Telecom/1996-04-telecom-walnutcreek.iso/back.issues/1992.volume.12/vol12.iss501-550

Text File | 1992-07-14 | 877.7 KB | 21,868 lines

Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa00831;
          21 Jun 92 22:44 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA26450
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 21 Jun 1992 20:57:45 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA24285
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 21 Jun 1992 20:57:37 -0500
Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1992 20:57:37 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #501

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 21 Jun 92 20:57:12 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 501

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Strange Pulse Dialing Behavior (Kevin W. Williams)
    Re: Strange Pulse Dialing Behavior (Leonard Erickson)
    Re: Strange Pulse Dialing Behavior (Ken Abrams)
    Re: Strange Pulse Dialing Behavior (Alan Rubinstein)
    Re: Funny Intercept on 1-710-555-1212 (Paul Houle)
    Re: Funny Intercept on 1-710-555-1212 (David W. Barts)
    Re: Funny Intercept on 1-710-555-1212 (Rich Greenberg)
    Re: Any News of CWA and AT&T? (David G. Lewis)
    Re: Any News of CWA and AT&T? (AT&T Management Insider)
    Re: Cycolac (was How Bell Labs Selects Ringers) (Jan De Ryck)
    Re: Cycolac (was How Bell Labs Selects Ringers) (Mark Terribile
    Re: Cycolac (was How Bell Labs Selects Ringers) (Barton F. Bruce)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Kevