered it anyway, I was again told
that they were unable to locate a technician, but promised four hour
response time.  (0900 -> after 1600) The rep apologized for the delay,
and said that a technician would be getting in touch with me shortly.

1900: Watched a session go through (via Sprint) to Falls Church, Va.
It went fine, as did several calls to Falls Church via Sprint over
same period I have been having difficulty with the calls to Iowa City.

2000: (Four hours after my followup call) Still no word from Sprint.
The second rep had assured me that they did work at night and they
would follow up on this within four hours.

2300: On a hunch, and just for the heck of it, I changed the dialing
script back to put Sprint's prefix in.  I figured that if the session
barfed, I could simply refuse to pay for that call, as I intend to for
the calls that failed over the past few days.  Will wonders ever cease
??  I dunno what they did, but the problem magically disappeared
between last night and tonight.  I have no idea if it was prompted by
my complaint, or if they noticed it from something else, or if it is
>REALLY< fixed for good at all.  I guess time will tell.

[Moderator's Note: A few lines garbled in transmission were lost at
this point ... then he continues ...]

If there are some Sprint management types listening in, I hope you
realize that you have some rather serious image problems in your
customer service area.  As you know, I am not the only one who has
complained here.  The technical problems I can deal with, but the
robot-like responses of your front-line people and the non-
responsiveness (twice) today made me seriously think about
cancelling the account and turning the business over to AT&T.  (They
are a bit more expensive, I admit, but the one time I had to call
their customer service line, they had a professional real-human rep
and no ^&$%#$ MOH.)

Enough ranting for now.


Good day.         JSW

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

Date: 8-FEB-1992 01:06:34.30
From: Douglas Scott Reuben <[e-mail]>
Subject: Low-Cost Voice Synth Chip Needed


I recently obtained a Digitalker DT-1050 Voice Synthesis kit, for
about $30.  It uses a SPC- MM54104 chip.

Is there anything comparable in voice quality to this (or better) but
at a lower cost? I anticipate using a good number of these (20 or so),
and $30 a shot is a bit steep.

If anyone has any suggestions, please mail me ...

Thanks in advance!


Doug    [e-mail]  //  [e-mail]

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

Date: Sun, 9 Feb 92 14:48:17 CST
From: Jack Decker <[e-mail]>
Subject: Query For a Friend


A friend of mine called today, and he is looking for a source for
either of the following two items:

1) Refurbished Toshiba Perception telephone equipment ... preferably
he is looking for a source that can supply not only refurbished
equipment, but also some technical knowledge (if you know of a source
for either the equipment OR the expertise, please let me know).

2) Those anti-twist devices used on telephone handsets to keep the
cord from twisting ... apparently they want to buy a quantity of these
items (maybe around 200 of them, they're even talking about using them
as promotional giveaways).

Also ... if any of you get any magagines or newsletters that regularly
contain advertisements from sellers of refurbished telephone
equipment, subscription/contact information for the magazine would be
appreciated.

If you know of any good sources, please send mail to me.


Jack Decker    [e-mail]    FidoNet 1:154/8

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

From: [e-mail] (Julian Macassey)
Subject: Telecoms in Eastern Europe
Date: 10 Feb 92 02:57:00 GMT
Organization: The Hole in the Wall  Hollywood California U.S.A.


     What did Comrade Joesph Stalin have to say about that tool of
capitalist commerce, the telephone? "I can think of no better
instrument of counter-revolution."

    How right he was, as recent developments in the communist
world have shown. Mind you TV and radio helped as well as the FAX
machine.

    There is a good article on "Telecommunications in Eastern
Europe" in the current {Economist} magazine (Feb 8-14 issue P74). It
discusses the situation in the East and discusses the Western Telecom
companies that are vying for the business. Yes, besides manufacturers
like AT&T and Seimens, the RBOCS are in there. Some of the payment
plans are imaginative. But then when it comes to international trade,
payment plans can be very imaginative.

    Anyhow, an informative article in the usual {Economist} style
and well worth a read.


Julian Macassey, [e-mail]  N6ARE@K6VE.#SOCAL.CA.USA.NA
742 1/2 North Hayworth Avenue Hollywood CA 90046-7142 voice [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Yanek Martinson)
Subject: Low-Bandwith Free Info Transfer?
Date: 10 Feb 1992 00:45:40 -0500
Organization: University of Miami Department of Mathematics & Computer Science


> In article <[e-mail]> TELECOM Moderator notes:

>> [Larry King] was letting the incoming lines ring for 30-40 minutes ...

Idea: suppose a modem calls another modem across the nation, detects
RRING, waits a few seconds, and hangs up. The modem on the other end
measured number of seconds or rings that the first one waited.  The
first modem calls back with the next piece of information.

This kind of thing would work for transmitting very short messages
(about one line for example) when speed is not important.

Would this work? Why not? Would it be illegal? By buying phone
service, am I not buying the right to ring anyone?


[e-mail]   [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: It probably would work and it definitly would be
illegal to pass messages, coded or otherwise without paying for it.
And no, when you buy phone service you are not buying the right to
'ring anyone'; you are buying the right to connect your instrument and
wire to any other instrument and wire whose owner wishes to communicate
with you.  The ringing is only the means to signal a pending connection;
it is not intended to be a communication in and of itself.  PAT]

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

Date: Sun, 09 Feb 92 21:43:25 EST
From: Alec Isaacson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Information Wanted on "Smart Phone"


I was watching the Olympics tonight and I saw a commercial for the
"Smart Phone" from AT&T and the Huntington Bank (a local bank here in
southwestern Ohio).  The commercial said something like "Imagine
getting a day's worth of errands done in 20 minutes.  The Smart Phone,
coming soon from AT&T and Huntington Bank."

The phone itself (the short glimpse the commercial gave us of it) has
a big LCD touchscreen and a standard Merlin style handset next to it.

Has anybody seen something like this before?  Is it being advertised
anywhere else?  Any other details?

If I hear any more, and if there is interest, I will post.

Thanks.


Alec D. Isaacson      AI4CPHYW @ miamiu.acs.muohio.edu
isaacson @ rogue.acs.muohio.edu (NeXt Mail)   Miami University, Oxford, OH

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

Date: Fri, 7 Feb 92 18:25:45 EST
From: Thomas Lapp <[e-mail]>
Subject: Telephone Company Creates Bad Neighbor Feelings


Excerpted from DCL DIALOG, a monthly column in the {DEC Professional},
Feb. 1992, page 94:

"... I won't talk about how hard it is for a self-employed
independent consultant to get a mortgage these days.  (Where's Neil
Bush when you need him?)  I also won't bring up the fact that it cost
me 50% more to have my eight phone lines installed than it did to have
a moving company transfer the equivalent of ten rooms of furnishings to
our new location.

"I won't bore you with the details of how the telephone company
managed to effectively short out all of the phones in the neighborhood
for two days while doing the installation, or how they destroyed my
next-door neighbor's 15-year-old rhododendron bush while putting in
the new underground cable.  Nothing like memorable first impressions ..."

                              --------

Sorry, the article doesn't tell where the author lives, so we don't
know which telco to blame for his mess. :-( I thought the section was
interesting.


tom   internet   mvac23![e-mail]  or  [e-mail] (home)

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

Subject: Tele-Scum (They're Back ...)
Date: Fri, 07 Feb 92 10:24:28 -0500
From: [e-mail]


  After thinking all this time that the plague of tele-marketing,
especially the automatic kind, was over, last evening I was given a
rude awakening.  Upon answering a phone call around 7:00pm, I was
greeted by an auto-seller which informed me that "my phone number has
been selected ... to find out how you can claim <whatever it was>,
just call 976-xxxx, or you can write to: National Services, [address
forgotten], Pittsburgh, PA."

Now they want _me_ to _pay_ to hear their spiel. Don't these guys ever
give up?


Steven Rezsutek       [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: They're back? I never thought they went away!  PAT]

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

Date: Fri, 7 Feb 92 13:10:28 EST
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject: Question From a D.A. Operator


Recently, I purchased a small bottle of "sparkling" bottled water.  On
the bottle was a firm's name followed by "Sweet Springs, WV 24980" and
a telephone number on 703-344 prefix (which I recalled, correctly as
it turns out, to be Roanoke, VA).  I located Sweet Springs on a map,
and it's right next door to VA (but Roanoke is not next door to WV.)
But when I called 304 directory assistance, I could not find the firm.
Then the operator said (this or very similar words): "I know this
sounds strange, but do you have the number on the bottle?"  I repeated
the number from memory, and she echoed back "344" and then disconnected.

I take it there have been other requests to DA for that firm.  The
best guess I can make is that the firm is in Roanoke or nearby, and
that Sweet Springs, WV is only the location of the spring where the
water was obtained.

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

From: [e-mail] (Stephanie da Silva)
Subject: Serving You Better
Organization: Taronga Park BBS
Date: Fri, 7 Feb 1992 19:01:13 GMT


This morning I called up Sears' 800 number to order a replacement
credit card, only to get a recording that said all the service
representatives were in a training seminar learning how to serve me
even better ...


Stephanie da Silva       Taronga Park * Houston, Texas
[e-mail]          568-0480   568-1032

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #124
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa02780;
          10 Feb 92 3:23 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA09085
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 10 Feb 1992 01:37:40 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA17522
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 10 Feb 1992 01:37:31 -0600
Date: Mon, 10 Feb 1992 01:37:31 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #125

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 10 Feb 92 01:37:26 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 125

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Information Wanted on History of Muzak (Harold Hallikainen)
    Re: Information Wanted on History of Muzak (Keith Smith)
    Re: Information Wanted About 2600 Magazine ([e-mail])
    Re: CDMA Impact on Cellular Software (Ron Dippold)
    Re: CDMA Impact on Cellular Software (Keith Smith)
    Re: Dutch Hackers Arrested; Now in Jail! (Mark Fulk)
    Re: Dutch Hackers Arrested; Now in Jail! (Ken Emery)
    Re: 900 Idea of the Future ([e-mail])
    Re: Accoustic Couplers (David Ptasnik)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sun, 9 Feb 92 13:33:01 -0800
From: [e-mail] (Harold Hallikainen)
Subject: Re: Information Wanted on History of Muzak
Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo


In his article [e-mail] (Mathew Zank) writes:

> Does anyone know about the history of Muzak, the service that brings
> office music?  All I know is that it is on a sub-channel of a local
> FM radio station.

    From the Broadcasting Yearbook history of broadcasting:

    Subsidiary FM Service - To aid FM broadcasters, the commission
in 1955 enabled them to apply for subsidiary communications
authorizations for supplemental services such as background music.
Sometimes called "functional music", this specialized service is
offered to stores, factories and other business subscribers.

    Originally, subsidiary communications were permitted on a
simplex basis, the station devoting part of the time on its channel to
regular broadcasting and part to this specialized service.  Later,
rules were adopted requiring subsidiary communications to be on a
multiplex basis, that is, using one or more subchannels with the main
channel used for regular broadcasting.  The FCC permits FM
broadcasters to use their subcarriers for a broad variety of new
services.

    Looking back in my 1980 FCC Rules, 73.293 required:

    Programs must be of a broadcast nature which are of interest
to limited segments of the public (ie, are point to multipoint).
Examples cited include background music, storecasting, detailed
weather forecasting, special time signals, special programs for
business, professional, educational, religious, trade, labor,
agricultural or other groups engaged in any lawful activity.  An SCA
could also be used for "operational communications" of the station
(feeding programming to other stations, giving cues to remote program
production units, etc.).  A subcarrier could also be used for the
station's own transmitter telemetry, though this did not require an
SCA (subsidiary communications authorization from the FCC), since it
was not a "point to multipoint" service.

    The rules also made provision for transmission of visual
material.  I believe they had the "electronic newspaper" in mind,
using fax technology of the time.  The SCA application had to include
full details on the visual transmission system proposed.  It's unclear
whether digital data transmission would be considered "visual", since
it is often displayed or printed.

    73.295(b) prohibited the use of subcarrier control signals to
delete main channel material (such as commercials).  In the early
1970's, I worked for an AM/FM combo.  The FM was automated with
"beautiful music".  I modified the automation to provide a separate
program output that consisted of all the music (which came from reel
to reel with 25 Hz EOM (end of message) cues) but did not pick up the
commercials (which came from tape cartridge "carousels").  We fed this
music only service to a few local background music customers over
phone lines.

    73.319 said that subcarriers (whether SCA or operational) must
use frequency modulation.  The instantaneous frequency must be between
20 KHz and 75 KHz for stations not transmitting stereo.  Stereo
stations must keep the instantaneous frequency between 53 and 75 KHz.
Subcarrier "injection" (modulation level of the main carrier by
subcarriers) was limited to 30% for mono stations and 10% for stereo
stations.  The center frequency of the subcarrier was to be within 500
Hz of the authorized frequency (most stations used 67 KHz).

    Now, 73.293 permits FM stations to use subcarriers for a
variety of purposes without specific FCC authorization.

    73.295 permits subsidiary communications to be used for the
purposes listed previously plus radio reading services, specialized
foreign language programs, bilingual television audio (although the
stereo TV SAP channel has probably replaced this application), and
point to point services such as paging, traffic signal control,
utility load management, etc.  They also specifically recognize data
services such as financial market data.

    73.319 now allows any method of modulation of subcarriers.
Previously, FM was required.  Some stations are transmitting multiple
audio programs using several single sideband AM subcarriers.  Others
are using FSK of the subcarrier for data transmission.  It would
appear that any modem technology (including QAM) could be used,
keeping in mind the frequency and noise limitations of the channel.

    Stations transmitting monaural are now allowed to have the
subcarrier carrier and significant sidebands between 20 KHz and 99
KHz.  Stereo stations can have sidebands and subcarriers between 53
KHz and 99 KHz.  The "injection" of subcarriers is still limited to
10% for stereo stations and 30% for monaural stations.  However,
stations transmitting subcarriers are now allowed to "overmodulate"
slightly (go over 75 KHz peak deviation" depending on the number of
subcarriers and their injection levels.

    Now, AM stations and TV stations are also authorized to run
subsidiary communications.  TV's generally run subcarriers on their
aural carrier (which is FM).  This is the basis of the SAP (secondary
audio program) and PRO channels.  The PRO is generally used for
operational communications, including transmitter telemetry.

    AM stations are allowed to run multiplex transmissions
(73.127).  These transmissions were originally limited to subaudible
transmitter telemetry (which used a voltage controlled oscillator
where 20 Hz represented a reading of 0 and 30 Hz was full scale,
although one system used biphase data transmission, real slow).
"Subcarrier injection" was limited to 6%.  Now, stations may transmit
anything they want as long as they stay within the authorized spectrum
(pretty much from carrier out to 10 KHz above and below carrier) and
the signal is not audible on "ordinary consumer receivers".  These
systems have used both amplitude and phase modulation of the AM
carrier.  They have generally been used for utility load management,
though I've heard very little of this use in the past several years.
Both of the currently used AM stereo systems utilize a subaudible
pilot tone, pretty much making the subaudible region unavailable for
subsidiary communications.

    So, there's more than you ever wanted to know about SCA!


Harold Hallikainen              [e-mail]
Hallikainen & Friends, Inc.     [e-mail]
141 Suburban Road, Bldg E4      phone [phone] fax [phone]
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-7590  telex 4932775 HFI UI

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

From: [e-mail] (Keith Smith)
Subject: Re: Information Wanted on History of Muzak
Organization: Keith's Computer, Hope Mills, NC
Date: Mon, 10 Feb 92 04:33:38 GMT


Strange hearing all this FM sub-carrier stuff.  MUZAK sure has come a
LONG way in the last five years.  At my REAL JOB we get All JAZZ MUZAK
til 11, Rock-and-Roll MUZAK from 11 - 3, and Adult Contemporary MUZAK
from 3 to 5.  All fed from a Satellite disk on the top of our building
into a little descrambler box next to the PA amp.  We change the
programming with a phone call.  Sure beats listening to a DJ talk
about himself or the latest "contest" huh?


aka Digital Designs   uunet!ksmith!keith   GEMail: K.SMITH52

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Information Wanted About 2600 Magazine
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Rochester Institute of Technology
Date: Sat, 8 Feb 92 11:33:53 GMT


For subscriptions:
2600 Subscription Dept
P.O. Box 752
Middle Island, NY 11953-0752

Network address is [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Ron Dippold)
Subject: Re: CDMA Impact on Cellular Software
Organization: Qualcomm, Inc., San Diego, CA
Date: Mon, 10 Feb 1992 01:13:38 GMT


[e-mail] writes:

> If this is true, I can say that,
>  1)  the size of CDMA software  is pretty bigger than FM software;
>  2)  As consequence, the memory of CDMA hardware have to be bigger than
>      that of FM;
> 1) and 2) concludes that the CDMA mobile phone is bigger than that of
> FM.  This is inconvenient for users.

1 and 2 are correct, but the last point.  That doesn't necessarily
follow from 1 and 2 ... the ROM, RAM, and EEPROM come in essentially
the same size packages regardless of memory.  Compare, for example,
standard DRAM for the PC.  You can get 256K and 1M DRAM in the same
package, and some boards will even let you plug in either.  There is
not a significant size increase as long as your memory increases by a
multiple of four.  What increases is the cost -- it costs a few more
bucks for the larger memory.

Admittedly, our first commerical phones aren't going to be the size of
Motorola's Micro-TAC Lite, which is a marvel of size engineering.
However, the mobile version will be the size of your standard Fujitsu,
Alps, NEC, etc. mobile phone, even though it includes both CDMA and FM
(AMPS) protocols, and the portable will be even smaller.

> As for FM software, base station software must manage the frequency
> resource, but CDMA needs not. I can conclude that FM is more complex
> than CDMA.  Why is CDMA software more complex than FM software?

If we were only imitating FM, perhaps.  But the base station software
for CDMA must also manage soft handoff (seamless handoff from cell to
cell) and other more complicated signalling options, such as secondary
signalling information added to the primary traffic information (so
you can use half the bandwidth for voice and half for modem).  The
base station also has to manage the CDMA channel resource, such as
determining when adding another call will result in unacceptable
degradation to the other channels.

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

From: [e-mail] (Keith Smith)
Subject: Re: CDMA Impact on Cellular Software
Organization: Keith's Computer, Hope Mills, NC
Date: Mon, 10 Feb 92 04:12:21 GMT


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

> [e-mail](Ron Dippold) writes:

>> Comparing CDMA software to FM software is pretty much like comparing
>> the control software for a USR Dual Standard modem to a 300 bps modem.
>> You get far better performance in exchange for more complexity.

> If this is true, I can say that,

>  1)  the size of CDMA software  is pretty bigger than FM software;

I'll buy that.

>  2)  As consequence, the memory of CDMA hardware have to be bigger than
>      that of FM;

But not that ...

> 1) and 2) concludes that the CDMA mobile phone is bigger than that of
> FM.  This is inconvenient for users.

Or that.  The physical difference in size of a 16Kbit ROM and a 1Mbit
ROM are quite nominal.  In fact 2 1Mbit ROMs would occupy around 2
square inches by say 3/16 of an inch in standard off the shelf
packaging.  Custom packaging could reduce this even further to less
than 1/3 that amount.  Software storage size is gonna be negligible
for any firmware used in electronics these days, Unless the software
overhead is absoulutely HUGE.  COST on the other hand ...


aka Digital Designs   uunet!ksmith!keith   GEMail: K.SMITH52

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

From: [e-mail] (Mark Fulk)
Subject: Re: Dutch Hackers Arrested; Now in Jail!
Organization: Computer Science Department University of Rochester
Date: Wed, 5 Feb 1992 18:51:52 GMT


Sorry for all the quoted material, but I believe this is well-justified.

> to give everyone an even break around here. I wonder why the authors
> seem to feel access to the Internet is some sort of right instead of a
  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

I wonder what evidence Pat has for this feeling.  I carefully scanned
the whole post, and the only germane paragraph I could find follows:

> ...  The Internet is a public network and if you cannot protect a
> system, you should not be on it. This is not just our statement, it is
> the written policy of many networking organizations... [long metaphor
> omitted] ... If you tie a cord to
> the lock and hang it out the mail-slot, people will pull it. If these
> people do damages, you should prosecute them, but not for the costs of
> walking after them and doing your security right.

Straw man attacks rarely, if ever, advance the cause of truth.  In
this case, as usual, they are being advanced on the basis of a false
dichotomy: either hackers are innocent or they are liable for many
things including the cost of normal system security.

I can find no evidence in the original post that the author considers
Internet access to be a right.  In fact, the paragraph above suggests
the opposite.  Rather, he seems to believe that the charges and
damages are grossly overstated and the suggested penalties are
extreme.  Quite clearly the author does not think that the
perpetrators are innocent of any wrongdoing or that the damages are
zero.  In another part of the article, he does express the opinion
that computer crime laws will be ineffective against the ``real''
criminals.

Finally, if you don't want to publish opinion on the hacker issue in
the digest or c.d.t., then don't publish your own opinions on the
matter either.  Use of the Moderator's position to favorably place
one's own opinions, with or without the suppression of other
positions, is clearly unfair.

By the way, please note that I have carefully avoided entering my
position on these issues.  If you want to know, I'll tell you; if you
listen carefully, I believe that you will be surprised.


Mark A. Fulk            Computer Science Department
[e-mail]        University of Rochester
Omit needless words -- Strunk    Rochester, NY  14627

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

From: [e-mail] (Ken Emery)
Subject: Re: Dutch Hackers Arrested; Now in Jail!
Organization: Teknekron Communications Inc.
Date: Fri, 7 Feb 1992 19:20:01 GMT


I don't know if these are the same Dutch hackers who would access
computers here in the U.S. but I do know for a fact that they were
malicious.  A person I know had half of his account wiped out (rm -rf)
after they had gotten what they wanted.  The only reason his entire
account was not wiped was because he was watching as they did this and
was able to kill the process midway through.


Bye,

ken emery

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

From: [e-mail] (The Squire, Phish)
Subject: Re: 900 Idea of the Future
Organization: Fantasy, Incorporated: Reality None of Our Business.
Date: Fri, 07 Feb 1992 23:15:14 GMT


[e-mail] (Edward Floden) recently informed us:

>        Videophone Sex.

> Remember, you heard it here first ... :)

> [Moderator's Note: Cute ... but not first, I'm afraid. There's already
> a phone sex purveyor trying it with slow-scan video. I think the
> company is in Florida. They even supply the video display units to
> their customers. But it is on regular phone lines, not 900, and the
> billing (there's always a catch!) is via your VISA/MC.   PAT]

And, Mitch Kapor said, in a recent address, that since sex is such a
motivator he fully expects the first commercial videophone services to
be porn-related.  I knew there was a reason I liked Mitch :-)


[e-mail] | Fubar Systems BBS
(805) 54-FUBAR    3/12/24, MNP5, 8N1   FSBBS 2.0, FSUUCP 1.3

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

From: David Ptasnik <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Acoustic Couplers
Date: Sun, 9 Feb 92 12:30:40 PDT


[e-mail] (Mickey Ferguson) wrote:

> Does anyone know of any acoustic couplers available for modems?

Interestingly enough, AT&T provides an acoustic coupler adapter for
it's uniquely shaped Merlin handset.  You slide the handset into the
"female" side of this thing, and the "male" side looks like a standard
handset that neatly fits into the acoustic coupler.


Dave        [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #125
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa03554;
          10 Feb 92 3:46 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA20371
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 10 Feb 1992 02:04:01 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA03931
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 10 Feb 1992 02:03:54 -0600
Date: Mon, 10 Feb 1992 02:03:54 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #126

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 10 Feb 92 02:03:53 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 126

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Support HR3515 and S2112! (Toby Nixon)
    Interactive Voice-Mail on PC (Robert M. Hamer)
    When Did the LEC's Start to Die? (Jack Decker)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Toby Nixon <[e-mail]>
Subject: Support HR3515 and S2112!
Date: 7 Feb 92 18:25:04 GMT
Organization: Hayes Microcomputer Products, Norcross, GA


[DISCLAIMER: The following is my personal position on this matter, and
not necessarily that of my employer.]

I am appalled at the RBOC's disinformation regarding HR3515/S2112,
which propose to limit RBOC entry into information services until fair
competition is possible.  Every time one of the RBOC ads has played on
the TV or radio, appeared in the newspaper, and now in the information
they mailed to me, I can't help but stand up out of my chair and
scream because of the contemptible lies.

Clearly, all of the services they claim are being held back are, or
could be, available TODAY.  We are IN the Information Age; where have
they been?  It's _here_, not "just over the horizon".  We don't need
the RBOCs to provide these services; all the RBOCs need to do is
continue to provide the transmission services, which they do today.
Unfortunately, the majority of the citizens of the USA don't know that
these services are already available WITHOUT RBOC HELP -- and the
RBOCs are taking advantage of this lack of knowledge to try to gain
popular support for their positions.

What would happen if the RBOCs were to enter these markets?  It is
clear to me, based on their past performance in similar situations
(such as voicemail) that they would leverage their monopoly on local
telephone service to force competitors out of the market.  They will
use their guaranteed return on investment income from their monopoly
on POTS to subsidize their information services (even providing
co-location with central office switches is a subsidy), thereby indeed
providing the "affordability" they talk about -- until the competition
is driven out of the marketplace. Then the RBOCs will be free to raise
the rates as high as they wish!  With their monopoly on access, they
could easily sabotage access to competitive services and make the RBOC
services look better (just being co-located will provide better circuit
quality and response times).  While all of the competition would have
to pay exhorbitant rates for ONA services (to obtain ANI information,
billing to phone accounts, etc.), the phone company has this free.
Free competition?  Hardly!

Many of you know that I am a Libertarian, and strongly oppose
government regulation of business.  The logical position for a
Libertarian might appear to be to support the RBOC's fight against
further regulation.  But the fact is that they've enjoyed this
GOVERNMENT-IMPOSED monopoly for decades; in too many ways, the RBOCs
function as though they were an arm of the government.  They have
effectively no competition for local access. Every competitive service
MUST use the RBOCs' facilities to reach their customers.  This places
the RBOCs in the position of being able to effectively control their
competition -- meaning there would be no effective competition at all.

Despite their protestations that the proposed legislation would limit
"consumer choice" and "competition", the reality is that provision of
such services by RBOCs, so long as they remain the sole provider of
local telephone service in most of the country, would be anti-choice
and anti-competitive, plain and simple.  It would be ABSOLUTELY UNFAIR
for the government to turn them loose to use their monopoly-guaranteed
income to try to put independent information services (even BBSes) out
of business, when it is the government that has permitted (required!)
them to get the monopoly in the first place.

It absolutely disgusts me that in their printed materials the RBOCs go
so far as to foment class warfare.  They talk about "the specter of
'information rich' versus 'information poor'".  They say that
minorities, the aged, and the disabled support their position, to
raise liberal guilt and stir up class envy (but without disclosing
what have certainly been massive contributions to these groups in
return for their support).  They further stir up class envy by making
the point that Prodigy and CompuServe customers are "... highly
educated professionals with above average incomes, owning homes valued
above national norms ... the world's most affluent, professional, and
acquisitive people", as though this were somehow evil!  They attack,
without stating any evidence, the alledged "reality" that the only
reason this legislation is proposed is to prop up newspaper
advertising revenues (the whole attitude of "evil profits" is so
hypocritical coming from those for whom profits are guaranteed, and
whom never mention the fact that they're not entering information
services out of altruism but only because they seek to expand their
own profits!).  They invoke jingoistic fervor by talking about
services "already being enjoyed by citizens of other countries" (but
at what incredible cost?).

The materials are packed with this politically-charged rhetoric, but
completely lacking in facts or reasonable explanation of the basis for
the positions of either side.  Their letter isn't written for a
politically- and technologically-aware audience, but for those who are
attuned to the anti-capitalistic culture of envy and redistribution.
It isn't written for those trying to make an informed decision on the
issues, but is intended simply to rally the ignorant into flooding
congressional offices with demands for services that most of the
writers wouldn't know the first thing to do with, and which the
writers don't realize are available without the RBOCs.

They talk about some supposed "right" of individuals to participate in
"the Information Age", regardless of, among other things, _income_.
Does all of this appeal to the plight of the poor and disadvantaged
mean that these services will be available regardless of ability to
pay?  Hardly!  _We_, the taxpayers, _we_, the RBOC customers, without
any choice of who provides our local phone service, will pay --
through the nose -- either in the form of cross-subsidization of
"lifeline" (!) information services by those of us paying "full"
residential rates or business rates, or by tax-funded government
subsidies or credits going directly to the RBOCs. Does anybody really
think that the RBOCs will cover the cost of providing these services
to the "information poor" out of their profits?  What a ridiculous
idea!

The fact that the RBOC position is supported by groups like the NAACP
and the National Council on Aging -- representing the most
politically-favored, most tax-subsidized groups in America -- make it
clear that they fully intend for the cost of such services to be born
by the middle class and small businesspeople of America.  Once again,
the productive segments of society get screwed.  Once again, private
businesses which have fought to build themselves WITHOUT any
government-granted monopoly will be forced out, to be replaced with
politically-favored and politically-controllable socialized services.
Once again, America edges closer to the facist system which has been
so soundly rejected elsewhere.  When will we ever learn?

We SHOULD all write to our congressmen and senators.  We should demand
that they pass HR3515 and S2112, and keep them in force unless and
until the RBOCs give up their local telephone monopolies and allow
truly free competition -- which means long after the monopolies are
broken up, until the lingering advantages of the monopoly are
dissipated.  Of course, the RBOCs could spin off entirely independent
companies to provide information services -- with no common management
and no favored treatment in data transmission over the other
independent information services -- and I would cheer.  But so long as
they have a chokehold on the primary _delivery vehicle_ for
information services in America, their protestations for "free
competition" ring incredibly hollow.


Toby Nixon                      | Voice   [phone]  Telex 151243420
2595 Waterford Park Drive       | Fax     [phone]  CIS   70271,404
Lawrenceville, Georgia  30244   | BBS     [phone]  AT&T    !tnixon
USA                             | Internet                [e-mail]

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

Date: Sat, 8 Feb 1992 11:34 EDT
From: "Robert M. Hamer" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Interactive Voice-Mail on PC


Help!  I've opened my big mouth once too often, and now need
information to help me back myself up.

I just got back from an NIH study section (you know, where you and a
bunch of other folks evaluate 64 grant proposals in three days and
assign priority scores for funding; 12 hour days; my brain is fried).
Anyway, the _last_ proposal (not one which I had been assigned and I
had not read it) went something like the following (I'm going to be
very nonspecific so I don't violate the confidentiality of the study
section process and only give already public information):

This group wants to do the following: People being followed for a
disease will telephone a computer whenever they have an episode, or in
any case, once a week.  The computer will call them if they haven't
called once per week.  In each call, the computer needs to know what
meds they're on, what their responses were when they called
previously, and make decisions about what questions to ask this time,
and to make decisions to follow up with more questions depending on
responses.  Peoples' responses will be via touch tone.  The dialog
will go as follows, sort of:

Person dials.  Computer answers, Person enters a password on touchtone
pad.

Computer: Hello, Mr. X.  How have you been feeling this week (press 1
for OK, 2 for not so good).

Person presses 2.

Computer: Oh, not too well, eh?  Well, I notice you've had troubles
with the whatevermedicine you've been taking in the past.  Have you
been having trouble with it this week?  (Press 1 for yes, 2 for no).

Person presses 1.

Computer: Has the trouble been that the whatevermedicine hasn't been
working, or that it has had side effects?  (Press 1 for not working, 2
for side effects.)

 ---Etc.

Addditionally, the system needs to periodically print reports for
physicians.  So, it is essentially a voice mail system that needs to
have extensive flexibility in terms of trees (the initial question
might have a bunch of possible responses, each response might have a
buanch of responses, etc, for lots of levels.)  The system needs to
read touch tones and generate voice on the phone coming from ASCII
strings on the computer.  It needs to know who each caller is and
possibly take that into account in entering and using the tree.  It
needs to be able to call out as well as answer, if the person hasn't
called in time.

They've already done this in a previous grant with one disease; they
want a new gbrant to do it with a new disease.  The old grant spent
large amounts of money, probably upwards of a million dollars.  The
new grant wants something under a million dollars.  They currently do
it on a system consisting of a micro to generate the voice, decode the
tones, and a VAX to make the decisions and make reports, both systems
dedicated to this one application.  Programming is done is C and
MUMPS.  They use a DECTalk voice generater, I think to generate the
voice.  It is horribly expensive.  They want money for something like
two programmers to adapt the system.

It was not a grant I was assigned to; I hadn't read it, but upon
hearing what the reviewers were saying a bout what it wanted, I opened
my big mouth and said something like "this sounds like they want piles
of money to do what a PC, a voice-mail card, and voice mail software
could do for a fraction of the cost."  The chairperson said "that
sounds interesting, why don't you write a few comments to that effect
for the pink sheets."  I said I'd have to read the grant before I did
that and it would take a few days.

So ... do any of you folks know of hardware/software combinations out
there capable of doing something like that?  Somehow, hundreds of
thousands of dollars to do that just sounds to expensive to me.  When
the original grant was funded, perhaps maybe five years ago, that
might have been the best one could do.  But today, it is my impression
that one could do quite sophisticated things quite cheaply on a FAST
(say 486-based PC). Please respond to me in addition to the list; I'm
going to be traveling again the next week or two, and I'm going to put
off reading the Digest until I get back, but I'll read specific
responses if they come in.  Thanks.

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

Date: Sun, 9 Feb 92 14:48:40 CST
From: Jack Decker <[e-mail]>
Subject: When Did the LEC's Start to Die?


Pat (the Moderator) recently speculated on when the demise of AT&T
might begin.  Personally, I'm more interested in the when the LEC's
(local telephone companies) might begin to feel threatened.  I truly
wish that some bright people would begin to work on a viable system of
"LEC bypass" that would give the LEC's some REAL competition.  The
cable TV industry is probably the most likely candidate, but seeing as
how they can't even do cable right (in most areas), I wouldn't count
on them.

What does puzzle me is why no one has ever really jumped on the idea
of using radio as an alternative to the phone system.  The airwaves,
after all, are free.  It would be feasible using current technology to
set up a computerized system where each "phone" would have enough
"smarts" to make a digital, noise- and static-free connection to any
other phone within radio range.  The way I would contemplate this
happening is that on a call attempt, the phone would first attempt a
direct connection (by some "handshaking" on a "hailing channel"
monitored by all phones when not in use).  If the called phone could
not be reached directly, the call could be passed to a nearby repeater
tower, at which point it would become a charged-for call.  Such
repaters might be operated by long distance carriers, who could
complete calls between two repeaters.  You'd set your phone to default
to the nearest repeater of the long distance carrier you wanted to
use.

If the called phone was within range, part of the "handshaking"
process would transfer the voice path to a pair of mutually-agreeable
frequencies, and also agree on a scrambling process for the voice
signal (I happen to think that scrambling of the signal is important,
despite the cellular carriers' apparent lack of concern).

The advantages to such a system would be numerous.  "Local" calls
would be free, and no one's "resources" would be used other than that
owned by the users of the phones.  There would be no more stringing of
cables to remote/difficult locations.  There would be no more of this
nonsense of being charged toll rates to call half a mile down the road
because the called phone happens to be on the wrong side of a nearby
exchange boundary.  A "Hinsdale" type fire could not put the whole
system out of commission.

I'm sure there would be disadvantages, too, but nothing that couldn't
be overcome.

Unfortunately, the current cellular system is a good example of how
NOT to do it.  Suppose that you are using your cell phone to talk to a
neighbor half a mile away on HIS cell phone.  Your phones both have
plenty enough power to communicate directly with each other, leaving
the cellular operator out of the picture entirely.  But, that's not
how the system works.  Instead, your call will go to a cell site and
even if the call gets to your neighbor's phone via the same cell site,
you will BOTH be charged airtime (at utterly ridiculous rates in my
opinion, especially considering that such a call is never handed off
to a local teleco).  Something is seriously wrong with this scheme!

But it is my firm belief that if a system were devised that included
free phone-to-phone communication for phones within reach of each
other, OR if cellular operators were to start providing "free" calls
(no airtime charges) between cell phones in the same local area, OR if
the system were expanded to allow MORE than TWO cell operators to
compete in a given area, you'd soon see the beginning of the end of
local cellular service.

Actually, I think that SOMETHING like this is going to happen, but I
don't want to be too specific lest phone company attornies and
lobbyists get wind of it and start taking steps to make sure it
doesn't happen.  I'll just say that I've noticed some recent changes
in attitudes in unexpected places that lead me to believe that things
will be MUCH different in ten to twenty years from now.


Jack Decker   [e-mail]   FidoNet 1:154/8

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #126
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa19787;
          11 Feb 92 2:30 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA27247
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 10 Feb 1992 23:55:10 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA09071
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 10 Feb 1992 23:54:57 -0600
Date: Mon, 10 Feb 1992 23:54:57 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #127

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 10 Feb 92 23:54:51 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 127

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    The Ultimate Loud Ringer (Ed Greenberg)
    Need Information on 'Integrated Voice Power 4' (Rob Sturgill)
    Beware of Impersonation Phraud (Dave Leibold)
    Civil Jury Rules Against AT&T in Patent Violation Case (Bill Berbenich)
    AXE Losing Trunk Links? (Paul Repacholi)
    FCC on 800 Charges (Larry Appleman)
    ATT Mail Charges (Again) (Steve M. Kile)
    ISDN and Education (Linda Suzanne Clark)
    Info Request: "Polling Modems?" (Coyt D. Watters)
    What Frequencies Does Touchtone Generate? (Van Bagnol)
    Panasonic KX-T2740 (Dave Stoddard)
    "Safe Fax" (Mike Riddle)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Ed Greenberg)
Subject: The Ultimate Loud Ringer
Date: Sun, 09 Feb 92 12:51:51 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest)


In article <[e-mail]> jim.redelfs%macnet@ivgate.
omahug.org writes:

> I had a customer with a "Quarry Horn" (AC-powered, phone-line
> triggered "ringer" -- truly a loud enunciator designed to be heard
> above the noise of construction equipment) on the outside of her
> (fortunately) rural residence.  It rattled the windows ...

> To this day, neighbors for a mile around know whenever she
> gets a call (she never had us install a switch for the horn!).

This puts me in mind of a friend who had trouble sleeping too late,
including through the phone calls that we would make to wake him up
before scheduled activities.

Way back, (so far back that the statute of limitations has run :-) my
friend boosted a period bell off the wall at his school (all stand and
remove your hats, the school was decommissioned this year.)  It was
interesting, because one bolt removed it, and it had two plug in
prongs that connected it to the system.  It was specced for 120VAC at
60 cycles -- house current.

My friend attached this to his phone system.  Not the phone line, of
course, but the ring generator on his 1A2 key system.  Now it was
getting 90 VAC at 20 cycles, causing the clapper to move much slower,
and the clear crisp sound of the bell to be heard whenever the phone
rang.  Now, he did NOT live in a rural neighborhood, but rather in
Suburbia, USA, and I think that they knew it for blocks around when
his phone rang.  Of course, his mother made him remove it eventually.

We called it 'The Ultimate Loud Ringer'.


Ed Greenberg         | Home: [phone] | [e-mail]
P. O. Box 28618        | Work: [phone] | DoD#: 0357
San Jose, CA  95159    | Fax:  [phone] | KM6CG (ex WB2GOH)

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

From: [e-mail] (Rob Sturgill)
Subject: Need Information on 'Integrated Voice Power 4'
Organization: Motorola LMPS
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1992 15:16:21 GMT


I recently purchased an 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.
[e-mail]         |  Shared Systems Division
phone: [phone]         |  1301 E. Algonquin Rd. IL02-4420
fax:   [phone]         |  Schaumburg Illinois 60196

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

Date: Mon, 10 Feb 1992 01:16:42 -0500
From: [e-mail] (Dave Leibold)
Subject: Beware of Impersonation Phraud


A recent news article mentions one travel hazard that is all too
common in the Philippines. It seems that there are phraud artists who
will tap incoming calls to hotel rooms and then proceed to imitate the
voice of callers feigning emergencies for which money is to be sent.
That is, an unwary traveller is phooled into thinking that the party
on the other end is really their relative or friend in real trouble
and then proceed to wire money that will reach only the phraud artist.

Beware of phone scams, even when travelling.


Dave Leibold - via FidoNet node 1:250/98
INTERNET: [e-mail]

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

Subject: Civil Jury Rules Against AT&T in Patent Violation Case
Date: Mon, 10 Feb 92 10:51:40 GMT
From: [e-mail] (Bill Berbenich)
Reply-To: [e-mail]


The following dispatch is presented verbatim.

By PAUL DECKELMAN
UPI Business Writer

   NEW YORK (UPI) -- A jury ruled American Telephone & Telegraph Co.
infringed upon somebody else's patent for telephone switching
equipment and awarded the plaintiff $34.6 million, an attorney said
Thursday.

   AT&T contends the suit is without merit and said it will appeal the
verdict.

   The six-member jury at the federal district court in Midland,
Texas, returned its verdict Wednesday after having heard six days of
testimony in the case, brought against the telecommunications giant by
Collins Licensing L.P., of Dallas.

   The plaintiff's lawyer, Joseph Grear, of the Chicago-based firm of
Rolf Stadheim Ltd., held out the possibility that the total award
could go substantially higher, due to interest accruing back to 1985.
An AT&T spokesman dismissed the possibility.

   U.S. District Court Judge Lucius Bunton is considering the jury's
recommendation. Final motions in the case are to be made Feb. 14, and
the judge's ruling is expected within the month.

   Grear claimed AT&T's 5ESS digital central office switching device
infringed upon a 1976 federal patent for a "Time Space Time (TST)
Switch" awarded to the late Arthur A. Collins.

   Collins was the founder of Collins Radio Co., now a division of
Rockwell International Inc., of El Segundo, Calif.


   "Arthur Collins was a pioneer in the field of digital
telecommunications. The jury's verdict provides recognition of Mr.
Collins' substantial research and development investment in, and
important technical contributions to, the field of digital telephony,"
Grear said.

   AT&T's Network Systems division came out with the device in the
early 1980s, using it for central-office telephone switching equipment
used to route calls to the proper exchange and number.

   The suit, filed in December 1990, originally named Southwestern
Bell, of Dallas, as a co-defendent. That portion of the case, however,
was dismissed when the regional telephone company argued it had not
violated the patent because it did not make the disputed switching
equipment -- it had only bought it from AT&T.

   But AT&T contends that Collins' patent was not valid.

   Spokesman Curt Wilson said the Federal Patent Office is currently
examining the patent in question in a separate proceeding at the
request of both AT&T and Collins Licensing. "We think they will
invalidate that patent and we won't have to pay," he said.

   There is no firm time frame for the anticipated Patent Office ruling.

   Wilson added that even if the patent is found by the government to
have been valid, AT&T does not believe its equipment used Collins'
discovery, and thus feels it did not infringe upon the patent.

   "The jury found in our favor on seven of the original eight counts
of the suit," Wilson said, "and on the remaining claim, awarded them
$34 million, 70 times less than the amount they had originally
sought."

   We believe this suit is totally without merit," the spokesman
asserted. "The patent is not valid -- and we expect the patent office
to agree."

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: AXE Losing Trunk Links?
Organization: Curtin University of Technology
Date: Mon, 10 Feb 1992 13:29:29 GMT


Has any one any idea why a AXE exchange should not be able to access
its trunks?

Situation: call disconected from a cross-bar exchange to an AXE. Then
could not call ANY number except local (same exchange, not same
location.  Kalamunda has two exchanges, a cross-bar (293- ) and the new
AXE (257- )) IE you could call 257-1000 but not 293-2000. Calling 1100
(service faults) or 000 (emergency, 911 to US types) gave 15 seconds
of silence then 'number unavailable' tone!!

This is a worry as we have a volunteer Fire Brigade and the members on
257 numbers may have lost their fire phone service. Any AXE experts
out there any idears?

PS: Telecom Australia is giving their usual "no record of a fault ...
must be your phone ... " verbage.


Paul Repacholi

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

From: [e-mail] (Larry Appleman)
Subject: FCC on 800 Charges
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Mon, 10 Feb 1992 23:04:21 GMT


We've heard recently about 800 numbers that are not toll-free, which
raised questions about using such 800 numbers to circumvent 900
blocking, and about the possibility of confusing consumers who have
come to expect that all 800 numbers are free.

The FCC apparently has no qualms about the idea of pay-per-call 800
numbers.  When proposing the rule requiring pay-per-call numbers to
begin with a message disclosing price and allowing callers to hang up
with no charge, the FCC specifically brought up the possibility of
pay-per-call 800 numbers.  Summarizing the rule proposal, the F.C.C.
wrote that the rule was "intended to apply to interstate 900 Services.
We seek comment on whether they should also apply to interstate 700,
976, 540 and other similar services, including 800 services in those
instances where the call is not free to the caller."  56 FR 14049-02
(April 5, 1991).

The final rule doesn't expressly mention 800 numbers; it covers "all
interstate pay-per-call services."  56 FR 56160-01 (November 1, 1991).
But I wonder what the F.C.C. had in mind almost a year ago when it
referred to "800 services in those instances where the call is not
free to the caller"?


Larry Appleman    P.O. Box 214, Cambridge B, Mass. 02140

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: ATT Mail Charges (Again)
Date: Mon, 10 Feb 92 20:23:46 PST


A short time ago it appeared that the folks at ATT Mail were going to
reconsider the decision to implement a monthly service charge.  I had
cancelled the service but then was welcomed back and led to believe
that new pricing would be announced shortly.

Anyone actually know what the "new" pricing really is?  I was suprised
to find the following item in my recent billing:


Billed Activity                  Quantity    Price      Total Amount

Client Account: 222-8552   (!SKILE)

  Network Charges
    Monthly Service Fee                     1      $3.000        $3.00

Guess it's time to call ATT in the morning.  If anyone has anything
official on ATT Mail pricing I'm interested.


Steve Kile
[e-mail]  [e-mail]  [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Linda Suzanne Clark)
Subject: ISDN and Education
Organization: California State University, Chico
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 1992 04:27:11 GMT


Are also compiling a book of currently used distance education
technologies.  I would be very interested in anyone's experiences,
opinions, etc.

    I am new to this field so don't feel that anything may be too
simplistic for me.

    Thank you so much for your help.


Suzie Clark     California State University, Chico

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

From: [e-mail] (Coyt D Watters)
Subject: Info Request: "Polling Modems?"
Organization: The Ohio State University Hospitals
Date: Thu, 6 Feb 1992 20:09:01 GMT


This is an information request:

Please reply to [e-mail]

For a project which is under evaluation, I need information on
products which support the following situation.

Looking for program/hardware for PC which will allow a user to produce
a document and place it in an "outbox."  Our host will dial up the
user's PC and download documents/faxes into the user's "inbox," then
pull the documents from the users "outbox."  These documents would
then be forwarded to the proper agents at our site, who would put
together the responses and send them to the modem queue.  When their
time comes around again, the modem would connect to the user's system
and download the messages, check for new (loop).

The package handling the transfer should:

a) be small
b) run transparently to the user (i.e. background)

Users PCs would be running MSDOS and/or Windows.


Coyt D. Watters  [e-mail]

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

Subject: What Frequencies Does Touchtone Generate?
Date: Fri, 7 Feb 92 11:37:52 PST
From: group1![e-mail] (Van Bagnol)


This *must* be a FAQ (no pun intended), but I need to know the
frequencies generated by touch-tone dialing.

All I know is that there are a pair of frequencies for each key, each
frequency corresponding to the keypad "grid" coordinates of the key
pushed.

E-mail (or even Faxing) preferred over posting. Many thanks in advance!


Van Bagnol / Group One, Ltd. / [phone] / fax: [phone]
[e-mail] /


[Moderator's Note: Yes, this is a frequent question. Along with many
others, the answer to this will be found in the Telecom Archives,
accessible using anonymous ftp at lcs.mit.edu  (cd telecom-archives).
But I'm sure at least one or two readers here will send you the file
as well.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Dave Stoddard)
Date: 29 Jan 92  06:43:45
Subject: Panasonic KX-T2740


Hello all!

A friend purchased a Panasonic KX-T2740 dual-line answering machine,
which worked fine for two months.

Suddenly, the left column on the keypad will not function as they are
supposed to, but, for example "1" now toggles the speakerphone.

They assure me that neither gravity nor liquid refreshments were
involved.

So I'm wondering, does this appear to be a purely 'electronics are
broken' problem, or do you think it could be programmed to not work
properly?

Thanks!


reply to [e-mail]

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

Date: Mon, 10 Feb 92 14:30:56 CST
From: [e-mail] (Mike Riddle)
Subject: "Safe Fax"


                        GUIDE TO SAFE FAX


Q: Do I have to be married to have safe fax?

A: Although married people fax quite often, there are many single
people who fax complete strangers every day.

Q: My parents say they never had fax when they were young and were
only allowed to write memos to each other until they were 21.  How
old do you think someone should be before they fax?

A: Faxing can be performed at any age, once you learn the correct
procedure.

Q: If I fax something to myself, will I go blind?

A: Certainly not, as far as we can see.

Q: There is a place down the street where I can go and pay for fax.
Is this legal?

A: Yes, many people have no other outlet for the fax drives and
must pay a "professional" when their needs to fax become too great.

Q: Should a cover always be used for faxing?

A: Unless you are really sure of the one you're faxing, a cover
should be used to ensure safe fax.

Q: What happens when I incorrectly do the procedure and I fax
prematurely?

A: Don't panic.  Many people prematurely fax when they haven't
faxed in a long time.  Just start over; most people won't mind if
you try again.

Q: I have a personal and a business fax.  Can transmissions become
mixed up?

A: Being bi-faxual can be confusing, but as long as you use a cover
with each one, you won't transmit anything you are not supposed to.


Origin: The Nebraska Inns of Court (inns.omahug.org) (1:285/27)

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #127
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa20761;
          11 Feb 92 2:53 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA20037
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 11 Feb 1992 01:07:44 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA12229
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 11 Feb 1992 01:07:32 -0600
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 1992 01:07:32 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #128

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 11 Feb 92 01:07:30 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 128

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Cellular Calls From Airplanes on the Ground (J. Philip Miller)
    Cellular Phone Question ([e-mail])
    Cellular Equipment - Questions From a Novice ([e-mail])
    Re: Cellular Phones and Safety (John Schubert)
    Re: Cellular Phones and Safety (Kenneth R. Crudup)
    Re: Party Not Answering Phone (Floyd Davidson)
    Help Wanted Wiring Western Union Clock (Jim Hickstein)
    WECO 302 Telephone (Tony Harminc)
    Suggestions Needed For Purchasing a Large Switch (Dave Johnston)
    Connecting Computers to Hotel Phones (TELECOM Moderator)
    Shareware Communications Programs (Cleveland Hardin)
    MOH, Bad Manners, Poor Throughput, and Sprint (Jack Winslade)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (J. Philip Miller)
Subject: Cellular Calls From Airplanes on the Ground
Date: Mon, 10 Feb 92 5:34:26 CST


A small item in the {St. Louis Post Dispatch} business section 2/10
indicates that the regulations are in the process of being changed to
allow cellular calls while the plane is on the ground.  As previously
discussed here there are serious problems when trying to call while in
the air because of the increased range of transmission.


     J. Philip Miller, Professor, Division of Biostatistics, Box 8067
     Washington University Medical School, St. Louis MO 63110
         [e-mail] - Internet  [phone]
uunet!wuarchive!wubios!phil - UUCP [phone](FAX)  C90562JM@WUVMD - bitnet

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Cellular Phone Question
Date: 9 Feb 92 15:22:23 +1000
Organization: University of New South Wales


   I wondered if anyone can tell me if two cellular phones can have
the same phone number. I would like to know how to program a cellular
with the phone number. I understand that some cellular phones can be
programmed through the keypad and do not need a programming interface.

  If you have any information on how to program a cellular phone
please E-mail.


Joe      University of NSW,  Sydney Australia.


[Moderator's Note: You cannot have two or more cellular phones with
the same number. Unlike wired phones, cell phones cannot have the
equivilent of an 'extension phone'. This has to do with the security
involved in checking the electronic serial number when calls are
placed or received.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Cellular Equipment - Questions From a Novice
Date: 9 Feb 92 10:22:57 CST
Organization: University of Kansas Academic Computing Services


I will soon become a new cellular user, and have a question on
cellular equipment.  I can buy a used phone, the NEC EZ-2400-A for 1/3
the price of a new model made for Southwestern Bell Mobile Systems.
The NEC sounds just OK -- when you use it the called party knows you're
on a cellular phone.  FYI, the NEC was manufactured in 1988.

My question is which, if either, to purchase?  Has technology
increased to where a new phone is better than one three years old?
How?  Does anybody make a phone that sounds as good as one in the
home?  Ideally I'd like people not to know I'm on a cellular phone.

Thanks.  E-mail replies are appreciated.  I'll post or e-mail
a summary upon request.


Mark    [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: The newer phones are lighter and the batteries seem
to last longer between charges. If the phone is three or more years
old, it would have been manufactured about the time the spectrum was
increased to 832 channels. You'll want to make sure the phone has all
of them. The older phones are limited to fewer channels.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (John Schubert)
Subject: Re: Cellular Phones and Safety
Reply-To: [e-mail] (John Schubert)
Organization: U.C. Berkeley -- ERL
Date: Sun, 9 Feb 1992 08:45:40 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> Steve Forrette <stevef@
wrq.com> writes:

> As far as my personal expreiences go, I find that I tend to get
> distracted when talking on the handset while driving.  I have to make
> it a point to pay attention to driving.  It is interesting to note
> that this does not happen when I use the hands-free.  After all, I can
> talk to passengers while driving just fine.  I think it is more
> related to being accustomed to not paying attention to what I'm
> looking at when holding the landline phone at home or office.

Well now I think I finally understand why you missed all of those
freeway offramps while we were talking on the phone Steve!!

But as far as my personal experiences (being a listener to "someone"
who is driving and talking on a cellular phone at the same time) it is
the next best thing to actually being there.

Of course this works out best when the hands-free feature is in use.
That way any "sound", whether it is generated from within or outside
of the vehicle in question, gets transmitted with quite a bit of
clarity.


John Schubert     [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Kenneth R Crudup)
Subject: Re: Cellular Phones and Safety
Organization: Software Tool&Die, (Boston), MA
Date: Mon, 10 Feb 1992 07:58:12 GMT


Someone mentioned that they get distracted when they talk on the
cellular phone, and that they have to make special efforts to drive
(properly).  Conversely, people hate talking to me when I'm driving -- I
will "er" and "um" and even drop the phone when the car is moving, as
I tend to put driving first (translation -- I'm probably cutting someone
off or trying to merge, or make a light :-). One day I'm going to have
to get a handsfree.


Kenny Crudup, Unix Systems Consultant    [e-mail]
16 Plainfield St. Jamaica Plain, (Boston), MA 02130-3633
Home [phone]     Home Fax [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Floyd Davidson)
Subject: Re: Party Not Answering Phone
Organization: University of Alaska Institute of Marine Science
Date: Sun, 9 Feb 1992 12:52:29 GMT


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

> In article <[e-mail]> TELECOM Moderator notes:

>> [Larry King] was letting the incoming lines ring for 30-40 minutes
>> at a time; AT&T circuits were in use all that time on a non-revenue

> What exactly that AT&T owns is tied up and unavailable to sell to
> someone else when the phone is ringing but no one picks it up?

> [Moderator's Note: What is unavailable all that time is the common
> equipment in the central office used for ringing and switching of
> calls. ... In addition, circuits between central offices are
> shared by all subscribers.  PAT]

The big thing is the toll trunk.  Consider a 27 minute period of
ringing and three minutes of talking type call.  The toll trunk is
connected all the way through for the entire 30 minutes, and only
three minutes is paid for.


Floyd L. Davidson        [e-mail]        Salcha, Alaska

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

Date: Sat, 8 Feb 92 13:18:58 PST
From: [e-mail] (Jim Hickstein)
Subject: Help Wanted Wiring Western Union Clock


After reading some months ago about the WU Time Service, and how some
of these self-winding clocks were floating around, I happened upon one
and immediately snapped it up.  Now, I'm trying to find the articles
about it in the Telecom Archives, but without success.  Can someone
point me to a store of this information, or at least the name and/or
email address of someone who also has one of these things?  I have it
running on its winding battery, but its setting-pulse wiring is
missing, and it has mechanical adjustments needed, I think.  I'd like
to see one that's running well and being set, to observe its action;
even better, to find a manual for it.  (Well, I can dream, can't I?)


Jim Hickstein, Teradyne/Attain, San Jose CA, [phone] FAX -0252
[e-mail] ...!{decwrl!teda,apple}!attain!jxh


[Moderator's Note: All the setting circuit wiring does is runs down to
the armature in the center which grips the minute hand when it is
within two minutes either side of the hour. When the magnet there is
energized the metal piece drops over the gear and moves it either way
as appropriate. Run any pair of wires down there and feed it from a
nine volt battery. To adjust the clock so it runs accurately, first
make absolutely certain it is hanging *perfectly level*. Then turn the
set screw in the pendulum *very slowly* about a quarter revolution at
most. A full revolution either way adjusts the clock by two minutes
per 24 hours. Set the clock to the exact time and watch it for a day.
Make further adjustments in the set screw as needed, reset the clock
and watch another day, etc.  Even without a setting circuit I have my
two clocks accurate to about five seconds per day. About once a month
or when I think of it I apply a nine volt battery to the setting
wires. I had not set my clocks for about three months (forgot about
it) and one of the two was about five minutes fast. The other was
about five minutes slow. WUTCO used to calibrate them *hourly*.  PAT]

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

Date: Mon, 10 Feb 92 17:12:41 EST
From: Tony Harminc <[e-mail]>
Subject: WECO 302 Telephone


I've seen a Western Electric model 302 "candlestick" telephone in a
store recently.  It is nickel plated, and in apparently good
condition.

Would anyone be willing to suggest what this should sell for ?  I like
it but I don't want to pay a ripoff price if these things are not as
rare as I think.


Tony H.


[Moderator's Note: Ask telco, and they'll tell you it isn't worth five
cents! Put it on the line and you will see the transmission is very
poor by modern standards. As purely an exhibit item, $100 would be
fair, maybe more if it is in really good condition.   PAT]

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

From: Dave Johnston  <[e-mail]>
Date: 7 Feb 92 15:44:48 PST
Subject: Suggestions Needed For Purchasing a Large Switch


I recently sent a submission asking for input from folks who managed
phone systems over 500 lines and especially those with networking.
Then the next day we changed our central EMAIL system and now my old
address bounces mail.

I would still like to hear from the above regarding their experiences
with their vendor, the general impression of the equipment,
reliability, technology, etc.

Sorry for the SNAFU.


Dave Johnston                     Santa Rosa Junior College
Supervisor, Campus Data/Telecom         1501 Mendocino Ave.
[e-mail]                 Santa Rosa, CA  95401
Voice [phone]                   Fax [phone]

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

Date: Tue, 11 Feb 1992 00:08:24 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Subject: Connecting Computers to Hotel Phones


Jeff Sicherman recently sent a file to the Telecom Archives which was
an article he found elsewhere suitable for the recent thread here on
acoustic modems. This file discusses hooking modems and computers to
phones in hotels, and similar places.

If you want a copy, pick it up at the Telecom Archives using anonymous
ftp to lcs.mit.edu. You must then cd telecom-archives. Look for the
file 'modems.and.hotel.phones'.

Thanks Jeff!


PAT

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

From: [e-mail] (Cleveland Hardin)
Subject: Shareware Communications Programs
Organization: Illinois Institute of Technology, Chicago
Date: Mon, 10 Feb 92 18:47:00 GMT


I will be getting my first modem soon and I am looking for a good
communications program.  I wanted to get opinions on the best program
to use. I am mainly interested in ease of use and features.  I am
running an IBM compatible under DOS 5.0.  I would appreciate replies
through e-mail since I am not a regular reader of this newsgroup.  If
I get a lot of replies I'll post a summary in a week or so.

Thanks in advance.


C.A. Hardin    [e-mail]

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

Date: Mon, 10 Feb 92 20:55:19 CST
From: [e-mail] (Jack Winslade)
Subject: MOH, Bad Manners, Poor Throughput, and Sprint
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: DRBBS Technical BBS, Omaha


I had prepared this first part as a reply via private mail, but when a
second query came in about it, I figured I may have used a nonstandard
TLA, so ...

>> This morning I phoned the Sprint customer service line.  After the
>> mandatory MOH, I explained that I was having difficulty with the
             ^^^
> Please decrypt this acronym.  I've never heard it before!

Ah, yes, Music On Hold.  I've always figured it must have been the
invention of some guy with the brains of a retarded houseplant!
Believe me, NOTHING is going to make me less impatient as I sit there
on perpetual hold as Ma Bell's meter keeps on running, let alone a
stringy, anemic rendition of Michael Jackson's 'Beat It' played over a
long-haul voice circuit. :-(

Let's face it, gang, MOH says one thing.  'We are too busy to talk to
you now and we will get to you when we are good and ready to do so.'

I consider MOH to be the SECOND rudest thing a called party can do to
me.  The rudest is for the answering party to immediately say 'Good
morning, XYZ Corporation, can you hold ...' to which my answer is
always 'no I cannot.'  That answer usually leaves them dumbfounded, as
if they had never heard it before.

I've always wondered what the reaction would be --- (We have a
three-digit code on our campus phone system that puts MOH on a parked
call.  It's the campus radio station, mostly classical, and it is not
too bad, for MOH that is.) --- if I would say to the Sprint rep, or to
anyone else with a cronic MOH habit, 'hold on a minute' <click> ...
give THEM MOH and let THEM wait.  ;-)

On a similar subject.  It was interesting to hear that Muzak <tm>
cycles on and off in 15 minute intervals.  I had never noticed that.
(Philosophical question: If Muzak were playing in the middle of a
forest, with nobody around to hear it, would it still be obnoxious ??)

Sprint update: (My previous post on Sprint's failure to call back,
after they told me twice they would do so within four hours.)  It's
now Monday at about 2040, about 80+ hours.  No call.  Maybe Sprint's
clock has stopped.  :-( I wonder if they are going for a record.
Again, I ask, ANY SPRINT MANAGEMENT PEOPLE READING THIS ??

However, the trouble magically disappeared on Friday at the 2300
session and looks like it is fixed for good.  The log did show one
failed session on Sunday, but I didn't see it, so I cannot tell for
sure if it was a cruddy connection or something else.

Also, nobody from Sprint apparently reads this group, at least nobody
wanted to write back to me about it.  I did, however, receive a note
from someone from AT&T saying that yes, they would gladly take the
business.  They may just get it too, not only for the Iowa City
connection, but for Uunet <Falls Church, Va> as well, if the numbers I
got in the following reply are duplicated when I make some tests of
AT&T v. Sprint using PEP.

> There has been discussion of just this type of Sprint connection on
> "uunet.forum".

> It appears that calls via AT&T get 10%-30% faster throughput on
> Telebit Trailblasers.  There appears to be a serious quality problem
> on Sprint lines.  Appended is a note to this affect.

> Using Sprint ...

{several deleted}       size      CPS
    (2/3-5:03:18)     140853      736
    (2/3-5:07:40)     143493      564   <--- OUCH!  {JSW's note}
    (2/3-5:11:29)      36584      988
    (2/4-5:48:53)     195523     1048
    (2/4-5:52:54)     199463      844

This is typical of what I get from Uunet using Sprint.

> Using AT&T ...

    (2/5-6:00:12)     185503     1107
    (2/5-6:03:17)     212443     1191
    (2/5-6:06:07)     157461      978
    (2/5-6:08:51)     172279     1096
    (2/5-6:11:38)     201786     1262
    (2/5-6:13:59)     142847     1065
    (2/5-6:16:09)     150306     1248
    (2/6-5:43:29)     213781     1312

This is closer to what I would like to see.  I occasionally get
1200-1300 using Sprint, but this is rare.  I am going to experiment
between the two and I'll report back.  BTW, on this same box I can get
1500+ cps in either direction using PEP on a local call.

Well, that's enough ranting for tonight.


Good day       JSW

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #128
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa22015;
          11 Feb 92 3:23 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA09686
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 11 Feb 1992 01:36:26 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA01455
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 11 Feb 1992 01:36:15 -0600
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 1992 01:36:15 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #129

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 11 Feb 92 01:36:01 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 129

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Incoming Calls Problem (Jim Redelfs)
    Re: Incoming Calls Problem (Patton M. Turner)
    Re: NPA Split Planned For 803? (S. Spencer Sun)
    Re: McGraw-Hill Sells BIX to Delphi's Owners 02/03/92 (Bob Hofkin)
    Re: Answer Supervision on Lines (Vance Shipley)
    Re: When Did the LEC's Start to Die? (Maxime Taksar)
    Re: Question on NY Tel's Capabilities (David Niebuhr)
    Re: Toll Free Call For UNIX System V Source Code (Scott Dorsey)
    Re: New Undersea Cable for Caribbean (Tom Gray)
    Re: 900 Phone Guide Magazine (Robert J. Woodhead)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Thu, 06 Feb 92 21:13:20 cst
From: [e-mail] (Jim Redelfs)
Subject: Re: Incoming Calls Problem
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: DRBBS Technical BBS, Omaha


Lance Sanders wrote:

> A friend recently complained...that I never answered the phone
> anymore, and moreover, why did I take the answering machine offline?
> ...I heard an extremely brief blip from my phone, picked up, and
> took a call.

> ...I switched [the set] with the downstairs trimline to make sure,
> and...Again, just the faintest blip of a ring. When I picked up, the
> connection was normal. There are no problems with outgoing calls...
> and from the caller's end, the line rings normally.

> ...how is it possible that my phone doesn't ring (except for that
> occassional brief blip)??? Can't my answering machine (also
> functioning properly) pick-up, even though the rings aren't audible?

> Can the _strenth_ of an incoming signal (call) be diminished so the
> bell doesn't ring, but no other aspect of the service is affected?

Yes.  This same problem befell my service immediately after I added
FIVE, new sets (four 2500s and one 2554) to my already burgeoning
collection.

The most likely cause of your problem is TOO MANY ringers bridged
across the line.  This condition will also cause your answering
machine to NOT pick-up a call since it is triggered by ringing
current.

The Central Office only has so much "poop" with which to ring your
line.  Generally, five "ringers" is considered the max.  Of course,
the distance from the C.O. is a factor, as is the "R.E.N." total for
the line.

Every device (telephone, answering machine, modem, security system,
etc.)  has an R.E.N. - a Ringer Equivalence Number.  That number can
be found on the registration tag somewhere on the device.

When the equipment manufacturing field was opened to competition, the
F.C.C.  wisely agreed with the Bell System that some form of STANDARD
should be adopted.  The two-bell ringer found in the old fashioned
desk phone (model 500 [rotary] or 2500 [TouchTone]) was established as
the standard.  Those telephones have a R.E.N. of 1B or one bell.  The
amount of current required to "ring" other devices are rated in
comparison to that standard and are tagged accordingly: .7B or 1.4B,
etc.

Shortly after plugging-in my five, "new" sets, I was sitting by one,
reading the paper when I heard a faint groan-like sound coming from
the device.  I picked it up to find a caller on line, none the wiser.

The cause was (to me) immediately apparent: I had SO MANY ringers on
the line that the Central Office could not properly ring them all.

Telco doesn't care if you have a "million" telephone devices attached
to the line since it is likely you will not have more than one or two
of them off-hook at the same time.  Ringing them all is another
matter.

The solution for MY situation was simple: I had to physically
disconnect the ringer inside enough telephones so that the rest of
them would ring.

The solution for you may not be so easy since it is just as likely as
not that you do NOT have telephones that come apart easily or are
worked on easily.  With the new, electronic telephones, I am not sure
if simply switching the ringer OFF will do the trick.  I suspect it
will not.

If you do NOT have a BUNCH of telephone devices on your line, then the
culprit is likely a single set that is defective and drawing WAY too
much ringing current.  Disconnect one phone/device at a time and have
a friend ring your number after each change.  Note the performance.
You should be able to isolate the offending set quite easily.

> Is this a common service problem?  I've never had it happen to me before.

No.  Fortunately it is rare.  The new generation of phones do not
require nearly as much current to "ring" as do the old ones.

I had a customer with a "Quarry Horn" (AC-powered, phone-line
triggered "ringer" - truly a loud enunciator designed to be heard
above the noise of construction equipment) on the outside of her
(fortunately) rural residence.  It rattled the windows.  One day, all
phones quit ringing.  I traced the problem to her latest acquisition:
an imported Italian antique telephone that, by itself, PEGGED my ohm
meter!  It must've sucked-up 3-4 bells of ringing current.

I explained that it was either the Italian "boat anchor" (VERY ugly
phone) or the Quarry Horn that had to go.  She had me silence the
phone.  To this day, neighbors for a mile around know whenever she
gets a call (she never had us install a switch for the horn!).


JR  Tabby 2.2   MacNet Omaha [phone]  -  O.M.U.G. On-Line  (1:285/14)

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

Date: Sun, 9 Feb 92 17:54:48 CST
From: Patton M. Turner <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Incoming Calls Problem


[e-mail] (Jim Redelfs) writes:

> When the equipment manufacturing field was opened to competition, the
> F.C.C.  wisely agreed with the Bell System that some form of STANDARD
> should be adopted.  The two-bell ringer found in the old fashioned
> desk phone (model 500 [rotary] or 2500 [TouchTone]) was established as
> the standard.  Those telephones have a R.E.N. of 1B or one bell.  The
> amount of current required to "ring" other devices are rated in
> comparison to that standard and are tagged accordingly: .7B or 1.4B,
> etc.

I beleve B refers to the frequency selectivity of the ringer, and
doesn't stand for bell.  I think A ringers respond to voltages in the
20 to 30 Hz range, while B ringers are more broadbanded.  Every 2500
set I have had experience with is rated at 1.0 A.  I suspect the
standards for A, B, and all the other ringer classes could be found in
part 68 of the FCC regs.

My experience confirms what Jim said about turning off electronic
ringers not reducing the load.  Turning off an electromechanical
ringer will not affect the load either, as all you are really doing is
insuring the clapper won't strike the gong.


Pat Turner    [e-mail]     KB4GRZ @ K4RY.AL.USA

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

From: [e-mail] (S. Spencer Sun)
Subject: Re: NPA Split Planned For 803?
Organization: Princeton Univ. Class of '94
Date: Sun, 9 Feb 1992 23:15:09 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> Carl Moore (VLD/VMB)
<[e-mail]> writes:

> How high up on the list is 803 w/r to number of exchanges?  I don't
> even have it listed as having N0X/N1X prefixes.

> 803 is in South Carolina, whose neighbor states have had to program
> for N0X/N1X prefixes:

I could be mistaken, but I do not believe there were or are any N0X or
N1X prefixes in 301 (never saw one anyway, although I fully
acknowledge that is far from saying that there absolutely raen't any)
and we're splitting into 410/301 anyway ...

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

From: [e-mail] (Bob Hofkin)
Subject: Re: McGraw-Hill Sells BIX to Delphi's Owners 02/03/92
Organization: Software Productivity Consortium, Herndon, Virginia
Date: Mon, 10 Feb 1992 00:33:20 GMT


I'm a moderator for BIX, so I have some insight into its operation,
but certainly nothing approximating spokesmanship.

Internet mail is important to the people who run BIX, but it probably
was caught in the capital spending freeze imposed late last year.
I've been told that GVC likes BIX and wants to revitalize it.  From a
current discussion among the moderators, Internet mail is far from
dead.


Bob Hofkin

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

From: [e-mail] (Vance Shipley)
Subject: Re: Answer Supervision on Lines
Organization: SwitchView Inc., Waterloo, Ontario
Date: Sun, 09 Feb 1992 23:03:57 GMT


About a year ago I purchased a copy of the technical interface
specifications for a new service offering from US West; Answer
Supervision-Line Side.

Excerpts from same follow:

ANSWER SUPERVISION-LINE SIDE        PUB 77336 ISSUE A, JUNE 1990

2.00    Purpose

2.02    Answer Supervision-Line Side provides an electrical signal
that is passed back to the originating end of a switched connection.
This signal indicates that the called line has gone off-hook.  This
service offering has applicability for billing record start and end,
announcement start and end, dialtone reorigination prevention, call
progress sequence indications, and other uses.  This service offering
may be used by terminal equipment (PBX, pay telephone, call diverter,
etc.) connected to the calling line to determine that the call has
been answered.

2.03    Previously, this signal was available on trunks, not lines.
At present the Disconnect Timer returns the line to an idle or normal
state upon termination of the call by the called party.  This timer
provides the only indication to the originating end that the called
party has terminated the call.  This disconnect timer has a lengthy
time-out interval.  This interval may be too long when used with
equipment that may depend on short intervals.

3.01    Signaling

A. This service provides the capability to deliver "off-hook" signals
from the terminating central office to a line interface at the
originating central office.  This signal is a polarity reversal of the
tip and ring conductors (tip-ring reversal) of the metallic facility
between the calling customer and the serving central office.  This
signal (2 to 3 sec.), indicates that the called station has answered
the incoming call.  The same situation occurs when the called party
disconnects prior to the calling party disconnecting.  At present,
this feature is only available in the DMS family of digital switches,
ie., (DMS10, DMS 100).

B. Answer indication is a reversal of -48 Volts and Ground at the
interface between the Tip and Ring conductors of a 2-wire pair.  At
the time of answer, Tip and Ring are interchanged by the switching
machine, so that the tip is now more negative than the ring.  This
reversal persists at least until the called line goes on hook, and
possibly until the calling line goes on hook.  All of the other
electrical characteristics on a line equipped for answer supervision
are identical to those of a normal line.

In article <[e-mail]> tim gorman <71336.1270@
CompuServe.COM> writes:

> LRA - Line Reversal on Answer (International Loads Only). On calls
> originating from a PBX line, the call is routed and connected as a
> regular call. When the far end answers and the line has the LRA line
> option, reversal is applied to the line.

> As noted, NTI provides this option only on international software
> loads, not domestic US software loads, at least according to my issue
> of their documentation.

I suspect that US West are simply using this "International" feature.
It reminds me of Northern's so called "Japan Only" features for the
Meridian SL-1 PBX.  Normally in the SL-1 call detail recording has an
accuracy of two seconds, that is that all call durations are given in
multiples of two seconds.  There is a feature that is called "Half
Second CDR Accuracy: for Japan" (or something like that).  I have
often turned this on, and it works fine.


Vance Shipley
[e-mail]   [e-mail]   ..uunet!watmath!xenitec!vances

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

From: [e-mail] (Maxime Taksar)
Subject: Re: When Did the LEC's Start to Die?
Date: 10 Feb 1992 09:55:22 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Maxime Taksar)


In article <[e-mail]>, Jack Decker <Jack@myamiga.
mixcom.com> writes:

> What does puzzle me is why no one has ever really jumped on the idea
> of using radio as an alternative to the phone system.  The airwaves,
> after all, are free.  It would be feasible using current technology to

Bzzt, but thank you for playing.

The airwaves are 'free' in the sense that they don't cost anything to
maintain.  However, they're far from 'free' in the sense that they're
extremely crowded.

Also, from the extremely small experience I have as a new amateur
radio person, I can tell you that much of your scheme is not in touch
with reality.  I'd suggest you find about more about radio and its
workings before feeling threatened by the phone company.  :-)


Maxime Taksar             KC6ZPS            [e-mail]

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

Date: Mon, 10 Feb 92 06:18:05 -0500
From: [e-mail] (david niebuhr)
Subject: Re: Question on NY Tel's Capabilities


In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Gil Kloepfer
Jr.) writes:

> In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Scott Barman)
> writes:

>> ...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 I recall, you can dial the first three-digits of your phone number
> with 9901 on the end (ie. NNX-9901) and in most exchanges you get a
> recording telling you the exchange and type of equipment (for example,
> dialing [phone] will say, "You have reached the Bay Shore DMS
> serving [blah blah blah].")  This may have changed since I moved to
> Texas a year and a half ago.

Actually, NNX-9901 can be called from any exchange, not necessarily
your home exchange.  I just tried this with the 281, 727 and 924
exchanges.  Trying the 282 exchange (same CO as 924) gave a lot of
different tones but no message.


Dave Niebuhr      Internet: [e-mail] / Bitnet: niebuhr@bnl
Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, NY 11973  (516)-282-3093

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

From: [e-mail] ( Scott Dorsey)
Subject: Re: Toll Free Call For UNIX System V Source Code
Organization: NASA Langley Research Center
Date: Mon, 10 Feb 1992 14:05:03 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Dave Levenson) writes:

> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Syd
> Weinstein) writes:

>> In my local Bell of PA directory ... one of the 800 numbers is
>> listed as "UNIX System V Source Code".

>> Gee, is the source code free for calling? :-)

> This listing also appears in the local NJ Bell white pages in Morris
> County.  The toll-free number listed with this name is 828-UNIX, which
> will get you to the people who provide source licenses to this
> product.  The call is toll-free.  The source license is not!

About three years ago, I was in a hospital in Atlanta, and since I had
not planned to be there, I did not have anything with me to do.  So I
spent some time thumbing through the phone book, and came across an
identical entry.  When I called it, the folks at the other end were
from AT&T, but had never heard of Unix before.


scott

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

From: [e-mail] (Tom Gray)
Subject: Re: New Undersea Cable for Caribbean
Date: Mon, 10 Feb 1992 08:47:25 -0500
Organization: Mitel. Kanata (Ontario). Canada.


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

> In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Andy
> Sherman) writes:

>> From a recent AT&T press release:

> 6 * 560 Mbps / 225,000 calls = 14.9 Kbps.  This is a heck of a
> compression rate.  Is this correct?

It is an easily achievable compression ratio.

Standard PCM - 64kbps
ADPCM transcoded - 32 kbps

Now do DSI - a fancy name for silence suppression
           - that is detect and transmit only the
             active speaker
           - a speaker will be active about 40%
             of the time

DSI compressed - 32Kbps*.4 = 12.8 kbps

The remainder of the 14.9 is probably used for signalling and packet
overhead.

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

From: [e-mail] (Robert J Woodhead)
Subject: Re: 900 Phone Guide Magazine
Organization: Foretune Co., Ltd.
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 1992 05:51:23 GMT


wybbs![e-mail] (Ken Jongsma) writes:

> The cover has a price of .95 per quarterly issue.

Are you sure it wasn't 95 cents for each minute you spent reading the
magazine?  I'd check your next phone bill if I were you ... ;^)


Robert J. Woodhead, Biar Games / AnimEigo, Incs. [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #129
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa24284;
          11 Feb 92 4:20 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA11119
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 11 Feb 1992 02:28:47 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA19624
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 11 Feb 1992 02:28:27 -0600
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 1992 02:28:27 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #130

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 11 Feb 92 02:28:21 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 130

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: What the ^&$%# is Going on With Sprint!?? (John A. Weeks III)
    Re: What the ^&$%# is Going on With Sprint!?? (Harold Hallikainen)
    Re: Looking For TDD Information (Dick Barth)
    Re: Looking For TDD Information (Toby Nixon)
    Re: Looking For TDD Information (George Hickok)
    Re: States with Relay Services (Dell H. Ellison)
    Re: New England Telephone Refiles For CLASS Without Caller ID (Adam Gaffin)
    Re: Plain Paper Fax/Modems (David Y. Chang)
    Re: V&H Tape Statistics (John W. Shaver)
    Re: Information Wanted on History of Muzak (Mathew Zank)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: plains!umn-cs!newave![e-mail] (John A. Weeks III)
Subject: Re: What the ^&$%# is Going on With Sprint!??
Date: 11 Feb 92 03:23:23 GMT
Reply-To: plains!umn-cs!newave![e-mail] (John A. Weeks III)
Organization: NeWave Communications Ltd, Lake Wobegon, MN


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

> 2300: On a hunch, and just for the heck of it, I changed the dialing
> script back to put Sprint's prefix in.  [...]  Will wonders ever cease
> ??  I dunno what they did, but the problem magically disappeared
> between last night and tonight.

I have had this happen a number of times with Sprint.  I sometimes
have trouble getting V.32 calls to go through, but they work fine when
I dial 10222 or 10288 before dialing the number.  Sprint tells me
there is nothing wrong, then things magically start working after a
few hours.

I had a similar thing happen on occasion with some of our Sprint
leased lines.  The line will be dead, and Sprint will tell me that it
is OK.  It will have magically fixed itself after Sprint tells me that
there is nothing wrong.


John A. Weeks III               [phone]             [e-mail]
NeWave Communications, Ltd.           ...uunet!umn-cs!kksys!tcnet!newave!john
Note: mail to Minnesota is currently broken. Use bang path if mn.org bounces.

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

Date: Mon, 10 Feb 92 14:24:31 -0800
From: [e-mail] (Harold Hallikainen)
Subject: Re: What the ^&$%# is Going on With Sprint!??
Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo


> [Moderator's Note: A few lines garbled in transmission were lost at
> this point ... then he continues ...]

Hmmm ... was Sprint used for the modem connection?


[Moderator's Note: Well, that I don't know. I do know that stuff sent
to me from jsw will have garbage in the middle of it as often as not.
Sometimes it is easy to pick out without losing any text, while some
messages have a line (or two or three) of text messed up. I think it
must have to do with it coming here from Fido, but yet that does not
make a lot of sense either, since other people get through okay.  PAT]

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

From: rbarth@ka3ovk (Dick Barth)
Subject: Re: Looking For TDD Information
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Dick Barth)
Organization: Internal Revenue Service, Washington, DC
Date: Sat, 08 Feb 92 20:48:04 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Steve
M. Hoffman) writes:
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 117, Message 10 of 12

> I'm looking for details on TDD.  I'm interesting in writing some
> software to emulate a TDD device so I can talk to a deaf friend
> without the use of a relay service via my computer.

First, there are some newer (and more expensive) TDDs that provide
ASCII capability at 110 or 300 baud in addition to normal TDD mode.  I
assume your friend doesn't have one of these. You might want to check.

TDD uses the Baudot code, not ASCII.  In particular it uses the
variant of Baudot that my elderly ITT Handbook refers to as the
"military version"; this version is also used in amateur radio
circles, so if you don't have the ITT Handbook, check the ARRL
Handbook.

TDD modems use FSK, like the Bell-103.  The tone pair is entirely
different, so TDDs are not compatible with standard ASCII modems.  The
tone pair is 1400 Hz Mark and 1800 Space, the same pair used in both
directions.  As is obvious, each TDD has to shut its tones off when
it's not busy sending something.

TDD modems can be bought commercially from several sources.  For a
list of those I know about, download "compare.tty" from file area two
of the HEX BBS.  Phone numbers below.

You can build a TDD modem fairly easily using chips like the EXAR 2206
and 2211; we're talking simple, low-rate FSK here.  You can also
modify an older -103 type to use the TDD tone pair.

Sample code for ASCII/Baudot conversion is also available (in C) from
the HEX.

Also available: public domain software (by John Spalding) which allows
the IBM-PC and PCjr, and the Color Computer, to talk to TDDs without a
modem.  This code uses the computer's cassette port to emulate a
modem.  Similiar code could probably be ginned up for other machines
that have cassette ports.  Full documentation, source and PC
executable are in "tdd56.zip", also file area two.

Good luck.  Yell if any questions.


Richard Barth, W3HWN **** HEX, the Handicapped Educational Exchange BBS
[phone] (TDD and 300 baud)    | Domain: [e-mail]
[phone] (300-2400 ASCII)      | UUCP:   uunet!media!ka3ovk!rbarth

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

From: Toby Nixon <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Looking For TDD Information
Date: 10 Feb 92 15:49:05 GMT
Organization: Hayes Microcomputer Products, Norcross, GA


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

> I'm looking for details on TDD.  I'm interesting in writing some
> software to emulate a TDD device so I can talk to a deaf friend
> without the use of a relay service via my computer.

Steve, it takes more than software to make a computer modem talk to a
TDD.  TDDs use a special half-duplex FSK modulation scheme.  Both
devices on a line use the same frequencies (I believe it is 1400 Hz
mark and 1800Hz space, or vice-versa) at 45.45 baud; the carrier is
turned on only long enough to send each character when you press a
key.  The data is coded in baudot (5 bits per character, like a telex
machine).  Normal data modem use Bell 103 modulation at 0-300 bps,
which is a continuous carrier with different frequencies used by the
originating and answering device, full-duplex, and most such modems
support only 10-bit characters.

There are some TDDs in use today which are switchable between the
traditional TDD modulation/format and "ASCII" -- which means ASCII
character set and Bell 103 modulation.  There are also some modems
available which support both Bell 103 and TDD modulation, but they're
pretty expensive for what you get.  Here are the names and contact
information for three companies that provide such modems:

    Ultratec
    P.O. Box 4040
    Madison, WI 53711
    608-273-0707

    PHONE-TTY Incorporated
    202 Lexington Ave
    Hackensack, New Jersey  07601
    201-489-7889  Voice
    201-489-7890  PTTY
    201-489-7891  FAX

    Krown Research, Inc.
    10371 W. Jefferson Blvd.
    Culver City, CA 90232
    213/839-0181
    [phone] Voice/TDD in California
    [phone] Voice/TDD Toll Free Outside California

Note that CCITT Study Group XVII is currently studying the addition of
an appendix to Recommendation V.22bis which would specify "automode"
and interworking procedures for combined TDD/V.22bis modems.  TDD has
never been standardized before, which is one reason so few modem
companies (and no major ones) supply TDD capability in their products.
But when this CCITT standard is done, TDD capability should become
much more widely available in data modems.


Toby Nixon, Principal Engineer      | Voice   [phone]  Telex 151243420
Hayes Microcomputer Products, Inc.  | Fax     [phone]  CIS   70271,404
P.O. Box 105203                     | BBS     [phone]  AT&T    !tnixon
Atlanta, Georgia  30348             | UUCP uunet!hayes!tnixon  Fido   1:114/15
USA                                 | Internet                [e-mail]

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

Date: Mon, 10 Feb 92 20:27:59 PST
From: [e-mail] (George Hickok ext 2621)
Subject: Re: Looking For TDD Information


Regarding the specs for TDD: I got interested in this several years
ago, and went so far as to build a prototype interface. The basics
that I started from are as follows:

TDD runs at 45.45 baud, using 1 start bit, 5 data bits, and 1.5 stop
bits. The code is a 5 level TTY (Badot?) code. The modem frequencies
are: 1400. Hz mark and 1800. Hz space, with transmission tolerance of
+- 1 percent, and receiver tolerance of +- 4 percent on the mark, and
+-5 percent on the space. A rather vague note suggests a maximum
transmission level of -4 dbm.

The tone turns on with the start bit, and holds for 180. to 250. mSec
after the stop bit, and then stops sending (unless another key is
struck). This allows both ends to send using the same tones.

It was suggested that these specs were chosen to insure that any
equipment which was converted for use in this service would not be
usable for any other service.  It is also possible that it was done to
make the modem simple and low in cost to implemement. I suppose lots
of old TTY equipment got a new lease on life by being converted to
this use.


Hope this helps ... (Usual Disclaimers Apply)
Email: [e-mail]  Voicemail: [phone] x2621

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

From: [e-mail] (Dell H. Ellison)
Subject: Re: States with Relay Services
Organization: Motorola Inc., Cellular Infrastructure Group
Date: Fri, 7 Feb 1992 20:01:48 GMT


"Joshua E. Muskovitz" <[e-mail]> writes:

> 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.

Who says that they're a public utility?

Of course, the phone companies would like us to call phone service a
public utility ...


Dell H. Ellison  ...!uunet!mcdchg!motcid!ellisond   Motorola, Inc.

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

From: [e-mail] (Adam M Gaffin)
Subject: Re: New England Telephone Refiles For CLASS Without Caller ID
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Sat, 8 Feb 1992 03:31:32 GMT


My thanks to John Covert for the original posting, without which I
never would have known to ask about this!

Middlesex News, Framingham, Mass., 2/8/92

By Adam Gaffin
NEWS STAFF WRITER

     New England Telephone has dropped plans to offer a controversial
"caller ID" service, saying the state made it too difficult to market
by making it too easy to evade.

     The state Department of Public Utilities approved the proposed
service last October. With a caller-ID device, a person could see the
originating numbers of incoming phone calls.

     But the department also required the company to offer a free
"per-line" blocking that would automatically prevent a caller's number
from ever showing up on the devices.

     The department ruling went beyond caller-ID decisions by other
states, which have generally required only "per-call" blocking, in
which a caller has to hit a three-button code for every call if she
wants to keep from appearing on one of the devices, rather than having
all of her calls blocked.

     New England Telephone officials decided the state decision would
cost them too many customers to make the service financially
worthwhile, company spokeswoman Roberta Clement said yesterday.

     This is because people who might be interested in caller ID would
assume that so many people would ask for the automatic blocking that
it would not make sense to sign up for the service -- since they would
not be able to identify so many incoming calls anyway -- Clement said.

     With free "per-line" blocking, "the perception is that every call
will be blocked," Clement said.

     The phone company had won state approval to charge $4.95 a month
for caller-ID. In addition, a user would have had to buy a display
device to plug into their phone jack for between $35 and $80.

     DPU officials could not be reached for comment.

     Caller-ID is made possible by new digital switching hardware and
programming. In Massachusetts, as in other states where it has been
proposed, there was considerable debate over privacy issues. Some
argued people had a right to see who was calling them -- especially if
they were the target of harassing phone calls -- while others argued
people had a right to keep their numbers private from mass marketers
and others who might collect such numbers into databases or for other
purposes.

     Law enforcement officials had looked forward to caller-ID as a
way to track incoming phone calls until New England Telephone starts
up a statewide "enhanced 911" system that will automatically identify
and route emergency calls from across the state. That system is still
several years away, officials say.

     The phone company still intends to market a ``call trace''
service which could be used to identify harassing phone calls, Clement
said.

     With this service, a customer receiving such calls could trigger
a system for comparing their originating numbers. If they matched, the
phone company would pass the information onto law enforcement -- the
customer would not be given the information. The company would charge
$3.95 per occurrence for this service, under a proposal to the state.


Adam Gaffin    Middlesex News, Framingham, Mass.
[e-mail]    Voice: [phone].
Fred the Middlesex News Computer: [phone].

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

From: [e-mail] (David Y Chang)
Subject: Re: Plain Paper Fax/Modems
Date: 6 Feb 92 18:47:35 GMT
Organization: Unisys/Convergent, San Jose, CA


> I am interested in purchasing a fax or fax modem that connects to
> a laser printer directly, thus providing plain paper faxes.  The
> advantage is that the computer need not be on to receive faxes.

> I know of two products:

> JetFax II from JetFax, Inc. (about $1000)
> OmniLink/Laser from Technology Concepts (about $450)

> I would appreciate hearing of others and of any experiences, good
> or bad, with this type of equipment.  I will summarize responses.

The ETFax-7 ScannerFax should be one of your choice for the
requirements you mentioned above and much more.

It can be a stand-alone fax machine or copy machine by itself and it
can also serve as a PC-fax, scanner or printer when used with an IBM
PC compatible which is supported by some software including
postscript, OCR, networking, automatic document retrieval system and
broadcast utility from what I understand so far.

The print out can be either on its fax paper or plain paper via a
laserjet II or compatibles.

The company carries ETFax-7 I know of is Compex Int'l Corp. Phone
[phone].


David Y Chang - Unisys Corp., San Jose, CA    [e-mail]

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

Date: 07 Feb 92 10:13:14 MST
From: Mr John W Shaver <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: V&H Tape Statistics


About the note by David Esan,

I looked at the info on NPAs. In the numerical sort by NPA 602 is
credited with 614 exchanges. In the sort by number of exchanges, 602
has 609. Which is correct?

BTW 602 is the state of Arizona. We probably have a number of remote
exchanges which are geographically designated, but have less than 5
pages of directory for each exchange. The Cochise County and vicinity,
which includes a couple of nearby New Mexico exchanges lists 30
separate communities and 19 or so exchanges.


                   John W. Shaver
     602 538 7622 // DSN 879 7622 // FTS 658 7622
     FAX [phone] // DSN 879 0656_// FTS 658 0656

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

From: [e-mail] (Mathew Zank)
Subject: Re: Information Wanted on History of Muzak
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 92 02:27:18 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest)


Does anyone know where I can buy a used SCA FM Radio?, If anyone has
one laying around I be more then happy to take it off your hands!


Matthew Zank * Eau Claire, Wisconsin
Internet [e-mail] -or [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: According to an FCC reg, SCA is for 'qualified
listeners' only. That is, you have to either subscribe to the music
service (and thus, get the receiver from them) or be visually
handicapped and get it from the reading service, etc. You're supposed
to be part of the group the transmission is intended for, not just a
random listener ... supposedly. I obey all FCC regs, don't you?
Doesn't everyone?  :)   PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #130
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa11957;
          16 Feb 92 12:47 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA14681
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 16 Feb 1992 10:55:58 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA05338
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 16 Feb 1992 10:55:50 -0600
Date: Sun, 16 Feb 1992 10:55:50 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #131

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 16 Feb 92 10:55:48 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 131

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    US Demands Access to LD Markets (Nigel Allen)
    HELP Wanted With AT+T 7405D Telset (John A. Pham)
    Bellcore Multimedia Software? (Ted Shapin)
    ADA Compliance Requirements (Hugh D. Meier)
    Looking For EIA IS-54 Standard Source (Rudolf Schnorr Von Carolsfeld)
    Line Test Device Needed For CID (Douglas Scott Reuben)
    RFD: comp.society.privacy (Dennis G. Rears)
    Operating Cost of Cellular Phones (Lothar Dahlmeyer)
    Need Information on FCC's "Video Dial Tone" Ruling (Sandy Kyrish)
    Dialing Instructions in Denver, Pa. (Carl Moore)
    How Are Exchanges Assigned? (Roy Smith)
    Finding a Company Name Behind an 800 Number (Otso Ylonen)
    Maryland DOES Have N0X/N1X (was NPA Split Planned For 803?) (Carl Moore)
    Hybrid Help Needed ([e-mail])
    Is 716-971 a Restricted Exchange? (Carl Moore)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Nigel Allen)
Date: 16 Feb 92 03:08
Subject: U.S. Demands Access to LD Markets
Organization: Echo Beach, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Reply-to: [e-mail]


* from {The Globe and Mail}, Toronto, February 7, 1992

U.S. demands access to all long-distance markets:
Canadians consider GATT move universally unacceptable

by Drew Fagan, Parliamentary Bureau

OTTAWA -- The United States is demanding that Canada and other
industrialized countries open their long-distance telephone markets to
unrestricted foreign competition.

     The proposals have been made as part of multilateral trade
negotiations under the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade.

     But [Canadian] federal officials and representatives of Canada's
telephone companies said yesterday [February 6] that they are
confident the U.S. demands will not become part of any final deal to
update trade rules involving the 108 countries in the GATT.

     Under the U.S. proposal, which was raised in the House of Commons
by New Democratic Party MP Lyle MacWilliam yesterday, there would be
minimal restrictions on foreign investment in domestic or
international long-distance telephone services.

     Foreign companies would be able to build their own facilities in
Canada and buy domestic companies. They would also be guaranteed
regulations to ensure they are being treated fairly.

     "This would completely unravel Canada's regulated
telecommunications market structure. It would mean massive foreign
intervention," Mr. MacWilliam said in an interview. "It would mean
unfettered competition. The nature of our industry would virtually
change overnight."

     In the House of Commons, International Trade Minister Michael
Wilson said Canadian officials were studying the proposal, and
emphasized that it will be just one issue among many that will be take
into account in trying to forge a GATT deal by the spring.

     Under [Canadian] federal regulations, domestic telephone companies
are now restricted to a maximum of 20 per cent foreign ownership.

     British Columbia Telephone Company of Burnaby is exempt from that
provision, however. It is controlled [about 51%] by GTE Corp. of
Stamford, Conn. Bell Canada, the largest of the phone companies, is
controlled by Montreal-based BCE Inc., which has minimal foreign
ownership. [Quebec-Telephone of Rimouski is also controlled by GTE
Corp., but falls under provincial jurisdiction.]

     While domestic telephone company officials are confident the U.S.
bargaining stance will not be accepted in Geneva, they are worried
that the United States could also press for the same provisions during
negotiations aimed at creating a North American free-trade zone
involving Canada, the United States and Mexico.

     At those talks, telephone companies fear, the United States would
have more bargaining strength because it would not be up against the
might of the European Community and Japan.


Canada Remote Systems.  Toronto, Ontario    NorthAmeriNet Host

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Help Wanted With AT+T 7405D Telset
Date: Sat, 15 Feb 92 15:51:42 PST


Does anyone has a schematic for AT+T 7405D telset?  I seem to have
destroyed my only 7405D telephone in this place.  I know "the source"
to sell a 7405 but don't think my boss will give me another $400 or so
for an obsolete 7405.


John

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

From: [e-mail] (Ted Shapin)
Subject: Bellcore Multimedia Software?
Date: 15 Feb 92 16:03:58 PDT
Organization: Beckman Instruments, Fullerton, CA


 From {Information Week}, Feb 10, 1992, p.8

"Bellcore ... is giving Internet users a new software package that
allows them to send multimedia E-mail messages.  Bellcore is
distributing the software in hopes that is will spur use of the public
phone network."

Anyone have more info on what this is or who to contact?

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

Date: Sat, 15 Feb 92 15:35:40 EST
From: "Hugh D. Meier" <[e-mail]>
Subject: ADA Compliance Requirements


I am looking for information on compliance to the ADA.  After some
research, the results have been less than specific.  If anyone has
found any definitive information on compliance, I would appreciate the
info.  Example: Pay phones in public places need TDD devices
installed? Brail lettering needed on emergency type phones?, etc. etc.
I am most interested in College/University environments, and private
sector businesses.  Please reply by E-mail, and I will send a summary
to the list after a week or so.  Thanks.


Hugh Meier     [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Rudolf  Schnorr Von Carolsfeld)
Subject: Looking for EIA IS-54 Standard Source (Digital Cellular)
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Rudolf  Schnorr Von Carolsfeld)
Organization: University of Victoria, Victoria, BC, Canada
Date: Sat, 15 Feb 92 21:56:34 GMT


Can anyone tell me where to get a copy of this standard?

Thanks in advance,


[e-mail]
Rudolf Schnorr von Carolsfeld
Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering
P.O. Box 3055 Victoria, B.C. Canada V8W 3P6
Telephone: [phone]   Facsimile: [phone]

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

Date: 15-FEB-1992 16:55:10.00
From: Douglas Scott Reuben <[e-mail]>
Subject: Line Test Device Needed For CID


Are there any products available (at a reasonable cost) that simulate
a telephone line with Caller*ID?

I know there are regular line voltage/ring/etc. simulators, but I'm
looking for one that does Caller*ID as well.

(CID is not yet available here, but I'd like to test a few things out
via such a device.)

Thanks in advance!,


Doug    [e-mail]  //  [e-mail]

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

Date: Sat, 15 Feb 92 17:54:14 EST
From: [e-mail] (Dennis G Rears )
Subject: RFD: comp.society.privacy
Organization: U.S. Army ARDEC, Dover NJ


   This is a updated Call for Discussion for the creation of a new
newsgroup with the name:

    comp.society.privacy

The original CFD went out several months ago.  Most of the comments
were favourable, the only disagreement was whether it should be named
comp.privacy or comp.society.privacy.  Because of the sentiments that
were stated, I am proposing the name to be comp.society.privacy.

  One question that was raised is what the relationship between CSP
and alt.privacy.  There is no relationship between the two groups.

    ---------------------Original CFD-----------------------------

  This newsgroup will be moderated and be gatewayed to an Internet
Mailing List.  I propose myself as the Moderator of this newsgroup. I
am currently moderator of the telecom-priv ([e-mail])
Internet mailing list.  The telecom-priv mailing list will be folded
into this newsgroup.

   The discussion will center around the effect of technology upon
privacy.  All to often technology is way ahead of the law and society
as it presents us with new devices and applications.  Technology can
enhance and detract from privacy.  For example cryptologic methods can
enhance privacy but sophisicated microphones can detract from it.

   Topics include but are not restricted to:

    o Telecommunications - Caller-Id, ANI, monitoring of phones
calls (cellear/cordless), tracking people's locations through use of

    o Cryptology - enhances citizens rights to safeguard their
information.

    o Data Bases - Big Brother is here but it is not just the
Govt, It is also Corporate America.  The advent of mailing lists has
now reach an extremely high level.  Consider the Social Security
Number.

    o High Tech Surveillance Devices - ranging for sophisicated
(SP) bugs, viewing devices, and audio devices.

    o The boon in video cameras and private citizens taping
events; e.g. Rodney King episode.  Video as well as Photographic
information can be forged.

    o The effect of technology on privacy in the legal arena (e.g.
admissibilty in court of items produced by new and old technology).

    o Misc - National Identifier Numbers, Bar coding currency,
electronic toll devices mounted on Autos, etc.

  This group is not intended for the overall issue of privacy, (e.g.
should a rape victim have their name published).

  Currently privacy issues are discussed in many newsgroups but only how
the privacy issue affects that one topic.  There is a need for a single
newsgroup.  The Internet mailing list telecom-priv (telecom-priv@pica.
army.mil) was created a year ago to discuss Caller-Id after the that
topic was bounced from comp.dcom.telecom.  Telecom-priv was expanded
to include all issues of privacy dealing with telecom equipment.

   I am proposing that this group be moderated to keep a high signal
to noise ratio.  Moderation of a newgroup means different thing to
different people.  The moderation that I propose will filter out all
administrative requests, test messages, non-tech/privacy items, and
excessive flames.  Nothing is censored.


            Dennis G. Rears
MILNET:   [e-mail]     UUCP:  ...!uunet!fsac1.pica.army.mil!drears
INTERNET: [e-mail]    USPS:  Box 210, Wharton, NJ 07885
Phone(home): 201.927.8757


[Moderator's Note: Discussion of this topic should take place in
either Telecom-Priv or news.groups. It is presented here only to alert
you to the pending discussion, not as a forum for the discussion.   PAT]

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

Date: Sat, 15 Feb 92 16:18:30 MST
From: [e-mail] (Lothar Dahlmeyer)
Subject: Operating Cost of Cellular Phones
Organization: National Radio Astronomy Observatory, Socorro NM


Howdy, Folks!

Could and would some kind soul out there please educate me about the
monthly OPERATING costs for cellular telephones?

What are the basic fees for activation and use?
What are the charges per call or time unit?
How much is YOUR average monthly bill?
Which carrier do you recommend and why?

I would like to hear from someone with recent first hand experience
with cellular telephones. I know there are 1-800 numbers to call, but
I'm trying to eliminate the sales propaganda.

Thanx, Pardners!


[e-mail] 146.88.1.4    Lothar Dahlmeyer  [phone]
National Radio Astronomy Observatory    Socorro, New Mexico, 87801

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

Date: Sat, 15 Feb 92 14:28 GMT
From: Sandy Kyrish <[e-mail]>
Subject: Need Information on FCC's "Video Dial Tone" Ruling


Is the text yet available on last fall's FCC announcement
on "video dial tone", which may or may not allow telcos
to provide video programming?  Text or analysis of same
would be much appreciated.
Thanks.


Sandy Kyrish [e-mail]

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

Date: Sat, 15 Feb 92 11:02:33 EST
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject: Dialing Instructions in Denver, Pa.


I have recently passed thru Denver, Pa. and found a cause for concern
regarding at least the pay telephones.  Denver is served by 215-267,
but I am still seeing the old instructions displayed for long-distance
and 0+ calls (i.e., 1+number or 0+number within 215).  And I even
tried 898-xxxx and 1-898-xxxx (I know 898 is in Philadelphia), and
found that the first was rejected with an error message and the second
got the automated request for money.  But elsewhere in 215 outside of
Bell of Pa. territory (such as at Birdsboro) I have seen the new
instructions.  The telco for Denver is Denver & Ephrata Telephone &
Telegraph Co. in Ephrata, which is in 717 and not affected by the
changes in area 215.

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

Date: Sat, 15 Feb 92 12:04:32 EST
From: Roy Smith <[e-mail]>
Subject: How Are Exchanges Assigned?


    I just got back from a vacation in Key West, Florida.  I
happend to notice that virtually every phone number in the book was
either in the 292, 294, or 296 exchange.  I noticed extremely few
numbers in the 293 exchange.  It struck me as odd that they would use
the even-numbered exchanges and jump over the ones in-between (293 and
295).  Come to think of it, where I grew up, every phone number was
either 664 or 666.  Is there some reason for not just assigning
exchanges sequentially as new CO's open up?

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: How Can I Locate the Company Name Behind an 800 Number?
Organization: Nokia Telecommunications.
Date: Sun, 16 Feb 1992 06:40:09 GMT


Question 1:

I wonder if somebody could tell me how to get US/Canadian company
names behind their 800 numbers. I called the number service of the
Finnish Telecom and got the answer they are able to tell only te-
lephone numbers based on company name and location -- not vice-versa.
Is there a service I could make enquiries to or would it be even
possible to get a list of all 800 numbers?

Question 2:

What's the difference between an 1-800 and an 800 number?


Otso Ylonen
Phone      office [phone], home [phone]
Mail       Liisantie 1 H 30, SF-90560 Oulu, Finland
Internet   [e-mail]
X400       C=fi A=elisa P=nokia O=nokia telecom S=ylonen G=otso


[Moderator's Note: There is no difference between 1-800 and 800. The
digit '1' is a required part of the dialing in some (most?) places in
the USA. People express the number either way, with or without the '1'.

There is no cross-reference listing to 800 numbers which I am aware
of. But if you see an advertisement with an 800 number, there is
always a company name in the ad, is there not?    PAT]

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

Date: Sat, 15 Feb 92 10:08:28 EST
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject: Maryland DOES Have N0X/N1X (was NPA Split Planned For 803?)


To [e-mail]: I notice you have a signon at
Princeton in New Jersey; where in Maryland are you from?

Yes, there are N0X/N1X prefixes in Maryland!  They first arrived in
late 1987/early 1988 because of the shortage in the Washington DC
area, and from then on all long distance in 301/202/703 has been
1+NPA+7D, even within 301 or within 703.  In November 1990, this
digest received word of the 301/410 split (to start 1 Nov. 1991); such
word arrived only about a week after I had gone to a Md. library,
looked up various Md.  call guides, and noticed N0X/N1X popping up in
other parts of the state (away from DC).  I am located in Harford
County, which currently has 515 and 612 among its prefixes.

You can find help in the archive file history.of.area.splits; it also
notes usage of N0X/N1X prefixes.

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

Date: Sat, 15 Feb 92 12:32:40 -0500
From: [e-mail] (Rich)
Subject: Hybrid Help Needed


I am working on a little phone project and I need some advice.

Can anyone point me to some references on designing hybrids? I already
have a bridge, transistor, and bypass cap to get my audio from the
phone line.  I would like to do this with op amps; I understand better
results can be obtained using this method. Also, it needs to be low
power, since the thing will be powered from the phone line.

Thanks in advance ...

Ed

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

Date: Sat, 15 Feb 92 17:38:58 EST
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject: Is 716-971 a Restricted Exchange?


I had an old note about 716-971 not being reachable from outside of
Rochester Telephone area.  I just got fast busy in trying to reach it;
that is apparently different treatment from dialing a non-existent
prefix.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #131
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa17177;
          16 Feb 92 14:59 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA06516
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 16 Feb 1992 12:54:51 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA17982
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 16 Feb 1992 12:54:43 -0600
Date: Sun, 16 Feb 1992 12:54:43 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #132

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 16 Feb 92 12:54:34 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 132

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Not the Best Week of My Life (TELECOM Moderator)
    Hawaii International Airport and Credit Card Payphones (John Cheuck)
    MCI Prefered and Modems (David Brightbill)
    MCI Friends & Family: Note For Overseas MCI Cardholder (Juergen Ziegler)
    Telecom Mailing Lists Wanted (Garth Gullekson)
    Looking for Modular Connectors (Jim Puls)
    Recent Telecom Articles in The Economist (Mike Riddle)
    Jobs, FTP and Other Trivia (Bryan Montgomery)
    Information Wanted on 800 Service in Canada ([e-mail])
    Injecting Audio Into a Phone Line (Roy Smith)
    Computerized Sales Calls: Weren't They Just Banned? (David L. Wilson)
    Legal History of Privacy for the Telephone and the Telegraph (Lew Oleinick)
    FCC Allows Cellular Phones in Airplanes ([e-mail])
    Spanish to English Telecom Dictionary Wanted (Alan Burnstine)
    Person to Person Collect Holding Time (Stephen Tihor)
    Help Needed With LANS Hardware Problem (Bob Clegg)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sun, 16 Feb 1992 11:25:09 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <telecom>
Subject: Not the Best Week of My Life


The past week has been sort of rough for me, in more ways than one. I
tried to do some re-wiring here on Tuesday which caused all sorts of
problems and kept me off line for a couple days while I was repairing
the problems that I caused. I was trying to hook up a second modem
with an A/B switch; move out a terminal which was not being used and
re-arrange the printer in the process. Everything -- and I mean
everything -- went sour. Add to that the fact that my bosses insisted
on about ten hours extra of overtime work this past week to catch up
on a lot of paperwork in the office, so I was arriving home two or
three hours later than usual three days in a row.

Then on Thursday, an old friend took very ill. Nicholas is a cat which
has lived with me for fifteen years. He was almost five years old when
his former caretaker passed away in 1977. For about a month now,
Nicholas was growing very feeble and thin. He was refusing to eat or
groom himself, and as often as not was missing or not using his litter
pan. Thursday he vomited a couple times and spent the day laying in
the corner. I put him in the animal hospital without a lot of optimism
for his recovery, and Saturday afternoon after a lot of anquish and
indecision decided to do what I knew in my heart was best. The doctor
ended his life at 19+ years of age, and I came back home feeling
pretty bummed out.

His housemate is a cat named Tarzan who came to live with me as a five
week old kitten at Thanksgiving, 1977. The two were together all these
years and Tarzan has been searching everywhere for Nicholas. But then,
I woke up a couple times last night also with the same feelings when I
realized he was not under the covers of my bed with me. I hope I did
the right thing, but it was a hard decision.

With the rush of things going on around here all week and the fact
that night after night I was very tired, I just was not able to do
anything for the Digest.  Maybe the week ahead will be a better one.


PAT

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

From: [e-mail] (John Cheuck)
Subject: Hawaii International Airport and Credit Card Payphones
Date: 16 Feb 92 04:06:28 GMT
Organization: BUG Inc., Sapporo, Japan


I am currently living in Japan and recently went for my first visit to
the paradise island of Oahu in Hawaii.  Since I was in between
business trips to the States and Asia, I needed to make a few phone
calls while I was at the International Airport.

There was not one telephone (later confirmed with Airport administration)
that accepted a standard M/C, Visa or Amex credit card!!  Now, there
were quite a few payphones that had instructions in English and
Japanese that said that credit cards were accepted, but these turned
out to be only those obtained through MCI or AT&T.  Hmmm ... I guess
that I'll have to get a US backed calling card (another problem) or
credit card (redundant) in the future.

Perhaps, this sort of inconvenience is the price one has to pay to be
in paradise ...


Regards,

John.

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

Date: Sat, 15 Feb 92 16:27:19 -0500
From: David Brightbill <[e-mail]>
Subject: MCI Prefered and Modems


MCI has a billing option for their 1+ customers called "MCI Prefered."
With this plan, after you enter the number, there is a pause and a new
tone.  At the new tone, you enter a three-digit billing code.  Then
when you get your bill, it is broken out by billing codes.  Very
helpful if you have to bill back to customers.  The problem comes when
you want to use a modem with the service.  If I enter the entire
number and the billing code in one string, it usually dosen't work
because the code tone hasn't happened yet.  If I put a bunch of pauses
in the dial string it works sometimes and sometimes it dosen't.  It
depends on how long it takes to set the call up.  There dosen't seem
to be a very long window in which to enter the code.  If you wait too
long, MCI drops the call.  If you do it too soon, the information
dosen't get passed.

Anyone have a clue as to how to make it work with MCI or if another
provider offeres a more modem friendly coded billing option?

Thanks,

Dave Brightbill


[Moderator's Note: Does your modem have a feature called 'wait for
second tone' (possibly by using @ in the dialing string)?   PAT]

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

Date: Sat, 15 Feb 92 14:46
From: Juergen Ziegler <[e-mail]>
Subject: MCI Friends & Family: Note For Overseas MCI Cardholder


The MCI F&F discount plan is also available to overseas MCI
cardholders.  With this feature you get a 20% discount on all numbers
that are on your list and have MCI as their PIC (primiary interexchage
carrier).

This is very interesting due to the high rates for calls from
elsewhere to the US. So the absolute saving is quite high.

But it gets even better. So you can set one international number (e.g.
your own number) on your list. So when you are visiting the US and
call that number, then you will receive that 20% discount as well. Not
bad!

To put your number on your list, just call the MCI customer service.


Juergen


[Moderator's Note: It has often been said that each of us is our own
best friend!  :)    PAT]

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

Date: 15 Feb 92 13:48:00 EST
From: Garth (G.C.) Gullekson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Telecom Mailing Lists Wanted


I'm in the process of assembling a mailing list for telecommunications
software developers. If anyone is aware of good sources of lists that
can be rented/purchased, or alternative methods of building up such a
list, I'd greatly appreciate it.

Thanks.


Garth Gullekson          |    TELOS: Object-Oriented CASE for Real-Time Systems
[e-mail]            |    Bell-Northern Research
Ph:  [phone]      |    P.O. Box 3511 Station C
Fax: [phone]      |    Ottawa Ontario, CANADA     K1Y 4H7

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

From: [e-mail] (Jim Puls)
Subject: Looking for Modular Connectors
Date: Sun, 16 Feb 92 9:22:21 CST


I'm looking for a source of modular connectors, four contacts, but
narrow, such as is often used on telephone handsets.  Can anyone out
there help me?  I'd also be interested in what the things are properly
called.  Please e-mail any responses to [e-mail].
Thanks!

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

Date: Sun, 16 Feb 92 07:30:52 CST
From: [e-mail] (Mike Riddle)
Subject: Recent Telecom Articles in The Economist


The current issue of {The Economist} "newspaper" (really weekly
newsmagazine to us U.S. types) contains two excellent summaries of
telecom upgrades in Eastern Europe.

At p. 18, "Eastern Europe on the Line: Governments in the former
communist block are underrating their bargaining power with western
telecoms firms," and

At p. 74, in a section headlined "Telecommunications in Eastern
Europe," the article "Finding their voice: Western telecoms companies
are fighting for contacts to modernise Eastern Europe's telephone
networks.  The potential rewards are vast.  So are the risks."

{The Economist}, February 8th - 14th 1992.

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

Date: Sun, 16 Feb 92 12:13:54 GMT
From: eb4/91/92 <[e-mail]>
Subject: Jobs, FTP and Other Trivia


Pat,

    I hpoe this doesn't cause you the same amount of trouble that the
`for sale' posts did (personally I was quite happy to see what
interesting items were available). But I will be graduating in
Electrical and Electronic Engineering from Portsmouth Polytechnic this
July. I would like to try and find a job in the N.E. area of the US
(NY,Ct) to join my fiancee. I am looking for a job to last 9-12 months
as there is a scheme allowing work visas for this period of time, but
I need a definte job offer before being issued a visa. Alternatively,
if any one would care to offer a permanent job I would also be very
interested to hear from them. As it currently stands we intend to
marry next spring and then go on to do a Masters next fall (in
Computer Engineering). Any advice would be most gratefull received.

Is the ftp by mail service still available for the telecom archives?
If so could you please supply the details again. Alternatively has
anyone got details of the Princeton/Dec ftp service?


Bryan


[Moderator's Note: Good luck on your job search. Maybe someone here
will have ideas or assistance for you.  The 'FTP by Mail' service is
still available. Write to [e-mail] (Doug Davis) for
details. Or perhaps I will post his help file here if he will send me
a new, updated version. The one I have goes back to last May.  There
are various other email/ftp servers around also, and I hope someone
will write with an updated list of these sometime soon.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail]
Organization: Queen's University at Kingston
Date: Saturday, 15 Feb 1992 22:18:04 EST
Subject: Information Wanted on 800 Service in Canada


Today I called BELL CANADA to get some pricing info on 800 service.
There is a $200 set up charge, plus billing is done in hours (not in
minutes) at the rate of 175 bucks for the first five hours (minimum)
and 27 bucks for each additional.

I need an 800 service which I think I will use only 45 minutes per
month. Is there any low cost third party service in Canada? I am
looking for an 800 service to be used by my Canadian and US customers.


Rick    [e-mail]

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

Date: Sun, 16 Feb 92 12:57:30 EST
From: Roy Smith <[e-mail]>
Subject: Injecting Audio Into a Phone Line


    What do I have to do to insert an audio signal into a phone
line?  I've got a cassette tape that I want to play (actually, it's a
very funny message that somebody once left me on my answering machine
that I want to play back and leave as a message on their machine as a
gag).  Is there some simple circuit that will let me do this?

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

Date: Sat, 15 Feb 92 15:02:30 EST
From: [e-mail] (David L Wilson)
Subject: Computerized Sales Calls: Weren't They Just Banned?
Organization: AT&T


   I just got a computerized phone sales call about cruises to the
Bahamas, or something like that: I was too annoyed to pay attention.
I was under the impression that all such calls were recently made
illegal under an Act of Congress; is this true, or was I dreaming?

  If these calls have, at long last, really been banned, what can I do
to file a complaint? I would assume that I can complain to the FCC;
does anyone know the address or phone number of a complaints bureau?

  The outfit that called me was called Costa Cruises, their phone
number is [phone], and they are located in New York.  I called
them a few times to let them know what I think of unsolicited
autodialed sales calls; I got a different operator each time, with
lots of voices in the background, so it sounds like a real boiler-room
operation.

  Does anyone have any information on this recent law?  And has anyone
else heard of Costa Cruises, or received their "invitation to win?"
Did you call them back just to harass them?

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

From: [e-mail] (Lew Oleinick)
Subject: Legal History of Privacy for the Telephone and the Telegraph
Date: 15 Feb 92 21:49:35 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Lew Oleinick)
Organization: The University of Texas at Austin, Austin TX


I'm doing research on the legal history of privacy issues for the
telephone and the telegraph for a project in graduate school.  If
anyone knows of a good reference text for this topic I would be
forever grateful for the name of such a book.  Also, if anyone knows
of anyone else doing research on this topic I'd like to collaborate
with them.

Thanks,


Lew.


[Moderator's Note: I suggest you may wish to also pose your question
to the Moderator and readers of Telecom-Priv ([e-mail])
and see if they can be of help.   PAT]

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

Subject: FCC Allows Cellular Phones in Airplanes
Date: Sat, 15 Feb 92 17:06:20 -0500
From: [e-mail]


Last year, some of you may recall seeing a discussion here about the
legality of cellular phone use in aircraft.  The legal situation was
murky then, but it has at last been clarified.

In new regulations effective March 9, 1992, the FCC has ruled that:

 - Cellular phone use while airborne is illegal.  This was the case
   already, but the regulations now make it explicit, and allow
   cellular phone companies to cut off service to violators.

 - Cellular phone use on the ground is legal, as far as the FCC is
   concerned.  Of course, FAA regulations still apply; for private
   flights this isn't a big deal, for airline flights the FAA is
   apparently making guidelines on when to allow cellular phone use.

Details are in the Federal Register, vol. 57, p. 830.

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

Date: Sun, 16 Feb 92 13:48 GMT
From: Alan Burnstine <[e-mail]>
Subject: Spanish to English Telecom Dictionary Wanted


        Can anyone recommend either a Spanish language telecom
dictionary or better still, a Spanish to English telecom dictionary.
I supervise a group of telecom network troubleshooters and although a
couple of my employees are bilingual and can work with our Spanish
language customers, they both got their telecom training in English.
They are having trouble translating the very specialized language of
telecommunications. Any help would be greatly appreciated.


Alan Burnstine    MCI Telecommunications
MCI Mail:374-9269   CIS:70511,3562
"Standard Disclaimers Apply"

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

Date: Sat, 15 Feb 1992 12:57 EST
From: Stephen Tihor <[e-mail]>
Subject: Person to Person Collect Holding Time


I recently had occasion to call an annoying user at another
institution within a different area code in our LATA that was having
local mail problems and called us about it (for no good reason).

I was working from home so I called Person-To-Person and Collect. Her
private DID line was out of service so I called the general number.
While the receptionist was trying to get the person at the far end,
the NYTel Operator tried to drop the call.  She said that she is only
allowed to wait 60 seconds before a call is accepted or rejected.

Since I would have simply called right back the same way to the same
effect as holding on the line I engaged the operator in converstation
about this policy which is not listed in the information section of my
current phone directory.  That managed to keep the operator on line
until my party reached the phone and accepted charges.

It is a pity that this fine and expensive service ($5 net plus at
least the normal 15 cents/minute) is being diminished.  The long hold
to get someone to the phone breaks even at about 33 minutes based on
the cost of a direct dialed call to that number.  The operator's
salary sitting there waiting no doubt cuts that down quite a bit.  I
wonder how much though ... at $30 per hour gross burdened cost
(including benefits and RofR) one should be able to afford at least
 ... 50 cents per minute + 15 cents for the call ... 65 cents per
minute net out of 3.50 for just the person to per part of the fee
(assuming 1.50 is the true cost of collect calling) ... hmm ....eight
or nine minutes wait time.


[Moderator's Note: I don't think the high surcharge on collect and/or
person-to-person calls is intended to pay for the operator's time. I
think it is intended to discourage the use of these features, which
telcos would generally like to abolish, or so I've heard.   PAT]

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

Subject: Help Needed With LANS Hardware Problem
From: Bob Clegg <[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 92 13:20:36 +1300
Organization: The Sideways Machine, Lower Hutt, New Zealand


Our terminals induce noise into our LAN when they are turned on. I
would like to make contact with anybody who is involved "at the coal
face" with LAN installations.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #132
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa19166;
          16 Feb 92 15:52 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA16113
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 16 Feb 1992 14:06:12 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA10869
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 16 Feb 1992 14:06:03 -0600
Date: Sun, 16 Feb 1992 14:06:03 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #133

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 16 Feb 92 14:05:41 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 133

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    What is This Box Under The Pay Phone? (Roy M. Silvernail)
    Your Participation Requested in Speech Survey (Ed Holliman)
    Telecommuting Survey Wants Participants (Adriana T. Bernardino)
    Bell Fax Trial Ends (Nigel Allen)
    Motorola Handheld Portable Cellular Antenna (Bill Berbenich)
    Cellular Phone Programming (Jon Cereghino)
    Log Periodic Array Antennas Info Wanted ([e-mail])
    Pay Phone Charges For 800 Calls (Michael Fumich)
    Help! Excessive Sidetone on a Meritor (Tie) (R. Patrick MacKinnon)
    A Cool Place To Get Phones (Doctor Math)
    How to Distinguish Different Rings? (Alan TC Penn)
    Need "Distinctive Ringing" Device Switcher (Paul Robichaux)
    Looking For KSU a Bit Bigger Than a Panasonic (Daniel M. Rosenberg)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: What is This Box Under The Pay Phone?
From: cybrspc![e-mail] (Roy M. Silvernail)
Date: Fri, 14 Feb 92 21:51:18 CST
Organization: Villa CyberSpace, Minneapolis, MN


I noticed something kind of unusual this morning.

There is a bank of pay phones on the lower level of the IDS Center
here in Minneapolis.  All the phones appear to be U S West.  They are
set up three abreast on either side of an 'island', and have the
typical small desk-top.

Underneath the desk-top, where one might expect to find a directory,
there is a brushed stainless-steel panel affair, about 14 inches wide
and perhaps five inches high.  It is featureless, except for a red LED
near the top right corner.  This LED flashes in concert with the audio
on the phone!  It caught my attention, and I watched after I hung up.
The LED appeared to react to activity during call teardown, as well.

Just what is inside that panel?  My first reaction is "this box is
monitoring my call."  I then thought perhaps it could even be
_recording_ the calls placed on this phone.  If it listens to
teardown, it must certainly listen to setup, as well.  (I didn't have
time to make a second call and test this theory.) So it could be
recording the number I dialed, in addition to the conversation.  Egad,
somebody now knows I called Dial-A-Ride! :-)

I wish I had had more time to explore, and I'll certainly take a more
critical look on my next trip downtown.  Meanwhile, does this sound
familiar to any Digest readers?  And if it _is_ recording traffic on
the pay station, how does this relate to wiretap laws?  There is no
prominent warning to the effect that calls are recorded, and no
15-second beep is heard on the phone.  Or is it just there to frighten
potential drug dealers?


Roy M. Silvernail |+|  [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Ed Holliman)
Subject: Your Participation Requested in Speech Survey
Date: 15 Feb 92 21:48:58 GMT
Organization: TI Computer Science Center, Dallas


       WANTED: VOLUNTEERS TO "DONATE SPEECH" OVER THE PHONE
      FOR A TEXAS INSTRUMENTS SPEECH RESEARCH DATA BASE
              COMPENSATION:  $5.00 PER CONVERSATION


   IF YOU:

   -  can be available for an occasional phone conversation
   -  are a **male** native speaker of American English
      ** between 20 and 60 years of age  **
   -  have access to a touch-tone phone
   -  can converse on selected topics for about 5 minutes

             YOU CAN BE PART OF THE TI SWITCHBOARD PROJECT.

Calls are made on an 800 number, and a computer chooses a topic and a
partner.  TI records the conversations and pays each participant $5.00
for each call.  Number of calls varies; average is 10.

        FOR MORE DETAILS, PLEASE CALL 1-800-759-7602 FROM A
     TOUCH-TONE PHONE; CHOOSE OPTION '3', AND LEAVE A
           MESSAGE WITH YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS

             OR SEND E-MAIL TO:

             [e-mail]

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

From: Adriana T Bernardino <[e-mail]>
Subject: Telecommuting Survey Needs Participants
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Date: Sat, 15 Feb 1992 15:30:37 GMT


I am working in the Center for Transportation Studies at MIT on a
research on telecommuting and I would like to contact individuals that:

(i) are self-employed or employees, currently working at home full- or
part-time; and/or
(ii) supervise employees who work at home full- or part-time;

who would be willing to answer a survey and provide some information
on their experience with this working arrangement.

Anyone interested in participating please reply directly to:

        [e-mail]

providing an e-mail address and specifying to which of the above group
he/she belongs. Thank you for your cooperation.


   Adriana  Bernardino, 77 Mass Ave  R1-075, Cambridge, MA 02139

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

From: Nigel Allen <[e-mail]>
Date: Sat, 15 Feb 1992 19:00:00 -0500
Subject: Bell Canada Public Fax Trial Ends
Organization: Echo Beach, Toronto


Bell Canada has decided it can't make money in the public fax
business, so it will be pulling the plug on the 50 pay-per-use fax
machines it has installed in and near Montreal and Toronto.

I suspect that the service was badly overpriced, but I don't remember
exactly how much Bell was charging.

Here is the official word from Bell Canada, as it appeared in {Bell
News} (Quebec edition), February 10, 1992.

End of the public fax trial:

The public fax trial which has been taking place since September 1990,
has ended with the decision not to immediately proceed with the
launching of a commercial service.

Approximately fifty public fax machines were installed at various
locations in Montreal and Toronto (airports, hotels, train and bus
stations, etc.). This service allows travellers to receive faxes from,
or send them to, anywhere in the world. Users are able to pay for the
service via Visa or MasterCard [but apparently not a telco calling
card].

The trial has been stopped because data gathered since September 1990,
confirms that with the economic situation as grave as it is, it is not
feasible to launch a commercial service at the moment. On top of this,
it would have meant a considerable investment in new equipment. In
less than 18 months, fax technology has evolved in leaps and bounds.
Keeping these factors in mind, the company has judged it an
inappropriate period for this type of investment.

Certain fax machines will remain in operation until September of this
year.


Canada Remote Systems.  Toronto, Ontario   NorthAmeriNet Host

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

Subject: Motorola Handheld Portable Cellular Antenna
Date: Fri, 14 Feb 92 14:39:31 GMT
From: [e-mail] (Bill Berbenich)
Reply-To: [e-mail]


I am looking for a retail and/or mail order source for one of those
little stubby antennas which will fit a Motorola Ultra
Classic/8000/Pulsar hand-held portable cellular phone.  The antenna
that came with mine is the "standard" antenna and is roughly 14cm
long.  Since I will be using the phone well within range of a cell
site, the stubby should serve my needs well without being as
cumbersome as the standard antenna.

For all of you bargain fanatics, I was able to buy the phone (actually
a Pulsar 12314A) for $99 at a local electronics/furniture retailer.
The usual catch, a mandatory cellular service "sign-up" period, was
part of the deal, but only for six months service.  The closest price
I had ever seen before for this model was $199 with a one-year
sign-up.  The carrier is BellSouth Mobility, Atlanta's "B" carrier.
The phone is new, in the box, and from the inspection date on the box
it appears to have just rolled off the assembly line last week.

BellSouth's rate for state employees is either $18 or $20/month (I
forget precisely which at the moment), plus airtime at 35/22 cents
peak/off-peak respectively.  The "A" carrier, PacTel Cellular, has
comparable rates.

Quite a deal, as I see it.  Anyone seen better for this particular
phone?  Good, don't tell me! :-) Atlanta area buyers should still be
able to get the phone at any Roberd's location.  I don't know when the
sale is scheduled to end, though.


Bill Berbenich, School of EE, DSP Lab   |  Telephone:   [phone]
Georgia Tech, Atlanta Georgia, 30332    |
uucp: ...!{backbones}!gatech!eedsp!bill |  Group 3 fax: [phone]
Internet: [e-mail]         |           or: [phone]

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

Date: Sun, 16 Feb 92 08:35:09 PST
From: [e-mail] (Jon Cereghino)
Subject: Cellular Phone Programming


Many people have inquired about cellular telephone programming here. I
ran across a short article in Baseline News on C-Message Weighting BBS
that tells about an expensive book with some programming information.
Here's the piece reproduced with permission:


CELLULAR TELEPHONE INFORMATION

Bishop and Associates offers a line of cellular telephone products
that might interest you.  A book titled PRODUCT OPERATION HANDBOOK
gives owners manual information for over 200 cellular telephone models
in a loose leaf format, ($149).  PROGRAM HANDBOOK gives programming
information for over 200 telephone models and includes information
like system ID numbers and a manufacturer's electronic serial number
(ESN) list, ($149).  SIMPLIFIED CELLULAR by Dennis Bishop describes
cellular system operation and is available for $29.  There are a
number of other books, cards, and sweatshirts offered on business and
cellular topics.  Bishop and Associates, Incorporated, P.O. Box 2027,
Bothell, Washington 98041, (800)-829-0572.

I don't have a commercial interest in B&A and am just passing this
along because there seems to be an interest.  I figure some clever
TELECOM Digest reader will probably have a 900-number up next week
with cellular phone programming information for $19/minute ...


Jon Cereghino    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Log Periodic Array Antennas Info Wanted
Date: 15 Feb 92 00:22:56 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail]


I'd appreciate any help. I'm looking for mathematical analysis of
pattern radiation of logaritmic periodic array antennas. I've seen
only graphic pattern radiation, but I need demonstrate it
mathematically. It's better if I can get also the dimension of
elements.

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

Date: Sun, 16 Feb 92 05:02 GMT
From: North Coast Communications <[e-mail]>
Subject: Pay Phone Charges For 800 Calls


I was recently traveling along I-80 through Iowa & noticed that
the COCOTs there charge 35 CENTS!!! for a call to an 800 number. This
was true of several phones on the Illinois side as well. (I have not
run across this situation before.) When I called "211" to reach the
COCOT owner he rudely told me that the charge not only covered the
"wear and tear" on the phone, but that the phone company CHARGED HIM
for every 800 call! The temptation to wrap a chain around my rear
bumper with the other end connected to the offensive instrument was
very strong. My question is, is this legal? (charging for 800 at a pay
phone, not the chain idea |:*) and to whom may I formally complain?


Thanks!         Michael Fumich           [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (R. Patrick MacKinnon)
Subject: Help! Excessive Sidetone on a Meritor (Tie)
Organization: University of Western Ontario
Date: Thu, 13 Feb 1992 04:13:01 GMT


I know there is a fix for this, but I can't find the literature.  I
have a MOD KEY16 KSU with MERITORs hanging off the stn ports.  The Rx
is fine, Tx also fine, but the sidetone is quite hot.  There is a one
or two component swap to cure it, but I cannot find it anywhere.
Could someone please help with some info?  Thanks for the time ...


[e-mail] (R. Patrick MacKinnon)
Western Business School  --  London, Ontario

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

From: [e-mail] (Doctor Math)
Subject: A Cool Place To Get Phones
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 92 19:45:13 EST
Organization: Department of Redundancy Department


I asked a telco lineman where it would be possible to get some
"old-style" Genuine Bell phones and was referred to a place called
Telephone Sales & Service.  Finally got the chance to go there
recently and it was quite an experience. This place deals mostly in
refurbished WE 500 and 2500 sets; they also had ITT sets and Trimline
phones, all at reasonable prices.  They also have some large glass
cases filled with a veritable history of telecom -- candlestick sets,
"explosion-proof" phones, antique desk sets and "buried cable" signs,
pay phones, etc. They also sell/install 1A2 key systems, and had a
real cord board (which I doubt is for sale).

So, for those of you who have been wondering about a good source of
genuine WE phones (besides scouring flea markets), this place is:

        Telephone Sales & Service
        812 W Edison Road
        Mishawaka  IN  46545
        [phone]

(For those of you in the area, it's across the street from Heritage
Cablevision's main offices, next door to the Community-Wide Credit
Union.)

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

From: T. C. Peng <[e-mail]>
Subject: How to Distinguish Different Rings?
Date: Wed, 12 Feb 92 16:40:22 PST


Hi Pat,

I think you can answer my ring signals question.

I notice there are several different type of telephone rings, for
instance custom ring, priority ring, internal call ring, outside call
ring, etc.

What I want to know is how different are those signals? Could a
generic telephone set distinguish these different ring signals ? Or
there must have a special device within the telephone to detect these
different ring signals?  If a special device is required, what device
is available on the market?


Thanks for your reply.


Alan TC Penn    email address : [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: Actually some of those are just different names for
the same ringing cadences under different applications. The phone just
makes the sounds the central office gives it. Basically there are
about three or four cadences commonly used: A single long ring; two
short rings; two long rings with a shorter than usual pause between
them; and a short ring - short pause - long ring. The auto-callback
feature here uses a short-long-short ring also.  See the next message
for more information.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Paul Robichaux)
Subject: Need "Distinctive Ringing" Device Switcher
Reply-To: acatt!fairgate![e-mail]
Organization: New Technology, Inc.
Date: Fri, 14 Feb 1992 22:47:25 GMT


Here in Huntsville, South Central Bell offers "distinctive ringing,"
whereby the CO gives you additional numbers which, when dialed, ring
your phone in a distinctive pattern.

Since I have one line, which is currently used for uucp, fax, and
voice, I'd like a switch which will ring attached devices based on the
ringing pattern. Are there any such beasts on the market?


Regards,

Paul Robichaux, apprentice rocket scientist.
[e-mail]  |  Disclaimer: NTI pays for my skills.
                                |  My opinions are mine, not theirs or NASA's.


[Moderator's Note: There are many such devices available. See the
catalog from 'Hello Direct' (800-HI-HELLO) as one such example.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Daniel M. Rosenberg)
Subject: Looking For a KSU a Bit Bigger Than a Panasonic
Organization: The Very Large Software Company of America
Date: Fri, 14 Feb 1992 21:31:54 GMT


I have asked (at least once) in this forum about recommendations for a
small KSU/PBX to be used in a radio station.

We would really, really like something like the Panasonic 1232, but
it's just a bit too small for our needs; 32 distinct extensions
doesn't leave us enough room for expansion. We really like the way it
hybridizes proprietary and POTS service on the same line, the overall
feature-richness, and the cost.

Can't we get these any bigger?

Other folks have suggested one of the small Northern PBX's, like a
Meridian, but those are a *lot* more expensive, and otherwise don't
seem to stack up to the Panasonics.

Help!


(NeXT)Mail: [e-mail]     [e-mail]
Stanford Metapage Project          {apple, ucbvax}!labrea!roadkill!dmr

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #133
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa21368;
          16 Feb 92 16:55 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA12933
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 16 Feb 1992 15:04:37 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA20141
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 16 Feb 1992 15:04:29 -0600
Date: Sun, 16 Feb 1992 15:04:29 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #134

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 16 Feb 92 15:04:28 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 134

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: MOH, Bad Manners, Poor Throughput, and Sprint (Steven A. Rubin)
    Re: MOH, Bad Manners, Poor Throughput, and Sprint (Harold Hallikainen)
    Re: MOH, Bad Manners, Poor Throughput, and Sprint (Steve Thornton)
    Re: AT&T No Longer Billing For Bogus 800 (Gordon Burditt)
    Re: Low-Bandwidth Free Info Transfer? (Tony Harminc)
    Re: Foiling Drug Dealers Use of Payphones (Richard Nash)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Steven A Rubin)
Subject: Re: MOH, Bad Manners, Poor Throughput, and Sprint
Organization: HAC - Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore
Date: Sat, 15 Feb 1992 20:42:28 GMT


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

>> There has been discussion of just this type of Sprint connection on
>> "uunet.forum".

>> It appears that calls via AT&T get 10%-30% faster throughput on
>> Telebit Trailblasers.  There appears to be a serious quality problem
>> on Sprint lines.

I think the main reason for Sprint's line quality problem is a direct
result of the line noise created by all those pins Sprint keeps
dropping to let you know how clear their circuit is.

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

Date: Sat, 15 Feb 92 16:40:03 -0800
From: [e-mail] (Harold Hallikainen)
Subject: Re: MOH, Bad Manners, Poor Throughput, and Sprint
Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo


> Ah, yes, Music On Hold.  I've always figured it must have been the
> invention of some guy with the brains of a retarded houseplant!

    I also hate to pay long distance rates to listen to some radio
station on the other coast while on hold.  We have previously
discussed locally generated busy signals (as opposed to ringback,
which is generated at the far end).  How about some long distance
carrier offerring locally generated music on hold?  When someone puts
me on hold (if the distant CO knows they did, which they would with
call waiting), drop the voice circuit (and stop charging me!).  When
the person gets back to my call, the voice circuit would be
reestablished (realizing these things take time).  I guess the closest
thing we have now is voice mail on busy.


Harold Hallikainen              [e-mail]
Hallikainen & Friends, Inc.     [e-mail]
141 Suburban Road, Bldg E4      phone [phone] fax [phone]
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-7590  telex 4932775 HFI UI

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

Date: Sun, 16 Feb 92 09:56:30 EST
From: Steve Thornton <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: MOH, Bad Manners, Poor Throughput, and Sprint


In TELECOM Digest 12 : 128, Jack Winslade said:

> I consider MOH to be the SECOND rudest thing a called party can do to
> me.  The rudest is for the answering party to immediately say 'Good
> morning, XYZ Corporation, can you hold ...' to which my answer is
> always 'no I cannot.'  That answer usually leaves them dumbfounded, as
> if they had never heard it before.

I take you've never had to answer the phone in a place of business
before.  If you have, you might have been faced with three lines
ringing at once.  The secretary who is putting you on hold so fast may
not have a choice. The next time you feel like making a snappy remark
(heard a thousand times, I assure you) to a secretary, you might
reconsider who is the one being rude. The only thing dumbfounding the
secretary on the other end is the fact that there can be so many
egotists in the world all calling at once. A little consideration goes
a long way.

BTW, I totally agree with you about MOH. Shouldn't it be BMOH, though,
for Bad Music On Hold?

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

From: [e-mail] (Gordon Burditt)
Subject: Re: AT&T No Longer Billing For Bogus 800
Organization: Gordon Burditt
Date: Sun, 16 Feb 1992 10:58:57 GMT


> The call IS free. It is the associated service that you are being
> charged for. No, I am not being flippant about this. If I pick up a
> telephone and dial an 800 number and order $10,000 worth of computer
> equipment, is that a $10,000 phone call? The difference is that in the
> case of the latter, I can make the call and order the merchandise in
> YOUR name and you will get the bill. With the service you seem to feel
> is inappropriate, I would have to have direct, physical access to your
> telephone.

Another difference is that in the no-ANI case, you will not get stuck
with "you are responsible for the use of your line, so you have to pay
whether you ordered it or not".  With 900 numbers, you do.  Do you
claim that if someone gets physical access to my line, I'm stuck for
the bill for services (ANI and not billed through telco)?  I will be
stuck with the bill for the *CALL*, but it's hard to run up $10,000
bills in a short time for just calls, not services, especially since
most people don't know anyone in Iraq or with an INMARSAT phone.

>> Payphone owners look out.  You'll start getting bills in the mail
>> for phone calls that won't appear on your phone bill, and which will
>> be essentially impossible to block.

> No, but the service provider can block the call. And he will if there

Does this mean that payphone owners and employers now have to block
800 calls to avoid getting bills for unauthorized services?  Or that
they have to call up thousands of "service providers" (more being
added every week) and ask them to block calls for their lines?

> is a probability that he will not be able to collect. The fact that
> the caller's number is known and verified greatly simplifies the
> extension of credit by non-standard means. Not long ago, participants
> in this very forum decried the fact that unless one had a telco, Visa,
> MC, or other major credit card, he was shut out of a number of
> convenience purchasing situations.

So how does this help the person who does not have HIS OWN phone?
Assuming he's not going to lie about who he is, can he have the bill
sent to him, not his {parents, wife, husband, employer, payphone
owner}?  Or is this flexibility accomplished by simply sticking the
wrong person with the bill?

> I have been instrumental in setting up some 800 number ordering
> systems that are able to use credit flexibility that has heretofore
> never existed. One of the key elements is the verification of the
> simple matter of the caller being who he claims to be. If the

If you use the ANI information for verification only, (and later
tracking down of deadbeats) and sufficient billing information comes
from the caller himself, then I don't have much problem with this,
although there ought to be more education to the general public that
ANI information is given out when you call 800/900 numbers.  ANI
information should not take the place of standard security measures.
If I call up about my credit card account or ATM card, don't assume
that you know which account I'm talking about from the ANI (surprise!
my wife and college-age kid have accounts, too), and ask for the PIN
number or mother's maiden name or whatever anyway.  And don't assume
the number I'm calling from is my new home phone, update your
database, and accuse me of giving a bogus phone number when you can't
reach me at my parents' house or an airport payphone.

Yes, most of this comes under "stupid use of ANI", which doesn't make
ANI bad by itself.  However, this is actual stupid use of ANI, as
reported in the Digest, not theoretical stupid use of ANI.

If you use the ANI information to bill the wrong person (caller !=
line owner in many cases), or as a fallback to bill the wrong person
if the right person refuses to pay, I certainly do object to it.

I anticipate also that ANI information will impede my ability to order
things by telephone.  Suppose I have a 9-to-5 job.  Many order lines
are open only 9-to-5, so I will never be able to order from my own
phone.  I probably can't call the 800 number from my work phone
because my employer has 800 blocking due to employee abuse of
"services".  So I call from a payphone or my work phone (which is
probably behind a big PBX).  I give my order.  I give them a credit
card number.  Since they can now check ANI, they do.  The ANI doesn't
match.  I give them my work and home phone numbers.  I explain the
situation.  If I'm calling from my work phone, I offer to let them
call me back to check.  If I'm calling from a pay phone, they can't
call back because payphones don't take incoming calls - only drug
dealers take incoming calls on payphones.  All of these procedures
probably require the approval of someone who isn't around at the
moment, or the ordertakers don't know how to deal with the situation.

> information presented does not agree with the ANI, an operator gives
> him a chance to explain. But there are many cases of a transaction
> occurring that otherwise would not without ANI.

Is this done at the cost of billing the wrong person?

On another subject, how do you match ANI information (a phone number)
with a name and address, or do you?  And WHICH name (billing vs.
listing) and which address (billing vs. listing)?  If billing
information, where do you get it?


Gordon L. Burditt     sneaky.lonestar.org!gordon

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

Date: Sat, 15 Feb 92 13:59:03 EST
From: Tony Harminc <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Low-Bandwidth Free Info Transfer?


[e-mail] (Yanek Martinson) wrote:

> Idea: suppose a modem calls another modem across the nation, detects
> RRING, waits a few seconds, and hangs up. The modem on the other end
> measured number of seconds or rings that the first one waited.  The
> first modem calls back with the next piece of information.

> This kind of thing would work for transmitting very short messages
> (about one line for example) when speed is not important.

> Would this work? Why not? Would it be illegal? By buying phone
> service, am I not buying the right to ring anyone?

> [Moderator's Note: It probably would work and it definitly would be
> illegal to pass messages, coded or otherwise without paying for it.
> And no, when you buy phone service you are not buying the right to
> 'ring anyone'; you are buying the right to connect your instrument and
> wire to any other instrument and wire whose owner wishes to communicate
> with you.  The ringing is only the means to signal a pending connection;
> it is not intended to be a communication in and of itself.  PAT]

Well I'm not so sure it would be illegal.  Seems to me there is a
continuum of information passing without billing, and it isn't clear
when it crosses the line into illegality.  Let's try a few examples:

If I call someone, and let the phone ring for two minutes without
answer, the information that no one is home (or that no one want to
answer) has been transmitted to me.  At the same time, the information
that someone called has been sent to the called party.  If the called
party has Caller*ID, then much more information has been transfered.
Surely no one argues that this is illegal?  Much the same applies to
getting a busy signal.

One step further: Most answering machines these days, including those
sold by AT&T, have a "toll saver" feature.  The number of rings the
machine takes to answer depends on whether an incoming call has been
logged previously.  If you call your own machine and it hasn't
answered within (typically) two rings, you know you have no messages
and can hang up without paying a toll charge.  This is very clearly an
information transfer without paying (and is advertised as such - it's
not some phone phreaks' trick).  Yet phone carriers don't seem to
complain about it.

Next: You call collect to someone (your answering service, say) who
refuses to accept the charges.  This indicates that you have no new
messages.  You have now avoided paying a toll charge, as above.  Is
this different from the "toll saver" feature on a machine ?

Onward: You call collect as above, but this time your call itself is
(by arrangement) used to mean that you have arrived safely at your
destination.  The called party accepts the call only if there is new
information about your trip, otherwise the charges are refused.

And: You call collect as before, but the name you give is actually
from a list which encodes a message to the called party.

Finally: You call person-to-person to a fictitious name, which is
encoded as above.  The called party says that that person is in a
meeting with Mr.  Jones and will be free at 3:15.  This is, of course,
also encoded information.  Thus a two way information passing has
occured with no charges.

OK -- where is the line ?  Pretty much everyone agrees that the last
two are illegal, and the first two are not.  Does the line lie between
the machine "toll saver" and the human one ?  A very strange idea, if
so.  Is it based on intent to pay ?  In the "toll saver" case, it
might be argued that if there *are* new messages, the machine will
answer and the caller will pay.  But this is just as true of the next
two cases.  It could even be true of the final case - e.g. if the
called party has new information to pass on, the call would be
accepted and paid for.

Not so simple I think ...


Tony Harminc


[Moderator's Note: Signals between yourself and telco or between telco
and the called party in the process of setting up the call are legal,
and by extension a communication between you and the operator or the
operator and the called party. Certain types of information will be
gleaned from this (the party is not home, is talking to someone else,
etc), however it is illegal to deliberatly structure the delivery of
these signals in such a way that a communication is passed between
subscribers without being paid for.  'Toll-Saver' on answering
machines is of questionable legality.  If you say your name is Tony
and that is in fact your name, all is well. If your name is really Bob
and you say 'Tony' to convey a message then there was fraud. Whether
or not the called party answers the phone, if he receives Caller-ID
then he is paying for the transmission of that information.  PAT]

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

From: trickie![e-mail] (Richard Nash)
Subject: Re: Foiling Drug Dealers Use of Payphones
Date: 15 Feb 92 21:52:56 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Robert S.
Helfman) writes:

> In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
> 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.

In Alberta, Canada, most payphones that I know of, are outgoing only.
Reason given, is that billing to a third party number, (the payphone
number) was and still is a fraudulent practice. With Billed Number
Services databases, it should be possible to screen out these types of
attempts and allow the reversal of this long time position in
locations that would be better served by permitting incoming calls.


Richard Nash          Edmonton, Alberta Canada T6K 0E8
UUCP:                    [e-mail]
unregistered leaf site;  trickie!rickie
Amatuer Radio Packet:    VE6BON @ VE6MC.AB.CAN.NA
                         VE6BON.ampr.org     [44.135.147.206]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #134
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa24491;
          16 Feb 92 18:27 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA00041
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 16 Feb 1992 16:41:23 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA21022
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 16 Feb 1992 16:41:15 -0600
Date: Sun, 16 Feb 1992 16:41:15 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #135

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 16 Feb 92 16:41:00 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 135

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Oregon PUC Hearing Summary (Daniel Herrick)
    Re: Oregon PUC Hearing Summary (Fred R. Goldstein)
    Re: Oregon PUC Hearing Summary (Robert Thurlow)
    Re: Oregon PUC Hearing Summary (Randy Bush)
    Re: Oregon PUC Hearing Summary (Joe Mann)
    Kansas City Sysops and Southwestern Bell (Newsbytes via crash!pro-gallup)
    Re: Info Services? Keep Them Banned! (David Gast)
    Re: Info Services? Keep Them Banned! (Eric Florack)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "90958, HERRICK, DANIEL" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Oregon PUC Hearing Summary
Date: 16 Feb 92 11:34:18 EST


> [Moderator's Note: Maybe you have forgotten or did not know that when
> I assumed responsibility for the Digest from Jon Solomon in 1988, I
> was using facilities at Boston University (bu.edu) because that is
> where Jon had the mailing list set up. I worked for three months via
> PC Pursuit between Chicago and Boston. When PC Pursuit was down for
> some reason or during hours it was not operational, I used AT&T to
> dial direct to bu.edu.  Because my phone bill and Telenet bill were
> quite high, I gratefully accepted the generous offer made to me by
> Northwestern University to establish the Digest at their site, and I
> have worked from here since February, 1989.

> Not once back in 1988-89 did it occur to me to blame IBT, AT&T,
> Telenet or anyone else for the costs involved. Not once did it occur
> to me telco owed me or this Digest anything other than a clean
> connection I was paying for.  People spend their money as they wish. I
> chose to make the changes required in the way I handled the Digest to
> lessen my expenses; I didn't ask telco for any charity!  PAT]

You would have screamed bloody murder if they had said you had to pay
daytime tolls no matter when you called.  That analogy is closer.


dan     [e-mail]
dlh Performance Marketing  POBox 1419 Mentor Ohio 44061


[Moderator's Note: There is no difference in interstate toll rates
between business and residence phones. A call to Boston costs X cents
during the day and some fraction of X cents for calls at night.
Whether or not your phone is business or residence does not matter.
And coincidentally, when I operated my own BBS during 1983-85 and the
BBS for the Chicago Public Library in 1982-83 they were on business
lines.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Fred R. Goldstein)
Subject: Re: Oregon PUC Hearing Summary
Date: 15 Feb 92 18:38:04 GMT
Organization: Digital Equipment Corp., Littleton MA USA


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Linc Madison) writes ...

> I don't follow your argument about "added cost to networked BBS's if
> they find themselves dialing long distance to reach their nearest
> neighbor."  Long distance rates for standard residential service and
> for standard commercial service are EXACTLY IDENTICAL everywhere in
> the United States.

Speak for your own RBOC, Linc!  Here in Massachusetts, New England
Telephone has DIFFERENT MTS (toll) schedules for residence and
business (within the LATA).

If the call is direct dialed from a residence phone, there is a
mileage component up to 22 miles+.  If it's operator/card, then
there's a mileage component, same schedule, but with additional rate
bands for longer distances.

If it's dialed from a business phone, then it's "postal", with a rate
of about 12.5c/minute for all intra-LATA toll, up to the first
$100/month or so (if I recall).  Then it's a nickel cheaper per
minute.  And they abolished the intra-LATA WATS tariff, since this is
almost the same thing.

Residence gets lots of concessions here.  Bay State East Service is
under 6c/ minute, except weekday mornings (not busy hour, but
mornings).  That's on top of about a $25-30 monthly rate for it,
including a fairly wide (by MA stds) flat-rate local package. So it's
actually cheaper to use the business line in the morning, and the
residence line in the afternoon.  (This in addition to the many local
rate options for residences.)

They do keep things confusing here!


Fred R. Goldstein   [e-mail]
k1io             or [e-mail]   voice:[phone]
Standard Disclaimer:  Opinions are mine alone; sharing requires permission.

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

From: [e-mail] (Robert Thurlow)
Subject: Re: Oregon PUC Hearing Summary
Organization: CONVEX Computer Corporation, Richardson, Tx., USA
Date: Fri, 14 Feb 1992 21:14:31 GMT


> [Moderator's Note: Oh, I don't think 'within a month or two' anyone
> would go off line who hadn't planned on it in the first place, let
> alone 'most of the BBSes'. Somehow I think they would survive.   PAT]

I have to strenuously disagree with you here, Pat.  I operate a BBS
for an amputee support group here in Dallas.  So far, it has been run
out of my own pocket, with the support group a little too pinched to
help out, but the plan is that they will ultimately cover the basic
costs.  The BBS runs on an ancient PC-XT clone with just enough
resources for the job, and the only reason it is there is that the
hardware was literally free.

The BBS has more real, useful information about and for amputees than
any single service I have ever found.  I cannot afford to pay business
rates out of my own pocket, so the day I received irrevocable notice
that I had to pay business rates would be the day I unplugged the BBS.
I think that would be a very sad day.  I frankly do not believe I
could get any reliable help with the funding from sources I know
about; I have not received such help in the ten months of operation.

I don't buy the stuff about charitable organizations being charged
business rates, either, because that is an acceptance of the status
quo I don't agree with.  I would like to see small organizations like
ours, measured by either net assets or monthly budget, get lower phone
rates than a business as well.  The phone bill for the group phone is
one of the major drains on our resources right now, and only results
in perhaps a dozen calls per month in each direction.  Full business
rates are certainly not justified on the basis of traffic.

Comparatively, the newsletter we publish is a much better investment;
we get several memberships per year that amount to just subscriptions.
I think a lot of good is done by non-profit organizations, and I'd
like to see favorable rates for phone service comparable to what we
can already get for postage with bulk mail.

If you're going to attack favorable rates as unfair subsidies, why are
residential phone rates lower than cost in any event?  Why should
anybody get subsidized when non-profit groups are not?


Rob Thurlow, [e-mail]

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

Date: Sat, 15 Feb 92 12:25 PST
From: [e-mail] (Randy Bush)
Subject: Re: Oregon PUC Hearing Summary


> Nor are the BBS operators. They are simply asking the telco and the
> PUCs to go by the existing rules. I have read the Oregon and
> California tariffs governing the matter most thoroughly and there is
> no contortion of reality that can justify regrading residential BBS
> lines to business service. You, US West, and anyone else may come up
> with hundreds of justifications why BBSes should not enjoy residential
> status, but the tariff will not back you up. From a legal standpoint,
> the move is bogus.

It is amusing to still see all these non-Oregonians who are unfamiliar
with the actual details of the case and filing ranting on about the
filing.  But I expected better of you, John.

The filing is not US West vs. BBSs.  It is Wagner vs. US West.  Wagner
filed, not US West.  Wagner filed after US West said they smelled
business not residential use, which was after Morgel became verbally
abusive to an innocent telephone installer who was just trying to find
more coppoer on the street.

The well-known fact (possibly not in the more hysterical fringes
outside of Portland) is that Wagner received and continues to receive
income from the lines in question.  US West has been and continues to
be quite reasonable and willing to discuss and negotiate.

Once Wagner's case is decided, likely against him as even local BBS
operators will be testifying in US West's favor, we can all get back
to actually trying to sort out levels of use and service in a world
where society is still trying to catch up with technology.

The distortion, red herrings, and hysteria do not help one iota.  They
only damage the position of BBS operators.  But I guess the bored and
uninformed need something to occupy them.


[e-mail]   ...!uunet!m2xenix!randy


[Moderator's Note: As a matter of fact, I received a lengthy file from
a reader updating us on Wagner, and I will put it in the next issue of
the Digest. Everyone should find it quite enlightening.   PAT]

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

Date: 16 Feb 92 00:23:24 CST (Sun)
From: [e-mail] (Joe Mann)
Subject: Re: Oregon PUC Hearing Summary


Let us not forget that US West is aggressively marketing it's new
service "COMMUNITY LINK" in two of it's states, and has plans to 'roll
it out' in others.

COMMUNITY LINK is US West's version of Prodity, or Compuserve.  It was
locally introduced at the SuperBowl, when US West installed thousands
of terminals around the Twin Cities hotels.

COMMUNITY LINK is delivered via a joint venture of US West and French
owned Minitel. The new partnership is named CLM for COMMUNITY LINK /
Minitel.  CLM owns the 'switch' that routes the calls to the various
Information Service Providers or ISPs.  It also sells / rents the
terminals to the end users to access COMMUNITY LINK.

It should come as no surprise that the largest ISP is US West's
partner Minitel.  Minitel provides many services that would
potentially compete with the privately owned BBSs.

It now seems that in addition to 976 information providers, BBS owners
are on US West's 'harassment list'.  US West fought 976 providers in
much the same way, before the PUC's.  This action only 2-3 years after
actively promoting 976 Information Providers to 'get into the
businesss'.

The best way for US West to ensure success for COMMUNITY LINK, is for
it to pre-empt any competition before it starts the service.

I suspect that the BBS owners in Oregon are in for a protracted and
eventully loosing battle.  After all it's tough to fight a 25 billion
dollar company's agenda.

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

Date: Sun Feb 16 04:17:29 1992
From: [e-mail] (System Administrator)
Subject: Kansas City Sysops and Southwestern Bell
Organization: Crash TimeSharing, El Cajon, CA
Date: Sun, 16 Feb 1992 12:17:26 GMT


The following article was in America Online's February 14 Newsbytes:

Agreement Nears For Phone Company And Kansas BBS Sysops

The report from Kansas City is that Southwestern Bell phone company is
nearing an agreement with local operators of computer bulletin board
systems in a dispute over the company's charging BBSes business rates.
The pact seems to center on language in a new tariff plan.

{Communications Daily} newsletter this week quoted attorney Robin
Martinez, representing the sysops, as saying the proposed agreement
calls for BBSes to be exempt from business rates if they meet certain
conditions.

One of the conditions is that the boards must be located in residences.
Exempted BBSes also must not charge for access, must not advertise and
must have fewer than five phone lines.

Martinez says the last stumbling block in the agreement is coming up
with a workable definition for "BBS" for the tariff language.

Stay tuned.


UUCP: crash!pro-gallup!samp           |  pro-gallup   300 - 14,400 bps
ARPA: crash!pro-gallup![e-mail]  |  All MNP Levels  [phone]

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

Date: Sat, 15 Feb 92 03:28:40 -0800
From: [e-mail] (David Gast)
Subject: Re: Info Services? Keep Them Banned!


[e-mail] wrote in Digest V12 #79:

> 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.

While I do not think the local telcos should be allowed in the info
business, the above should be corrected.  The local telcos have their
monopoly; the cable companies also usually have a monopoly, and
frequently there is a monopoly in the newspaper business as well.
This monopoly can exist because of the Failing Newspaper Act (and
subsequent legislation) which essentially allows newspapers to engage
in activities which would be illegal in other businesses.  Such
activities include collusion, and price fixing.

The result is frequently only one major paper in a metropolitan area
and the inability of NEW papers to get going.  LA, for example, has
only one major English language paper and it owns something like 50%
of the Spanish language paper.  There are other papers, of course --
the WSJ, the NYT, the Santa Monica something, the LA Daily News (which
I think is only distributed in certain areas and is not significant
competition), the LA Weekly, the Reader (similar to the one in
Chicago), etc.

Thus, there is government regulation protecting the newspapers as well.


David

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

Date: Sat, 15 Feb 1992 13:51:03 PST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Info Services? Keep Them Banned!


Hi, David:

Thanks for taking the time to write me.

> While I do not think the local telcos should be allowed in the info
> business, the above should be corrected.  The local telcos have
> their monopoly; the cable companies also usually have a monopoly.

The effects are very different in these two instances, except in those areas
(Rochester is among the first) in which the  local cable company runs a local
commercial channel, that runs in direct competition with the local broadcast
channels. This is a situation I'll get into later.

For the majority of cable monopolies, there can be said to be little
effect on the 'served' as a whole, since there are other types of
reception to be had ... free broadcasting, and in some areas
'wireless cable' systems. THis, then cannot be said to be a full
monopoly. If you argue that there should be competition allowed by
city governments in cable locals, I would tend to agree; such
implimentation of market pressures certainly would serve to lower
prices, better service, and provide more jobs. However, since there
are other sources of TV, as I point out above, I have a harder time
being quite as vocal about a cable monopoly. It's bad, we agree, but
let's work on the worst example of what the monopoly does.

 I /will/ say that.  where there are effects on the 'served', they
tend to be more profound than they are in the cose of a telephone
monopoly. For example: Some of the effects on the served, it can be
argued, are political ... given that the coverage of news events and
commentary on them, can be controlled by those who own the systems ...
and since a large part of cable systems in this country are owned by
Ted and Jane, guess which way the politics will lean.

But your argument, when extended to local cable companies also being
programming providers, is valid, in comparison with local phone
monopolies, if only in that the traditional broadcasters are now being
held hostage by local cable ops who deem them not programming to be
carried, but competitors ... as the BBS ops are being held hostage to
the local telcos who deem THEM to be not customers to be served as
Kingsbury would dictate, but competitors.  In both cases, it is not in
the carrier company's best interests to serve well at a fair price.

(Boy, run-on sentence, hmm?)

I get the idea we agree, that in both situations, these local
company's role should be limited to making sure the existing signals
are CARRIED, and not creating their own.

> This monopoly can exist because of the Failing Newspaper Act (and
> subsequent legislation) which essentially allows newspapers to engage
> in activities which would be illegal in other businesses.

I would suggest that while your comparison is valid, there's a
slightly different reason for this than you might expect.  Consider
the editorial policies of the papers that were allowed to operate in
such manner.  Gannett, for example, in our local area owns two papers:
THe Times Union, and the Democrat and Chronicle ... known by readers
at the times Unrinal and the Chronic Democrat ... the latter of which
oughta tell you about the editorial (and news coverage) policies of
Gannett ...

I suspect there's more than a few that were allowed to exist by a
Liberal/Democrat controlled CONgress simply because of their vocal
(and sometimes, under-cover) support of Liberal/Democratic policy.

It's odd that such papers, by the way, have been strangely silent on
this issue.

My best regards.


E

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #135
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa26482;
          16 Feb 92 19:13 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA24559
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 16 Feb 1992 17:28:04 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA29686
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 16 Feb 1992 17:27:55 -0600
Date: Sun, 16 Feb 1992 17:27:55 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #136

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 16 Feb 92 17:27:32 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 136

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    More On The Wagner Case At The Oregon PUC (Walter Scott)
    What the RBOC's Send Out to Inquirers on HR3515/S2112 (Toby Nixon)
    Re: Massachusetts DPU Approves ISDN (Fred R. Goldstein)
    Re: Seeking Simple Telephone Line Simulator (Gordon D. Woods)
    Re: 411 is Now a Profit Center in Texas (Larry Rachman)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sun, 16 Feb 92 09:53:44 PDT
From: lorbit![e-mail] (Walter Scott)
Subject: More On The Wagner Case At The Oregon PUC


 ... With Tony Wagner of Portland, Oregon and First Choice
Communications BBS. I learned that Wagner's BBS is still online. This
is contrary to my understanding of the 2/5/92 {Newsbytes} story by Dana
Blankenhorn.  Wagner's BBS is available at:

503-297-0278
503-297-0279
503-297-0343 [RESTRICTED ACCESS]

     Wagner mentions his dispute with US West in bulletin #1 on his system.
Here is full text of that bulletin.

       ================= TEXT BEGINS ================

Well The U.S. West phone company has decided that ALL Phone lines that
have modems on them Should be classed As Business Lines..

I have run a FREE Bulletin Board System for years out of my own pocket
with out ever asking users to help pay the Cost of running the
system..

This will have to change if U.S. West has their way so please leave me
mail as to how you feel about this better yet Call the Phone Company
and tell them how you feel ...

If this happens I will do something like a Pay system that will cost
around $1.00-3.00 Per hour depending on what parts of the BBS you want
to use The Advantage to you will be unlimited Time on NO Time Limits
If it get to busy I will add more lines Wildcat can handle 250 Lines :-)

            I may then even add a bunch of Doors with Games Etc.

         ================= TEXT ENDS =================

     Wagner's legal expenses were not dealt with in the manner implied
by {Newsbytes} on 2/5/92. Although an investigation of Wagner's
"Pacific Nortwest Phone's" conference (the location on Wagner's system
of the FidoNet PNWBELL echo) would indicate that the subject of others
chipping in to pay for legal services was broached, Wagner informed me
that no group of SysOps or users ever paid for, or attempted to pay
Richard Samuels (Wagner's original attorney).

     Richard Samuels withdrew from Wagner's complaint filing at the
Oregon Public Utility Commission shortly before a December 10 hearing
date. Wagner represented himself at that hearing.

     The "Pacific Nortwest Phone's" conference on First Choice
Communications additionally reveals an important item of interest. It
is apparent that US West and SouthWestern Bell are sharing information
about disputes with BBS operators in their respective operating
jurisdictions. Such is illustrated in the following message pulled
from the "Pacific Nortwest Phone's" conference on First Choice
Communications.

          ============= TEXT BEGINS ============

 From    : SCOTT LENT                       Number    : 223 of 241
To      : ALL                               Date      : 01/10/92 11:56am
Subject : a note                            Reference : NONE
Read    : [N/A]                             Private   : NO
Conf    : 505 - Pacific Nortwest Phone's


That may or may not be of interest to those of you serviced by US
West:

A group of sysops in Missouri met with representatives from
Southwestern Bell on 01/07/92 in St. Louis for the second in a series
of negotiations. At the meeting, William Bailey, District Manager-Rate
Administration, divulged that he had been in contact with "someone
from US West," and that their conversation included discussion of
their respective telephone tariffs.  Specifically, he made reference
to your (Oregon's) tariff wording that refers to "domestic use."

This information is two-fold.  First, you now know that your RBOC
people are in contact with others about tariff wording.  Secondly,
your RBOC people are aware that other RBOCs are negotiating with their
consumers over regulations that affect the modeming community.


Scott

DB B1056/004017
* Origin: GKCSA-the ultimate bal...er...Bell buster (1:280/310)

      ================ TEXT ENDS ===================


     Wagner has retained attorney Kevin Miles [uncertain of spelling]
to represent him in his complaint case at the Oregon Public Utility
Commission. Miles has until March 3, 1992 to file a brief. A round of
reply briefs from the opposing parties in the complaint is also
possible.

                 Walter Scott

"Lightfinger" Rayek's Friendly Casino: 206/528-0948, Seattle, Washington.

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

From: Toby Nixon <[e-mail]>
Subject: What the RBOC's Send Out to Inquirers on HR3515/S2112
Date: 16 Feb 92 17:15:52 GMT
Organization: Hayes Microcomputer Products, Norcross, GA


I called the number published in the newspaper ads for more
information on the BOC's fight against legislation restricting their
offerings of information services.  This week (I'm not sure which day,
because I was out in California when it arrived), I received some
materials in the mail.  I have transcribed them here verbatim.  My
commentary will appear in a following article.

DISCLAIMER: I am sending this information simply so that you will know
what is being said, NOT, repeat NOT, because I support what is said.
Likewise, this posting is NOT to be construed as an indication of any
position on these issues on the part of my employer.  Any
typographical errors are mine and are not in the original.

    -- Toby

                               ***

[Envelope] The return address is listed as "P.O. Box 33605, Washington
DC 20033-0605", but there is no company name.  The return address is
on a LABEL stuck over another address (tacky!).  This original address
is 1625 K St. NW, Suite 300, Washington DC 20006.]


[Page 1]
[Letterhead: "America's Future / Too Important To Leave On Hold"]

January 30, 1992

Mr. Toby Nixon
P.O. Box 105203
Atlanta  GA  30348

Dear Mr. Nixon:

    Thank you very much for taking the time to call and ask for
additional information about the future of information services in the
United States.  The current public policy debate about these services
centers on issues of concern to us all -- consumer choice, competition,
and affordability.

    Regional Bell company entry into information services could
provide tangible, concrete benefits to residential and small business
customers.  Consumers could have more choices and easier, more
affordable access to information services -- eliminating the specter
of "information rich" versus "information poor" that currently defines
the information services industry in this country.

    Information services like community education programs, home
health monitoring services, community events calendars, individually
customized travel, sports, and stock market information, remarkable
new features like electronic Yellow Pages, and dramatic improvements
in home shopping options can now be in the future of all American
consumers, whether they line in a Manhattan apartment or a Nebraska
farmhouse.

    The Regional Bell companies believe that every American has a
right to participate in the Information Age, regardless of location,
age, income, or physical ability.  Many public-interest organization
also believe that, and have supported lifting the information services
restriction.  They include the National Association for the
Advancement of Colored People, the National School Boards Association,
the National Council on Aging, the National Association of the Deaf
and the World Institute on Disability.

    We need your help to make sure that the door to the
Information Age remains open to all.  If you agree, please write your
Congressional Representatives and Senators.  Their names and addresses
are:

Hon. Ben Jones        Hon. Sam Nunn         Hon. Wyche Fowler
U.S. House of Rep.    U.S. Senate           U.S. Senate
Washington DC 20515   Washington DC 20510   Washington DC 20510

    Thank you for your help.

    Sincerely,
    s/Stokes Liles
    Stokes Liles

[Page 2]

                      Dawning of a New Age

    In America today, we stand on the threshold of a
communications revolution.  A new generation of services that would
make access to a wide variety of information as easy as dialing your
phone is just over the horizon.

    For example, your children could receive, complete, and turn
in homework assignments electronically, even if they can't go to
school.  Your parents could "visit" the doctor without ever having to
leave their house -- the doctor could take pulse rates, monitor vital
signs, and talk directly to them.  *You* could use these services to
do your banking, make your shopping list, and turn on your house
lights on your way home.

    These services focus on increasing the information readily
available to you on a day-to-day basis, and are generally known as
"information services."  Their ultimate purpose is to improve your
life by increasing your control over the multitude of tasks and
decisions you face every day.

    The few commercial information services available today are
generally tailored to the needs -- and the pocketbooks -- of
businesses and an affluent few.  In fact, Prodigy, one popular
service, characterizes its subscribers as "...highly educated
professionals with above average incomes, owning homes valued above
national norms."  CompuServe, another computer-based information
service, describes itself as "the source for more than 750,000 of the
world's most affluent, professional and acquisitive people."

    We at the regional Bell companies believe that all Americans,
regardless of age, income, physical ability or location should have
access to the benefits these services can bring.  The unique public
access network offered by your phone company can help make this a
reality.

    A new age -- the Information Age -- is dawning.  But we need
your help to make sure that America doesn't get pushed back into the
dark, and that all Americans have access to affordable information
services.  America's future is too important to leave on hold.


[Page 3]

              REASONS TO OPPOSE H.R. 3515 AND S. 2112

      CONGRESS SHOULD NOT UPSET COURT DECISIONS ALLOWING THE
          BELL COMPANIES TO PROVIDE INFORMATION SERVICES

* On October 7th, 1991, the U.S. Court of Appeals lifted a judicial
barrier preventing the regional Bell telephone companies from offering
information services like electronic Yellow Pages, home health
monitoring, home shopping, home banking, or home education services.

* The American Newspaper Publishers Association (ANPA) has backed
legislation in both the House of Representatives and U.S. Senate that
would effectively overturn the court decisions and prevent the Bell
companies from provising many information services.  The House bill is
referred to as H.R. 3515, and the Senate bill as S. 2112.

* Through this legislation, newspaper publishers are attempting to win
in Congress what they have lost in court decisions.  In reality, the
ANPA is trying to close the door on technological innovations that
might reduce newspaper advertising revenues.

* These bills would *delay the availability* of affordable information
services to the majority of American consumers.  By restricting the
Bell companies' ability to enter new markets -- especially those in
their local areas -- H.R. 3515/S. 2112 would deny American consumers
new services that are already being enjoyed by citizens of other
countries.

* Groups such as the NAACP, the National Council on Aging, American
Council for the Blind, National Council of Silver Haired Legislators,
and the National School Boards Association support Bell company entry
into the information services marketplace.

* Passing H.R. 3515/S. 2112 would *hurt* America and American
consumers -- by stifling competition, by restricting the creation of
new jobs, and by denying the majority of U.S. citizens access to
affordable new technologies.

* Congress can and should act to make the United State more
competitive, not less.  Oppose H.R. 3515/S. 2112 -- they are *not in
the best interests of American consumers*.


[Page 4]

                      LETTER WRITING TIPS

* If you agree that the door to the Information Age should remain open
to all Americans, please include these points in your letters to your
Congressional representatives:

1)  OPPOSE H.R. 3515/S. 2112 -- THEY ARE NOT IN THE BEST INTERESTS
OF AMERICAN CONSUMERS!

2)  ASK YOUR REPRESENTATIVE/SENATOR TO VOTE AGAINST THESE BILLS.

* Your letter should be addressed to:

    The Honorable (Senator's Name)
    U.S. Senate
    Washington  DC  20510

    The Honorable (Representative's Name)
    U.S. House of Representatives
    Washington  DC  20515

* Make sure to put *your address* on the letter, and don't forget to
sign it.

* Use your own language, and personalize the issue.

* Stick to *this* issue, and be brief.

* State the *facts*.

* *Neatness* counts; type your letter if possible.

                               ***

Posted, but not agreed with, by:

Toby Nixon, Principal Engineer      | Voice   [phone]  Telex 151243420
Hayes Microcomputer Products, Inc.  | Fax     [phone]  CIS   70271,404
P.O. Box 105203                     | BBS     [phone]  AT&T    !tnixon
Atlanta, Georgia  30348             | UUCP uunet!hayes!tnixon  Fido   1:114/15
USA                                 | Internet                [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Fred R. Goldstein)
Subject: Re: Massachusetts DPU Approves ISDN
Date: 15 Feb 92 23:18:15 GMT
Organization: Digital Equipment Corp., Littleton MA USA



In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Adam
M. Gaffin) writes ...

> The DPU made a couple of other minor changes in the company's proposed
> rates for various services, but basically agreed with NET's rate
> request. Unfortunately, I don't know what the DPU did with per-minute
> or per-packet rates, since I couldn't drive into Boston, and I hard a
> hard enough time getting them just to fax me the three pages of
> monthly base charges (DON'T talk to me about certain Massachsetts
> state agencies :-) )

I had a friend in Boston ... here are the rates.

Circuit-switched data (intraoffice only):

    For the first 30 minutes total usage per month:
        $.10 first min/.08 add'l min
    For additional usage: ("bulk discount")
         .06 first min/.03 add'l min
    These rates are temporary pending cost studies.

I didn't see any different rates for packet than proposed, which was
$.70 to $.60/kilosegment, plus $.02 or .01/call, depending on time of
day.  The kilosegment rate has bulk discounts.


Fred R. Goldstein   [e-mail]
                 or [e-mail]   voice:[phone]
Standard Disclaimer:  Opinions are mine alone; sharing requires permission.

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

Date: Sat, 15 Feb 92 09:37:15 EST
From: [e-mail] (Gordon D Woods)
Subject: Re: Seeking Simple Telephone Line Simulator
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail].
mot.com (Devon Davis) wrote:

> A comany called Teltone produces a telephone line simulator (model TLS3)
> for about $540.  The address is:

> They require a 110 volt power supply.  There are two RJ11 jacks on the
> front of the box.  One jack can call the other jack by dialing a two
> digit preassigned phone number.  The box is meant to demo or test fax
> machines, phones, and modems. I have worked with these boxes for over
> a year and consider them a very useful tool.

The box has a subtle flaw if you're doing more than connecting some
faxes, etc.:  It only provides -24 volt battery. Otherwise it's a
dynamite machine.

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

Date: 15 Feb 92 22:02:12 EST
From: Larry Rachman <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: 411 is Now a Profit Center in Texas


In his recent contribution, Gregg E. Woodcock <[e-mail]>
writes:

> The feature works like this: After reading you the number you
> requested, you are prompted with the following message, "If you want
> to have this number dialed automatically without hanging up press 1

[omitted]

> This is quite a sad commentary on how lazy our socity has become (I
> know, maybe you don't have pen/paper handy, maybe you are blind ...)

 ...or maybe you're on a cellular phone, on the expressway. If they
offered the service here, I'd probably use it when I was in the car.
Actually, if it saved me a minute of air time, it would *save* me
money! On Long Island, with the 'low usage' plan, peak air time is
$0.97 per minute :-( !


Larry Rachman, WA2BUX                  [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #136
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa28070;
          16 Feb 92 19:56 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA18337
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 16 Feb 1992 18:13:02 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA00240
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 16 Feb 1992 18:12:53 -0600
Date: Sun, 16 Feb 1992 18:12:53 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #137

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 16 Feb 92 18:12:49 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 137

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Information Wanted on History of Muzak (Jim Gottlieb)
    Re: Information Wanted on History of Muzak (Floyd Vest)
    Re: Bellcore Multimedia Software? (Wallace Colyer)
    Re: Bellcore Multimedia Software? (Syd Weinstein)
    Re: Incoming Calls Problem (Paul Cook)
    Re: Help Wanted Wiring Western Union Clock (Laird P. Broadfield)
    Re: Help Wanted Wiring Western Union Clock (Harold Hallikainen)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Jim Gottlieb)
Subject: Re: Information Wanted on History of Muzak
Date: 16 Feb 92 10:55:49 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Jim Gottlieb)
Organization: Info Connections, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo, Japan


[e-mail] (Keith Smith) writes:

> we get All JAZZ MUZAK til 11, Rock-and-Roll MUZAK from 11 - 3, and
> Adult Contemporary MUZAK from 3 to 5.  All fed from a Satellite disk
> on the top of our building into a little descrambler box next to the
> PA amp.  We change the programming with a phone call.

Sounds totally ancient compared with what we have here in Japan.  The
"cable radio" service we subscribe to for 6000 yen a month ($US47 --
about the same as Muzak charges) provides 440 channels of digital
audio over a coax that they blended into the building TV antenna
cable.

The 440 channels (204 of which are doubled up to provide 102 stereo
programs) offer every kind of music and non-music programming
imaginable, including one channel that plays nothing but "Happy
Birthday" 24 hours a day, three channels that play South Korean music,
one channel each for North Korean music, harp-based background music,
country, Mexican, Bluegrass, Beatles, Presley, Soul, Fusion, and on
and on and on.

Keeping the telecom angle, there's even one channel that is connected
to a phone line ([phone]) so that you can broadcast whatever
you want to whomever else might be listening to channel J40 at the
time.

Hmm, it's cold outside.  Maybe it's time to turn on one of the
"Tropical Music" channels ...

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

From: Floyd Vest <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Information Wanted on History of Muzak
Date: 16 Feb 92 08:55:42 CDT


[5 Feb 92 05:31:42 GMT] [e-mail] (Mathew Zank) wrote:

> Does anyone know about the history of Muzak, the service that brings

 From _Uncle John's Fourth Bathroom Reader_:

General George Squier was head of the U.S. Signal Corps in WWI.
During the war he discovered a way to transmit music over electrical
lines.  When the war was over, he showed his discovery to a Cleveland,
OH utility.  The company liked his invention, and in 1922 helped
Squier set up the Wired Radio Company.

o Their plan: Provide an alternative to radio by broadcasting music to
households through their power lines (for a fee).

o Squier changed his company's name to "Muzak" in 1934.  Why?  He
liked Kodak's name, and wanted something that sounded similar.

Squier overlooked one thing when he started his bisiness: households
receiving radio broadcasts free of charge would not see any reason to
pay a monthly fee for Muzak's wire broadcasts.  This made it tough to
attract customers.  However, events during WWII helped keep the
company in business:

o To combat assembly line fatigue, the British government began
broadcasting the BBC in defense factories.

o When production at these plants increased as much as 6%, the U.S.
government hired Muzak to pipe sounds into U.S. plants.  Their productivity
rose 11%.

o Studies showed that even cows and chickens increased productivity when
"functional" music played in the background.

o Seeing this, the company switched its focus to increasing productivity
for business customers.  Today it broadcats via satellite to 180
different Muzak "stations: around the country -- and into the ears of
more than 100 million "listeners" worldwide.


Floyd Vest <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Manager, Administrative Systems--Auburn University, Alabama USA
Voice: [phone]  BBS: [phone]  FIDO: 1:3613/3

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

Date: Sun, 16 Feb 1992 15:39:48 -0500 (EST)
From: Wallace Colyer <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Bellcore Multimedia Software?


The following is the announcement from Bellcore of Metamail.

 Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1992 14:50:37 -0500 (EST)
 From: Nathaniel Borenstein <[e-mail]>
 Subject: Metamail:  Multimedia Mail for the Masses

On behalf of Bellcore, I am happy to announce the availability of the
"metamail" software to the email community.  This package, which is
available free of charge for unlimited use by anyone for any purpose,
is offered in the hope of making multimedia mail more widespread.

                          OVERVIEW

The basic idea of "multimedia" electronic mail is to extend email as
we now know it to include many other types of data beyond plain
English text.  In particular, there is no reason, in principle, why
email should not include text in any of the world's languages and
character sets, nor why email should not include pictures, sounds,
animations, active spreadsheets, or any other kind of data that can be
stored on a computer.

In recent years, various research systems and even some commercial
products have extended email to include some or all of these
capabilities.  Until recently, however, none of them worked together,
and all of them required whole communities of users to abandon their
old tools en masse in favor of the new tools of a single software
vendor.

Recent developments have the promise of changing all of that.  There
is a new proposed standard for the format of multimedia mail, which
would make software from different vendors able to work together
smoothly with multimedia mail, as they do now with plain text mail.
The software being announced here implements that proposed standard,
but takes it a step further by incorporating it into the existing
tools with which people read mail today, allowing multimedia mail to
be adopted in an evolutionary rather than a revolutionary fashion.

                         DETAILS

Metamail is a package that can be used to convert virtually ANY
mail-reading program on UNIX into a multimedia mail-reading program.
It is an extermely generic implementation of MIME (Multipurpose
Internet Mail Extensions), the proposed standard for multimedia mail
formats on the Internet.  The implementation is extremely flexible and
extensible, using a "mailcap" file mechanism for adding support for
new data formats when sent through the mail.  At a heterogeneous site
where many mail readers are in use, the mailcap mechanism can be used
to extend them all to support new types of multimedia mail by a single
addition to a mailcap file.

The core of the package is a mechanism that allows the easy
configuration of mail readers to call external "viewers" for different
types of mail.  However, beyond this core mechanism, the distribution
includes viewers for a number of mail types defined by the MIME
standard, so that it is useful immediately and without any special
site-specific customization or extension.  Types with built-in support
in the metamail distribution include:

        1.  Plain US ASCII (i.e., English) text, of course.
        2.  Plain text in the ISO-8859-8 (Hebrew/English) character set.
        3.  Richtext (multifont formatted text, termcap-oriented viewer)
        4.  Image formats (using the xloadimage program under X11)
        5.  Audio (initial "viewer" for SPARCstations)
        6.  Multipart mail, combining several other types
        7.  Multipart/alternative mail, offering data in multiple formats.
        8.  Encapsulated messages
        9.  Partial & external messages (for large data objects)
        10.  Arbitrary (untyped) binary data

Other media types and character sets may be easily supported with the
mailcap mechanism, using the provided types as examples/templates.
The metamail software also provides rudimentary support for the use of
non-ASCII characters in certain mail headers, as described by a
companion document to the proposed MIME standard.

The metamail distribution comes complete with a small patch for each
of over a dozen popular mail reading programs, including Berkeley
mail, mh, Elm, Xmh, Xmail, Mailtool, Emacs Rmail, Emacs VM, Andrew,
and others.  Crafting a patch for additional mail readers is
relatively straightforward.

In order to build the metamail software, a single "make" command
followed by a relatively short compilation will suffice.  Patching
your mail reader is somewhat harder, but can usually be accomplished
in less than an hour if you have the sources at hand.  The experience
of beta testers is that the metamail package can easily be used to get
multimedia mail working with your existing mail readers in less than
half a day.

                        AVAILABILITY

To retrieve the file, use anonymous ftp to the machine
thumper.bellcore.com (Internet address 128.96.41.1).  Type "cd
pub/nsb".  In that directory, you will find:

1.  mm.tar.Z -- this is a compressed tar file containing the entire
metamail distribution.  Uncompress it, untar it, and read the
top-level "README" file for further instructions.  Strictly speaking,
this is the only thing you really need to retrieve.

2.  A subdirectory called "samples".  Except for the README file, each
file in this directory is a sample MIME-format message, which can be
used to test your metamail installation.

3.  BodyFormats.{ps,txt,ex} -- a copy (in PostScript/text/Andrew
format) of the latest draft of the MIME proposed standard.  This
document is also available as an Internet Draft.

4.  Configuration.{ps,txt,ex} -- a copy (in PostScript/text/Andrew
format) of the latest draft of the Internet informational RFC
describing the mailcap file format.  This document is also available
as an Internet Draft.

A new mailing list has been set up for disucssion of the metamail
software and related issues.  The mailing list is
[e-mail].  Requests to join the list should be
directed to [e-mail].

Please feel free to recirculate this announcement as widely as possible.


Nathaniel S. Borenstein <[e-mail]>
Member of Technical Staff, Bellcore

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

From: [e-mail] (Syd Weinstein)
Subject: Re: Bellcore Multimedia Software?
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Datacomp Systems, Inc.  Huntingdon Valley, PA
Date: Sun, 16 Feb 1992 21:34:22 GMT


[e-mail] (Ted Shapin) writes:

> From {Information Week}, Feb 10, 1992, p.8
> "Bellcore ... is giving Internet users a new software package that
> allows them to send multimedia E-mail messages.  Bellcore is
> distributing the software in hopes that is will spur use of the public
> phone network."

> Anyone have more info on what this is or who to contact?

This is MIME, the Multi-purpose Internet Mail Extensions ... and if
they think it will spur use of the public phone network, then what
they released it with the name Internet in it I don't know.  Its a
draft RFC on a proposed attachment interface for sound, binary files,
video, etc.

It is simple, uses external process viewers, and includes patches for
common mail user agents to take advantage of it.


Sydney S. Weinstein, CDP, CCP          Elm Coordinator - Current 2.3PL11
Datacomp Systems, Inc.                 Projected 2.4 Release: Mid?? 1992
[e-mail] or dsinc!syd      Voice: [phone], FAX: [phone]

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

Date: Sat, 15 Feb 92 21:59 GMT
From: Proctor & Associates <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Incoming Calls Problem


Lance Sanders wrote:

> A friend recently complained...that I never answered the phone
> anymore, and moreover, why did I take the answering machine offline?
> I heard an extremely brief blip from my phone, picked up, and
> took a call.

Jim Redelfs responded:

> The most likely cause of your problem is TOO MANY ringers bridged
> across the line.  This condition will also cause your answering
> machine to NOT pick-up a call since it is triggered by ringing
> current.

> The central office only has so much "poop" with which to ring your
> line.  Generally, five "ringers" is considered the max.  Of course,
> the distance from the C.O. is a factor, as is the "R.E.N." total

How true!  If you have many devices on your line, it is prudent to
add up the total RENs from all of them, and make sure that it doesn't
go much above five.  It was mentioned by some folks who responded to
Lance's dilema that many electronic phones have RENs less than 1.0.
But I have found that some electronic phones have even heavier loads
than a standard 2500 set.  Some are as high as 1.7.

Some of my customers have told me that they have successfully used our
46222 OPX/Long Loop Adaptor to boost the ringer capacity on a line.
This device is intended to boost DC voltage and ringing for extending
a PBX or key system extension off premises, but since it repeats
everything it sees at standard CO DC and ringing voltage, it works
well in this application.

The 46222 has standard RJ11 jacks for the input and output.  Just plug
it into 117 VAC and hook the telco line to the input, and the lines to
the telephones and other devices to the output.

Since it puts very little load on the line itself, you can actually
split your phones between the input and the output for driving a
maximum load.  The output has the same 5 REN capacity and 48 VDC line
voltage as the telco provides, but you have the advantage of repeating
everything so that electrically it looks like you are next door to the
CO.

If the phones are evenly split between the input and output of the
46222, you can probably drive at least 10 standard REN.

These are stocked by North Supply and GTE Supply, or available from
Proctor.


Paul Cook                         206-881-7000
Proctor & Associates         MCI Mail 399-1080
15050 NE 36th St.            fax: [phone]
Redmond, WA  98052-5317    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Laird P. Broadfield)
Subject: Re: Help Wanted Wiring Western Union Clock
Date: Wed, 12 Feb 1992 01:30:05 GMT


In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Jim
Hickstein) writes:

> After reading some months ago about the WU Time Service, and how some
> of these self-winding clocks were floating around, I happened upon one
> and immediately snapped it up.

[Pat explains how to adjust the accuracy with the adjustment screw ...]

I thought the most brilliant suggestion was whoever wrote in and said
he had cannibalized one of the digital watches that had an
"on-the-hour" beep, and connected the beep out circuit to the
accurizing armature on the clock.  Perhaps he'll see this and send you
the details.  (No, I'm sure WU didn't call it an "accurizing
armature", but it's the best I could come up with on the spur of the
moment.)


Laird P. Broadfield
UUCP: {ucsd, nosc}!crash!lairdb
INET: [e-mail]

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

Date: Wed, 12 Feb 92 16:30:31 -0800
From: [e-mail] (Harold Hallikainen)
Subject: Re: Help Wanted Wiring Western Union Clock
Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo


> I had not set my clocks for about three months (forgot about
> it) and one of the two was about five minutes fast. The other was
> about five minutes slow. WUTCO used to calibrate them *hourly*.  PAT]

    This reminds me of a theory presented by Ric Turner, a
programmer who used to work for me.  If you average the time according
to all the clocks in the time zone (including the ones that are
broken), will you get the exact time?

    With Pat's small sample, it seems to work!


Harold Hallikainen              [e-mail]
Hallikainen & Friends, Inc.     [e-mail]
141 Suburban Road, Bldg E4      phone [phone] fax [phone]
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-7590  telex 4932775 HFI UI


[Moderator's Note: No, you will merely get an 'average' of the time
shown on all the clocks. That 'average' may or may not by coincidence
happen to be the correct time, but it probably won't be considering
that only one precise situation of the hands on the clock can be
correct at any given moment and there are numerous ways the hands can
be situated which would be wrong.  I have written digital clock
programs for my Apple II+ computer in BASIC which after sufficient
tweaking were accurate within a couple seconds per 24 hours.  Oh ...
just remembered: Ameritech's voicemail clock here has been off by
about five minutes for several weeks. Very annoying!   PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #137
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa29829;
          16 Feb 92 20:44 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA02127
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 16 Feb 1992 19:01:32 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA06146
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 16 Feb 1992 19:01:25 -0600
Date: Sun, 16 Feb 1992 19:01:25 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #139

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 16 Feb 92 19:01:19 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 138

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: When Did the LEC's Start to Die? (Harold Hallikainen)
    Re: When Did the LEC's Start to Die? (Jack Decker)
    Rabbit Network Press Release Confuses Bits and Characters (Nelson Bolyard)
    Re: What the ^&$%# is Going on With Sprint!?? (Dennis Blyth)
    Re: Answer Supervision on Lines (Alan L. Varney)
    Re: NPA Split Planned For 803? (Jacob DeGlopper)
    Re: Party Not Answering Phone (Will Martin)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sat, 15 Feb 92 16:15:36 -0800
From: [e-mail] (Harold Hallikainen)
Subject: Re: When Did the LEC's Start to Die?
Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo


> Personally, I'm more interested in the when the LEC's (local
> telephone companies) might begin to feel threatened.  I truly wish
> that some bright people would begin to work on a viable system of "LEC
> bypass" that would give the LEC's some REAL competition.  The cable TV
> industry is probably the most likely candidate, but seeing as how they
> can't even do cable right (in most areas), I wouldn't count on them.

    It seems to me that the bus topology of CATV systems is so
substantially different from the switched mesh topology of the phone
network that it's unlikely for CATV companies to take over a
substantial portion of the local phone traffic.  Their cable has lots
of bandwidth, but, currently, there is no switching, so everyone's
phone call would end up everywhere.  With the switched network, your
phone call goes only where it's needed.  It's a sort of "space
multiplexing" where each conversation circuit is in a different
location in the cable as opposed to the CATV frequency division
multiplexing, where all circuits would be in the same physical
location, but utilizing different frequencies on the cable.

Let's see ... if we have a thousand pair cable and allocate 3 KHz in
each direction to each pair, we get about 6 MHz of capacity on the
cable (figuring 3 KHz one way and 3 KHz the other way is 6 KHz).  Of
course a single CATV cable has a whole lot more capacity, but that one
cable goes all over town.  With the telco cable, each area of town has
its own cable heading to the CO.  So, although the CATV cable has more
capacity, the switching of the telephone network allows it to handle
more traffic.

    CATV companies are installing fiber as their trunk cables,
then demodulating out to RF on coax to go into homes.  Even in these
systems, I'm not aware of any switching going on.  It would, of
course, be a different story if either the CATV company or the phone
company ran a fiber from the home back to a switch somewhere.  Here,
it seems we get into a balancing act between the cost of circuit-
kilometres and the cost of switches (up front costs and recurring
costs).  Putting in more swithces reduces the number of required
circuit-kilometers (It's not as far to the CO).

> What does puzzle me is why no one has ever really jumped on the idea
> of using radio as an alternative to the phone system.  The airwaves,
> after all, are free.  It would be feasible using current technology to
> set up a computerized system where each "phone" would have enough
> "smarts" to make a digital, noise- and static-free connection to any
> other phone within radio range.  The way I would contemplate this
> happening is that on a call attempt, the phone would first attempt a
> direct connection (by some "handshaking" on a "hailing channel"
> monitored by all phones when not in use).  If the called phone could
> not be reached directly, the call could be passed to a nearby repeater
> tower, at which point it would become a charged-for call.  Such
> repaters might be operated by long distance carriers, who could
> complete calls between two repeaters.  You'd set your phone to default
> to the nearest repeater of the long distance carrier you wanted to
> use.

    This sounds a little like the Personal Communications Network
now proposed (as I recall).  It's a sort of cross between cellular and
cordless phones.  As another writer has pointed out, the electromagnetic
spectrum is very crowded.  Cellular gets around that by reusing
frequencies.  As traffic increases, more smaller cells are added.
Voice circuits are run to each of the cell sites.  As we get more and
more sites, we end up with one cell site per house and a wire going to
that cell site.  We call that a "cordless phone."

    CATV companies are looking at getting into PCN, as are local
telcos.  Again, the CATV is going to have to add some switching to
their system, or else they'd run out of capacity real quick.

    The use of an RF to RF link for local calls is interesting.  I
don't think we have enough spectrum available to make cell sites large
enough for you to call anyone very far away.


Harold Hallikainen              [e-mail]
Hallikainen & Friends, Inc.     [e-mail]
141 Suburban Road, Bldg E4      phone [phone] fax [phone]
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-7590  telex 4932775 HFI UI

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

Date: Sat, 15 Feb 92 15:59:15 CST
From: Jack Decker <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: When Did the LEC's Start to Die?


In message <[e-mail]>, I wrote:

> But it is my firm belief that if a system were devised that included
> free phone-to-phone communication for phones within reach of each
> other, OR if cellular operators were to start providing "free" calls
> (no airtime charges) between cell phones in the same local area, OR if
> the system were expanded to allow MORE than TWO cell operators to
> compete in a given area, you'd soon see the beginning of the end of
> local cellular service.

Actually, what I meant to say was, you'd see the end of exorbitantly
high charges for local cellular service ... not that it would be the
end of cellular service altogether!  I happen to think that a cellular
system could still be profitable even if "local" calling between cell
phones were offered at no additional airtime charge.  The cell
operator would still make money on calls to and from "landline"
phones, and calls to distant areas.

At the same time, free cell phone to cell phone calling would bring
more subscribers online, and they'd still get the monthly service fee
from each subscriber.  And, unlike the wireline phone companies, the
cellular companies have virtually no expense when a new subscriber
comes online (other than the cost of setting up a billing account)
because there are no wires to be run.  I do understand that
overloading the capacity of a cellular system might be a real
possibility in congested areas with the cellular systems of today, but
I would hope that the next generation of cellular systems would
anticipate the day when everyone is using cellular, and wireline
telephone systems are as antiquated as telegraph service is today.  Of
course, that day will NEVER come as long as cellular service is priced
out of reach of the average person.


Jack Decker    [e-mail]    FidoNet 1:154/8

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Rabbit Network Press Release Confuses Bits and Characters
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc., Mountain View, CA
Date: Sat, 15 Feb 1992 23:01:13 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> uuhare![e-mail]
Jon Havel, Technical Support Director for THE RABBIT NETWORK, INC.
announced the new local modem service for the metro-Detroit area that
is intended to be cheaper than "local" phone calls, due to Detroit's
small local calling areas.  He wrote:

> The network backbone speeds will be upgraded as needed and will
> range anywhere from 56kbps (56,000 characters/second) up to T3 (3
> million characters per second).  Telebit T3000 modems, the newest
> models, will provide users with reliable dial-up access via 14.4kb
> (14,400 characters/second) V.32bis links.

The quoted text seems to say 56kbps (bits/second) means 56,000
characters per second.  Maybe he meant those famous binary characters,
0 and 1.  One wonders if his customers use those characters, or if
they use 8-bit characters like the rest of us.  Also, according to my
sources, T3 (a.k.a.  DS-3) is 44.736 Mbps, not 3 Mbps as implied
above.

If this is representative of the technical support expertise at
RABBIT, it would seem they're not off to a good start.


Nelson Bolyard      [e-mail]      {decwrl,sun}!sgi!whizzer!nelson
Disclaimer: Views expressed herein do not represent the views of my employer.

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

Date: Sun, 16 Feb 92 09:44:23 -0500
From: Dennis Blyth <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: What the ^&$%# is Going on With Sprint!??
Organization: Europe Group Dayton


    [previous references to Sprint fixing and/or not fixing problems]

At a previous employer (a well known computer systems VAR) the habit
was to hire service people who were 'good with people' and not
necessarily 'good in fixing equipment / software' because we
recognized it was more important to FIX THE CUSTOMER and not (just)
fix their hardware and/or software problem!!

We had very high customer satisfaction ratings (in fact, we took an
award) overall, but, when it came to the item 'fixed right the first
time' we had low scores.  It had something to do with our training
(and/or lack thereof) provided to our service representatives.

BTW, these observations do NOT apply to NCR!


Dennis Blyth, Marketing Research, NCR Europe Group
[e-mail]  Phone: [phone]

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

Date: Sun, 16 Feb 92 09:06:19 CST
From: [e-mail] (Alan L Varney)
Subject: Re: Answer Supervision on Lines
Organization: AT&T Network Systems


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Vance
Shipley) writes:

> A. This service provides the capability to deliver "off-hook" signals
> from the terminating central office to a line interface at the
> originating central office.  This signal is a polarity reversal of the
> tip and ring conductors (tip-ring reversal) of the metallic facility
> between the calling customer and the serving central office.  This
> signal (2 to 3 sec.), indicates that the called station has answered
         ^^^^^^^^^^^^ Note 1A.
> the incoming call.  The same situation occurs when the called party
                          ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Note 2A.
> disconnects prior to the calling party disconnecting.  At present,
> this feature is only available in the DMS family of digital switches,
> ie., (DMS10, DMS 100).

> B. Answer indication is a reversal of -48 Volts and Ground at the
> interface between the Tip and Ring conductors of a 2-wire pair.  At
> the time of answer, Tip and Ring are interchanged by the switching
> machine, so that the tip is now more negative than the ring.  This
> reversal persists at least until the called line goes on hook, and
           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Note 1B.
> possibly until the calling line goes on hook.  All of the other
> electrical characteristics on a line equipped for answer supervision
> are identical to those of a normal line.

   Just another reason to NOT design CPE from the "technical
interface" documents.  Notes 1A and 2A imply a few seconds of T/R
reversal, while Note 1B implies it lasts until the called line goes on
hook (or longer)!  I don't speak for NTI's DMS products (but I do talk
about them :-)), so I wouldn't want to guess which paragraph is
correct.  But I do know the 5ESS(rg. tm) Switch feature I previously
described, "Calling Line Side Supervision", operates per paragraph B.
The second reversal (on called party on-hook) should be at the time
the originating switch has determined the called party can no longer
re-connect by going back off-hook (10-12 seconds of disconnect
timing).


Al Varney - AT&T Network Systems -- The above is not necessarily the
            opinion of AT&T.

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

From: [e-mail] (Jacob DeGlopper)
Subject: Re: NPA Split Planned For 803?
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Jacob DeGlopper)
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Date: Sat, 15 Feb 92 17:57:18 GMT


In a previous article, [e-mail] (S. Spencer Sun)
says:

> I could be mistaken, but I do not believe there were or are any N0X or
> N1X prefixes in 301 (never saw one anyway, although I fully
> acknowledge that is far from saying that there absolutely raen't any)
> and we're splitting into 410/301 anyway ...

I know of at least one offhand -- 301 217 xxxx is the Montgomery
County Government Centrex system.  I don't have the phone books up
here, but if one exists, it seems more likely that there are more.


 _/acob DeGlopper, EMT-A, Wheaton Volunteer Rescue Squad -- [e-mail]

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

Date: Sat, 15 Feb 92 14:00:14 CST
From: Will Martin <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Party Not Answering Phone


> [Moderator's Note: It is quite common. AT&T now breaks the connection
> after a few minutes if the called party has not answered and the
> calling party does not disconnect voluntarily. The main reason this
> was started was because radio talk-person Larry King ripped off AT&T
> for many thousands of dollars in network resources by encouraging his
> listeners over the air to dial his talk show call-in number 'and just
> let it ring until we get ready to answer; that way no one has to pay
> the phone company for the time they were on hold ...'. What was
> happening was he was letting the incoming lines ring for 30-40 minutes
> at a time; AT&T circuits were in use all that time on a non-revenue
> basis; and AT&T finally got tired of King's abuse of the network. When
> AT&T started their new policy, King blasted them over the air and told
> his listener/participants how to dial the call using Sprint. I guess
> he thought this would somehow punish AT&T and reward the other
> company. His idea to transfer all that lousy, money-losing traffic to
> the other carrier caused a few snickers at AT&T. ('Gee, we're sorry to
> lose your business, Mr. King; your thirty minute connections which
> generated three minutes of revenue ...')  PAT]

Hmmm ... I never listen to radio call-in shows, so this is not my area
of expertise ... but I've seen and heard enough references to Larry
King to believe that his is a NIGHT-TIME call-in show. So the AT&T
resources to which you refer, Pat, were ones sitting idle at night in
any case.  The tying-up of them by callers listening to many minutes
of ring indicator (an interesting way to psychologically modify and
manipulate the caller before they reach Mr. King, wouldn't you say? By
the time they get through, they're so zoned-out by the droning
repetition of the ring signal that they are mesmerized and easily
manipulated! :-) would not have cost AT&T anything, except maybe a few
cents worth of electricity.

I'd like to see some trustworthy statistics on the subject -- I'm
beginning to believe that the long-distance carriers (and probably the
local telcos, too) make up their costs, and get a fair profit, based
solely on business usage during prime-shift working hours.  Any income
they derive from residential and off-peak usage is actually pure gravy
 -- they could make money even if they gave residential users
unlimited off-peak calling at some trivial amount, like $5 per month.
I wonder if there is any independent audit of a representative sample
of these firms to show if that contention is true or not?

Regards,


Will
[e-mail] OR [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: Well, your computer is otherwise sitting idle while
you are asleep; how about if I start using it without paying you for
the resources? After all, the only thing it is costing you is a little
bit of electricity.  It really does not matter how much it costs AT&T
or how much or little it is otherwise used. As the tariffs now read
they are entitled to get paid. Your idea of changing the whole method
of billing for off-peak service is an interesting one, however. But
until that time comes, if it ever does, AT&T has the right to expect a
reasonable amount of overhead in setting up/taking down calls and
payment for the time in the middle.  PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #138
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa02562;
          16 Feb 92 21:42 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA26566
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 16 Feb 1992 19:59:59 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA19049
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 16 Feb 1992 19:59:47 -0600
Date: Sun, 16 Feb 1992 19:59:47 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #140

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 16 Feb 92 19:59:43 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 140

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: High Speed Modems and PSTN (Colin Plumb)
    Re: Rotary Dialers Go Home! (Richard Nash)
    Re: What Frequencies Does Touchtone Generate? (Dave Leibold)
    Re: ATT Mail Charges (Again) (Dave Leibold)
    Re: NPA Split Planned For 803? (Dave Leibold)
    Re: Connecting Computers to Hotel Phones (Rupert Mohr)
    Re: COCOT Information Wanted (Richard McCombs)
    Re: Low-Bandwith Free Info Transfer? (Vance Shipley)
    Re: Cellular Calls From Airplanes on the Ground (Mark Purcell)
    Re: ADA Compliance Requirements (David Lesher)
    Re: BBB's 900 Number (John Schubert)
    Re: Question on NY Tel's Capabilities (David Niebuhr)
    Re: Need Information on 'Integrated Voice Power 4' (Bob Nelson)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Colin Plumb)
Subject: Re: High Speed Modems and PSTN
Date: Sun, 16 Feb 1992 04:21:48 -0500
Organization: Array Systems Computing, Inc., Toronto, Ontario, CANADA


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

> Well, one possibility (which has been discussed here before) is
> digital frame slips. These look like huge phase hits to the modem.

> About the only way to prove that they are happening is to put a TIMS
> (transmission impairment measuring set) on both ends of the connection
> and look for phase hits greater than 40 degrees.

Actually, there's an easier way: connect at 2400 bps (no error
correction) and see if { (or is it }; I forget - one of the curly
braces) characters appear at regular intervals.  The worst line I was
ever on had them about every two seconds.  For some reason, slips show
up as this characteristic character under V.22bis (2400 bps)
modulation.

Agreed, they are a pain in the ass.


Colin

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

Date: Sat, 15 Feb 92 22:00:22 CST
From: [e-mail] (Richard Nash)
Subject: Re: Rotary Dialers Go Home!


> The inability or unfriendliness of ACD's to rotary phones raises a
> question to me with regard to ANI delivery.

> It would seem that is the tone/pulse calling method could be
> delivered to the called party by either ANI or within Caller-ID
> 'packets' (and let's not get sticky about the definitions at this
> point) then answering machines and ACD's could tailor their behavior,
> prompts, options, etc.  to the capabilities of the calling party and
> eliminate some of the extra instructions for rotary callers or putting
> them through menus that they will never be able to use.

> Do CO's sense/capture this condition so that it is/could be
> forwarded in the ANI data ?

> Of course, if someone uses rotary dialing with a tone capable phone
> he will be misdirected by this method, but perhaps the receiving end
> could initially prompt for the caller to hit a tone button *if it is
> informed that the caller pulse dialed* to handle the cases where tone
> generation is available to the caller.

> On the other hand, maybe the ommission of this feature is all a
> nefarious plot by the telco's to get everyone to switch to DTMF :-)

Yes this is possible but is quite possibly not provided. The method
employs a special 'KP2' pulse sent instead of the normal 'KP' pulse in
the ANI spill. Since most subs use DTMF and the telco wants to
encourage complete migration to this single format, they are loath of
any expense to assist DP (dial pulse) phone users.

The exception handling described to identify DP customers who have
DTMF pads, benefits only those customers, and becomes a hinderance to
DP customers who only have DP. Such instructional announcements
provide additional confusion as to how the call should be handled. As
the prime objective is to provide the most direct and efficient
service to the DP customer, by putting an announcement on the line
would defeat the intent of automatically connecting the DP sub to an
operator, and would delay serving them anyways. So if you are a DP
customer with DTMF capabilities, you are better served by letting you
switch to DTMF when utilizing some service.  Give the non-DTMF-capable
DP customer the timeout as the usual treatment and eventually everyone
will own one of them there fancy fandangled new gadgets.  :-)


Rick Nash

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

Date: Sun, 16 Feb 1992 01:32:03 -0500
From: [e-mail] (Dave Leibold)
Subject: Re: What Frequencies Does Touchtone Generate?


group1![e-mail] (Van Bagnol) wrote:

> This *must* be a FAQ (no pun intended), but I need to know the
> frequencies generated by touch-tone dialing.

Indeed, it is included in the FAQ list with it's very own question and
answer. Touch tones and stuff like that are in the Technical section
of the list.

> [Moderator's Note: Yes, this is a frequent question. Along with many
> others, the answer to this will be found in the Telecom Archives,

or wherever the Digest FAQ is sold :-)


Dave Leibold - via FidoNet node 1:250/98
INTERNET: [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: How would you like to go door to door selling the
Digest in your community? I hereby give you the franchise rights in
your town. Sell it for whatever you can get, and send me half! :)  PAT]

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

Date: Sun, 16 Feb 1992 01:48:01 -0500
From: [e-mail] (Dave Leibold)
Subject: Re: ATT Mail Charges (Again)


I should point out that AT&T in Canada has also moved to a monthly fee
rather than an annual fee, along the lines of over CAD$3/month rather
than the approximately CAD$40/yr for Canadian AT&T Mail service. This
is just the base subscription fee, and does not represent the proposed
monthly minimum charge that caused controversy some time ago.

The monthly minimum of CAD$29 as proposed for Canadian customers is
being waived indefinitely, it seems (in the U.S., a similar charge
seems to have been waived earlier). I'm not sure if this applies to
just the present customer base or to any AT&T Mail customer. In the
meantime, it seems the reaction to the price move in the U.S. has
finally made it up north, so things look better for now.


Dave Leibold - via FidoNet node 1:250/98
INTERNET: [e-mail]

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

Date: Sun, 16 Feb 1992 01:42:15 -0500
From: [e-mail] (Dave Leibold)
Subject: Re: NPA Split Planned For 803?


[e-mail] (S. Spencer Sun) wrote:

> I could be mistaken, but I do not believe there were or are any N0X or
> N1X prefixes in 301 (never saw one anyway, although I fully
> acknowledge that is far from saying that there absolutely raen't any)
> and we're splitting into 410/301 anyway ...

Actually, 301 did have a number of N0/1X prefixes, along with the
other area codes involved in the Washington Metro area. Growth in
Washington's local area required cutover to N0X and N1X, and
ultimately changes in local dialing to require area code + number when
crossing an area code boundary. When I was checking out what prefixes
would split to 410, many N0X and N1X were found; the info on prefixes
involved in the 301/410 split might still be kicking around in the
TELECOM Digest Archives.


Dave Leibold - via FidoNet node 1:250/98
INTERNET: [e-mail]

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

Date: Fri, 14 Feb 92 11:42:38 +0100
From: [e-mail] (Rupert Mohr)
Subject: Re: Connecting Computers to Hotel Phones


In comp.dcom.telecom was written:

> Jeff Sicherman recently sent a file to the Telecom Archives which was
> an article he found elsewhere suitable for the recent thread here on
> acoustic modems. This file discusses hooking modems and computers to
> phones in hotels, and similar places.

> If you want a copy, pick it up at the Telecom Archives using anonymous
> ftp to lcs.mit.edu. You must then cd telecom-archives. Look for the
> file 'modems.and.hotel.phones'.

I have been told many big hotels in major cities in Germany now
provide the standard ISDN wall jacks. Journalists using Toshiba
laptops with ISDN card can use this fast mode to send their stuff to
their agencies.


Rupert
addresses:  uucp   [e-mail]  IP: 192.33.254.1
            cis    72446,415            Fax [phone]

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

Subject: Re: COCOT Information Wanted
From: [e-mail] (Richard McCombs)
Date: Sat, 15 Feb 92 22:35:44 CST
Organization: The Red Headed League; Lawton, OK


[e-mail] (John R. Levine) writes:

>> Though COCOT's have received "bad press" in this group, I'm in the
>> position of wanting one to install in a small shopping plaza here in
>> central Connecticut that my relatives own.

> Isn't Connecticut one of the few sensible states that have outlawed
> COCOTs?  I know I've never seen one there.

The last that I heard COCOTs are also illegal in Oklahoma, however if
a Southwestern Bell Coin Phone is on your property you can have an AOS
as the default 0+ carrier for interlata calls.


Internet: [e-mail]
ARPA: [e-mail]
UUCP: ...!ricksys!rick   Fidonet: Richard McCombs on Fidonet 1:385/6

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

From: [e-mail] (Vance Shipley)
Subject: Re: Low-Bandwith Free Info Transfer?
Organization: SwitchView Inc., Waterloo, Ontario
Date: Sat, 15 Feb 1992 21:23:47 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> our esteemed Moderator
injects:

> And no, when you buy phone service you are not buying the right to
> 'ring anyone'; you are buying the right to connect your instrument and
> wire to any other instrument and wire whose owner wishes to communicate
> with you.  The ringing is only the means to signal a pending connection;
> it is not intended to be a communication in and of itself.  PAT]

I believe that the only way we will see the telco's and carriers offer
advanced transaction processing cababilities, inherent in IN, is if we
move towards a usage based pricing.  If I call California and get no
answer why shouldn't I be billed?  I tied up circuits (note: even in
an ISDN where all the dialing, alerting, etc. is handled out of band,
a B-channel is still reserved) and received information from the far
end; no one is there.  This of course would be met with much
resistance :).


Vance Shipley
[e-mail]   [e-mail]   ..uunet!watmath!xenitec!vances

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

From: [e-mail] (Mark Purcell)
Subject: Re: Cellular Calls From Airplanes on the Ground
Date: 15 Feb 92 23:54:32 GMT
Organization: Kralizec Dialup Unix Sydney: [phone] V.32


[e-mail] (J. Philip Miller) writes:

> A small item in the {St. Louis Post Dispatch} business section 2/10
> indicates that the regulations are in the process of being changed to
> allow cellular calls while the plane is on the ground.  As previously
> discussed here there are serious problems when trying to call while in
> the air because of the increased range of transmission.

But that isn't the major concern with the use of cellular phones.  In
Australia it is illegal to use a phone within a plane due to the
effects the transmission has on the aircraft navigation systems.  As
there are some very sensitive instruments used for navigation, and if
they get thrown out by internal tranmission then all sorts of
complications will result.

As a sideline I was onboard a C-130 yesterday and requested permission
to use a cellular phone before we had flashed up.  The bottom line was
I would have to leave the plane before I could transmit.


Mark

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

From: David Lesher <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: ADA Compliance Requirements
Date: Sun, 16 Feb 92 14:31:38 EST
Reply-To: [e-mail]  (David Lesher)
Organization: NRK Clinic for habitual NetNews abusers - Beltway Annex


> I am looking for information on compliance to the ADA.  After some
> research, the results have been less than specific.  If anyone has
> found any definitive information on compliance, I would appreciate the
> info.  Example: Pay phones in public places need TDD devices
> installed?

I was walking by a coin slot at a Metro station in MD yesterday when I
saw a box -- about 8.5" * 11" by 1.5" thick. It was metal and had a
substantial lock, considering the box itself was thin aluminum. I was
able to sneak a peak in the gap in the cover, and lo and behold -- a
TTY!

Since then I've seen a second one -- this time in a department store,
I think.


[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (John Schubert)
Subject: Re: BBB's 900 Number
Reply-To: [e-mail] (John Schubert)
Organization: U.C. Berkeley -- ERL
Date: Sun, 9 Feb 1992 08:34:08 GMT


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

>> [Moderator's Note: Yes, in the past it was free. Likewise, the
>> corporate records telephone look-up service offered by most state
>> governments was free, as was the public library telephone reference
>> service for lookups from the local criss-cross directory in most
>> towns. Many phone look-up services are now using 900 numbers.  PAT]

> Another troubling 900 number I saw the other day was one that, for
> only 95 cents a minute, would tell you all about USPS rates and
> regulations.  I'm not sure if this was run by the USPS itself or by
> Pitney-Bowes, but there must be a lot of uninformed people out there
> for this to make money.  After all, the USPS operates their "Postal
> Answer Line" automated system in most cities that has hundreds of
> categories of information available, all for a local call.  And they
> even have real people at the post offices that you can call to ask
> questions!  (Imagine that!)

Gosh, next thing you know Pitney Bowes is going to have a 900 number
for service problems.  I can just see it now, after going through a
whole bunch of "fixes" (each corresponding to a different number)
there will be that last possible fix to try (like number 12) where we
get to pay $10 dollars for the priviledge of hearing a recorded voice
say, "if all else fails try dropping the unit from a height of 6" onto
a hard surface, preferably concrete."


John Schubert   [e-mail]

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

Date: Tue, 11 Feb 92 08:37:33 -0500
From: [e-mail] (david niebuhr)
Subject: Re: Question on NY Tel's Capabilities


In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Gil Kloepfer
Jr.)  writes:

> In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Scott Barman) writes:

>> ...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.

> Where are *YOU* on Long Island????  At least in many spots on L.I., at
> least where I used to live, we were running on DMS-100s.  I know that
> Central Islip was on a 5ESS.  I remember the day they cut-over to the
> DMS-100 at my parents' house in Islip.  I picked up the phone and got
> a dial tone which sounded "different" (and there was no background
> hum).  I remember telling my parents about the fact "we were digital
> now" and they seemed very unimpressed ...

I've tried several of the 9901 numbers and received various responses
ranging from "this is the ... 5ESS(tm) serving the exchanges of
 ..., ..., ...," to "this is the ... DSO serving the ..., ..., ...,
exchanges" to "this is the ... DMS serving the ..., ..., ..., exchanges".

I even received "not in service" and "cannot be dialed" messages for
valid exchanges.

Are these responses due to the type of switch in use at a particular
location?

On a side note, I called NYTel concerning why an exchange being billed
at a higher rate for a toll call than should be.  When I told the
representative that calls to that exchange should be cheaper and
mentioned that I knew the switch verification number, she asked where
I received this information.  My response was "I have my sources".


Dave Niebuhr      Internet: [e-mail] / Bitnet: niebuhr@bnl
Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, NY 11973  (516)-282-3093


[Moderator's Note: You should have offered to sell her a subscription
to TELECOM Digest. You could then split the commission with me. :)  PAT]

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

Date: Sat, 15 Feb 92 11:19:44 CST
From: Bob Nelson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Need Information on 'Integrated Voice Power 4'
Organization: Interphase Corp., Dallas


Just a work of caution, the AT&A32C dsp(in lower case for a reason)
SUCKS, I had to use one two years ago and the hardware and instruction
set doesn't deserve the title of DSP!!!!! You would do better to use
the MOT56000 or the AD21xxx.  Just my .02 worth.


Bob

PS: DO LOOPS STOP INTERRUPTS!!!!!!!
This makes ffts hard to write for realtime work!

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #140
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa04386;
          16 Feb 92 22:27 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA17161
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 16 Feb 1992 20:46:22 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA17318
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 16 Feb 1992 20:45:54 -0600
Date: Sun, 16 Feb 1992 20:45:54 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #139


TELECOM Digest     Sun, 16 Feb 92 19:29:40 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 139

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: MCI Friends & Family: Note For Overseas MCI Cardholder (Steven Miale)
    Re: Phone Service to Cuba (Tony Harminc)
    Re: Tele-Scum (They're Back ...) (Ed Wells)
    Re: Low-Bandwith Free Info Transfer? (Jeff E. Nelson)
    Re: Windsor, Ontario Routing (was Point Roberts, Wa.) (Norman Soley)
    Re: Cellular Phone Programming (Nathan Friedman)
    Re: Pay Phone Charges for 800 Calls (Tad Cook)
    Re: Line Test Device Needed for CID (Tad Cook)
    Sprint Versus AT&T, at UUNET (Peter da Silva)
    1 + 7D Still in Use at Denver, Pa. (Carl Moore)
    GOSIP: Government Open Systems Information Profile (Michael A. Frank)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Steven P. Miale)
Subject: Re: MCI Friends & Family: Note For Overseas MCI Cardholder
Organization: University of Virginia Computer Science Department
Date: Sun, 16 Feb 1992 20:03:34 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Juergen Ziegler) writes:

> The MCI F&F discount plan is also available to overseas MCI
> cardholders.  With this feature you get a 20% discount on all numbers
> that are on your list and have MCI as their PIC (primiary interexchage
> carrier).

(He noted this could be interesting if you added your own number to
the list of friends.)

Even better are the telemarketing calls you get if someone puts you on
their list!  The conversation goes like this:

    "Sir, I'm from MCI and..."
    "No, I don't want it."
    "But let me explain what..."
    "I said NO!." <click>

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

Date: Sat, 15 Feb 92 18:28:54 EST
From: Tony Harminc <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Phone Service to Cuba


Several people sent me replies on this topic.  The general point made
is that the USA has a trade embargo with Cuba, so any scheme that
involves transfering money there is illegal.

Without commenting on the inanities of the US law, I wonder what would
happen if someone were to set up a business in Canada, with (say) a
900 number that could be called from the US.  This would then accept
(DTMF) a number in Cuba to be called, and place the call via regular
011+ dialing.  Would the US government view anyone in the US who dealt
with such a service as traitors (or whatever)?  Presumably it could
be argued that money was flowing from the caller to the 900 service
provider, then to the company in Canada, thence to Teleglobe (Canadian
monopoly overseas carrier), and finally Teleglobe would do settlements
with the Cuban telephone system.

I checked on direct dial rates to Cuba from here.  In prime time
(7-11) its C$1.92 for the first minute and 1.28 for subsequent
minutes.  Off peak rates are 1.35 and .90 respectively.  Not exactly
cheap, but not out of line with other Caribbean points.  How does this
compare with the AT&T rates via the tropospheric scatter link
mentioned previously?

I also tried dialing some random numbers in Havana, just to see what
the speed and quality of connection were like.  Some strange results.
Since I didn't know any Havana numbers, I guessed that they would
probably be six digits (reasonable sized city, but technologically
backwards).

All the following prefixed with 011 53 7:

Number      Time until ->     Result

44 55 66     45 sec           very loud 120 IPM busy (old xbar sound)

55 66 77      5 sec           msg from Teleglobe switch (cannot
                              complete your call as dialed) Evidently
                              the switch (DMS300?) "knows" that this
                              is not a valid Havana prefix.

33 44 55     20 sec           bizarre! background noise, then silence
                              followed by a ringing (PTP) tone but with
                              60 IPM cadence.  From Teleglobe I think.

22 33 44     50 sec           loud ringing (xbar sound) Answer!
                              Sounded like "oo ah yu"

Unfortunately I speak no Spanish, and the person answering spoke no
English or French (not unreasonably). Can someone translate "oo ah yu"
?  (No -- it wasn't "who are you" :-) )

The connection was quite loud and clear, though there was a
half-duplex quality to it.  Possibly TASI or one of its mutations was
in the circuit.

If anyone who speaks Spanish would like to try a three-way call this
way, I'm willing to spend the couple of bucks it costs (once or twice
 -- not every day!).  You would have to pay for the call to me here - I
have telco 3-way calling.  Presumably this would satisfy even the most
scrupulous defender of the US embargo, since it would be my $1.00 or
so that might eventually make it to Cuba, and not any US money :-)


Tony H.


[Moderator's Note: Speaking of Cuba, a friend of mine listens to Radio
Havana on his shortwave radio. They give an email address he has been
trying to reach for quite awhile without success. Maybe a netter can
offer some advice:   cdp!web!ceniai!radiohc   web!ceniai!radiohc@bitnet.

He says his mail has been bouncing back and/or falling in a hole at
some unknown place. Send comments to [e-mail].  Thanks.  PAT]

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

From: Edward E. Wells Jr. <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Tele-Scum (They're Back ...)
Date: 16 Feb 92 09:10:16 GMT
Organization: Wells Computer Systems Corp., Levittown, Pa. 19058


[e-mail] writes:

> After thinking all this time that the plague of tele-marketing,
> especially the automatic kind, was over, last evening I was given a
> rude awakening.  Upon answering a phone call around 7:00pm, I was
> greeted by an auto-seller which informed me that "my phone number has
> been selected ... to find out how you can claim <whatever it was>,
> just call 976-xxxx, or you can write to: National Services, [address
> forgotten], Pittsburgh, PA."

> Now they want _me_ to _pay_ to hear their spiel. Don't these guys ever
> give up?

  I told the phone company that I wanted these calls stopped and that
my home phone is not to be used as a trash can for someone else's
business.  With that, I found it quite difficult to get the names and
addresses of these people that call and ask that you solicit their
1-900 numbers.  With this, the phone company agreed that the only way
to get them would be to call them, then cancel the charges and wait
for them to contact me directly.  This continued for two years until
the phone company said that I wouldn't be able to do this any more
(after dozens of cancelled calls).

  What's really funny is that I haven't had even one call asking me to
call someone's 1-900 number.  It's been at least six months!  Maybe
someone finally got the point.


Edward E. Wells Jr., N3IAS, President            Voice: (215)-943-6061
Wells Computer Systems Corp., Box 343, Levittown, Pa. 19058
{dsinc,francis,hotps,houxl,lgnp1,mdi386,pebco}!wells!edw

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

From: [e-mail] (Jeff E. Nelson)
Subject: Re: Low-Bandwith Free Info Transfer?
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Jeff E. Nelson)
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Date: Sat, 15 Feb 1992 23:59:59 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Yanek Martinson) describes a method for two modems to communicate
without ever answering the phone (by counting RRINGs), and wonders if
this kind of communication (a) works and (b) is legal.

The Moderator notes:

> [Moderator's Note: It probably would work and it definitly would be
> illegal to pass messages, coded or otherwise without paying for it.
> And no, when you buy phone service you are not buying the right to
> 'ring anyone'; you are buying the right to connect your instrument and
> wire to any other instrument and wire whose owner wishes to communicate
> with you.  The ringing is only the means to signal a pending connection;
> it is not intended to be a communication in and of itself.  PAT]

Regardless of the legality, such communication methods are already
incorporated into devices that are in use today: the "toll-saver"
feature of answering machines. Granted this communication is not as
sustained as the kind Martinson wonders about, but it is communication
nontheless, and seems to be illegal according to the Moderator.

I wonder if we should start worrying about a long-distance carrier
winning a lawsuit which makes all of these devices illegal.


Jeff E. Nelson | [e-mail] | Digital Equipment Corporation
Affilation given for identification purposes only

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

From: [e-mail] (Norman Soley)
Subject: Re: Windsor, Ontario Routing (was Point Roberts, Wa.)
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Date: 11 FEB 92 19:52:34


In article <[e-mail]>, Dave.Leibold@f524.n250.z1.
FIDONET.ORG (Dave Leibold) writes:

> [e-mail] (david niebuhr) writes:

>> Winsdor, Ontario is both South and East of Detroit; therefore, where
>> does Windsor get its routing from, Detroit or from some point in
>> Canada?

> Windsor, being Bell Canada territory, would likely keep most routing
> within Canadian soil. Much of the action, say to Toronto or elsewhere
> in Canada, would presumably go through London, Ontario, where most of
> area code 519 would be handled. Anything going to the States could be
> sent across the creek to Detroit; I think Bell Canada does have a
> major U.S. gateway via Windsor/ Detroit, considering that I've had
> some not-in-service messages for some 800 numbers terminate on a 313
> switch.

What you are forgetting is that switched traffic between Canada and
the US (and everywhere else for that matter) gets touched by Teleglobe
(in theory), the one and only IRC from Canada (while their monopoly
lasts, which isn't for much longer). I'm not sure of how this works in
practice but presumably Teleglobe has toll offices at several
connection points with AT&T and possibly some other US IRCs. Bell
Canada may operate these on Teleglobe's behalf though. I know that
Bell Canada does have connections to AT&T for leased services at
Buffalo/Fort Erie, Detroit/Windsor and Port Huron/Sarnia because I
managed services that ran through them (in a past life). There are
probably such arrangements at most border points.

Of course you know that when someone says "in theory" they mean "not
really".


Norman Soley, Specialist, Professional Software Services, ITC District
Digital Equipment of Canada                   [e-mail]
Opinions expressed are mine alone  and do not reflect those of Digital
Equipment Corporation or my cat Marge.

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Cellular Phone Programming
Date: Sun, 16 Feb 92 16:40:25 PST


I came across a listing that had intstructions to program 30+ brands
of cellular phones.  It apears to be very complete and not copyrighted,
so I can make photocopies for whoever wants them.  The only problem
might be that it is over 50 pages, but I think my local printing shop
can solve that.

E-mail me if you are interested.


Nathan Friedman    [e-mail]

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

Subject: Re: Pay Phone Charges for 800 Calls
From: [e-mail] (Tad Cook)
Date: 16 Feb 92 22:46:37 GMT


Michael Fumich  <[e-mail]> writes:

> I was recently traveling along I-80 through Iowa & noticed that
> the COCOTs there charge 35 CENTS!!! for a call to an 800 number. This
> was true of several phones on the Illinois side as well.

(stuff deleted)

> My question is, is this legal? (charging for 800 at a pay
> phone, not the chain idea |:*) and to whom may I formally complain?

This question came up a couple of years ago in a conversation I had
with someone at the Washington State Utilities and Transportation
Commission.  At least in the state of Washington it is legal for
payphones to charge for 800 calls, although I have never seen one that
does.

Check with your state PUC.


Tad Cook     |  Phone:  [phone]             |   MCI Mail: 3288544
Seattle, WA  |  Packet: KT7H @ N7DUO.WA.USA.NA   |   [e-mail]
             |  USENET: [e-mail]          or...sumax!ole!ssc!tad

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

Subject: Re: Line Test Device Needed for CID
From: [e-mail] (Tad Cook)
Date: 16 Feb 92 22:45:32 GMT


Douglas Scott Reuben <[e-mail]> writes:

> Are there any products available (at a reasonable cost) that simulate
> a telephone line with Caller*ID?

> I know there are regular line voltage/ring/etc. simulators, but I'm
> looking for one that does Caller*ID as well.

Proctor & Associates has been mentioned in the past as a source of
line simulators.  I am not certain, but I believe that they have a new
version of their telephone demonstrator called the Centrex Demo that
will do Caller ID as well as simulating various Centrex features.

You can reach Proctor & Associates at 206-881-7000, or via internet at
[e-mail].  Their fax number is 206-885-3282.


Tad Cook     |  Phone:  [phone]             |   MCI Mail: 3288544
Seattle, WA  |  Packet: KT7H @ N7DUO.WA.USA.NA   |   [e-mail]
             |  USENET: [e-mail]          or...sumax!ole!ssc!tad

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

From: [e-mail] (Peter da Silva)
Subject: Sprint Versus AT&T, at UUNET
Organization: Taronga Park BBS
Date: Sun, 16 Feb 1992 14:21:48 GMT


Since UUNET uses Sprint for their 800 numbers, I'm surprised that you
saw ANY difference between Sprint and AT&T.

The Sprint versus PEP echo-cancellation problem is one of the reasons
FICC is using UUPSI now. I would be interested in knowing if that
problem has been fixed.

I have no relationship with Sprint other than being a happy customer
of their voice long-distance service. Both Sprint and AT&T are my
long-distance carriers, because each has something they do better than
the other.


Peter da Silva. Taronga Park BBS.  [phone]|1032 2400/n/8/1.

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

Date: Sun, 16 Feb 92 12:07:17 EST
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject: 1 + 7D Still in Use at Denver, Pa.


I have received a phone call from the Denvewr & Ephrata telephone
company.  They serve parts of two area codes (215 and 717), and in the
interest of uniformity in their service area, they have NOT changed
the dialing instructions for the part in 215.  I asked about calls to
(not yet existing?) prefixes of N0X/N1X form in 215, and hear that the
Denver (215-267) equipment is smart enough to handle time-outs; for
example, 1-303-xxxx vs. 1-303-xxx-xxxx.  If I am not mistaken, this
company also serves Adamstown, Pa., 215-484; who serves 215-445 at
Terre Hill?

Their entire service area is to change instructions at the same time
when it's necessary to prepare for the NXX area codes.  This would be
1994 or 1995.

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

From: [e-mail] (michael.a.frank)
Subject: GOSIP: Government Open Systems Information Profile
Date: 7 Feb 92 15:52:05 GMT
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories


I'm presently taking a course on ISDN, and our instructer wants us to
get information on on the Government Open Systems Interconnection
Profile (GOSIP).  I thought the folks reading the the TELECOM Digest
might be of help to me.  I'm looking for general information on
GOSIP,as well as the defining specifics and how ISDN requirements have
been included.  One last final thing, Great Britain has a form of
GOSIP, and any information concerning its differences with GOSIP would
be most helpful.  Thanks in advance.


Mike Frank # AT&T Bell Laboratories # Naperville, IL
# ihlpb!tank #  708-979-5040


[Moderator's Note: Sorry, I don't allow GOSSIP here in this Digest. I
only want substantiated facts printed, such as my own notes. :)   PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #139
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa07747;
          16 Feb 92 23:59 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA16912
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 16 Feb 1992 21:39:26 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA12366
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 16 Feb 1992 21:39:15 -0600
Date: Sun, 16 Feb 1992 21:39:15 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #141

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 16 Feb 92 21:39:12 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 141

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Revised Listing of Class Codes; Other Recent Notes (Jeff Jonas)
    New California Privacy and Computer Crime Legislation (Jim Warren)
    Fax Forwarding Services, Anyone? (Jiro Nakamura)
    Re: On Having a Level Playing Field (Michael Gersten)
    Call Waiting Detector (Brian Rice)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Fri, 14 Feb 92 13:02:52 -0500
From: krfiny![e-mail]
Subject: Revised Listing of Class Codes; Other Recent Notes


Here's my update to John Gilbert's list (posted/distributed as Volume
12, Issue 124, Message 1 of 11).

My main "value added" is adding the non-technical terms next to
the technical terms, and sources for the information.

The following list was compiled from comp.dcom.telecom postings and
the Bell Atlantic "IQ services" information line at [phone].

CLASS and Custom Calling Feature Control Codes:
(These appear to be standard, but may be changed locally)

*57  Customer Orignated Trace (COT) Activation "call trace"
    The number of the last call you received is logged at the CO.
    You get an acknowledging recording.  Then hang up.
    Write down the date and time.
    You don't get the number - you must contact the
    business office or police.
    Costs $1.50 - $3 depending on your area.

*60  Selective Call Rejection (SCR) Activation
    (start "call block" list management)

*61  Selective Distinctive Alerting (SDA) Activation
    (start "priority call" list management)

*62  Selective Call Acceptance (SCA) Activation

*63  Selective Call Forwarding (SCF) Activation
    (start "select forwarding list" management)

*65  ICLID Activation (caller ID)
    (turn on caller ID delivery to me, the subscriber)

*66  Automatic Recall (AR) Activation
    (activate "repeat call" - retry last number for 30 minutes)

*67  Call Privacy Toggle (block caller ID delivery for next call only)
*68  Computer Access Restriction Toggle
*69  AC Activation "return call" (call last person who called you)
*70  Call waiting disable
    "tone block" (prevent call waiting tone, useful for data calls)
    *70 // dial tone // the number you're dialing

*71  Ring, no-answer forward activation
*72  Call forwarding immediate Activation (72# on some systems)
*73  Call forwarding Deactivation (73# on some systems)
*74  Speed call 8 program (74# on some systems)
*80  SCR Deactivation "call block"
*81  SDA Deactivation "priority call"
*82  SCA Deactivation
*83  SCF Deactivation "select forwarding"
*85  ICLID Deactivation (turn off caller ID delivery to me, the subscriber)
*86  AR Deactivation "repeat call"
*89  AC Deactivation "return call"
n#   speed dial (n=2 to 9)
nn#  speed dial (nn=20-49)
72#  activate call forwarding
73#  deactivate call forwarding
74#  set speed dialing (8 numbers)
75#  set speed dialing (30 numbers)

Rotary/pulse phones: use 11 for the * (ex: *57 => 1157) (is there a
pulse code for #?  I doubt it becuase it's not a prefix)

You do not need to subscribe to call trace to use it.  Some areas
allow return call and repeat call on a per use basis.  The cost is
higher per use than with a subscription, but you pay nothing for
months where you don't use it.

*65 and *85 are used when you subscribe to Caller-ID if you want to
reduce the number of calls logged because there's a surcharge after
400 calls per month.

New York Telephone has a recorded message system describing their
services.  Here's what I gathered from (800) EASY-NYT (327-9698) (this
mostly jives with information from the Bell Atlantic IQ services
information line at [phone])

Menu choice:

45 ->   A person relays voice/TDD at no additional charge.
        This is WITHIN New York State only.
        What about calls in/out of New York State?
        The operator said the originator should call information for
        the relay service.  This is a service of AT&T, and is currently
        not allowed to call across states.
        [phone]  voice
        [phone]  TDD

        The AT&T newsline [phone]  (221-NEWS)
    for Friday June 8, 1991 mentioned that the (Chicago) Illinois
    relay center opened June 10.
        It is the fourth, others being in New York, Alabama and California.
    [and Sprint's in Texas as mentioned in TELECOM Feb 1992]

46 ->   restrict outgoing calls to pay services
                exchanges 540, 550, 970, 970
                area codes 700, 900
        This service is free of charge.

14 ->   "Ring Mate" allows you to add one or two additional numbers,
        each with a unique ring pattern (and call waiting beep).

AT&T has language translation centers.  I believe these are the numbers:

[phone]  AT&T Language Line (outside the USA)
[phone]  AT&T Language Line (USA only)
[phone]  AT&T Language Line information

You can get translators (English/Japanese, ...) as needed, but the
cost is rather high.  I'm not sure if reservations/appointments are
necessary.  It would be interesting to see the setup and costs for a
conference call from the US to Japan, using the translation center and
a TDD relay for the deaf (particularly if the deaf were non-english).
Or better yet -- a video conference from the US to Russia with
translators.

CCITT rules:

How to write a number:

[phone]
    international
    (spaces, NO dashes)

[phone]
    within the country (parentheses around the optional city code)


Jeffrey Jonas    [e-mail]

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

Date: Sat, 15 Feb 92 22:49:07 PST
From: autodesk!megalon![e-mail] (Jim Warren)
Subject: New California Privacy and Computer Crime Legislation


  This is the first part of a three-part electronic document
concerning legislation that has been introduced to address issues of
computer crime and privacy of personal data.  Contrary to the opening
paragraph of this first part, this does *not* include the much-larger
text of the bill and background/commentary.

  Although this concerns California legislation, there is ample reason
to believe that many other states -- and perhaps eventually the
federal government -- will use this legislation as a model for their
own work.

  If you would like those two [much larger] parts, please request them
from [e-mail] and I will be happy to email them.


jim

               ========================================

   This includes the full text of legislation that was introduced Feb.
10th in the California State Senate by a senior member of that body,
the Chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Senator Bill Lockyer of
Southern Alameda County.  This copy of the bill plus staff background
comments is being uploaded within days of its availability in Senate
offices.

MAJOR TOPICS
   Sec.1:  "Privacy Act of 1992", Senate Bill 1447 (Lockyer, Privacy)
   Sec.2:  Driver's licenses: Use of human-readable and magstripe information
   Sec.3:  Privacy: Rights of employees and prospective employees
   Sec.4:  Computer crime laws: Modifications
   Sec.5:  Automatic vehicle identification [AVI] systems: Control of uses

CONTENTS OF THIS MESSAGE                                      [words/chars]
   Introductory comments and details of notation conventions     [757/5190]
   Reformatted verbatim text of the Feb. 10th bill             [3227/21285]
   Background notes prepared by Sen. Lockyer's assistant       [2465/15546]
If printed, this would take approximately 12 pages.

REPORTEDLY A LEGISLATIVE "FIRST"

   This effort in "electronic democracy" may be the first time that state
legislation has been distributed online, for access by the general public,
at the same time it becomes available to legislators and their staff.

   A senior member of the Senate computer system's technical staff
reportedly said they have never-before down-loaded a machine-readable
copy of initial legislation onto a personal computer for
redistribution on public computer networks.

  Furthermore, Sen. Lockyer's Legislative Assistant responsible for
the bill said he knows of no prior instance where legislative staff
have gone online on public nets to seek citizen input and discussion
about new legislation.

SOURCES OF ORIGINAL DOCUMENTS & INFORMATION

   Mr. Ben Firschein is the Legislative Assistant to Sen. Lockyer who is
handling this bill:

      Office of Senator Bill Lockyer
      Room 2032, State Capitol
      Sacramento CA 95814
      Mr. Firschein/916-445-6671, main number/916-445-5957, email/**

   Formatted, binary, machine-readable versions of this text will be
available on the WELL, the Whole Earth 'Lectronic Link.  The WELL is a
public teleconferencing system located in Sausalito, California,
accessible via the Internet; voice/415-332-4335, 2400-baud
data/7-E-1/415-332-6106.  For read-only access instructions, SEND A
REQUEST TO: [e-mail].  ** -- Mr. Firschein will be online
on the WELL within a week or so.  You may request his email address,
also, from [e-mail].

There will be four read-only files:

   A.  The original file that was down-loaded from the Senate's legislative
computer system in WordPerfect format on a PC-compatible diskette.

   B.  The above file, converted to a Word-5.0 Macintosh format, with
pagination approximating the printed copies of the bill available from
the legislative offices.

   C.  Background information, explanations and mention of some
alternatives, prepared by Mr. Firschein, in original WordPerfect
format for PC-compatibles.

   D.  That backgrounder file, converted to Word-5.0 Macintosh format.

REPRESENTING LEGISLATION-IN-PROGRESS: A NOTATION PROBLEM

   In the California Senate, printed legislation-in-progress uses the
following conventions:

  When stating new legislation, *plain-text* states PROPOSED law.

  When *amending* current law, *plain-text* states the CURRENT law,
and *strike-thru text* indicates current law to be deleted while
*underscored* or *italicized* text represents wording to be added to
those current statutes.  Deletions and additions represented by
strike-thru and underlining or italics *amend* current law.

  But, the basic ASCII character-set -- and a great many older
terminals and computer printers -- have no strike-thru, italics or
underlining.  So, here is how that unavailable notation is represented
in this document:

    [[ annotation ]] -- explanatory comments by "uploader" Jim Warren
       all capitals  -- originally bold-face text; no legislative meaning

  Unless stated as amending current law:
       plain-text    -- text of new legislation, proposed to be new law

  When stated as amending current law:
       plain-text    -- text of current law to remain unchanged
    << strikethru >> -- text in current law, proposed for deletion
    {{ underscore }} -- text proposed to be added to current law.

THE BEGINNING ...

  The introduction of this legislation in the Senate is the beginning
of a lengthy process or review and revision by amendment, prior to its
possible passage into law.

  Please send your comments and suggestions about the legislation --
and about the Senate staff's active cooperation in making it publicly
available, online -- to Mr. Firschein and Sen. Lockyer.


Jim Warren, 345 Swett Rd., Woodside CA 94062; voice/415-851-7075,
fax/415-851-2814, email/[e-mail] -or- [e-mail]
[ for identification purposes, only: contributing editor, MicroTimes;
Chair, First Conference on Computers, Freedom & Privacy (March, 1991);
and member, Board of Directors, Autodesk, Inc.; blah blah blah ]


[Moderator's Note: This message is also appearing in Telecom-Priv, and
followup discussion should be held there. ([e-mail])
We are trying to push all privacy discussions to that forum. Thanks.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Jiro Nakamura)
Subject: Fax Forwarding Services, Anyone?
Organization: Shaman Consulting
Date: Sun, 16 Feb 1992 22:20:42 GMT


An associate and myself are publishing a newsletter called NeXTwatch
for the NeXT computer (real snazzy, I must say :-).  The problem is,
we want to have a fax subscription available, but the only problem is:

    We can get around 11c to 13c per minute from our LD company,
but using G3 fine-mode faxing at 9600bps, it takes us 16.2 minutes to
fax our ten page newsletter. Even at the cheapest rate:

    $0.11  * 16.2 minutes == $1.78

$1.78 per issue per person is too much, considering that postage and
printing only amounts to less than 80 cents, roughly. We don't want to
have our fax subscriber price be almost double or triple our US mail
price. In addition, we aren't thrilled with the prospect of our fax
machine being tied up for ten hours, for only 30 subscribers.

Any suggestions?  We had thought that AT&T had offered a fax
forwarding service where we could send them one copy and a list of the
phone numbers and they would fax the document to the list.  But I
phoned up AT&T and the representative knew nothing about this service.
Is there a special business office within AT&T that offers this? Or am
I hallucinating about whether they have it?

If anyone has ANY suggestions about how we can drive the cost per copy
of our newsletter down to around (or less than) $1, please please
e-mail me at <[e-mail]> or post to this group (I read it
avidly). Thank you very much.


Jiro Nakamura
Technical Editor, NeXTwatch
[e-mail]   The Shaman Group    [phone] Voice/Fax/Data

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

From: [e-mail] (Michael Gersten)
Subject: On Having a Level Playing Field
Organization: STB BBS, La, Ca, 310 397 3137
Date: Sun, 16 Feb 1992 01:28:20 GMT


There is an alternative to competition at the LEC level. However, it
requires our watchdog PUC and FCC to put a little teeth into what they
do.

Simply put, require that, in exchange for the monopoly, they must
provide certain features.

Example: minimum grade quality for voice lines
Example: They must make availible a "how much does this cost" for a
telephone number via the ISDN data channel (no charge for this, other
than the packet cost).

Similarly, they would need to regulate (really enforce this) what a
COCOT can and cannot do with DMTF pads.

What would we get from this?

Well, imagine a phone able to say "Please dial your number."
Then "Choose a carrier.
1 Sprint xxx plus yyy/minute
2 Att    xxx plus yyy/minute
etc."

All of these prices would, of course, be 10-15 cents per minute higher
so that the COCOT would be able to make some money.

Now, what about the "I'll use the COCOT to call another company and
use them to do the real call" stuff? Well, ...

OK, so its not perfect. But you won't get any better by going to
competition at the local exchange level.

(Hmm ... here's a (bad) idea. Since the LD companies already surcharge
your calling card calls, maybe half of that surcharge would go to the
COCOT the call was placed from?)


Michael Gersten        [e-mail]

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

Date: Sun, 16 Feb 1992 19:44:34 -0500
From: [e-mail] (Brian Rice)
Subject: Call Waiting Detector
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Brian Rice)


Like many congenital computer nerds, I use my one home phone line a
lot with my modem, thus making me incommunicado to other human beings.
Unlike many congenital computer nerds, I don't like this situation.  B-)

It seems to me to be a fairly obvious idea to have a device which
would sit between your modem and your household wiring and, in the
event of the arrival of a call-waiting signal, suspend the modem
connection and give a signal ... at this point a human being could
pick up a voice extension, click the switchhook, and talk.  Is such a
product on the market?  I've seen ads for devices which promise to
mediate access among phone, modem, and fax calls, but none of them
mentions a facility like the above.


Brian Rice   [e-mail]   [phone]
DG/UX Software Quality Assurance
Data General Corp., Research Triangle Park, N.C.


[Moderator's Note: The problem is not in being able to isolate your
modem while taking a call ... it is in how do you tell the other end
that it should sit there and wait even though the carrier (to its
perspective) has been lost?  The problem with call-waiting as a
substitute to two actual pairs of wires is that *someone or something*
has to wait on hold. You can't have two conversations as one time as
you can with two actual lines. And the problem with modems is they
won't tolerate that arrangement. Call-waiting and modems are simply
not compatible.  PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #141
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa16640;
          17 Feb 92 3:09 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA22228
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 17 Feb 1992 00:29:15 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA10413
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 17 Feb 1992 00:29:05 -0600
Date: Mon, 17 Feb 1992 00:29:05 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #142

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 17 Feb 92 00:29:03 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 142

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    More on Telcos and BBSs (Communications Daily via Peter Marshall)
    HR 3515: Threat or Menace? (John R. Levine)
    Re: Info Services? Keep Them Banned! (Doctor Math)
    Re: Kansas City Sysops and Southwestern Bell (John Higdon)
    Re: Oregon PUC Hearing Summary (John Higdon)
    Re: MOH, Bad Manners, Poor Throughput, and Sprint (Brandon S. Allbery)
    Re: Phone Service to Cuba (David Lesher)
    Re: Looking for Modular Connectors (Patton M. Turner)
    Re: Rabbit Network Press Release Confuses Bits and Characters (Ron Dippold)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sun, 16 Feb 92 13:07:30 PDT
From: [e-mail] (peter marshall)
Subject: More on Telcos and BBSs


The 2/4 issue of {Communications Daily} reports that "US West is
taking a hard line," in the Oregon case discussed here recently.

The trade journal, citing US West's brief in this case, notes that the
company says that it is "compelled under its tariff" to apply business
rates to such BBSs because, according to US West, residential rates
can only hold for what the company's brief calls a "domestic setting."
According to the article, US West stated that the OR BBS that is the
immediate subject of the case is "out of any rational definition of
domestic use ..."  Also noted in this item is the company's posture on
the Portland sysop's stance "that he doesn't profit from his BBS,"
with US West claiming that "United Way and other organizations are
charged business rates but don't profit from services they offer."

Taking a parallel look at current developments on the telco-BBS front
in Missouri, CD's 2/11 issue also indicated that "... (BBS) operators
in Kansas City and Southwestern Bell are near agreement on new tariff
language that would settle dispute on charging BBS's business rates."

According to this item, BBSs would be "exempt" from such classification
only under several conditions, including utilization of four lines or
less; yet remaining to be worked out in negotiation was a "workable
definition for BBS."  US West and Taco Bell were earlier said to have
been in touch on questions of tariff language, while the latter
company was later said to have denied this assertion.


Peter Marshall ([e-mail])
"Lightfinger" Rayek's Friendly Casino: 206/528-0948, Seattle, Washington.

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

Subject: HR 3515: Threat or Menace?
Date: Sun, 16 Feb 92 22:39:18 EST
From: John R. Levine <[e-mail]>


With all the disinformation that telcos are spreading about HR3515, I
wonder how many people really know what it says.  Here is a summary of
a copy I got a week or two ago.  Anyone can get a complete copy, by
calling the House Document Room at [phone] and asking for one.
It's free (or more correctly, you've already paid for it.)  I haven't
seen the senate version yet but I gather it's similar.  "Quotes" are
verbatim from the bill.

The privacy clause four paragraphs down is intriguing, it could be
read to prevent CLID and customer ANI, or to prevent recipients
thereof for using it other than for routing calls or verifying phone
bills.  I believe its intent is to forbid using the subscriber
database as a prospect list for internal use or sale to others.

Personally, now that I see what this bill really involves, I'm in
favor of it 100%, and find that the telcos' reaction says really
ominous things about their attitudes and intentions.

HR 3515, the Telecommunications act of 1991 [or maybe now 1992.]

Title I - Infrastructure Development

 -- Joint Federal-State board will impose and enforce network quality
standards.

 -- LECs must interconnect on a nondiscriminatory basis.
Interconnects must colocate where feasible, otherwise LEC must
provide virtual colocation at the same price.  Detailed rules to be
made, not binding on rural carriers (those with under 50K lines.)

 -- FCC to revise ONA findings to require unbundled ONA features, made
available in a uniform and timely way.  Must not discriminate between
affiliates and non-affiliates when they offer tariffed and non-tariffed
features.

 -- "Personally identifiable customer information obtained or
collected by a local exchange carrier in the course of providing
telephone exchange service shall be used only in connection with the
provision of such service, and shall not be made available to any
affiliate of such carrier or any other person except -- (1) as
required by law; or (2) upon the affirmative request by the customer
to which such information relates."

 -- LEC shall file tariffs for interconnect and access services, FCC
shall ensure charges reasonable and features not bundled.

 -- Prices must be cost based except that explicit price components to
subsidize POTS still permitted.

 -- Resale of phone service permitted without restriction.

 -- Various planning and study requirements by FCC.

 -- FCC must license new technologies within two years of determination
that they're in the public interest.

Title II -- RBOC rules

The rest of these apply only to divested RBOCs:

 -- They may provide information services (which I abbreviate IS.)

 -- Electronic publishing (which the rest of us refer to as "content"
and I abbreviate as EP) may not be offered by an RBOC in any state
within which the RBOC operates until 50% of subs have access to
competing EP service, 10% subscribe, and RBOC has demonstrated to the
Justice Dept. that its position as LEC won't impede competition or
increase phone costs.

 -- FCC may offer waivers for EP services where no competition exists
for the service.

 -- IS must be offered by separate subsidiary, with outside directors,
arms length transactions with LEC, separately operated, mostly separate
ads, at least 10% outside ownership, no transmission facilities.

 -- Lots of rules to prevent cross subsidies, rules given for
allocating costs, basically LEC doesn't pay for anything they
wouldn't have paid for in the absence of IS.

 -- No IS in any state until all barriers to competitive entry imposed
by that state's laws or regs are removed.

 -- Gateway services (i.e. no content, just switching and protocol
conversion) if offered must be offered to all under the same terms.

 -- Any LEC subscriber may file a complaint or a civil action if he
believes that a cross-subsidy or other infraction.

 -- All parts of MFJ still apply other than those modified by this
act.  No anti-trust immunity granted by this act.


Regards,

John Levine, [e-mail], {spdcc|ima|world}!iecc!johnl

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

From: [e-mail] (Doctor Math)
Subject: Re: Info Services? Keep Them Banned!
Date: Sun, 16 Feb 92 22:17:12 EST


[e-mail] (David Gast) writes:

> This monopoly can exist because of the Failing Newspaper Act (and
> subsequent legislation) which essentially allows newspapers to engage
> in activities which would be illegal in other businesses.  Such
> activities include collusion, and price fixing.

> Thus, there is government regulation protecting the newspapers as well.

Sure is. Around here, there's only one local paper. For reasons as yet
unknown to me, I cannot order this paper Sunday only because I live in
the county in which it is printed. I can have Saturday + Sunday, seven
days, or six days (no Sunday). If I lived outside the county, I could
order Sunday only in addition to any of the other configurations.
Besides walking over to the local paper machine every Sunday or
ordering the {Chicago Tribune} (as I plan to do soon), what can I do
about this?  The price difference between Saturday + Sunday and seven
day is about $3 per month, the intent of which seems to be the
promotion of seven day service. This is a paper which provided less
information than either the Net or week-old coastal papers (I get the
{San Francisco Examiner} by mail).

This thread is getting off-base. Sorry. Just had to rant a little.

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

Subject: Re: Kansas City Sysops and Southwestern Bell
Date: 16 Feb 92 20:54:52 PST (Sun)
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)


[e-mail] (System Administrator) writes:

> The following article was in America Online's February 14 Newsbytes:

> One of the conditions is that the boards must be located in residences.
> Exempted BBSes also must not charge for access, must not advertise and
> must have fewer than five phone lines.

I can certainly agree that residential service must be provided only
in residences, that "residential" BBSes should not charge, and I might
also be persuaded that they should not advertise to qualify for
non-business service. BUT -- someone please explain what the number of
service drops has to do with residential/business classes of service!
How does exceeding some magic number of lines suddenly regrade
residence telephone service and make it business service?

Theory: the telco, who ultimately wants to go into the BBS biz itself,
feels in its little corporate heart that if the free BBS is "small"
enough, then it will not be a threat to its overpriced, future
commercial offering.

With all of my Pac*Bell bashing (and diety knows that company deserves
every word of it), I have to admit that this "three lines or less"
idiocy that SWB has apparently gotten away with has never been tried
by Pac*Bell. Indeed, Pac*Bell has a thirty-line RESIDENTIAL
mini-Centrex tariffed (and it has been around for years). Am I to
assume that such service is NOT available in SWB territory? I am
beginning to believe that there are worse telcos than Pac*Bell out
there.


John Higdon <[e-mail]> (hiding out in the desert)

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

Subject: Re: Oregon PUC Hearing Summary
Date: 16 Feb 92 18:08:45 PST (Sun)
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)


[e-mail] (Randy Bush) writes:

> It is amusing to still see all these non-Oregonians who are unfamiliar
> with the actual details of the case and filing ranting on about the
> filing.  But I expected better of you, John.

I claim no familiarity with the Wagner vs. US West case. My comments
were made in general regarding the usually bogus labelings of
"business" that many people (especially uninformed business office
reps) try to attach to unconventional residential uses of the
telephone.

I have even had to fight this battle on a small scale myself, but the
tariffs came to the rescue. Notations were entered into my records and
the issue has never come up again.


John Higdon <[e-mail]> (hiding out in the desert)

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

Date: Sun, 16 Feb 92 19:39:19 -0500
From: [e-mail] (Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH)
Subject: Re: MOH, Bad Manners, Poor Throughput, and Sprint
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH)
Organization: North Coast Public Access *NIX, Cleveland, OH


As quoted from <[e-mail]> by NETWRK@HARVARDA.
HARVARD.EDU (Steve Thornton):

> In TELECOM Digest 12 : 128, Jack Winslade said:

>> I consider MOH to be the SECOND rudest thing a called party can do to
>> me.  The rudest is for the answering party to immediately say 'Good
>> morning, XYZ Corporation, can you hold ...' to which my answer is

> I take you've never had to answer the phone in a place of business
> before.  If you have, you might have been faced with three lines
> ringing at once.  The secretary who is putting you on hold so fast may
> not have a choice. The next time you feel like making a snappy remark

Only too true.  One of our clients keeps their computers in a secretary's
office; I get graphic proof of how overloaded with calls a secretary
can be at any given time time (and this is with two secretaries both
answering calls!).  I used to feel the same way about "XYZ Inc., can
you hold?";  now I know better.

> BTW, I totally agree with you about MOH. Shouldn't it be BMOH, though,
> for Bad Music On Hold?

Depends on how you feel about paying LD charges to hear it.  On the
other hand, I don't look to LD companies providing a local hold option
(as suggested by someone else): the LD companies are making a profit
on that time you spend listening to MOH, after all.  Would they make
as much from a flat rate charge to the company you're calling for
local MOH to callers?  That's assuming that they don't price the flat
rate so high no company would be willing to pay for it, of course.
And that the company is willing to pay for (part of) your call, even
granting that caller-local MOH on a standard incoming line would
probably be cheaper to them than an incoming 800 line.

But I can take even *bad* music on hold over some things.  I once
called a computer company's support number and got to hear a Dianetics
ad on hold (courtesy of a radio station being played as "M"OH).  My
response was essentially "Can I throw up now?"  :-(


Brandon S. Allbery, KF8NH [44.70.4.88]        [e-mail]
Senior Programmer, Telotech, Inc. (if I may call myself that...)


[Moderator's Note: The problem with delayed answering of phone calls
in business places is largely the fault of the person in charge of the
staff assigned to answering. If they need another person on the phones
full time, then they should hire someone and not force such a backlog
to occur. But predicting the proper staffing levels in large phone
centers is an inexact science at best. It can't always be helped.  PAT]

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

From: David Lesher <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Phone Service to Cuba
Date: Sun, 16 Feb 92 23:55:01 EST
Reply-To: [e-mail]  (David Lesher)
Organization: NRK Clinic for habitual NetNews abusers - Beltway Annex


{Relay calls via Canada?}

Someone in Miami just tried this about a year ago.  Once word got
around to the exile community, he got busted rather quickly.

> I also tried dialing some random numbers in Havana, just to see what
> the speed and quality of connection were like.  Some strange results.

Folks, any results involving the terms "telephone" and "Cuba" are best
described as strange.  Those interested can look up my posting a few
years ago where I talked about loaning the telco repairman my butt set
 -- he didn't have one! The chance of even an assigned number working
when you call is so low that you might form a state lottery pool on
it.

[e-mail]

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

Date: Sun, 16 Feb 92 22:55:52 CST
From: Patton M. Turner <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Looking for Modular Connectors


Jim Puls writes:

> I'm looking for a source of modular connectors, four contacts, but
> narrow, such as is often used on telephone handsets.  Can anyone out
> there help me?  I'd also be interested in what the things are properly
> called.  Please e-mail any responses to [e-mail].

I've seen them called RJ-22 plugs, but I have doubts about this.  It
certainly isn't a USOC code unless it is for an E&M trunk :-).
Anyway, the tools are available in several grades.  The cheapest use a
plastic frame, and are about worthless.  Rat Shack might sell them, I
don't know, I wouldn't be caught dead with one.  I think Newark
Electronics still sells the medium grade tool (steel frame, imported)
for about $20 (cat 43-005).  If you're interested in the top of the
line tools check with Jensen, Specialised Products Company,
Techni-Tool, or the like.  They all carry crimp tools from AMP and the
like. Jensen sells the AMP tool with the correct die for $135.


Jensen Tools
7815 S. 46th St.
Phoenix, AZ 85044-5399
[phone]

For Newark Electronics check the yellow pages of your nearest major city.


Pat Turner    [e-mail]     KB4GRZ @ K4RY.AL.USA

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

From: [e-mail] (Ron Dippold)
Subject: Re: Rabbit Network Press Release Confuses Bits and Characters
Organization: Qualcomm, Inc., San Diego, CA
Date: Mon, 17 Feb 1992 05:17:19 GMT


[e-mail] writes:

> The quoted text seems to say 56kbps (bits/second) means 56,000
> characters per second.  Maybe he meant those famous binary characters,
> 0 and 1. <deleted>

> If this is representative of the technical support expertise at
> RABBIT, it would seem they're not off to a good start.

There has been quite a bit of speculation on other Usenet subs
regarding the identity of the Rabbit Network, especially its
connection to tygra (from the same area), which has similar problems.
Its representative on the net has been similarly fascinated with
rabbits, even to the point of posting pornographic Tiny Toon stories.

If this is the case, I'd say this was doomed before it began.

No line available at 300 baud.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #142
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa10668;
          18 Feb 92 3:10 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA29735
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 18 Feb 1992 01:12:29 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA02717
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 18 Feb 1992 01:12:21 -0600
Date: Tue, 18 Feb 1992 01:12:21 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #143

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 18 Feb 92 01:12:12 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 143

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Biographical Sketch: Gilbert S. Vernam (WU Tech Review via Jim Haynes)
    Non-blockable Caller ID Approved in Indiana (Michael Harpe)
    And The Billing Goes On! (John Higdon)
    Telex From Internet?? (Chip Elliott)
    Cellular LD Carriers ([e-mail])
    Multiple Lines on Same Number? (Simon Taylor)
    Looking for EIA IS-54 Standard Source (Digital Cellular) (Robert McMillin)
    1-800-HAIR (David Niebuhr)
    ISDN Prices (John Schultz)
    Ringer For the Hard of Hearing (Chaim Frenkel)
    Re: Rotary Dialers Go Home! (Bryan J. Abshier)
    Re: Low-Bandwith Free Info Transfer? (John Higdon)
    Re: When Did The LEC's Start to Die? (Doctor Math)
    Correction: SW Bell Article Attribution (crash!pro-gallup!samp)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Jim Haynes)
Date: Sun, 16 Feb 92 22:28:28 -0800
Subject: Biographical Sketch: Gilbert S. Vernam
Organization: University of California, Santa Cruz


This is from the bio accompanying an article in the {Western Union
Technical Review}, April, 1958.

"Gilbert S. Vernam, Assistant to the Systems and Equipment Engineer,
graduated from Worcester Polytechnic Institute in 1914 with a B.S.
degree.  After 15 years with the AT&T Engineering Department, he
transferred to the International Communications Labs, and in 1932 to
Postal Telegraph which later merged with Western Union.  While with
AT&T he invented a method of using printer equipment do encipher and
decipher messages automatically that is widely used by our armed
forces, and took part in the early development of the TWX system.  For
Postal he developed an automatic concentrator, and supervised the
development of the semiautomatic "torn-tape" relay system and its
installation in a number of switching centers for Postal and for the
Signal Corps and Navy; he also prepared a technical manual describing
the system for the Signal Corps.

More recently [1957-58 ed note] he has worked on the development of
push-button switching systems Plans 51 and 54 for leased wire patrons
and Plan 55-A for the Air Force.  Mr. Vernam holds about 60 patents
relating to telegraph systems.  He is a Professional Engineer, a
member of Tau Beta Pi, Sigma Xi and AFCEA, and a Life Member of AIEE."


[e-mail]    [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: Just keep it up, Jim! I may have to require that
you type in all those old issues of {WU Tech Review}!  :)  Thanks for
another excellent article.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Michael Harpe)
Subject: Non-blockable Caller ID Approved in Indiana
Organization: University of Louisville
Date: Mon, 17 Feb 1992 14:15:24 GMT


The Indiana Legislature has approved non-blockable Caller ID service
for Indiana Bell.  This is the major hurdle that needed to be cleared
for Indiana Bell to begin offering this service.  I don't have the
full text of the article from the {Courier-Journal} Indiana Edition
with me, however, I can summarize.

The bill was passed after intense debate in the legislature.  They got
it through by bundling it in with a prohibition on measured service.
Indiana Bell had strongly opposed blockable CID since they felt it
diminished the value of the service tremendously.  No timetable was
given for when the service would actually be available.  I know in my
area (Jeffersonville, IN, area code 812) it won't be any time soon, I
don't think.  It's my understanding that we have a very old switch
that will need major upgrades.

Perhaps someone more in the know can fill in details.  I didn't see
anything about this so I thought I would pass it on.


Mike Harpe                 PSTN: 502-588-7428
83 Business School         FAX:  [phone]
University of Louisville   Louisville, KY  40292

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

Subject: And The Billing Goes On!
Date: 16 Feb 92 21:38:54 PST (Sun)
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)


Regular readers may recall that last year I had ordered a T1 from
Sprint for my office. After Sprint had given me the most incompetent
royal run-around concerning credit, we cancelled the order.
Eventually, Sprint's brain-dead NY office got its act together and
decided that my firm was not such a bad risk after all and approved
the order. By that time, we had made other arrangements and were not
interested.

This is where the story picks up and continues as they say. Even
though a circuit was never installed, the idea of billing us for it
seemed too much to resist. Hence, since some time last year, we have
been receiving regular, large bills from Sprint for NOTHING. At first,
I laughed them off and simply called the main, so-called "Customer
Service" number and explained the situation. Each time I was told that
it would be "taken care of" (and that they "appreciated [my]
business").

And each month thereafter, a new bill would show up with the back
charges on it as well. More calls to "Customer Service" with the
result as mentioned above. At one point, I turned the matter over to
our major accounts rep at Sprint. I got profuse apologies and
assurances that it would be handled forthwith. But it was not.

Why am I whining about this now? Because I just recently found out
that this little "misunderstanding" with Sprint has tarnished an
otherwise spotless D&B that my company has enjoyed. We now have a
"slow pay" on our report, courtesy of Sprint. It is not enough that I
have to be inconvenienced to the max by this excuse for a long
distance carrier, but now I have a major amount of "credit repair"
ahead to negate the result of this blatant manifestation of Sprint's
incompetency. And all of this in light of the fact that I have
personally sent a lot of business in Sprint's direction in my role as
telecommunications consultant.

Sprint may have the finest network in the world (which is doubtful),
but words cannot express my contempt for its method of doing business.
Anyone want some more reasons why we still use AT&T?


John Higdon <[e-mail]> (hiding out in the desert)


[Moderator's Note: I'll see if I can find the name and number of the
attorney for Sprint I called to scream and yell at when Sprint
misapplied our check for $10,000 and tried to extort another payment
in the same amount from us since they were afraid to go high enough in
their organization to get authorization to write off that much due to
their clerical error. Call and tell him you are fixing to sue his
client and ask if his office will intervene to get them off whatever
collision course they are on this time.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Chip Elliott)
Subject: Telex From Internet??
Organization: Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH
Date: Mon, 17 Feb 1992 22:08:24 GMT


I need to send telexes from an Internet node, via email.
Naturally I will be glad to pay for this service.

Does anyone know how I can do it?

Please reply via email, as I never browse this group!  Many thanks
indeed.


[e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: I don't think any site is set up to act as a
gateway for this. You can get telex service from MCI Mail and/or ATT
Mail if you want to subscribe to those services. Don't, however, try
to send it from Internet addressed to 'attmail.comp!telex!<number>. I
think they closed up that loophole long ago after getting stuck with
some telex charges from netters with the temerity to try it.   PAT]

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

Subject: Cellular LD Carriers
From: [e-mail] (System Operator)
Date: Sun, 16 Feb 92 18:05:57 PST
Organization: Telecommunications Central, San Diego CA


I recently got a piece of mail from US West Cellular saying that I
have to choose a long distance company for my cellular phone.  They
even included the 10xxx numbers. Anyways, I'm wondering what the best
company (in terms of rates) is between the following:

                333     US SPRINT COMMUNICATIONS
                223     CABLE & WIRELESS COMM.
                511     EXECULINE OF SACRAMENTO, INC.
                700     EXPRESS TEL
                569     WEST COAST TELECOMMUNICATIONS
                288     AT&T COMMUNICATIONS
                222     MCI TELECOMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION

Thank You,


[e-mail] (System Operator)
Telecommunications Central   San Diego, CA.

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

From: [e-mail] (Simon Taylor)
Subject: Multiple Lines on Same Number?
Organization: VisionWare Ltd., Leeds, UK
Date: Mon, 17 Feb 1992 08:13:40 GMT


A colleague has recently moved to California from the UK, he currently
has two phone lines installed on separate numbers one for voice, one
for fax, but would now like to install a second line on the voice
number ie. Have two lines, both with the SAME number.  He has called
the local telephone company (I will find out which one it is if this
is relevant) and they do not understand his request!  They seem quite
happy to provide an extension socket but cannot understand the concept
of having two lines on the same number.  He asked them how large
companies who have say 50 lines manage it do they have 50 different
phone numbers?

Anyway I think the problem we have is one of terminology in the UK
we could want is required a "trunk group" ... what should we be asking
for in the US?


Thanks,


Simon Taylor
Support Manager   EMAIL   : [e-mail]
VisionWare Ltd    BANGNET : ...!uunet!mcsun!uknet!vision!simon
57 Cardigan Lane  PHONE   : [phone] Ext. 237
Leeds             FAX     : [phone]
LS4 2LE           SUPPORT
England           HOTLINE : [phone]


[Moderator's Note: Some businesses do have fifty actual numbers
assigned to fifty actual lines. What you want to ask for is X lines,
all in rotary hunt from the main number. Period. Then be quiet and
don't overtax their intelligence. That's all you have to say.   PAT]

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

Date: Mon, 17 Feb 92 02:06:35 PST
From: rlm@ms_aspen.hac.com (Robert L. McMillin)
Subject: Re: Looking for EIA IS-54 Standard Source (Digital Cellular)


> Can anyone tell me where to get a copy of this standard?

Although you've probably been inundated with responses, here's one
source you can try: Global Engineering Documents in Irvine, CA.  (714)
261-1455.


Robert L. McMillin                     | Voice:    [phone]
Hughes Aircraft/Hughes Training, Inc.  | Fax:      [phone]
Los Angeles, CA                        | Internet: rlm@ms_aspen.hac.com

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

Date: Mon, 17 Feb 92 18:00:25 -0500
From: [e-mail] (david niebuhr)
Subject: 1-800-HAIR


As one of the "fillers" on tonights 5 pm news (WNBC-TV, New York City)
the female anchor (Sue Simmons) mentioned her changed hair style.

As the "talking heads" started their quipping, two numbers were shown
on the screen:

    1-800-HAIR-YES
    1-800-HAIR-NAY

and it was implied at that time that a vote was being taken on whether
the viewer liked it or not.

One of the people on the set asked if there was a charge and the
answer was, of course, no.  In fact, they went to great pains to say
that the numbers were ficticious.

So what happens when the telecast is given to the teaser for the
6 ppm news?  The co-anchor votes via, you guessed it: 1-800-HAIR.

I hope NYTel gets its just deserts with this, they deserve it.  (The
TV station, too).


Dave Niebuhr      Internet: [e-mail] / Bitnet: niebuhr@bnl
Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, NY 11973  (516)-282-3093


[Moderator's Note: What did NY Tel have to do with this foolishness?
Did NY Tel encourage people to call and vote? Don't blame them!   PAT]

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

Date: Mon, 17 Feb 92 13:53:48 CST
From: John Schultz <[e-mail]>
Subject: ISDN Prices


In a recent discussion on a local BBS, we stared talking about ISDN,
specifically price and availability.  Even though I read the Digest
frequently, I couldn't remember an average price that posters have
mentioned.  What I'm interested in is both the installation and
monthly costs that ISDN users see.  Feel free to e-mail me or post the
answers to the Digest.  I'll summarize if there is enough interest.
Thanks.


John Schultz (caffeine abuser)
[e-mail]    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Chaim Frenkel)
Subject: Ringer For the Hard of Hearing
Organization: CDC Investment Management
Date: Tue, 18 Feb 1992 04:40:46 GMT


I am looking for help in hooking up a louder ringer for a relative that
is hard of hearing. Could anyone tell me how to do this.

The relative lives in Israel, if that would make any difference in the
technique.


Chaim Frenkel    [e-mail]       212-891-6114

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

From: [e-mail] (Bryan J Abshier)
Subject: Re: Rotary Dialers Go Home!
Organization: The Ohio State University
Date: Mon, 17 Feb 1992 05:42:13 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Richard
Nash) writes:

>> On the other hand, maybe the ommission of this feature is all a
>> nefarious plot by the telco's to get everyone to switch to DTMF :-)

> Yes this is possible but is quite possibly not provided. The method
> employs a special 'KP2' pulse sent instead of the normal 'KP' pulse in
> the ANI spill. Since most subs use DTMF and the telco wants to
> encourage complete migration to this single format, they are loath of
> any expense to assist DP (dial pulse) phone users.

     This is very interesting.  My local phone company has refused to
switch my line to DTMF.  Whenever I inquire as to wether they can turn
on my DTMF service, they ask for a $250.00 instalation fee.  Now, you
might think that this is because we're still on a primative switch,
but we also have call waiting and have been offered a variety of other
services.  All of our telephones are able to use DTMF and I have to
switch back to DTMF whenever I dial an information service or private
exchange.  This has really encouraged me to switch to their DTMF
service :-)


Bryan J. Abshier | [e-mail] | [e-mail]

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

Subject: Re: Low-Bandwith Free Info Transfer?
Date: 16 Feb 92 21:18:53 PST (Sun)
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)


[e-mail] (Jeff E. Nelson) writes:

> I wonder if we should start worrying about a long-distance carrier
> winning a lawsuit which makes all of these devices illegal.

I think not. First, trying to enforce such a law would be an exercise
in futility. Second, it is petty stuff such as this that gives many
(including myself) the constant impression that business has nothing
better to do than nickel and dime its customers to death.

Just what we need: "ring-no-answer" and "busy" charges! How about "all
circuits busy" and "equipment failure" charges as well? After all, you
received information that the carrier is under-equipped and/or poorly
maintained, did you not?

Enough already!


John Higdon <[e-mail]> (hiding out in the desert)

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

From: [e-mail] (Doctor Math)
Date: Mon, 17 Feb 92 00:30:47 EST
Subject: Re: When Did The LEC's Start to Die?


[e-mail] (Harold Hallikainen) writes:

>     The use of an RF to RF link for local calls is interesting.  I
> don't think we have enough spectrum available to make cell sites large
> enough for you to call anyone very far away.

How many calls are within your neighborhood? A phone call ties up
eight circuits in a typical 1AESS (I'm not sure exactly what is meant
by this; I was told this during a tour of the facilities). That same
amount of facility usage will connect me across town or across the
street, but tying up that much facility to call across the street
seems wasteful.  I've often wished for some alternate method in this
case. Perhaps the "repeater" sites could have a backbone for distances
greater than one hop ... a landline call with RF at both ends... which
ends up being just like cordless phones, albeit on a larger scale.
It's also almost exactly how cell phones work. Maybe everyone should
have cell service instead of wire! I know I would if it weren't
artificially expensive.

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

Date: Sun, 16 Feb 92 18:21:58 MST
From: [e-mail] (System Administrator)
Subject: Correction: SW Bell Article Attribution


The source for the article forwarded was incorrectly attributed to
America Online's 14 Feb 92 {Newsbytes}.

The correct source is America Online's 14 Feb 92 {Networker's Journal}.


UUCP: crash!pro-gallup!samp            pro-gallup   300 - 14,400 bps
ARPA: crash!pro-gallup![e-mail]   All MNP Levels  [phone]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #143
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa12590;
          18 Feb 92 3:59 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA01046
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 18 Feb 1992 02:11:14 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA28164
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 18 Feb 1992 02:11:03 -0600
Date: Tue, 18 Feb 1992 02:11:03 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #144

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 18 Feb 92 02:11:00 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 144

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    MOH From Radio: Is it Lawful? (Laird P. Broadfield)
    MOH - Is it a Violation of ASCAP & BMI? (Michael Faurot)
    Re: MOH, Bad Manners, Poor Throughput, and Sprint (Jim Redelfs)
    Re: Party Not Answering Phone (Hoyt A. Stearns Jr.)
    Re: Party Not Answering Phone (Robert M. Hamer)
    Re: Party Not Answering Phone (Peter da Silva)
    Re: Oregon PUC Hearing Summary (Peter da Silva)
    Re: Kansas City Sysops and Southwestern Bell (Peter da Silva)
    Re: ADA Compliance Requirements (Mike Gordon)
    Re: FCC Allows Cellular Phones in Airplanes (Mike Gordon)
    Re: More on Telcos and BBSs (Reginald Hirsch)
    Re: Log Periodic Array Antennas Info Wanted (Rolf Meier)
    Re: Rabbit Network Press Release Confuses Bits and Characters (Ron Dippold)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Laird P. Broadfield)
Subject: MOH From Radio: Is it Lawful?
Date: Mon, 17 Feb 1992 22:36:54 GMT


In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Brandon S.
Allbery KF8NH) writes:

> But I can take even *bad* music on hold over some things.  I once
> called a computer company's support number and got to hear a Dianetics
> ad on hold (courtesy of a radio station being played as "M"OH).  My
> response was essentially "Can I throw up now?"  :-(

Only vaguely on subject, but interesting as an intellectual-property
question, is this a violation of anything?  I assume that Muzak has
handled all of the rights issues on what they are feeding, but if I
play a radio station in my place of business, or as MOH, what's the
situation?  Should I be paying the radio station?  ASCAP?  What if I
have a little more taste, and get a CD-changer for my MOH; do I pay
the record companies?  ASCAP again?  I would think this was at least
vaguely "public performance".


Laird P. Broadfield
UUCP: {ucsd, nosc}!crash!lairdb
INET: [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Michael Faurot)
Subject: MOH - Is it a Violation of ASCAP & BMI?
Organization: ism:c:m/xo
Date: Mon, 17 Feb 1992 18:33:16 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Brandon
S. Allbery KF8NH) writes:

> But I can take even *bad* music on hold over some things.  I once
> called a computer company's support number and got to hear a Dianetics
> ad on hold (courtesy of a radio station being played as "M"OH).  My
> response was essentially "Can I throw up now?"  :-(

I don't know how true this might be or even if this is a valid
consideration.  I once knew a guy that was a studio engineer and
heavily involved in the music business (recording, promoting, etc.).
He once mentioned to me that he thought the idea of MOH was a
violation of the royalty fees and what-not that have to be paid to
organizations like ASCAP and BMI.  I think radio stations have to pay
some sort of fees to these organizations, but I'm not certain.

At any rate, could it be possible that by "re-broadcasting" this music
it's violating the royalty contracts of the various artists?


Michael Faurot   | Domain: [e-mail]
------- ------   | UUCP:   ...uunet!media!ka3ovk!irscscm!bogart!mfaurot
Fax:  [phone]   Tel:  [phone]

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

Date: Sun, 16 Feb 92 23:39:02 CST
From: [e-mail] (Jim Redelfs)
Subject: Re: MOH, Bad Manners, Poor Throughput, and Sprint
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Macnet Omaha


In a reply to Jack Winslade, Steve Thornton wrote:

>> I consider MOH to be the SECOND rudest thing a called party can do to
>> me.  The rudest is for the answering party to immediately say 'Good
>> morning, XYZ Corporation, can you hold ...' to which my answer is
>> always 'no I cannot.'  That answer usually leaves them dumbfounded, as
>> if they had never heard it before.

> I take you've never had to answer the phone in a place of business
> before. If you have, you might have been faced with three lines
> ringing at once. The secretary who is putting you on hold so fast may
> not have a choice. The next time you feel like making a snappy remark
> (heard a thousand times, I assure you) to a secretary, you might
> reconsider who is the one being rude. The only thing dumbfounding the
> secretary on the other end is the fact that there can be so many
> egotists in the world all calling at once. A little consideration
> goes a long way.

I HAVE manned (personed?) a busy Call Director before: the console to
which all the after-hours calls to (my) TelCo's executives were
forwarded.

Having started my telco career as a toll cordboard operator (first
male Service Assistant in Omaha's Toll Unit I), I was trained to
announce the fact that the call I was placing was LONG DISTANCE -- all
other considerations and announcements/questions being secondary.

I have NO problem being asked (I don't even hold out for POLITELY) if
I can hold, but if the called party doesn't even wait for my RESPONSE,
I get bent out of shape!

If I can NOT hold, I will calmly state that fact -- if they give me a
chance.  Frequently, they are able to forward the call with little
delay WITHOUT placing me on hold after all.

But, you're right.  A little courtesy goes a long way.  If I'm warm,
dry, comfortable and calling locally, I can ALWAYS hold.  If I'm
calling Cable Assignments from atop a 30-ft pole in February
(Nebraska), generally I have no CHOICE but to "HOLD" -- but that I'd
rather not!

Operators/Receptionists: Take the time to LISTEN to the caller's
response when asking them to hold after JUST answering the call.

Callers: Bend a little.  If "the meter" isn't running, and you're NOT
standing in the rain remember: Life is too short.  A little
MusicOnHold is actually GOOD for you! ... it helps you appreciate RAP
"music"!!  :)


JR
Tabby 2.2  MacNet Omaha    402-289-2899    Better than ever! (1:285/14)


[Moderator's Note: But what about the cases where you are not even
asked one way or the other ... just put on hold with a recording which
answers and announces that being on hold is your fate at that time?  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Hoyt A. Stearns jr.)
Subject: Re: Party Not Answering Phone
Organization: International Society of Unified Science
Date: Mon, 17 Feb 1992 18:02:08 GMT


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

>> [Moderator's Note: It is quite common. AT&T now breaks the connection
>> after a few minutes if the called party has not answered and the

Wouldn't it make sense for the equipment (perhaps with SS7) to free up
equipment on a busy until a signal from the answering end re-seizes
it?  Or better, why isn't call-back-busy implemented?


   Hoyt A. Stearns jr.| [e-mail]
   4131 E. Cannon Dr. |
   Phoenix, AZ. 85028 |     voice
   _______USA_________|_602_996_1717__

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

Date: Mon, 17 Feb 1992 17:33 EDT
From: "Robert M. Hamer" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Party Not Answering Phone


Our esteemed Moderator has repeatedly said variations on:

> calling party does not disconnect voluntarily. The main reason this
> was started was because radio talk-person Larry King ripped off AT&T
> for many thousands of dollars in network resources by encouraging his
> listeners over the air to dial his talk show call-in number 'and just
> let it ring until we get ready to answer; that way no one has to pay
> the phone company for the time they were on hold ...'. What was

Way back when I was a kid, say the early 1960s, there were several
talk shows in various stations in New York City.  That was the
practice then.  They had one telephone number whether you called
locally or long distance, and the practice was to let it ring until
the host answered, and then the caller was on the air.

1.  I am not aware than anyone thought he or she was ripping off the
    telephone company.  Prices were structured common practice was
    that call setup, including unlimited ringing, was not charged.

2.  It is my impression that the above practice was the way most radio
    talk shows worked then.

3.  I hold no brief for Larry King, but singling him out for what was
    common practice seems a bit unfair.

4.  It would be possible to hypothesize that in those days, when one
    company had a monopoly on all long distance calls (and the same
    company on most local service), and profits were guaranteed by
    the FCC and various state utility commissions, that the company
    didn't care worth a fig about whether some caller let the phone
    ring for an hour.  Further, it might be possible to hypothesize
    that the company figured that these toll calls were calls that
    would not have been made, thus generating revenues on otherwise
    idle (off-peak) equipment.

5.  It would also be possible to hypothesize that this same company,
    now subject to competition, and no longer with profits guaranteed,
    saw an opportunity to turn previously uncharged ringing time into
    a profit center.

6.  That company thus changed the rules in mid-stream.  They are
    entitled to do just that, but to blame a talk show host, whether
    or not he happens to be an idiot, for operating under the rules
    as they existed at the time seems a bit much.

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

From: [e-mail] (Peter da Silva)
Subject: Re: Party Not Answering Phone
Organization: Taronga Park BBS
Date: Tue, 18 Feb 1992 02:16:56 GMT


> [Moderator's Note: Well, your computer is otherwise sitting idle while
> you are asleep; how about if I start using it without paying you for
> the resources?

Go ahead. My numbers are [phone] and [phone].


Peter da Silva. Taronga Park BBS.  [phone]|1032 2400/n/8/1.


[Moderator's Note: Peter asked me to leave the numbers in the message,
which I have done. But the analogy is not fair! He specifically
invites calls, and no doubt responds to calls with software which is
difficult or impossible to break out of via the modem; thus the
operating system and remainder of the computer is safe from intrusion,
meaning the computer is only in a limited way 'usable'.  That is not
quite the same thing as my response to Will.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Peter da Silva)
Subject: Re: Oregon PUC Hearing Summary
Organization: Taronga Park BBS
Date: Tue, 18 Feb 1992 02:03:54 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Randy Bush)
writes:

> The well-known fact (possibly not in the more hysterical fringes
> outside of Portland) is that Wagner received and continues to receive
> income from the lines in question.

That definitely passes the "Duck Test" for a business. If US West is
behaving more reasonably then SWBell I'm glad to hear it, but let's
see what happens after this one's decided.


Peter da Silva. Taronga Park BBS.  [phone]|1032 2400/n/8/1.

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

From: [e-mail] (Peter da Silva)
Subject: Re: Kansas City Sysops and Southwestern Bell
Organization: Taronga Park BBS
Date: Tue, 18 Feb 1992 02:55:04 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(System Administrator) writes:

> One of the conditions is that the boards must be located in
> residences.

Fair enough.

> Exempted BBSes also must not charge for access,

Fair enough.

> must not advertise and

This is probably reasonable, depending on what they mean by "advertise".

> must have fewer than five phone lines.

There they go again. If they want to charge business rates for anyone
with more than X phone lines (since they have to put in extra
pedestals) that's fine. But making it "BBSes with more than X lines"
is simply bogus. It's unreasonable to treat modem users any
differently to any other class of subscriber.


Peter da Silva. Taronga Park BBS.  [phone]|1032 2400/n/8/1.

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

Date: Mon, 17 Feb 1992 00:51:17 CST
From: "Mike Gordon N9LOI [e-mail]"
Subject: Re: ADA Compliance Requirements


David Lesher ([e-mail]) wrote:

> I was walking by a coin slot at a Metro station in MD yesterday when I
> saw a box -- about 8.5" * 11" by 1.5" thick. It was metal and had a
> substantial lock, considering the box itself was thin aluminum. I was
> able to sneak a peak in the gap in the cover, and lo and behold -- a
> TTY!

What good does a TDD do inside a locked box, especially if the box
isn't marked as containing a TDD?  Is the local phone company going to
give hearing impaired users the key (assuming they all use the same
key), or to the business/school/etc. that the phone is located at.

Seems to me like the places that put a lock on the electric door
openers used on doors for people with disabilities.  They don't want
them to be 'worn out' by non-disabled individuals who just don't want
to pull the door open.  The TDD, like the door opener, is for
ACCESSABILITY, and the lock destroys that accessability.


Mike Gordon  N9LOI  [e-mail]
Disabled Student Services  University of Wisconsin - Whitewater

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

Date: Mon, 17 Feb 1992 01:08:02 CST
From: "Mike Gordon N9LOI [e-mail]"
Subject: Re: FCC Allows Cellular Phones in Airplanes


[e-mail] wrote:

> Cellular phone use on the ground is legal, as far as the FCC is
> concerned.  Of course, FAA regulations still apply; for private
> flights this isn't a big deal, for airline flights the FAA is
> apparently making guidelines on when to allow cellular phone use.

    Maybe now they can replace the now-obsolete 'no smoking' lights
with 'no phones' lights.  It could be a little retro-fit type thing. :)

     Now Seriously, I thought that cell phones transmit a little 'yes,
I'm still alive' message to the cell site every once in a while.
Would the phone user have to take the battery pack off to ensure that
this transmission does not take place?  I know that it's unlikely that
this short transmission could screw up the avionics equipment, but
rules are rules.


Mike Gordon  N9LOI [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: The battery pack would not have to be removed; the
phone would merely have to be turned off.   PAT]

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

Subject: Re: More on Telcos and BBSs
From: [e-mail] (Reginald Hirsch)
Date: 17 Feb 92 16:44:00 GMT
Organization: Ye Olde Bailey BBS - Houston, TX - 713-520-1569
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Reginald Hirsch)


It's amazing but not surprisinng how similiar the arguments in other
jurisdictions are so similiar as the ones used in Texas.


[Moderator's Note: Oh, not really. Even though the Bells are all now
separate, they still are very cozy and close. Look at how CLASS
features such as Caller-ID was proposed and implemented in the various
states. The Bells all still stay in close contact with each other.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Rolf Meier)
Subject: Re: Log Periodic Array Antennas Info Wanted
Date: Mon, 17 Feb 1992 11:53:48 -0500
Organization: Mitel. Kanata (Ontario). Canada.


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

> I'd appreciate any help. I'm looking for mathematical analysis of
> pattern radiation of logaritmic periodic array antennas. I've seen

> mathematically. It's better if I can get also the dimension of
> elements.

You could try any textbook on electromagnetics, but right now on my
desk I have the following:

"Electromagnetics"; Kraus and Carver; McGraw-Hill; section 14-17 of my
copy (second edition, 1973)

"The AARL Antenna Book"; The American Radio Relay League; chapter 10
of the 16th edition (1991)

The latter has many sample designs.


Rolf Meier    Mitel Corporation

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

From: [e-mail] (Ron Dippold)
Subject: Re: Rabbit Network Press Release Confuses Bits and Characters
Organization: Qualcomm, Inc., San Diego, CA
Date: Tue, 18 Feb 1992 03:41:16 GMT


[e-mail] (Ron Dippold) writes:

> There has been quite a bit of speculation on other Usenet subs
> regarding the identity of the Rabbit Network, especially its
> connection to tygra (from the same area), which has similar problems.
> Its representative on the net has been similarly fascinated with

Confirmed.  They share the same fax number.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #144
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa13993;
          18 Feb 92 4:26 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA06304
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 18 Feb 1992 02:28:34 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA07077
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 18 Feb 1992 02:27:56 -0600
Date: Tue, 18 Feb 1992 02:27:56 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Symposium Announcement


The following is a special mailing to the list forwarded to me today
with a request that it be distributed to the readers of the Digest.

PAT


           THE FOURTH NORTH CAROLINA SYMPOSIUM ON
     ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND ADVANCED COMPUTING TECHNOLOGY

                 MARCH 25-27, 1992

     The McKimmon Center, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC

                  60 Talks
       Demonstrations & Poster Sessions from Universities & Companies
       Tutorials March 25, 1992.  Symposium March 26-27, 1992

SESSIONS ON:

   I. LEARNING (Learning, Neural Networks, Genetic Algorithms,
          Case-Based Reasoning, Learning by Example)

   II. ADVANCED COMPUTING (Fuzzy Logic, RISC/ASIC, Parallel Processing,
          Intelligent Databases, Knowledge-Based Systems,
          Object-Oriented Programming Systems)

   III. COMPUTER HUMAN INTERFACE (CHI) (Computer-Human Interaction,
          Graphical User Interface, Virtual Reality, Natural Language,
          Multi-Media, Scientific Visualization, Client Server Model)

WITH APPLICATIONS TO: Manufacturing, Health Science, Telecommunications,
Engineering, Information Systems

SPONSORS: N.C. State University, Office of Continuing Education and
Professional Development, Industrial Extension Service, IEEE Computer
Society of Eastern North Carolina, Triangle Area Neural Network Society

               Symposium Chair:  John Sutton

The North Carolina Symposium on Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Advanced
Computing Technology (ACT) is designed for professionals, researchers and
students to increase their knowledge of current artificial intelligence
applications in a wide variety of fields.  The symposium will provide a
forum for discussions with both local, area and nationally known individuals
employing artificial intelligence techniques in actual applications.

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

                               TUTORIALS

WEDNESDAY, MARCH 25, 1992

1:30-2:00PM  Registration -- McKimmon Center
2:00-5:00PM  "Knowlege Engineering for Expert Systems"
             Cornelia Yoder, IBM, Poughkeepsie, NY
2:00-5:00PM  "Real-Time Neurocomputing:  An Introduction"
             Robert J. Jannarone, University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC

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

     CONCURRENT SESSIONS: THURSDAY, MARCH 26 -- FRIDAY, MARCH 27, 1992

THURSDAY, MARCH 26
7:30-8:30AM - Registration - McKimmon Center

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

               SESSION I -- LEARNING

Session Chair:     Jonathan A. Marshall, UNC, Chapel Hill, NC
Session Co-Chairs: Al Bethke, Research Triangle Institute, RTP, NC
                   Atul Bhatt, Becton Dickinson Research Center, RTP, NC

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

THURSDAY MORNING, March 26, 1992, 8:30 AM
SESSION I: LEARNING

"Real-Time Neurocomputing for Hardware Performance Monitoring."
Christopher M. Lindstrom and Robert J. Jannarone, NCR and University
   of South Carolina, Columbia, SC

"An Introduction to Artificial Neural Networks Using Analog VLSI."
John J. Paulos, Electrical and Computer Engineering, NCSU, Raleigh

"Hardware Fuzzy Inference Acceleration System."
Hiroyuki Watanabe, Computer Science, UNC-Chapel Hill

"A Real-Time Algorithm for On-Line Parameter and Model Surveillance."
Aspi D. Engineer and Robert J. Jannarone, Electrical and Computer
   Engineering, University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC

"A Neurocomputing Kernel Algorithm for Real-Time, Continuous Cognitive
   Processing."
Yalin Hu and Robert J. Jannarone, Electrical and Computer Engineering,
   University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC

"Neural Network Control of a SCARA Type Robot Manipulator."
Santosh Ananthraman and Devendra Garg, Mechanical Engineering and
   Materials Science, Duke University, Durham, NC

"Evolutionary Ecology and Computational Models of Animal Behavior."
Leslie A. Real, Biology, UNC-Chapel Hill

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

THURSDAY LUNCH, March 26, 1992, 12:00 PM

KEYNOTE LUNCHEON TALK: "Usage of Genetic Algorithms to Build
   Explanation Facilities for Neural Nets."
Russell Eberhart, Research Triangle Institute, RTP, NC

POSTER SESSION PREVIEW

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

THURSDAY AFTERNOON, March 26, 1992, 1:30 PM
SESSION I: LEARNING

"Psychological and Physiological Considerations for a Model of
   Brain Function in Declarative Memory."
Howard Eichenbaum, Psychology, UNC-Chapel Hill

"Pitch Plasticity in the Mature Auditory System."
Robert Peters, Speech and Hearing Sciences, UNC-Chapel Hill

"A Relatively Simple, Invertebrate Visual Pathway Specialized to
   Detect the Dimming of Light."
Ann Stuart, UNC Medical School, Chapel Hill

"Statistical Foundations of Multiscale Medial Vision."
James M. Coggins, Computer Science, UNC-Chapel Hill

"Unsupervised Learning of Constraints in Neural Networks for
   Simultaneous Visual Processing of Multiple Objects."
Jonathan A. Marshall, Computer Science, UNC-Chapel Hill

"Vector Mean Field Annealing and Its Application to MRI."
Wesley E. Snyder, Radiology, Bowman Gray School of Medicine,
   Winston-Salem, NC

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

THURSDAY EVENING, March 27, 1992, 5:00 PM -- 7:00 PM

RECEPTION AND DEMONSTRATION/POSTER SESSION

During lunches and the reception, companies and universities will present
posters and demonstrations of current successful Artificial Intelligence and
Advanced Computing Technology projects.

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

FRIDAY MORNING, March 27, 1992, 8:30 AM
SESSION I: LEARNING

"Finding Chaos in Noisy Systems with Neural Nets."
Stephen Ellner, A. Ronald Gallant, and Douglas Nychka, Statistics,
   NCSU, Raleigh

"Stability Criteria for Non-Linear Noisy Neural Network Model of
   Somatosensory Cortex."
Boris Gutkin, Statistics, NCSU, Raleigh

"A Neural Network Approach to a Multistage Graph Optimization Problem."
Stan Thomas, Mathematics and Computer Science, Wake Forest University,
   Winston-Salem, NC

"Back-Specialization in a Classifier System."
Philippe Collard, Universite de Nice-Sophia Antipolis, Valbonne,
   France

"Analysis of Neural Nets: Some Tools from Statistical Physics."
Marjorie Klenin, Physics, NCSU, Raleigh

"Efficient Simulated Annealing."
Griff Bilbro, Electrical and Computer Engineering, NCSU, Raleigh

"Comparison of Impurity Measures in Decision Tree Induction."
Dennis Bahler, Computer Science, NCSU, Raleigh

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

FRIDAY LUNCH, 12:00 NOON-1:30 PM

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

FRIDAY AFTERNOON, March 27, 1992, 1:30 PM
SESSION I: LEARNING

"Data Structures + Genetic Operators = Evolution Programs."
Zbigniew Michalewicz, Computer Science, UNC-Charlotte

"A Comparison of Genetic Algorithms and Very Fast Simulated
   Reannealing on Function Optimization Tasks."
Bruce Rosen and Lester Ingber, Computer and Information Sciences,
   University of Delaware, Newark, DE, and Science Transfer
   Corporation, McLean, VA

"Concept Formation: Representation vs. Performance."
Mirsad Hadzikadic, Computer Science, UNC-Charlotte

"Spatial Representation and Sensor-Based Reasoning in the Presence of
   Uncertainties."
Jing Xiao, Computer Science, UNC-Charlotte

"Methodology of Designing Artificial Neural Networks for Fault
   Detection."
Mo-yuen Chow, Electrical and Computer Engineering, NCSU, Raleigh

"A Comparison of CMAC and Back Propagation Neural Networks for
   Real-Time Control of Nonlinear Systems."
John D. Charlton, Biomedical Engineering, UNC-Chapel Hill

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

              SESSION II -- ADVANCED COMPUTING

Session Chair:     John Sutton, NCSU, Raleigh, NC
Session Co-Chairs: Fred Atwater, GTE Laboratories, RTP, NC
           Jim Felder, IBM Corporation, RTP, NC
           Dennis Bahler, NCSU, Raleigh, NC
           Bill Lahti, Knowledge Systems Corporation, Cary, NC

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

THURSDAY MORNING, March 26, 1992, 8:30 AM
SESSION II: ADVANCED COMPUTING

"Emerging Software Technologies - Expert Systems, Neural Networks,
  Multimedia, Genetic Algorithms, Virtual Reality"
Cornelia Yoder, IBM Corporation, Poughkeepsie, NY
  (Joint session with Computer Human Interface -- session III)

10:30 AM

"Intelligent Databases - CoBase: Cooperative Distributed Databases"
Wesley Chu, UCLA, Los Angeles, Ca.

"Intelligent Databases - ObjectWise Intelligent Database Prototype"
Alexandru Bejan, IBM Corporation, Kingston, NY

"Learning How to Index Documents"
Allen Ginsberg, AT&T Bell Labs, Murray Hill, NJ

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

THURSDAY LUNCH, March 26, 1992, 12:00 PM

KEYNOTE LUNCHEON TALK: "Usage of Genetic Algorithms to Build
   Explanation Facilities for Neural Nets."
Russell Eberhart, Research Triangle Institute, RTP, NC

POSTER SESSION PREVIEW

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

THURSDAY AFTERNOON, March 26, 1:30 PM
SESSION II: ADVANCED COMPUTING

"Intelligent Hypertext - RelType: Relaxed Typing for Intelligent
   Hypermedia Representations"
Dilip Barman, Brown University, IBM Corporation, Poughkeepsie, NY

"Generalized Logic Programming"
Gopalan Nadathur, Duke University, Durham, NC

"KITSS - A Functional Software Testing System Using a Hybrid Domain Model"
Uwe Nonnemann, AT&T Bell Labs, Murray Hill, NJ

"The NCSC Mass Storage Project: The Challenge of Information Intelligence
   in a High Performance Environment"
Nate Hillery and Michael Neascu, North Carolina Supercomputing Center,
   RTP, NC

"Parallel Processing - High Performance Highly Portable Parallel
   Skyline Solver"
Fabio Lozupone, IBM Rome Scientific Center, Rome, Italy

"Parallel Processing - New Architecture of Scalable Shared Memory"
Greg Byrd, North Carolina Supercomputing Center, RTP, NC

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

THURSDAY EVENING, March 27, 1992, 5:00 PM -- 7:00 PM

RECEPTION AND DEMONSTRATION/POSTER SESSION

During lunches and the reception, companies and universities will present
posters and demonstrations of current successful Artificial Intelligence and
Advanced Computing Technology projects.

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

FRIDAY MORNING, March 27, 8:30 AM
SESSION II: ADVANCED COMPUTING

"Efficient Sorting of Large Arrays on the MasPar MP-1"
Jan F. Prins, UNC, Chapel Hill, NC

"SPOTLIGHT: A Data Explanation System"
Tej Anand, Nielsen Advanced Information Technology Center,
Bannockburn, IL

"Intelligent Configuration Assistant System for Hospital Information
  Management"
Shri Goyal, GTE Laboratories, Waltham, MA

"Query Processing in Distributed Information Systems"
Zbignew Ras, University of North Carolina - Charlotte, NC

"Design Evaluation and Cost Estimation Expert System for Printed
  Circuit Boards"
Sriram Subramaniam, American Airlines Decision Technologies Inc.,
  Dallas, TX

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

FRIDAY LUNCH, 12:00 NOON-1:30 PM

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

FRIDAY AFTERNOON, March 27, 1:30 PM
SESSION II: ADVANCED COMPUTING

"Object- Oriented Tools for Image Pattern Recognition"
James M. Coggins, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC

"Building Reusable Software with Object-Oriented Programming"
Bill Lahti, Knowledge Systems Corporation, Cary, NC

"A Generalized Constraint Processor for Constructing Concurrent Engineering
  Designs"
Dennis Bahler, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC

"Distributing Knowledge Based System Building Capabilities Within
  Becton Dickinson"
Mary Overby, Becton Dickinson Research Center, RTP, NC

"Simplified Knowledge Acquisition Through Templates"
John Lusth, Becton Dickinson Research Center, RTP, NC

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

           SESSION III -- COMPUTER HUMAN INTERFACE (CHI)

Session Chair:    Steve Hayden, BNR Inc., RTP, NC
Session Co-Chair: Robert Bell, Northern Telecom, RTP, NC

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

THURSDAY MORNING, March 26, 8:30 AM
SESSION III: COMPUTER HUMAN INTERFACE

"Emerging Software Technologies - Expert Systems, Neural Networks,
  Multimedia, Genetic Algorithms, Virtual Reality"
Cornelia Yoder, IBM Corporation, Poughkeepsie, NY
  (Joint session with Advanced Computing -- session II)

10:30 AM

"Virtual-Worlds Research at UNC Chapel Hill"
Mark R. Mine, UNC, Chapel Hill, NC

"Controlling Dynamic Interactions in Virtual Environments"
Rick Kazman, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA

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

THURSDAY LUNCH, March 26, 1992, 12:00 PM

KEYNOTE LUNCHEON TALK: "Usage of Genetic Algorithms to Build
   Explanation Facilities for Neural Nets."
Russell Eberhart, Research Triangle Institute, RTP, NC

POSTER SESSION PREVIEW

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

THURSDAY AFTERNOON, March 26, 1:30 PM
SESSION III: COMPUTER HUMAN INTERFACE

"Virtual Reality: Promises and Problems"
David A. Smith, Virtus Corp., Cary, NC

"Methods in Collaborative Visualization"
Ray Idaszak, North Carolina Supercomputing Center, RTP, NC

"Issues Associated with Visualizing Environmental Data"
Theresa Rhyne, Unisys Corp./U.S. EPA, RTP, NC; Co-authors Mark Bolstad,
Lynne Petterson, & Penny Rheingans

"Design and Experimental Evaluation of Radiology Workstations"
David Beard, UNC, Chapel Hill, NC

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

THURSDAY EVENING, March 27, 1992, 5:00 PM -- 7:00 PM

RECEPTION AND DEMONSTRATION/POSTER SESSION

During lunches and the reception, companies and universities will present
posters and demonstrations of current successful Artificial Intelligence and
Advanced Computing Technology projects.

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

FRIDAY MORNING, March 27, 8:30 AM
SESSION III: COMPUTER HUMAN INTERFACE

"'AskJef': An Interface Design Advisor"
Robert L. Simpson, NCR, Atlanta, GA

"We Have Met The User, and They Are Us"
Tim Dudley, Bell-Northern Research, Ottawa, Canada

"Using Computer-Generated Protocols to Study Writers' Strategies"
Marcy Lansman, UNC, Chapel Hill, NC

"Tools and Techniques for Tracking and Analyzing User Behaviors"
Dana Smith, UNC, Chapel Hill, NC

"Using Mainframes as Data Servers for UNIX Workstations"
Kenneth Bowler, Bell-Northern Research, Ottawa, Canada

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

FRIDAY LUNCH, 12:00 NOON-1:30 PM

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

FRIDAY AFTERNOON, March 27, 1:30 PM
SESSION III: COMPUTER HUMAN INTERFACE

"System Support for Synchronous Collaboration"
Kevin Jeffay, UNC, Chapel Hill, NC

"Constructing Graphical User Interfaces"
Steve Thiedke, Intelligent Visual Computing, Morrisville, NC

"A Voice Natural Language Interface For Equipment Repair Systems"
Alan Bierman, Duke University, Durham, NC

"Recent Advances in Speech Technology"
Robert Rodman, NCSU, Raleigh, NC

"Automatic Language Identification"
Rick Klevans, Insurance Systems Group/NCSU, Raleigh, NC

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

                HOTEL ACCOMODATIONS

The Brownestone Hotel, 1707 Hillsborough St., Raleigh - [phone]
The Velvet Cloak Inn, 1505 Hillsborough St., Raleigh - [phone]
The Radisson Plaza Hotel, 420 Fayetteville St. Mall - [phone]

Please make your own reservation directly with one of the above or any other
facility of your choice.  When making your reservation state that you are
attending a program at McKimmon Center.  All of the hotels listed are close
the main NCSU campus.  None are within walking distance of McKimmon Center.

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

                   SYMPOSIUM FEES

Payment Received On or Before March 2       Payment After March 2
   $210 Per Person                             $230 Per Person
   $195 IEEE/TANNS/INNS/Members                $215 IEEE/TANNS/INNS/Members
   $ 25 Students                               $ 25 Students

Student registration does not include meals; students have the option
of purchasing meals at an additional cost.

A 10% discount is extended to companies having three or more persons
attend.  Be sure to write a check for the correct adjusted amount.

TUTORIAL FEES: $30 Per Person (With Symposium Registration)
               $75 Per Person (If you are attending the Tutorial Only)

The registration fee for the symposium includes attendance, two
luncheons, refreshment breaks and materials.  The student fee does not
include meals.  Lodging is not included in the registration fee.
Foreign registration fees must be paid by an official bank check or
money order payable in U.S.A.  dollars.

The symposium and tutorial will be limited in size for maximum
effectiveness, and registrations will be accepted in the order they
are received.  Registration should be made no later than two weeks
before the symposium date.  The registration fee cannot be refunded
when cancellation is made after the week before the symposium date, or
when a registrant fails to appear.  It is therefore the registrant's
responsibility to notify the Office of Continuing Education and
Professional Development one week in advance in the event of a
cancellation.  Substitutions may be made at any time.  When calling,
ask for Belinda Niedwick, Program Assistant, phone [phone].

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

               4TH N.C. SYMPOSIUM ON AI & ACT

                 REGISTRATION FORM

TUTORIAL WORKSHOPS, March 25, 1992 -- BEAI92

Please check the tutorial you plan to attend:

  ___ Knowledge Engineering

  ___ Neurocomputing

Tutorial Fees: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . __________$30
                               (With Symposium Registration)

Tutorial Fees: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . __________$75
                               (Attending the Tutorial Only)

SYMPOSIUM, March 26-27, 1992

Registration Fees (Payment must be received by March 2 to receive discount):

IEEE/TANNS/INNS/Members . . . . . . . . . . . . __________$195 Early Bird
                                                (Registered by March 2)

                                                __________$215
                                                (Registered after March 2)

Non-member . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .__________$210 Early Bird
                                                (Registered by March 2)

                                                __________$230
                                                (Registered after March 2)

Student Fee (Does not include meals). . . . . . __________$25


TOTAL FEES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ __________


TO REGISTER: Complete this form and send it to the address shown below.
Please check your method of payment in the spaces provided at the bottom.
One registrant per form.  Make photocopies for additional forms.  Make check
payable to NCSU.

Name_________________________________________________________________

Title _______________________________________________________________

Company _____________________________________________________________

Mailing Address _____________________________________________________

City, State, Zip ____________________________________________________

Telephone:  Day ________________________ Evening_____________________


( ) Payment enclosed        ( ) Visa          ( ) MC

Card# ____________________________________ Exp. Date ________________

Signature ___________________________________________________________

Return Forms and Payment To: North Carolina State University, Office of
Continuing Education and Professional Development, Box 7401, Raleigh, NC
27695-7401, Attn: Connie Bacon/Belinda Niedwick, [phone]

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

For additional information contact:

Prof. John Sutton, Department of Electrical & Computer Engineering, Box
7911, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27695-7911.
Tel [phone], Fax [phone], E-mail [e-mail]

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












Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa27975;
          18 Feb 92 23:54 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA06101
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 18 Feb 1992 21:48:27 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA32150
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 18 Feb 1992 21:48:10 -0600
Date: Tue, 18 Feb 1992 21:48:10 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #145

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 18 Feb 92 21:47:55 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 145

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: MOH From Radio: Is it Lawful? (Tad Cook)
    Re: MOH From Radio: Is it Lawful? (Nickolas Landsberg)
    Re: MOH From Radio: Is it Lawful? (Jerry Leichter)
    Re: MOH From Radio: Is it Lawful? (Kath Mullholand)
    Re: MOH - Is it a Violation of ASCAP & BMI? (John Higdon)
    Re: MOH, Bad Manners, Poor Throughput, and Sprint (Barry Mishkind)
    Alternatives to MOH (Chris Arndt)
    Re: Seeking Simple Telephone Line Simulator (Paul Cook)
    Re: MCI Prefered and Modems (Daniel Herrick)
    Re: MCI Prefered and Modems (Alan Burnstine)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Re: MOH From Radio: Is it Lawful?
From: [e-mail] (Tad Cook)
Date: 18 Feb 92 19:26:21 GMT


Concerning playing a radio station as Music On Hold, lairdb@crash.
cts.com (Laird P. Broadfield) writes:

> Only vaguely on subject, but interesting as an intellectual-property
> question, is this a violation of anything?  I assume that Muzak has
> handled all of the rights issues on what they are feeding, but if I
> play a radio station in my place of business, or as MOH, what's the
> situation?  Should I be paying the radio station?  ASCAP?  What if I
> have a little more taste, and get a CD-changer for my MOH; do I pay
> the record companies?  ASCAP again?  I would think this was at least
> vaguely "public performance".

I hear that ASCAP (American Society of Composers, Authors and
Publishers) has been cracking down on this.  There were some news
items in {Teleconnect Magazine} in the past couple of years about
small businesses getting hit with claims by ASCAP lawyers.  They call
up, get put on hold, determine that you are playing a local radio
station, and send you a bill.  The artists are due royalties for
performance, and ASCAP handles the money.  Same thing can happen if
you have a CD changer on shuffle play rotating between five of your
favorite Windham Hill CDs.

A local vegetarian restaurant where I dine frequently, the Sunlight
Cafe, was visited recently by an ASCAP rep.  Seems that the cafe has a
sound system where they allow employees to play cassettes of their
favorite artists, some of whom are very obscure bands appearing only
on small independent record labels.  ASCAP says that they must keep a
log of all "performances", then turn the logs over to ASCAP, who will
cheerfully prepare an invoice.  The alternative is to call one of the
"foreground music" companies, rent their service, and they have
contracts with ASCAP that covers all the royalties.

Radio stations pay performance fees to ASCAP, but if you present the
radio station programming to the public either via your background
music system or music-on-hold, you have to pay for another
performance.


Tad Cook     |  Phone:  [phone]             |   MCI Mail: 3288544
Seattle, WA  |  Packet: KT7H @ N7DUO.WA.USA.NA   |   [e-mail]
             |  USENET: [e-mail]          or...sumax!ole!ssc!tad

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

Date: Tue, 18 Feb 92 13:34:33 EST
From: [e-mail] (Nickolas Landsberg)
Subject: Re: MOH From Radio: Is it Lawful?
Organization: AT&T


Regarding this MOH thread, my local tire dealer (Goodyear) has
stopped piping in MOH from local radio stations because he was losing
customers to the competition (Firestone), who happened to have an
advertising blitz on that month.  The moral seems to be that you
better be very careful just what you play to your customer's when
they're on hold! :)


Nick Landsberg

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

Date: Tue, 18 Feb 92 07:42:47 EDT
From: Jerry Leichter <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: MOH From Radio: Is it Lawful?


Technically, play a commercial radio station for MOH is almost
certainly a violation of the station's copyright on its material.
There is (or at least once was, though I doubt it's ever changed)
actually a special regulation defining "fair use" in a closely related
circumstance: It used to be very common for stores, especially stores
selling radios, to fill the store with music from some local station.
Often, they blared it out speakers to the street, too.  This practice
is still followed in some neighborhoods, but it's become quite rare --
a fact I had really never noted until thinking about this question.

Anyhow, the radio stations complained that their stuff was being used
without their permission.  Eventually, a compromise was reached: A
store may have a radio, which can be heard by customers, tuned to a
station without owing the station anything PROVIDED that the radio has
no extension speaker.  While I specifically remember the business
about the extension speaker, I suspect the law also said "one radio
per store" or "per floor" to avoid the obvious way of getting around
the limitation.

MOH inherently provides "extension speakers", so would not fall under
this exception.

That's theory.  In today's competitive radio market, I'd guess that
few if any radio stations would object to being used for MOH.  It
makes them more visible, and they'd know that their chances of
collecting any royalties would be essentially nil -- the MOH people
have too many easy alternatives.

As to playing CD's or tapes: This is done by many restaurants and
music stores.  I don't know what the law would say here (I'll check
with a lawyer I know who specializes in the area), but I suspect that,
again, technically this qualifies as a public performance and
royalties are owed to the artists.  However, the expense of collecting
probably outweighs the potential gain.

BTW, everyone's seen the ASCAP and BMI notices on records, but how
many people know just what they mean?  Theoretically, a radio station
(or similar business) owes royalties for each and every cut of music
they play.  Keeping track of this in full detail, calculating the
amounts, then figuring out who has to be paid how much, would be
impossible.  Instead, ASCAP and BMI provide blanket licenses for use
of copyright material registered with them.  They record samples of
on-air play from stations who subscribe with them, then figure out
what covered material is being played.  (Yes, there are people who
spend their days listening to tapes, marking down what is being
played.  They apparently become VERY good at what they do -- they can
figure out what is being played based on a couple of seconds of music,
then skip on to the next cut.  There was an article in the {New York
Times} a couple of years back describing the process and people -- I
believe both ASCAP and BMI are still located in Manhattan.)  ASCAP and
BMI then extrapolate from the samples, bill the stations, and
distribute the royalties.  One of those neat little "behind the
scenes" systems without which something we are exposed to every day --
music on radio -- could not work.


Jerry

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

Date: Tue, 18 Feb 1992 9:22:57 -0500 (EST)
From: [e-mail] (Kath Mullholand)
Subject: Re: MOH From Radio: Is it Lawful?


Laird Broadfield writes:

> Only vaguely on subject, but interesting as an intellectual-property
> question, is this a violation of anything?  I assume that Muzak has
> handled all of the rights issues on what they are feeding, but if I
> play a radio station in my place of business, or as MOH, what's the
> situation?  Should I be paying the radio station?  ASCAP?  What if I
> have a little more taste, and get a CD-changer for my MOH; do I pay
> the record companies?  ASCAP again?  I would think this was at least
> vaguely "public performance".

As a matter of fact, it is, and ASCAP, among others, is vigorous about
filing suit.  They have collected from small restaurants with piped in
radio music, and from small companies with radio MOH.  If a company is
using radio, CD, records, or other unlicensed recordings for MOH or
over a speaker system on a regular basis, I'd wager it's only a matter
of time before they'd hear about it.

Interesting to note, however, that New England Telephone uses radio
MOH.  Perhaps ASCAP only goes after the little guy.

This information came primarily from MUZAK.


kath

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

Subject: Re: MOH - Is it a Violation of ASCAP & BMI?
Date: 18 Feb 92 10:36:56 PST (Tue)
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)


[e-mail] (Michael Faurot) writes:

> I think radio stations have to pay some sort of fees to these
> organizations, but I'm not certain.

Radio stations pay these people through the nose! The fees are based
on gross (not net) station revenues.

> At any rate, could it be possible that by "re-broadcasting" this music
> it's violating the royalty contracts of the various artists?

BMI, for one, thinks so. I personally know of a radio station that got
stuck paying BMI extra money for putting ITS OWN PROGRAM on hold for
its business office. BMI actively looks for big businesses, calls them
and determines the radio station being used, and then attempts to
extort major sums. Did I say attempt? BMI has been successful in every
case it has gone after.

The workaround is to subscribe to a music service (such as Muzak) as a
source for MOH. The "licensing fees" are built in to the cost of the
service.

BMI justifies all of this by claiming that "the poor artists and
composers need to be paid for their work." Of course if you look at
the distributions (after BMI withholds its "administrative costs"
[kaff-kaff]), the lion's share goes to those who already rake in
millions from record sales, performances, etc.

BMI and ASCAP are considered by broadcasters to be the biggest legal
extrortion rackets in the world. Being soaked by these people is the
thanks the stations get for helping artists promote their wares.

SESAC is another, lesser-known, money collector. One seasoned
broadcaster was visited by a representative from this group who
demanded his pound of flesh. "We do not play any SESAC recordings so I
am not paying!", was the reply. The "rep" went to the record library
and after about fifteen minutes managed to produce a SESAC-represented
disk. "What about this?", he inquired.

Whereupon the station owner took the record and immediately broke it
in two over his knee. "What about it? Would you care to find another?"
That station never did pay any money to SESAC.


John Higdon <[e-mail]> (hiding out in the desert)

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

From: [e-mail] (Barry Mishkind)
Subject: Re: MOH, Bad Manners, Poor Throughput, and Sprint
Organization: Datalog Consulting, Tucson, AZ
Date: Tue, 18 Feb 92 19:06:29 GMT


[e-mail] (Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH) writes:

>>> me.  The rudest is for the answering party to immediately say 'Good
>>> morning, XYZ Corporation, can you hold ...' to which my answer is

>> I take you've never had to answer the phone in a place of business
>> before.  If you have, you might have been faced with three lines
>> ringing at once.  The secretary who is putting you on hold so fast may
>> not have a choice. The next time you feel like making a snappy remark

> [Moderator's Note: The problem with delayed answering of phone calls
> in business places is largely the fault of the person in charge of the
> staff assigned to answering. If they need another person on the phones
> full time, then they should hire someone and not force such a backlog

I think the problem is with the airy "Can you hold?" which is then
followed INSTANTLY by a "click." Even on a long distance call, I'm
more likely to respond evenly to "XYZ Corp., I'll be back within
(10/30) seconds to help you" and then the operator DOES return as
advertised.

One corporation, a major publisher of many different computer
magazines once kept me on hold for over five minutes before I hung up.

Worse, are those tech support numbers using 900 service that do much
the same.

Regards,


Barry

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

Date: Tue, 18 Feb 92 08:18:17 -0800
From: [e-mail] (Chris Arndt)
Subject: Alternatives to MOH


One of the local civil engineering companies has a NOAA weather radio
jacked into their phone system's MOH port. It sure beats listening to
music you can't stand, or (worse yet) those maddening self serving
commercials for the company you are on hold with.  (Sometimes I think
places that have those commercials have a policy that ALL calls are
placed on hold so the caller gets a dose of the commercial.)

Anyone have experience with other novel uses for the MOH jack? Maybe I
could make $$ selling "Jokes On Hold" tapes!

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

Date: Mon, 17 Feb 92 19:43 GMT
From: Proctor & Associates <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Seeking Simple Telephone Line Simulator


[e-mail] (Devon Davis) wrote:

> A comany called Teltone produces a telephone line simulator (model TLS3)
> for about $540.  The address is:

> They require a 110 volt power supply.  There are two RJ11 jacks on the
> front of the box.  One jack can call the other jack by dialing a two
> digit preassigned phone number.  The box is meant to demo or test fax
> machines, phones, and modems. I have worked with these boxes for over
> a year and consider them a very useful tool.

[e-mail] (Gordon D Woods) writes:

> The box has a subtle flaw if you're doing more than connecting some
> faxes, etc.:  It only provides -24 volt battery.

All of the line simulators from Proctor and Associates use standard 48
volt battery feed.  In addition, dialtone, ringback tone, busy tone
and ringing voltage conform exactly to Bellcore's LSSGR (Local
Switching System Generic Requirements).  The four line unit (model
49200) sells for $475.  The two line one is $259.95, and is strappable
for 110VAC 60Hz/220VAC 50Hz.  There is a new model 49300 coming out
that will simulate Centrex.


Paul Cook                        206-881-7000
Proctor & Associates        MCI Mail 399-1080
15050 NE 36th St.           fax: [phone]
Redmond, WA  98052-5317   [e-mail]

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

From: "90958, HERRICK, DANIEL" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: MCI Prefered and Modems
Date: 17 Feb 92 17:26:40 EST


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

> MCI has a billing option for their 1+ customers called "MCI Prefered."
> With this plan, after you enter the number, there is a pause and a new
> tone.  At the new tone, you enter a three-digit billing code.  Then
> when you get your bill, it is broken out by billing codes.  Very
> helpful if you have to bill back to customers.  The problem comes when
> you want to use a modem with the service.  If I enter the entire
> number and the billing code in one string, it usually dosen't work
> because the code tone hasn't happened yet.  If I put a bunch of pauses

> [Moderator's Note: Does your modem have a feature called 'wait for
> second tone' (possibly by using @ in the dialing string)?   PAT]

Some time ago, Toby Nixon of Hayes said that feature was accessed in
Hayes modems by putting w in the dialing string.  w works in my Zoom
modems.


dan     [e-mail]
dlh Performance Marketing  POBox 1419 Mentor Ohio 44061

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

Date: Tue, 18 Feb 92 14:36 GMT
From: Alan Burnstine <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: MCI Prefered and Modems


In Digest #132, David Brightbill asks (regarding MCI account codes):

> Anyone have a clue as to how to make it work with MCI or if another
> provider offeres a more modem friendly coded billing option?

I use MCI account codes with my modem with no trouble.  What you need
to do is enter a W between the dialed number and the account code.  The W
is the Hayes symbol to wait for second dial tone.  This will only work
if your modem is set to X4 either as the default or in your
initialization.  x1 - x3 will not recognize the second tone.

Our esteemed Moderator made the following suggestion:

> [Moderator's Note: Does your modem have a feature called 'wait for
> second tone' (possibly by using @ in the dialing string)?   PAT]

This is good for placing calling card calls with modems but will not
work with account codes.  The @ symbol is the command to wait for five
seconds of silence.

You can also simply program pauses between the dialed number and the
account code, but the pause length varies depending on your local
telco and MCI's network congestion.  I find that five seconds is about
right.


Alan Burnstine    MCI Telecommunications
"Standard Disclaimers Apply"

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #145
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa29907;
          19 Feb 92 0:42 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA12923
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 18 Feb 1992 22:48:47 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA17089
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 18 Feb 1992 22:48:30 -0600
Date: Tue, 18 Feb 1992 22:48:30 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #146

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 18 Feb 92 22:48:25 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 146

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Nynex Roaming Charges and Changes in New England (David E. Sheafer)
    Re: Cellular Calls From Airplanes on the Ground (Phydeaux)
    Cantel Discontinues the 0+ Dialing Feature (John R. Covert)
    Information Wanted on Cellular Service in NYC Area (Tak To)
    Re: FCC Allows Cellular Phones in Airplanes (John R. Covert)
    Cellular NPA/NXX Tables (Robert Ricketts)
    Re: Fax Forwarding Services, Anyone? (Jay Ashworth)
    Re: Fax Forwarding Services, Anyone? (Andy Sherman)
    Re: Fax Forwarding Services, Anyone? (Cliff Barney)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: David E. Sheafer <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Nynex Roaming Charges & Changes in New England
Date: 18 Feb 92 22:24:25 GMT
Organization: Merrimack College, No. Andover, MA


In my cellular bill this month (Nynex Mobile - New England) there was
a note that effective immediately Nynex customers no longer have to
pay a daily fee when roaming on the SNET network in Western MA and CT,
and that the roaming charge for Nynex Mobile - New England Customers
has been cut 25% to .75/minute when roaming on the SNET network.

On my bill this month I had three charges of .50/each for activating
Follow-Me-Roaming on the Star Cellular Network in New Hampshire.
When I called and questioned these charges, the charges were removed,
but I was told that when activating FMR on the Star Cellular Network
there will be a charge from now on.

However, I was told I won't receive a charge for activating FMR
anywhere else, other than Star Cellular.


David E. Sheafer
internet:  [e-mail]   or  uucp:      samsung!hubdub!nin15b0b
GEnie:     D.SHEAFER             Cleveland Freenet:    ap345

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

Date: Tue, 18 Feb 92 14:54:05 PST
From: [e-mail] (Phydeaux)
Subject: Re: Cellular Calls From Airplanes on the Ground


Mark Purcell writes:

> In Australia it is illegal to use a phone within a plane due to the
> effects the transmission has on the aircraft navigation systems.

I've used my cellphone countless times while sitting in an airplane on
the ground.  No airline employee has ever told me that I could not do
this.  As I understand it (yes, I know, highly scientific evidence)
the reason why use is prohibited in airplanes is because of the effect
on the cellular system if you hit many many cells at the same time,
*not* because it does anything to the instruments.  Does anybody have
an idea as to what really happens if one were to use a cellphone at
altitude?  What happens when you call from the top of say, the Sears
Tower?


reb
-- *-=#= Phydeaux =#=-* [e-mail]  or  [e-mail]
ICBM:  41.55N 87.40W  h:828 South May Street  Chicago,  IL 60607  312-733-3090
w:reb Ingres 10255 West Higgins Road Suite 500 Rosemont, IL 60018 708-803-9500


[Moderator's Note: I *have* used my cell phone from the observatory at
Sears Tower. The local expressway/traffic monitors for Chicago have
their office in the Sears observatory. They sit in a large room with
plate glass windows so that the public may peer in and see the various
hookups they have to radio stations using their services, etc. A sign
on the window says 'dial *123 from your cellular phone' ... so I did.
Right in front of me (behind the window) a woman saw a flashing light,
reached over to press it and picked up her handset. I told her I was
standing right outside the window looking at her. She turned aorund
and we chatted for a minute about local traffic conditions.  I saw no
harm to the cellular system here as a result of my call ... but what
do I know?   PAT]

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

Date: Tue, 18 Feb 92 19:41:14 PST
From: John R. Covert  18-Feb-1992 2221 <[e-mail]>
Subject: Cantel Discontinues the 0+ Dialing Feature


I just received the following bill insert:

0+ Dialing

As of February 21, 1992, Operator Assisted calls will no longer be
available on the Cantel network.  You will not be able to dial "0" to
access a landline operator for the following types of calls: credit
card, calling card, person to person or third party billing.

In future, to make a call from your Cantel phone, simply dial direct
according to the rules outlined below:

Local Calling             Dial the seven digit number

Long Distance in Canada         Dial 1 + Area Code (if different from your own)
and the United States            + Seven digit number

International Long Distance Dial 011 + ... (you know what it says)
Please note: there will be a short delay when making your first
international long distance call.

While 0+ dialing is being discontinued, you can still have any of your
cellular questions answered 24 hours a day by a Cantel Customer
Service Representative, simply by dialing "0" from your Cantel phone
(it's a free call).

   ----

Cantel may be locking you into them as an LD carrier to protect their
own LD rates, which are quite a bit higher (typically 15% or more)
than Bell Canada's rates.  For example, .43 per minute Ottawa-Montreal
instead of .37.

It was most ironic to receive this today, after I've spent some time
fuming about the increasingly frequent requirement among U.S. carriers
that roamers and now often even local customers have to make
international calls and sometimes even domestic calls with a calling
card "to prevent fraud."

Would you broadcast your calling card over the radio?


john

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

Date: Tue, 18 Feb 92 15:47:42 EST
From: "Tak To" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Information Wanted on Cellular Service in NYC Area


Hello,

I am thinking of getting a [hand held] cellular phone in the NYC area.
I would appreciate any information or hints as to which carrier/service
plan I should choose, as well as what kind of equipment I should buy.

Here are my basic requirements:

I live in NYC and work mostly at home.  I anticipate that I'll use my
phone mostly when I am stuck in traffic.  I would probably keep my
cellular number to a few close friends and relatives, but leave a
message on my answering machine to tell people to call my cellular
phone in case of emergency.

I travel to Boston for several days every month or so.  When I am in
Boston it would be harder to reach me, hence I would probably need my
cellular phone even more. (I would be visiting various clients.)  When
I am in Boston most of the calls would be coming from people in
Boston.

Here are some questions:

- NYNEX or Metro One, which company should I go with?

- FMR roaming: is it true that I have to turn it on *every day*?  What
  is the availability in CT and RI?  Are there any alternatives to FMR
  roaming for getting calls while I am on the road?

- Would I be better off getting another number in the Boston area?

- I think that a hand held would fit my need more than a car- or trans-
  portable.  (I would basically carry it *everywhere*.)  I am thinking
  of buying one of the following: OKI 900, Fujitsu Pocket Commander,
  Mitsybushi 3000 or the Motorola Micro-TAC.  Anyone has any experience
  using one of these? Any recommendation of very compact phones?

- What is the connection quality using just a hand-held phone when driving
  along the highways between Boston and NYC?  Do I need an adaptor to boost
  to 3 watts?

- Any recommendations of mobile mounting kits?  Are 'hands free operation'
  kits useful?

Thanks in advance.


Tak   ([e-mail])

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

Date: Tue, 18 Feb 92 12:50:57 PST
From: John R. Covert  18-Feb-1992 1515 <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: FCC Allows Cellular Phones in Airplanes


The Moderator likes us to keep subject lines intact, but I think the
above subject is somewhat misleading, based on the following
information from the Federal Register:

                             Vol. 57, No. 6
                               56 FR 830
                         Thursday, January 9, 1992

AGENCY: FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
 ...

SUMMARY:  The  Commission  adopted  rules  prohibiting  the use of cellular
  telephones  in  airborne  aircraft.  However,  the FCC will allow the on-
  ground use and installation of cellular telephones in aircraft subject to
  Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) regulations. ...

  The adopted rules clarify andconcisely state the prohibition of airborne
  use of cellular telephones in aircraft and that the use of cellular
  telephones while the aircraft is on the  ground  is  subject  to FAA
  guidelines.  ...

Summary of Report and Order

    On September 2, 1988, the Commission released a Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking, 3 FCC Rcd 5265 (1988), 53 FR 35851 (September 15, 1988)
seeking comments on proposed rules to prohibit the airborne use of
cellular telephones in aircraft and to allow the use of cellular
enhancers on a routine basis.

    In response to the Notice, the commenting parties distinguished
between the airborne use of cellular telephones and the use of
cellular telephones while the aircraft is on the ground. The parties
overwhelmingly agree that the airborne use of cellular telephones
would likely cause interference to cellular operations.  The Report
and Order therefore adopts rules to prohibit such use.

    With respect to the use of cellular telephones in aircraft while
the aircraft is on the ground, the record generally supports a finding
the there are public interest benefits to allowing such use.
Permitting the on-ground use of cellular telephones in aircraft would,
for example, allow commercial airline passengers who are faced with
substantial ground delays after boarding their flights to use their
portable telephones for business and personal reasons.  As to concerns
that the on-ground use of cellular telephones in aircraft may
interfere with aircraft operations, the Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA) has recently indicated that it is developing
operational guidelines to restrict cellular telephones to use at the
gate and during extended waits on the ground when specifically
authorized by the captain of the aircraft.  The Report and Order
defers to the FAA to establish regulations for the use of cellular
telephones while the aircraft is on the ground.

    The majority of commenters also state that we should permit
cellular telephones to be installed in private aircraft provided that
these telephones are used only while the aircraft is on the ground. In
view of the lack of evidence showing that the mere installation of
cellular telephones in aircraft would cause interference and the
legitimate reasons to allow such installation, the Report and Order
adopts rules allowing such installation.  Where cellular telephones
are installed in aircraft, the Report and Order requires that a notice
be posted adjacent to the telephone stating that the use of cellular
telephones while the aircraft is airborne is prohibited by Federal
Communications Commission rules and the violation of this rule could
result in suspension of service and/or a fine. The posted notice will
also state that the use of cellular telephones while the aircraft is
on the ground is subject to FAA regulations. In addition, our rules
will require that all cellular telephones must be turned off once the
aircraft is airborne.

Rule Changes

    Part 22 of title 47 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended
as follows:

PART 22-PUBLIC MOBILE SERVICE

    Section  22.911  is  amended  by adding paragraph (a)(1) to read as
follows:

Sec. 22.911 Permissible communications.

    (a)

    (1) Cellular telephones shall not be operated in airplanes,
balloons or any other aircraft capable of airborne operation while
airborne. Once the aircraft is airborne, all cellular telephones on
board such vehicles must be turned off.  The term airborne means the
aircraft is not touching the ground.  Cellular telephones may be
installed in aircraft. A cellular telephone which is installed in an
aircraft must contain a posted notice which reads: "The use of
cellular telephones while this aircraft is airborne is prohibited by
FCC rules, and the violation of this rule could result in suspension
of service and/or a fine.  The use of cellular telephones while this
aircraft is on the ground is subject to FAA regulations."

    (2)  Reserved

    Section  22.912  is  amended by adding new paragraph (c) to read as
follows:

Sec.  22.912 Responsibility for operational control and maintenance of
mobile stations.

    (c) A cellular carrier may either refuse or terminate service to a
subscriber, in accordance with any applicable local requirements for
timely notification, for using a cellular telephone in an airborne
aircraft in violation of Sec. 22.911(a)(1).

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

Date: 18 Feb 92 09:23:07 EST
From: Robert Ricketts <[e-mail]>
Subject: Cellular NPA/NXX Tables


     I'm looking for an NPA/NXX database that includes cellular NXXs
*and* indicates them as such.  I've received NPA/NXX (V&H and
otherwise) tables from several vendors and even though they all
include cellular NXXs, none of them flag those NXXs as such.

     Any help on where to obtain cellular NPA/NXX pairs would be much
appreciated.  V&H data is optional - I'm mainly interested in the
NPA/NXX and wire center name.  An indicator showing which system (A/B)
would also be useful but not required.

     I only receive the moderated TELECOM Digest feed so I'll only see
replies if published.  Or please e-mail at CI$ 73670,1164.  Thanks in
advance ...


Robert Ricketts / PC Consultant / v-mail [phone] / Houston
                                    e-mail CIS 73670,1164

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

From: [e-mail] (Jay Ashworth)
Subject: Re: Fax Forwarding Services, Anyone?
Date: Mon, 17 Feb 92 20:21:58 EDT
Organization: Psycho: The Usenet<->Fidonet Gateway of St. Pete Florida


Jiro, I must inquire ... is this newsletter free?  Every newsletter
I've ever seen cost so much that the difference between .80 and 1.78
would be trivial ...  Oh, BTW, what's your production flow look like?  :-)


Cheers,

Internet: [e-mail]
UUCP: ...!uunet!ndcc!tct!psycho!Jay.Ashworth

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

From: [e-mail] (Andy Sherman)
Subject: Re: Fax Forwarding Services, Anyone?
Date: Mon, 17 Feb 92 23:11:37 EST


[ Description of poor economics of fax subscription delivery for
newsletter ]

> Any suggestions?  We had thought that AT&T had offered a fax
> forwarding service where we could send them one copy and a list of the
> phone numbers and they would fax the document to the list.  But I
> phoned up AT&T and the representative knew nothing about this service.
> Is there a special business office within AT&T that offers this? Or am
> I hallucinating about whether they have it?

> If anyone has ANY suggestions about how we can drive the cost per copy
> of our newsletter down to around (or less than) $1, please please
> e-mail me at <[e-mail]> or post to this group (I read it
> avidly). Thank you very much.

I *think* (big disclaimer) that what your are describing is AT&T
Easylink's Enhanced FAX service.  I'm at home now and don't have a
company directory, so I can't much help you with a number.  My
suggestion is to call the customer service 800 number for AT&T Mail
(which is another Easylink service) and see if they can direct you.

The application you describe could also be done through AT&T Mail's
fax gateway, but I don't know what the costs are.

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

Date: Tue, 18 Feb 92 20:02:11 PST
From: Cliff Barney <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Fax Forwarding Services, Anyone?


Sorry, there is no way you can send one fax to many people.  If you
think about it for a minute, one fax has to equal one call.  AT&T does
in fact offer a service in which you can upload one fax and send it to
a list of people; however you will pay for each transmission.

I questiuon whether you need to send your fax fine mode, however; with
proper attention to choice of font you can do perfectly well with
standard mode.

One further comment -- if you can send a ten-page newsletter for $1.78
you are doing better than most commercial services can achieve.  You
must be sending a lot of white space.  Suggestion: reformat your
newsletter and get it down to a page or two.

Further suggestion:  don't use fax.  It is inherently high cost.

I have had some experience weith this, since I designed a daily fax
paper which is currently being sent to some 600 people daily.  Our
costs for a two-three page paper are half of what you think you can
achieve for ten pages; frankly I doubt that you will be able to get
anything like the rates you are expecting.  Our newsletter sells for
several hundred dollars a year, which is why we can afford to fax it.


All the best.

Cliff Barney   Io Publishing San Mateo, Calif/.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #146
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa02074;
          19 Feb 92 1:47 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA24656
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 18 Feb 1992 23:46:24 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA20052
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 18 Feb 1992 23:46:03 -0600
Date: Tue, 18 Feb 1992 23:46:03 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #147

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 18 Feb 92 23:46:00 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 147

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Windsor, Ontario Routing (was Point Roberts, Wa.) (Eric M. Carroll)
    Re: How Are Exchanges Assigned? (Dave Leibold)
    Re: Kansas City Sysops and Southwestern Bell (Doctor Math)
    Re: Party Not Answering Phone (David G. Lewis)
    Re: Tele-Scan (They're back...) (Edward Gehringer)
    Re: HR 3515: Threat or Menace? (Andy Sherman)
    Re: 1-800-HAIR (Bob Izenberg)
    Re: Revised Listing of Class Codes; Other Recent Notes (Carl Moore)
    Re: Pay Phone Charges for 800 Calls (Carl Moore)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Eric M. Carroll)
Subject: Re: Windsor, Ontario Routing (was Point Roberts, Wa.)
Organization: UTCS, Network Development
Date: Tue, 18 Feb 1992 10:08:09 -0500


> What you are forgetting is that switched traffic between Canada and
> the US (and everywhere else for that matter) gets touched by Teleglobe
> (in theory), the one and only IRC from Canada (while their monopoly
> lasts, which isn't for much longer).

> Of course you know that when someone says "in theory" they mean "not
> really".

In a recent presentation I attended from Teleglobe on the plans for
international ISDN, this question came up, especially with regards to
SS7 deployment within Bell Canada and the US BOCs & IXCs. The
Teleglobe person indicated that Bell Canada ran its own connections
with the US due to its participation in the NANP. Many of these peer
to peer connections were said to exist between the US and Canada. No
indication of Teleglobe participation was evident at the technical
level. Billing details between the two are not known to me.

Certainly from the perspective of leased lines, Teleglobe does not get
involved in Canada/US connections.


Eric Carroll        University of Toronto Computing Services
            Network Development

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

Date: Sun, 16 Feb 1992 17:47:34 -0500
From: [e-mail] (Dave Leibold)
Subject: Re: How Are Exchanges Assigned?


Roy Smith <[e-mail]> wrote:

> I just got back from a vacation in Key West, Florida.  I
> happend to notice that virtually every phone number in the book was
> either in the 292, 294, or 296 exchange.  I noticed extremely few
> numbers in the 293 exchange.  It struck me as odd that they would use
> the even-numbered exchanges and jump over the ones in-between (293 and
> 295).  Come to think of it, where I grew up, every phone number was
> either 664 or 666.  Is there some reason for not just assigning
> exchanges sequentially as new CO's open up?

292, 294 and 296 are the only prefixes I can find for Key West. In
multiple-exchange situations, using every other prefix might be done
to reduce the effects of dialing errors (ie. if 294 should be dialed
as 293 or 295 by accident). In Stratford, Ontario, the prefixes 271
and 273 were in use (519 area), until a recent 272 prefix was added to
that city.

In Calgary, Alberta, the vast majority of numbers there begin with
2xx; this was a nice rule to follow up to a point (Edmonton,
incidentally, has mostly 4xx numbers). Yet the telco (AGT) for some
strange reason decided to assign a few of the 22x prefixes to other
places in Alberta. Calgary has now run out of the 220-299 prefix
series, so other numbers are now appearing, many of them in the form
5xx.

Halifax-Dartmouth, Nova Scotia has most prefixes beginning with 4xx,
though some prefixes are now breaking that rule despite plenty of 4xx
prefixes left. Buffalo, NY, has generally relied on 8xx prefixes.

In general, it's up to each phone company to decide how the numbers
will go. In some cities, the assigment of prefixes is all over the
place.  In many cases, older step-by-step technologies will have
likely determined how exchanges would be assigned. For instance, it
was expensive to put in equipment to process extra number
combinations; "digit absorbing" was used instead.

For instance, an exchange with 523-xxxx numbers could be set up on a
step-by-step so that only the last four digits need be used to
complete a call to another 523-xxxx number. Thus, the digits 5, 2 and
3 would be "absorbed" or ignored by the phone company equipment for
dialing purposes; only when the next digit comes along does the call
start to get routed (and that first digit cannot be a 5, 2 or 3 ... in
fact, in one exchange in my experience, you can dial absorbed digits
for hours and still complete the call once the last four digits start
to get dialed). Thus, it would not be possible to use other prefixes
such as 532 or 252 or 333 for a local call from such an exchange;
furthermore, care would have to be taken to avoid a conflict with
local calling (say 523-4xxx local numbers were in effect; you could
not put a 234-xxxx exchange in service without overhauling the service
on 523-xxxx since 234 would be interpreted as 523-4 ...)

There are a host of historical and technical considerations which have
a play in exchange assignment, along with whatever the phone company
felt like assigning. I'll leave it at that for now, before too many
Digest issues get filled.


Dave Leibold - via FidoNet node 1:250/98
INTERNET: [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Doctor Math)
Subject: Re: Kansas City Sysops and Southwestern Bell
Date: Tue, 18 Feb 92 00:14:13 EST


[e-mail] (John Higdon) writes:

> With all of my Pac*Bell bashing (and diety knows that company deserves
> every word of it), I have to admit that this "three lines or less"
> idiocy that SWB has apparently gotten away with has never been tried
> by Pac*Bell. Indeed, Pac*Bell has a thirty-line RESIDENTIAL
> mini-Centrex tariffed (and it has been around for years). Am I to
> assume that such service is NOT available in SWB territory? I am
> beginning to believe that there are worse telcos than Pac*Bell out
> there.

I know of at least two people in Pac*Bell territory with large numbers
of lines that they get at residential rates. Not a problem. Around
here (Ameritech -- Illinois/Indiana/Michigan/Ohio/Wisconsin) they
start to ask questions if you order more than two (I have three) and
may require an "inspection" to ensure that you aren't running a
business. Centrex?  Not tariffed for residential. Period. No mixing
measured and unmeasured service, either. ISDN? Sure, just order at
least 500 lines. Personal ISDN? What's that? Caller ID? Forward on
busy? Distinctive ringing?  No can do. I'm served by a 1AESS, and they
have a 5ESS in the building with it, waiting for something to happen.
Perhaps they will cut over and give me the services I want. It could
be worse -- Call Waiting isn't even available in some areas. A mixed
blessing, to be sure.


[Moderator's Note: Well, I do not know which Ameritech company has
your business, but IBT has all those things you mentioned above,
including residential centrex which they sell as 'Starline Service'.
I have Caller-ID and several other CLASS features on my line including
distinctive ringing and forward on busy/no answer to voicemail.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (david.g.lewis)
Subject: Re: Party Not Answering Phone
Organization: AT&T
Date: Tue, 18 Feb 1992 20:54:23 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Hoyt A.
Stearns jr.) writes:

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

>> [Moderator's Note: It is quite common. AT&T now breaks the connection
>> after a few minutes if the called party has not answered and the

> Wouldn't it make sense for the equipment (perhaps with SS7) to free up
> equipment on a busy until a signal from the answering end re-seizes
> it?

We're talking about Ring No Answer (RNA), not busy.  With SS7, the
busy tone is played at the office as "close" to the originating caller
as possible -- if the call is signaled SS7 all the way, the busy tone
is played at the originating EO and the trunks between the originating
and terminating EOs are cleared.  If interworking with non-SS7 is
encountered, the busy tone may be generated closer to the terminating
EO and carried back inband.

With RNA, however, the circuit must be cut-through in the reverse
direction during ringing.  This is so that when the call is answered,
the reverse voicepath is immediately available.  If the reverse
voicepath weren't cut through before answer, when the called party did
answer, it would take some discrete amount of time to cut through the
voicepath, and the calling party could lose the first several seconds
of speech of the called party.

This also enables interworking with non-SS7 signaled trunks and
offices, so that call progress tones can be passed back in band.

> Or better, why isn't call-back-busy implemented?

Because this is a RNA, not a busy.


David G Lewis        AT&T Bell Laboratories
[e-mail]  or  !att!houxa!deej      ISDN Evolution Planning

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

Date: Tue, 18 Feb 1992 19:13:09 -0500
From: [e-mail] (Edward Gehringer)
Subject: Re: Tele-Scan (They're back...)


  To get rid of junk calls ...
  -- --- --- -- ---- -----

You can join an organization called Private Citizen, Inc., P. O. Box
233, Naperville, IL 60566, [phone].  It costs $20 to join.
They send a directory "twice a year to every firm that we believe to
be involved in the Junk Call Industry [sic] (including firms that sell
private information about you to telemarketers).  The commuication
basically says that you demand a $100 fee for each junk call you get.

Their brochure quotes the {Wall Street Journal} (among others), as
saying, "Their [Private Citizen's] strategy is michievous, ruthless,
and surprisingly effective."

I can't vouch for that yet; I just got the information two weeks ago
and haven't joined yet.


Ed Gehringer, Dept. ECE & CSC, North Carolina State Univ.  [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: We've had articles about Bulmash and his group here
in the Digest in the past. He seems to have an effective technique.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Andy Sherman)
Subject: Re: HR 3515: Threat or Menace?
Date: Tue, 18 Feb 92 09:54:39 EST


In <[e-mail]> John R. Levine writes:

[ about HR 3525 ]

> The privacy clause four paragraphs down is intriguing, it could be
> read to prevent CLID and customer ANI, or to prevent recipients
> thereof for using it other than for routing calls or verifying phone
> bills.  I believe its intent is to forbid using the subscriber
> database as a prospect list for internal use or sale to others.

The referenced paragraph is:

> -- "Personally identifiable customer information obtained or
> collected by a local exchange carrier in the course of providing
> telephone exchange service shall be used only in connection with the
> provision of such service, and shall not be made available to any
> affiliate of such carrier or any other person except -- (1) as
> required by law; or (2) upon the affirmative request by the customer
> to which such information relates."

It might be hard to make the case that this clause will forbid ANI
delivery to IXC's.  First off, ANI *must* be delivered to the IXC or
the call can't get rated and billed.  Secondly, does a telephone
number delivered by itself constitute "personally identifiable
customer information?"  The anti-CNID and anti-ANI forces have argued
in this forum that it is not, thus diminishing the value of the
service.  Which is it?

A bit of reductio ad adsurdum: if the phone number was personally
identifiable customer information, this paragraph could be read as
outlawing long distance service.  After all, is the delivery of a
caller's billing number to an IXC for purposes of completing an
interexchange call an activity necessary to provision of local
exchange service?  It depends upon whether or not you consider
interexchange access to be part of the definition of local service.  I
doubt that ANI or CLID is what the drafters of this bill had in mind.

I agree with John that the real target of this paragraph is a
dissemination of information that is substantially more comprehensive
than a naked phone number.  One can get a clear idea of what this is
about from similar restrictions that already bind interexchange
carriers.  Personally identifiable customer information includes
things like bill detail or calling patterns, coupled with name,
address, and/or other demographic data.  Readers of this Digest should
be well aware of the restrictions placed upon interexchange carriers
in the use of this information and what happens when those
restrictions are violated.  Does the name Randy Borow ring any bells?

Note also that such restrictions may bar the sale of marketing data to
outsiders, or even to internal subsidiaries like information services,
but they do not bar use of customer data for legitimate marketing
activity related to local exchange service (LECs) or interexchange
service (IXCs).  If you doubt that statement, just consider AT&T's
marketing technique of the bill message "an analysis of your calling
patterns indicates that you could save money by signing up for the XXX
calling plan."  None of the restriction on use of customer data (and
they are strict) makes this illegal, nor should they.  Customers would
not be well served if a business was forbidden to undertake the
analysis required to price and package its products and services in
such a way as to retain its current customers or recruit new ones.
Customers would not be well served if a business was forbidden to use
customer information to generate information for sales and marketing
activity related to that business.  Nothing in the proposed
legislation would prevent the LECs from similarly using customer
information for the marketing and sales of local exchange service,
which is quite arguably necessary to the provision of the service.

Personally, I have mixed feelings about restrictions on the sale of
information.  It does not really deal the privacy issue vis a vis the
sale of lists to zero in on a single industry without examining the
entire issue.  I suppose that you could argue that until there is
1competition for local dial tone that customers who object to the sale
of marketing information by the LECs do not enjoy the option of taking
their business elsewhere.  This argument would not apply, however, to
the IXCs, where there is vigorous competition.  Yet restrictions
remain on IXCs (probably by force of tradition) that don't apply to,
say, the catalog or credit card industries, which buy and sell lists
with ease.

An interesting side question.  With all the moaning about the sale of
lists, has there arisen a credit card or catalog company that doesn't
to sell its lists and uses that as a selling point?


Andy Sherman/AT&T Bell Laboratories/Murray Hill, NJ
AUDIBLE:  [phone]
READABLE: [e-mail]  or att!ulysses!andys
What? Me speak for AT&T?  You must be joking!


[Moderator's Note to Newcomers: Randy Borow was an AT&T employee and
regular participant here about a year ago. He relayed some private
informaiton about an AT&T customer in this forum. He was fired the
next day.  Poor Randy ... I have heard nothing from him lately ... has
anyone else?  Is his union grievance still in process?   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Bob Izenberg)
Subject: Re: 1-800-HAIR
Date: Tue, 18 Feb 92 2:34:57 CST


In TELECOM Digest V12 #143, David Niebuhr wrote:

>  As one of the "fillers" on tonights 5 pm news (WNBC-TV, New York City)
>  the female anchor (Sue Simmons) mentioned her changed hair style.

Was it good taste or merely technologically simpler times that kept
WNBC from using an 800 number (the acronym is left to the reader's
imagination) to ask us whether Sue Simmons should have the breast
reduction surgery that she was contemplating a few years ago?

Local television news is just a hair away from being an Irwin Allen
movie most of the time anyway, but this is near to the final
absurdity.  How about an 800 number to let us choose their clothes for
the next day?  "Press 1 if you'd like Sue to wear blue tomorrow."
"Press 5 if you'd like Jim to get a mohawk."  Et cetera.

As Albert Brooks' TV reporter in "Broadcast News" opines, "Yes. never
forget that *we're* the real story ..."


Bob

DOMAIN-WISE: [e-mail]  BANG-WISE: ...cs.utexas.edu!dogface!bei

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

Date: Tue, 18 Feb 92 17:34:22 EST
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re  Revised Listing of Class Codes; Other Recent Notes


You list 970 twice in a row; should one of these be a 976?
(I am also thinking of 971 in Rochester, NY.)

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

Date: Tue, 18 Feb 92 17:18:42 EST
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Pay Phone Charges for 800 Calls


What about emergency calls from these phones which charge for the
calls to 800-?  Remember that emergency calls now usually do not
require money deposit from a dial-tone-first pay phone.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #147
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa04074;
          19 Feb 92 2:22 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA31293
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 19 Feb 1992 00:34:10 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA27801
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 19 Feb 1992 00:33:56 -0600
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1992 00:33:56 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #148

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 19 Feb 92 00:33:55 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 148

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: When Did the LEC's Start to Die? (Phil Karn)
    Re: What is This Box Under The Pay Phone? (Nigel Allen)
    Re: Phone Service to Cuba (Tony Harminc)
    WECo Modular Connector Naming (Jay Ashworth)
    Whatever Happened to Zenith's Phonevision? (Jim Haynes)
    Hookup Charges - Are They Ripping us Off? (Jonathan Bradshaw)
    Popular Communications Magazine in Braille (Douglas W. Martin)
    PHONES Conference on RelayNet (Nigel Allen)
    Unable to Hang up on Robot Tele-Marketeer (Seng-Poh Lee)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 17 Feb 92 17:45:26 -0800
From: [e-mail] (Phil Karn)
Subject: Re: When Did the LEC's Start to Die?


I've done a lot of thinking on exactly this point, but with regard to
data rather than voice. The telcos do a pretty good job with local
voice, and it would be hard to compete with them on either price or
quality. As Lauren Weinstein has said, "Your average cable TV company
makes General Telephone look good!"

The real problem is data. Having worked for Bell Labs and Bellcore for
over a decade, I can say that the local telcos still simply haven't
got a clue about data. Either they don't understand the needs of data
users, or they refuse to give them what they want because it's so
different from what they've been selling for over 100 years.

The most successful telco data service is raw point-to-point digital
transmission. Even though it's usually outrageously overpriced, it's
successful for two reasons. First, the telcos have little, if any,
competition. Second, the service is so simple that the telcos have
little opportunity to screw it up. They just have to move the bits
from point A to point B as reliably as possible. Nothing more, nothing
less.

Other service providers, who *do* understand data, can use the telco's
digital leased lines to build the kind of packet-switched networks
that their users really want. The Internet's backbone and regional
networks are the best example, but there are also many private and
corporate packet-switched networks.

But when the telcos themselves get involved in data switching, you get
brain-damaged circuit-switched services like ISDN. Tell them you want
packet switching, and they'll give you X.25. And even these clumsy
services have gone basically nowhere, mainly because of the threat
they pose to the telco's own leased-line business. Why should they
make ISDN universally available at, say, $10 or $20/month and destroy
their own lucrative 56kb DDS markets? It just won't happen as long as
local data transmission remains a de-facto telco monopoly. ISDN has
been "almost here" for over a decade now. If it ever does "arrive", it
will be long after the dialup modem manufacturers finally hit the
Shannon limit of an analog phone line. Nobody will care.

I agree that radio is perhaps the best way to challenge the telcos in
the near term. This is especially true with data because data networks
permit a much wider range of architectures. A voice network is
severely constrained by limits on end-to-end delay of at most a few
hundred milliseconds. This precludes many interesting possibilities,
such as multi-station relaying. But other metrics, such as throughput
and cost, are usually much more important than delay in a data
network.

You could easily conceive of a metropolitan area packet radio network
in which each station not only generates and sinks its own traffic,
but also relays the transmissions of its neighbors. When communicating
across town, your packets would be relayed through intermediate
stations instead of being sent directly to the destination. Although
this increases delay, this approach minimizes transmitter powers and
consequently the interference to stations at other locations in the
network that are trying to send their traffic at the same time. The
result is a much greater overall network capacity than a network that
relies on direct point-to-point communications between user terminals
and relatively distant, central "hubs", as in traditional cellular
telephony.  As the station density in a given area increases, the
average distance between neighbors decreases and so does the average
power of a transmission. This effectively increases the carrying
capacity of the network to help accomodate the additional users.

The network could also be augmented by a few well-placed point-to-
point transmission links (microwave or fiber) spanning relatively
large distances within the network. This would offload some of the
traffic that would otherwise flow across the radio network and again
increase its carrying capacity. Because these links would be shared by
all the users of the network, the per-user cost would be small even if
overpriced telco facilities were used.

Even better, the system is highly decentralized, making it more robust
against the failure of critical nodes and much more difficult for one
powerful entity (like a telco) to exercise control. Nodes providing
services primarily for the benefit of others (such as the cross-network
"wormholes" and gateways to long-haul networks) might carry only the
traffic of users who agree to pay for their use. These services
wouldn't be monopolies -- if someone charged too much, anyone else
would be free to provide a competing service at a lower price.  But I
would hope that most of the network would operate as USENET does now,
with each node providing free relay services in exchange for being
able to use the rest of the network to carry its own traffic.

This is a radical concept, but I think it is entirely realizable. Much
of the basic technology has already been pioneered primarily by the
DARPA SURAN (SURvivable RAdio Network) project, although SURAN has yet
to prove that the equipment can be made at commercially viable (as
opposed to militarily viable) prices. Getting the necessary radio
spectrum is another challenge. PCS at 1.8 GHz is one possibility, but
even now Part 15 of the FCC rules allow unlicensed one watt spread
spectrum transmitters on certain UHF frequency bands. Equipment is
already available to operate under these rules, but in my opinion it
is all either junk or overpriced. The market is still wide open to
anyone who can build a truly high performance, low cost Part 15 spread
spectrum transceiver.

I confess to some doubts in advocating radio bypass of the telephone
companies, as radio spectrum is a very precious resource. It is
usually preferable to use copper or fiber for fixed applications,
reserving radio spectrum for mobile communications. But a local packet
radio service such as the one I have described will have served its
purpose even if, God forbid, it is eventually overtaken by a
well-designed wire or fiber packet switching service provided by the
telcos. At least it will have finally woken up the telcos to the
urgent need for low cost, high performance local packet switched data
services.

But then again, one might as well have tried to get Western Union into
the telephone business.


Phil

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

Date: Tue, 18 Feb 1992 00:39:40 -0500
From: [e-mail] (Nigel Allen)
Subject: Re: What is This Box Under The Pay Phone?


cybrspc![e-mail] (Roy M. Silvernail) writes:

> There is a bank of pay phones on the lower level of the IDS Center
> here in Minneapolis.  All the phones appear to be U S West.

> Underneath the desk-top, where one might expect to find a directory,
> there is a brushed stainless-steel panel affair, about 14 inches wide
> and perhaps five inches high.  It is featureless, except for a red LED
> near the top right corner.  This LED flashes in concert with the audio
> on the phone!

Perhaps what's hidden in the panel is a TDD or ASCII keyboard. The
panel would open when it detects a modem carrier. This would be
extremely useful (in the case of a TDD) for the hearing-impaired and
for obsessive modemers like myself if it's an ASCII keyboard attached
to a 2400 bps modem.

I have seen a combination TDD/pay phone at the Vancouver airport. The
panel hiding the keyboard only opened once the TDD you were calling
sent back carrier.


Nigel Allen - via FidoNet node 1:250/98
INTERNET: [e-mail]

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

Date: Tue, 18 Feb 92 11:35:31 EST
From: Tony Harminc <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Phone Service to Cuba


> {Relay calls via Canada?}
> Someone in Miami just tried this about a year ago.  Once word got
> around to the exile community, he got busted rather quickly.

Sure -- but my point is that obviously a Canadian company can't be
busted in Canada under a US law.  Who would they bust?  The US
callers of the service?  Surely in the good old, freedom loving, USA
it can't be illegal to make a phone call?

In fact Canada (like most other western countries) has laws in place
specifically designed to counter US boycotts of third countries.  From
time to time this has included the USSR, Vietnam, Cuba, Albania, and
others.

In the 1960s, IBM Canada struck a deal to sell Selectric typewriters
to Cuba.  The US government told IBM US to tell IBM Canada not to.
The Canadian government told IBM Canada to ignore the US law, because
this is Canada, and foreign law does not apply in Canada.  The
typewriters were shipped.

Much the same thing happened in the late 1980s in Britain: this time
it was oil pipeline components destined for the USSR.  Companies with
US parents were blocked by British law from complying with the US
embargo.

NB: Please no flames about being a communist or any of that nonsense.
I have no more liking for Castro than for any other dictator.  Doesn't
seem like any reason to prohibit phone calls to Cubans who may have
equally uncomplimentary views of their own government.


Tony H.

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

From: [e-mail] (Jay Ashworth)
Subject: WECo Modular Connector Naming
Date: Mon, 17 Feb 92 20:35:34 EDT
Organization: Psycho: The Usenet<->Fidonet Gateway of St. Pete Florida


Well, a Graybar Telecom catalog I have here, admittedly not an
authoritative source, lists that as an RJ-14.  Four position, four
conductor.

6p4c is an RJ-11, 6p6c, an RJ-12, and 8p8c, an RJ-45.

RJ-21X is that big 25pair Amphenol bugger they use as a demark when
you order 15 lines (for your BBS ...)


Cheers,

Internet: [e-mail]
UUCP: ...!uunet!ndcc!tct!psycho!Jay.Ashworth

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

From: [e-mail] (Jim Haynes)
Subject: Whatever Happened to Zenith's Phonevision?
Date: 18 Feb 92 07:40:02 GMT
Organization: University of California, Santa Cruz


(Funny how things pop into your head when you are driving a long way
alone.)

Back when there wasn't any cable TV to speak of, there were various
pay-TV schemes being proposed.  One that Zenith promoted for a long
time was called "Phonevision".  I don't really remember how it was
supposed to work -- something like the TV stations transmits a
scrambled signal over the air, and if you want to see the program you
phone someplace and it sends the decryption key over your phone line
to the TV set.  This being long before Carterfone it would have
required the active cooperation of the phone company, in addition to
all the other obstacles to acceptance that kept it from ever flying.
Anyone care to fill us in on how it really worked?


[e-mail] [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Jonathan Bradshaw)
Subject: Hookup Charges - Are They Ripping us Off?
Date: 18 Feb 92 16:34:06 GMT
Organization: Purdue University Computing Center


I am personally interested in knowing whether the phone company is
ripping consumers off for these so-called "hookup charges". In today's
world of computerized switching I fail to see how a company like GTE
can charge you $57 for what I consider is basically punching some
numbers into a computer. If I move into an apartment that has had
phone service before, what POSSIBLE extra work that is worth $57 are
they doing? No cables to run, no wires to connect, just activation of
the circuit which is probably completely computerized. Even better,
it's the same charge whether I am adding a new line or simply
transferring my current phone. In the later case, they aren't even
ADDING me to the database, just changing the physical location address
within the database.

Am I missing something here? It all seems like another phone company
scam. Right along with the "deposit" fee new phone customers are
charged.


Jonathan Bradshaw      | Whovian | [e-mail]     (Primary)
* PURDUE UNIVERSITY *  | Trekker | [e-mail] | Prodigy XMSN02B
U93 WNDU-FM South Bend |Red Dwarf| Forsythe Computers | Blakes  7

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

From: [e-mail] (Douglas W. Martin)
Subject: Popular Communications Magazine in Braille
Date: 18 Feb 92 18:03:11 GMT
Organization: Naval Ocean Systems Center, San Diego


     I found this note in newsgroup misc.handicapped, and thought it
might be of interest to other newsgroups.  I saved the article without
the header or by-line, so, I ask the author to forgive me for not
giving him credit.

Doug Martin      [e-mail]

 Subject: New Braille Magazine From NLS

Starting with the April issue, NLS will be producing {Popular
Communications} as a new braille magazine.  This magazine covers
subjects such as short-wave listening, scanners, CB, ham radio,
cellular telephones, and other communications topics.  If you are
getting QST from NLS already, and are known to be a braille reader,
you will automatically be on the mailing list.  If you do not meet
those criteria, but are interested in getting this magazine free,
contact your cooperating braille/talking book library.

This notice will appear in the Jan-Feb issue of {Braille Book
Review}.

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

From: Nigel Allen <[e-mail]>
Date: Sun, 16 Feb 1992 19:00:00 -0500
Subject: PHONES Conference on RelayNet
Organization: Echo Beach, Toronto


People with access to RelayNet BBSes may be interested in the PHONES
conference. (RelayNet is a network of BBSes running PCBoard software.
Some are amateur, some are commercial. A PCBoard conference is the
same as a Usenet newsgroup or a FidoNet echo.)

Here are the numbers of a few boards that carry the conference. There
are a lot of RelayNet boards, and you may be able to find one near you
by checking in a list of local BBSes, which you may be able to obtain
from a local computer newspaper, computer store or university computer
center.

Hispanic Bell Mgmt Assoc, Chicago 312-727-4868
Bell Microcomputer Club,  Chicago 312-727-5043
The Icebox, New York              718-793-8548
The Mystical Connection, Colorado 303-245-3376

Of course, FidoNet has its MDF and FCC echoes, which I regularly
participate in.


Canada Remote Systems.  Toronto, Ontario     NorthAmeriNet Host

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

Date: Tue, 18 Feb 92 21:00:16 EST
From: Seng-Poh Lee <[e-mail]>
Subject: Unable to hang up on robot tele-marketeer


I just had the strangest experience.  There I was on my modem reading
news, when I received a call waiting tone.  I hung up and the phone
dutifully rang.  There was this robot salesman telling me to "hang up
now if I was satisfied with my standard of living".  So I hung up :-).
I then tried to resume my modem connection (I have error correction,
so I can call back and pick up where I left off).  But all I got from
the modem was 'NO DIALTONE'.  So I picked up the phone, and the robot
salesman was STILL THERE! I hung up again, waited five seconds and
picked up again.  Still there.  It took more than 45 seconds before I
could get dial tone again.

Could anyone clue me in on what happened? I'm on an 5ESS, so I SHOULD
be able to hang up on the calling party.  Was this a freak? Its the
first time it's ever happened and I'm curious as to what happened.


Seng-Poh Lee  <[e-mail]>


[Moderator's Note: You *can* hang up on the calling party usually, but
it still takes longer than five seconds to do it. Had you waited maybe
20 seconds or so instead of five, you'd have probably shook the
nuisance.  And of course, each time you went back off hook, you
restarted whatever timer is there keeping track of those things. With
the older central offices, you go a minute or more sometimes, but not
with the newer stuff.    PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #148
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa07277;
          19 Feb 92 3:34 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA05405
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 19 Feb 1992 01:51:12 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA07775
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 19 Feb 1992 01:51:03 -0600
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1992 01:51:03 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #149

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 19 Feb 92 01:51:00 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 149

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Me and My Crazy Ideas (TELECOM Moderator)
    Caller ID Information Wanted (Eddie Anthony)
    Caller ID on College Campus; Legal Question (Arun Baheti)
    Pac*Bell Claims They Can't Help Me With Annoyance Calls (Eric W. Douglas)
    TE&M Article on Local Exchange Carriers (David Moon)
    TOOLS'92 - Call for Papers (Jane Hillston)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1992 01:16:41 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Subject: Me and My Crazy Ideas


The other day I got the idea I would like to have the Caller-ID data
display on my terminal and/or printer instead of the display box I
purchased for that purpose about a month ago. I have CID on both
lines, but one display unit covers both lines since a Radio Shack Two
Line Controller sits in-between the display unit and the incoming
phone line.

To get the CID data, I figured I would have to be off hook listening
for it while convincing the central office I really wasn't off hook so
it would be sent. The answer to that part of the problem was to
install a 'tap' on my line which would be there listening all the
time. The 'tap' consisted of nothing more than routing one side of the
incoming pair for line two (my data line) through a 0.1 mfd capacitor.
This cut off the DC. When a call came into the modem line, by
listening on the little earpeice I built, I could hear a ringback tone
(as though I were the caller) and between the first and second rings,
sure enough, there was a little burst of data sent along.

So far, so good. Now how to capture or read that data ... we know from
the Telecom Archives file 'caller.id.specs' that the data is sent at
1200 baud in ASCII. So I plugged a modem into the tapped line, and set
it for 1200 baud.

Now here is where I ran into trouble, and never did get satisfactory
results. Maybe a reader can help:

I issued the ATH1 command to the modem. It had to be off hook, since
being on a tapped line, there never would be any ringing signal to
take it off hook otherwise.

I issued the ATC command to the modem (a US Robotics HST) to shut down
the transmitter and have it sit there quietly just listening.

I turned the speaker on the modem up so that when I listened with
nothing on the line, all I heard was silence; a very slight amount of
cross talk from somewhere, and nothing else. At this point the modem
was off hook with the tapped line feeding it.

When I dialed the second line, immediatly the modem speaker gave forth
a sort of 'click' and I heard ring back tone just as the person
calling the number would hear it. After the first ring, sure enough in
quite loud, plain tones came the Caller-ID data.  But *absolutely
nothing* came through to the terminal screen!

I tried a different approach: ATA to force the modem off hook followed
by dialing into the second line before the ATA could time out from
lack of originate carrier. The first incoming ring was heard through
the modem speaker (which I guess basically served as an amplifier for
the tapped line), and the very instant the Caller-ID data started
flowing in the speaker cut off and the terminal screen displayed the
message CONNECT 1200. Within a second or two, I got a line of
gibberish on the screen and the message CARRIER LOST.

I also tried ATCA, to turn off the transmitter and force the modem off
hook at the same time. I got nothing on the screen.

Finally by fooling around with the word length, parity and stop bits
for a while, I got it perfected to the point that I always got some
sort of gibberish inbetween the CONNECT 1200 message and the NO
CARRIER message which always followed within a second or two. But the
terminal got really screwed up, since all sorts of ASCII in the range
of 0 through 31 was being sent. Screen clears, turn on graphics mode,
all kinds of junk.

Very well, I have another trick up my sleeve: I put the terminal in
what is called 'monitor mode' .. that is, where it merely prints out
what it gets but does not actually act on it ... now I got the actual
gibberish on my screen in the form of weird graphics characters. I
also have a mode where I can print out the hex values of each
character rather than the ASCII representation, and this mode -- the
printing out in plain hex the value of each bit sent to me -- showed
me all the things being sent ... and they made no sense at all.

We know from 'caller.id.specs' that Caller-ID data is sent as a string
of ASCII in the range of 30-39 hex or 48-57 decimal. But what I got
made no sense at all.

Has anyone experimented successfully with getting Caller-ID data
displayed on their terminal?  If so, please tell me what I am doing
wrong. Am I not getting the parity or stop bits correct? Is the modem
at fault somehow, scrambling up or misunderstanding what is coming in?

Answers please!  This is really mystifying me.


Patrick Townson

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

From: [e-mail] (Eddie Anthony)
Subject: Caller ID Information Wanted
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Eddie Anthony)
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 92 00:59:29 GMT


What exactly has to be "in place" for Caller ID to work? I see a box
advertised in the Tenex catalogue for $50 that shows who's calling you
but with the disclaimer that it might not work in all areas. Now, here
in Cleveland, I believe that the police departments have it on their
phones to trace the cranks and the suicide calls and such, but can the
necessary circuitry be in place for JUST the police departments or
would it have to be implemented for a whole system?

I'd really like one of those boxes.....:)


Eddie [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: As your local telco if they offer CLASS features,
and in particular Caller-ID on your exchange. If so, then the display
box you saw advertised will work. Otherwise not. What has to be 'in
place' is you have to subscribe to the service and have the data sent
to you on each call.  PAT]

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

Date: Tue, 18 Feb 1992 16:54 CDT
From: Arun Baheti <[e-mail]>
Subject: Caller ID on College Campus; Legal Question


My school has recently aquired a telephone switch which will finally
give the entire campus up-to-date features, and along with everything
else comes CID (the screens for which only specific on campus sites
will have).  This has raised some questions regarding privacy.

I'm curious about to what extent private entities will need to follow
state regulations regarding CID blocking.  Local company is US West
and state is Minnesota.

I'd appreciate any pointers to the archives or a specific information.
Thanks.


arun baheti    [e-mail]    [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: I think you will find that since the phone system
is privately owned and you are not a subscriber -- but merely a user
 -- the various laws which would otherwise prevail if it were the
telco itself doing this won't be applicable.  PAT]

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

Date: Tue, 18 Feb 92 22:40:36 PST
From: [e-mail] (Eric W. Douglas)
Subject: Pac*Bell Claims They Can't Help Me With Annoyance Calls


Last weekend I had a few oddities on my private phone line. I get home
Friday night, and my answering machine indicates a call has been
recorded. When I playback, I get a cycling beep, which continues for
an infinite amount of time (I had my machine set to VOX instead of
1min) Anyways, I knew it was some kind of data equipment, but not
exactly what. (It didn't sound like a [standard] modem or fax machine)
At any rate, I wrote the call off, and didn't think about it again.

The next morning, about 8 am, I'm awaken by the phone (same number) I
answer the call; again, the same beep. Now I figure that someone has
configured their data equipment incorrectly, and it is repeatedly
trying to batch to my number.

After the second call, I managed to get ahold of a droid at Pac*Bell,
who told me that "they can't trace calls, and the there is no way at
all to rectify the problem." When I told her that I was a Computer
Scientist, and dealt extensively with computers and new of their
[PB's] ability to trace calls, she responded with "we don't have any
advanced computers like that here ... "

Needless to say, after speaking with her supervisor (who again told me
they couldn't trace the call) the calls have stopped. (For now...)

My questions:

1) Pac*Bell can trace these calls right? I've been keeping up with
   Telecoms articles on the advancements of call tracing ... so why
   would this person lie to me? (Or why would they refuse to rectify
   the problem from their end?)

2) What kind of data equipment makes a 1.5 sec (5k-8kHz) beep, then
   pauses for an equal amount of time, then repeats? (The supervisor
   said something of FCC approval of "junk faxes")

Just curious,


Eric W. Douglas             Technojock               [phone]
I'net: [e-mail]      [e-mail]
AppleLink: STUDIO.D      Compuserve: 76170,1472       AOL: EWDOUGLAS

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

Date: Tue, 18 Feb 92 16:53:17 EST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: TE&M Article on Local Exchange Carriers


The Jan 15, 1992 issue of {Telephone Engineer and Manager} (TE&M) has
an interesting article on the Local Exchange Carriers which includes
forecasts of growth, capital expenditures, etc. It covers both the
RBOCs and Independents.

The following data was extracted from the article:

COMPANY            TOTAL ACCESS         PERCENT LINES SERVED
                   LINES SERVED          BY DIGITAL OFFICES
                   1991 (thousands)          1991

GTE                18,700                    80%
BellSouth          18,000                    57
Bell Atlantic      17,800                    56
Ameritech          16,647                    45
NYNEX              15,500                    61
PacBell            14,400                    37
US West            12,700                    40
Southwestern Bell  12,411                    32
United Telecom      4,100                    89
SNET                1,924                    47
Centel              1,596                    99
Alltel              1,217                    80
Puerto Rico Tel       912                    92
Cincinnati Bell       810                    59
Rochester Tel         474                    98
Pacific Telecom       357                    99
Century Tel           315                    75
Telephone & Data Sys. 302                    92
Lincoln Tel           233                    90
Commonwealth Tel      197                    91
Anchorage Tel         133                   100
Citizens Utilities    129                   100
Puerto Rico Comm.     123                   100
Roseville Tel          83                   100
Illinois Consolidated  79                    75


The seven RBOCs average about 47% of lines served by digital offices.

The independents average about 86% of lines served by digital offices.

Check out the article for more....


David Moon               Internet: [e-mail]
General Datacomm, Inc.   ATTMail:  !dmoon
Middlebury, CT 06762
[phone]           FAX: [phone]

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

From: Jane Hillston <[e-mail]>
Subject: TOOLS'92 - Call for Papers
Date: 18 Feb 92 17:13:48 GMT
Organization: Department of Computer Science, University of Edinburgh



                         SECOND ANNOUNCEMENT

                            CALL FOR PAPERS

        6TH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON MODELLING TECHINIQUES
            AND TOOLS FOR COMPUTER PERFORMANCE EVALUATION

                         September 16-18th, 1992
                         Scandic Crown Hotel
                         Edinburgh, Scotland, UK.


Conference Chair:
        Rob Pooley, ([e-mail])
        Department of Computer Science,
        University of Edinburgh.


Program Committee:
        Ian Akyildiz, Georgia Tech, USA
        Heinz Beilner, University of Dortmund, Germany
        Maria Calzarossa, University of Pavia, Italy
        Giovanni Chiola, University of Torino, Italy
        Blaine Gaither, Amdahl Inc, USA
        Gunther Haring, University of Vienna, Austria
        Peter Harrison, Imperial College, London, UK
        Peter Hughes, Bell Northern Research (Europe), UK
        Peter King, Heriot-Watt University, UK
        Anthony Krzesinski, University of Stellenbosch, RSA
        Raymond Marie, IRISA, France
        Ramon Puijganer, University of Balearics, Spain
        Martin Reiser, IBM Zurich, USA
        Herb Schwetman, MCC Inc, USA
        Guiseppe Serazzi, Politecnico di Milano, Italy
        Connie Smith, L & S Computer Technology, USA
        David Thomas, BT Ltd, UK
        Kishor Trivedi, Duke University, USA


Organisation:

Local Arrangements:
           Jane Hillston, ([e-mail])
           Dept. of Computer Science, Univ. of Edinburgh, Scotland.

Sponsorship & Exhibitions:
           Peter King, ([e-mail])
           Dept. of Computer Science, Heriot-Watt Univ., Scotland.

Tutorials:
           Nico van Dijk, (fax: [phone])
           Dept. of Econometrics, Univ. of Amsterdam, Netherlands.


The sixth International Conference on Modelling Techniques and Tools
for Computer Performance Evaluation is to be held in Edinburgh, UK.
This is the major European forum for the presentation of research and
applications of performance analysis tools and techniques.

The themes of the conference will be:

        - Tools to support the performance evaluation process;

        - New techniques of potential use in performance tools;

        - Case studies using performance evaluation for real systems.

Performance evaluation includes measurement, modelling and
experimentation in order to predict the likely behaviour of computer
systems and networks in terms of throughput, response time etc.  It is
sometimes extended to include matters of reliability and
"performability".

Unlike other major conferences in the performance area, the Techniques
and Tools series concentrates on technology aimed at general classes
of problems, rather than theoretical results.  We are keen to mount
demonstrations of tools which show new capabilities.

A locally produced copy of the proceedings will be available at the
conference.  A book of papers from the conference will also be
produced and published by Springer-Verlag.  This will be available at
discount rates for all conference participants.

Papers are invited on all aspects of the development and the use of
tools and techniques for computer performance evaluation. Papers must
be written in English, should include an abstract and should not
exceed 15 pages.  Submitted papers (or any portion thereof) should not
have been previously published.  Electronic or fax submissions will
not be accepted.

Submit five copies to:

        Rob Pooley (Program Chair),
        Department of Computer Science,
        Edinburgh University,
        Kings Buildings,
        Mayfield Road,
        Edinburgh EH9 3JZ, UK.

        [e-mail]
        fax:[phone]

Proposals for demonstrations should also be submitted to the Program Chair.

Before the conference there will be a programme of tutorials on aspects
of performance modelling.  This programme provisionally includes:

                Uses of Product Forms   Nico van Dijk

                Tools and Reliability   Kishor Trivedi

                Numerical Approaches    Edmundo de Sousa e Silva

                MVA and Computational   Ian Akyildiz
                     Techniques

Further suggestions and proposals for tutorials should be sent to the
tutorial coordinator, Nico van Dijk.


IMPORTANT DATES:

Proposals for tutorials due:    1st March 1992.
Paper submissions due:          1st May 1992.
Demonstration proposals due:    1st May 1992.
Notification of acceptance by:  13th July 1992.
Camera ready copy required by:  21st August 1992.


The conference will be held in the Scandic Crown Hotel, in the middle
of Edinburgh's historic Old Town, on the Royal Mile.  There will be a
civic reception in the City Chambers on Tuesday 15th September.  The
conference will be held in the Banqueting Hall of the Royal College of
Physicians.

For further information or registration please contact:

        Mrs Edith Field
        UNIVED Technologies Ltd.
        University of Edinburgh,
        16, Buccleuch Place,
        Edinburgh EH8 9LN
        SCOTLAND.
        [e-mail]

        fax: [phone]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #149
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa12495;
          20 Feb 92 2:52 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA05740
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 20 Feb 1992 01:00:31 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA11074
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 20 Feb 1992 01:00:15 -0600
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 1992 01:00:15 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #150

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 20 Feb 92 01:00:11 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 150

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Me and My Craxy Ideas (TELECOM Moderator)
    Re: Me and My Crazy Ideas (Craig R. Watkins)
    Re: Me and My Crazy Ideas (Bob Clements)
    Re: Me and My Crazy Ideas (Stephen Tell)
    Re: Me and My Crazy Ideas (Toby Nixon)
    Re: Me and My Crazy Ideas (John Higdon)
    Re: Me and My Crazy Ideas (John A. Limpert)
    Re: Me and My Crazy Ideas (Jon Gauthier)
    Re: Me and My Crazy Ideas (Brandon S. Allbery)
    Re: Me and My Crazy Ideas (Gil Kloepfer Jr.)
    Re: Me and My Crazy Ideas (Jacob DeGlopper)
    Re: Me and My Crazy Ideas (Doug Faunt)
    Re: Me and My Crazy Ideas (Samuel W. Ho)
    Re: Me and My Crazy Ideas (Eliot Moore)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: TELECOM Moderator ([e-mail])
Subject: Re: Me and My Crazy Ideas
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 1992 23:30:21  CST


The power of this net!  Ideas and responses move very quickly. I
received nearly a hundred replies in 24 hours to my comments yesterday
on trying to get the terminal to display Caller-ID information. This
issue has a baker's dozen of those replies, selected at random. The
consensus seems to be it takes a different modem than is customarily
found in regular use.  Read on.


PAT

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

From: "Craig R. Watkins" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Me and My Crazy Ideas
Date: 19 Feb 92 08:38:18 EST
Organization: HRB Systems, Inc.


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

> The other day I got the idea I would like to have the Caller-ID data
> display on my terminal and/or printer instead of the display box I
> purchased for that purpose about a month ago.

> So I plugged a modem into the tapped line, and set it for 1200 baud.

What type of modem?  I assume a Bell 212 type?  Those are PSK.  CID is
FSK.  You probably need a Bell 202 or V.23 modem.

Or, as was posted previously, Bell Atlantic sells an RS232 CID box for
$50 (quite the bargain, I would say).  Other sources have also been
posted.


Craig R. Watkins      [e-mail]
HRB Systems, Inc.     [phone]

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

Subject: Re: Me and My Crazy Ideas
Organization: Bolt Beranek and Newman Inc., Cambridge MA
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 92 10:31:04 EST
From: [e-mail]


I'm sure you'll get a zillion responses, but:

[Moderator's Note: How about a hundred the first day?  PAT]

> So far, so good. Now how to capture or read that data ... we know from
> the Telecom Archives file 'caller.id.specs' that the data is sent at
> 1200 baud in ASCII. So I plugged a modem into the tapped line, and set
> it for 1200 baud.

Not all "1200 baud" modems are the same.  Your "1200 baud" modem is
actually a 600 baud modem using phase shift to carry 1200 bits per
second.  The Caller-ID tones are actually 1200 baud, on a simple AFSK
tone as used by the early HALF-DUPLEX 1200 BPS modems.

You need a different modem, such as the Motorola caller-ID chip or a
ham-radio packet TNC modem or a Bell 202 modem.  Probably the easiest
off-the-shelf solution is to get one of those boxes that have an
RS-232 output which have been mentioned in the Digest in the past.
You can't do it with an ordinary Hayes-style modem.


Bob Clements, K1BC, [e-mail] (in Caller-ID-less NYNEX territory)

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

From: [e-mail] (Stephen Tell)
Subject: Re: Me and My Crazy Ideas
Date: 19 Feb 92 15:40:00 GMT
Organization: University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill


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

> To get the CID data ....
> ... install a 'tap' on my line which would be there listening all the
> time. The 'tap' consisted of nothing more than routing one side of the
> incoming pair for line two (my data line) through a 0.1 mfd capacitor.

> So far, so good. Now how to capture or read that data ... we know from
> the Telecom Archives file 'caller.id.specs' that the data is sent at
> 1200 baud in ASCII. So I plugged a modem into the tapped line, and set
> it for 1200 baud.

Correct, but although the data is sent at 1200 baud, it does not use
Bell 212 (PSK?) encoding.  Instead it uses the older Bell 202
half-duplex FSK encoding.  I'm not sure, but I think the mark and
space frequencies are somthing like 1200 Hz and 2200 Hz. Find a modem
that handles that antique encoding and this should work just fine.
They used to be rather common at hamfests and such.

Once you get a modem that understands the encoding, you'll get
recognizable ASCII on your terminal.

Since such a modem can "mod" as well as "dem" the Bell 202, you would
probably then be more than half way to constructing a "caller-ID
simulator."  Just detect the first ring and squirt out the data right
after it.  A CNID reciever tester could probably be built from a
phone-line simulator, the old modem, and a tiny bit of software on the
PC.


Steve Tell       [e-mail]    H: [phone]   #5L Estes Park apts
UNC Chapel Hill Computer Science    W: [phone]   Carrboro NC 27510

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

From: Toby Nixon <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Me and My Crazy Ideas
Date: 19 Feb 92 13:24:28 GMT
Organization: Hayes Microcomputer Products, Norcross, GA


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

> So far, so good. Now how to capture or read that data ... we know from
> the Telecom Archives file 'caller.id.specs' that the data is sent at
> 1200 baud in ASCII. So I plugged a modem into the tapped line, and set
> it for 1200 baud.

It's not Bell 212 or V.22, which are the modulation schemes normally
used for full-duplex data transmission in PC-type modems.  Caller ID
uses Bell 202, which is a half-duplex modulation scheme.  A Bell 212
modem cannot receive Bell 202 modulation.  You'll need to get a 202
modem if you're going to do this -- but I don't know anybody who makes
them anymore!  Maybe you can get a used one through one of your Bell
contacts, but if you have to pay for it you might as well just buy one
of the commercial Caller-ID computer interface boxes.


Toby Nixon, Principal Engineer      | Voice   [phone]  Telex 151243420
Hayes Microcomputer Products, Inc.  | Fax     [phone]  CIS   70271,404
P.O. Box 105203                     | BBS     [phone]  AT&T    !tnixon
Atlanta, Georgia  30348             | UUCP uunet!hayes!tnixon  Fido   1:114/15
USA                                 | Internet                [e-mail]

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

Subject: Re: Me and My Crazy Ideas
Date: 19 Feb 92 10:28:56 PST (Wed)
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)


The reason that you had no luck trying to get CNID data with your
212-type modem is that the data is not 212! It is, as you surmised,
1200 bps, but it is more similar to 202 data. This would require a
special modem, not readily available at your local Comp USA.


John Higdon <[e-mail]> (hiding out in the desert)

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

From: gronk![e-mail] (John A. Limpert)
Subject: Re: Me and My Crazy Ideas
Organization: BFEC/GSFC
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1992 15:43:52 GMT


I believe Caller ID uses simple FSK like the Bell 202 modem.  This is
not going to be compatible with a Bell 212A PSK modem.  Has anyone
tried connecting a Bell 202 modem?


John A. Limpert        [e-mail]    uunet!n3dmc!gronk!johnl
Code 530.2       Goddard Space Flight Center

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

From: [e-mail] (Jon Gauthier)
Subject: Re: Me and My Crazy Ideas
Organization: Ericsson Network Systems, Inc.
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 1992 01:01:42 GMT


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

> So far, so good. Now how to capture or read that data ... we know from
> the Telecom Archives file 'caller.id.specs' that the data is sent at
> 1200 baud in ASCII. So I plugged a modem into the tapped line, and set
> it for 1200 baud.

> Has anyone experimented successfully with getting Caller-ID data
> displayed on their terminal?  If so, please tell me what I am doing
> wrong. Am I not getting the parity or stop bits correct? Is the modem
> at fault somehow, scrambling up or misunderstanding what is coming in?

I'm not sure about the Caller ID specifications, but are you sure that
the data is modulated according to Bell 212A specs for 1200 baud?  If
not, a 212A/V.22 modem can't decode it.

Anyone have any other ideas?


Jon L. Gauthier   214-997-0157    Ericsson Network Systems, Inc
[e-mail]                          P.O. Box 833875
MIS Systems Programmer                Richardson, TX 75083-3875

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

Date: Wed, 19 Feb 92 19:34:51 -0500
From: [e-mail] (Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH)
Subject: Re: Me and My Crazy Ideas
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH)
Organization: North Coast Public Access *NIX, Cleveland, OH


As quoted from <[e-mail]> by [e-mail]
(TELECOM Moderator):

> the tapped line), and the very instant the Caller-ID data started
> flowing in the speaker cut off and the terminal screen displayed the
> message CONNECT 1200. Within a second or two, I got a line of
> gibberish on the screen and the message CARRIER LOST.

> Finally by fooling around with the word length, parity and stop bits
> for a while, I got it perfected to the point that I always got some
> sort of gibberish inbetween the CONNECT 1200 message and the NO
> CARRIER message which always followed within a second or two. But the
> terminal got really screwed up, since all sorts of ASCII in the range
> of 0 through 31 was being sent. Screen clears, turn on graphics mode,
> all kinds of junk.

I don't have the specs in front of me and ncoast doesn't have FTP, so
I can't check (mail server, anyone?), but ... is there any chance that
it's a synchronous packet that's being sent?  In that case, the data
would be rammed together without start and stop bits (instead the
packet itself has start and stop bit sequences).  (Sorry to bore you
if you already know what's going on with synchronous protocols, which
you probably do ...)  If you can convince the modem to do HDLC, you
might be able to get something out of it.  Some modems do have a
"synchronous" mode, the question is whether you can convince them to
print out the entire data packet and not insist on receiving whatever
particular kind of packet ID and/or address it expects.


Brandon S. Allbery, KF8NH [44.70.4.88]        [e-mail]
Senior Programmer, Telotech, Inc. (if I may call myself that...)

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

Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1992 19:56:01 -0600
From: "Gil Kloepfer Jr." <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Me and My Crazy Ideas
Organization: Southwest Systems Development Labs, Houston, TX


[Caution ... theories follow ... I don't know this for sure as they
don't have Caller-ID here yet (sigh)]

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

> So far, so good. Now how to capture or read that data ... we know from
> the Telecom Archives file 'caller.id.specs' that the data is sent at
> 1200 baud in ASCII. So I plugged a modem into the tapped line, and set
> it for 1200 baud.

I think the problem is that the modems we use for regular data
communications have a set-up period between the time a carrier is
received and the time data actually can be sent.  I suspect that there
isn't enough settling time for the modem to actually get in sync with
the caller-ID signal.

The other problem is that the way that you have the modem coupled to
the phone line may not provide the proper signal level for the chips
in the modem to properly demodulate the signal.  Although it hears
what it thinks is a valid carrier, it may not be one that's
intelligent.

I'm pretty sure that the way the Motorola Caller-ID chip works is that
it synchronizes itself to the first ring signal it gets ... after that,
it listens for a 1200 baud carrier and somehow syncs itself faster
than a regular 1200 baud modem would.

To give you an idea how sensitive some of this stuff is ... I had a
really cheap phone downstairs, and the ringer capacitors (or
something) acted as enough of a filter to completely garble all V.32
(9600 baud) communication on that line until I unplugged the phone.

This is the best I can explain with my limited understanding.  My
training is software, but I know enough about hardware to be a little
more useful than dangerous! ;-)

Hope this helps!  Let us all know what you come up with!


Gil Kloepfer, Jr.            [e-mail]     ...!ames!limbic!gil
Southwest Systems Development Labs (Div of ICUS)       Houston, Texas

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

From: [e-mail] (Jacob DeGlopper)
Subject: Re: Me and My Crazy Ideas
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Jacob DeGlopper)
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 92 03:12:29 GMT


In a previous article, [e-mail] (TELECOM Moderator) says:

> The other day I got the idea I would like to have the Caller-ID data
> display on my terminal and/or printer instead of the display box I

> 1200 baud in ASCII. So I plugged a modem into the tapped line, and set
> it for 1200 baud.
>
> Now here is where I ran into trouble, and never did get satisfactory
> results. Maybe a reader can help:

> Has anyone experimented successfully with getting Caller-ID data
> displayed on their terminal?  If so, please tell me what I am doing
> wrong. Am I not getting the parity or stop bits correct? Is the modem
> at fault somehow, scrambling up or misunderstanding what is coming in?

As I understand it, Caller-ID is not sent using the standard 1200 baud
tone pairs, and therin lies your problem.  I know of one BBS back in
the DC area which has a Caller-ID verification system in place; I
believe they're using a Caller-ID modem of some sort and their own
software, which they are intersted in distributing.  The board is the
Arlington Software Exchange, 1 703 542 7143.  You should be able to
hit it through PC Pursuit without a problem.


 _/acob DeGlopper, EMT-A, Wheaton Volunteer Rescue Squad -- [e-mail]

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

Date: Wed, 19 Feb 92 09:16:57 -0800
From: Doug Faunt N6TQS 415-688-8269 <[e-mail]>
Subject: Me and My Crazy Ideas


Your modem is 212 standard, and caller ID is 202 standard, as I
recall.  They are very different protocols.

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

Date: Wed, 19 Feb 92 13:37:54 CST
From: [e-mail] (Samuel W. Ho)
Subject: Re: Me and My Crazy Ideas


This may be a bit obvious, but does your modem support Bell 202?  A
lot of modern modems don't support it.  Of course, if you are using an
Apple-Cat, never mind.


Sam Ho


[Moderator's Note: I used to have an Apple Cat ten years ago or so for
my Apple computer. I finally gave it to one of the youngsters in the
neighborhood who was thrilled to get *any kind* of modem for his
computer. Maybe I should have kept it.   PAT]

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

Date: Wed, 19 Feb 92 19:35:31 PST
From: [e-mail] (Eliot Moore)
Subject: Re: Me and My Crazy Ideas
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest)


Suggest you save your sanity: buy a Caller-ID-to-RS232 kit.  $45.50
from IMC, 1-800-992-3511.


[Moderator's Note: My sanity has been gone for many years, but thanks
for the suggestion. This sounds like the best idea of all. And thanks
to the several others who wrote suggesting places where mental health
services might be found in my community for free or at low cost.  :)
It was a fun project for a few hours on a winter's night.   PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #150
******************************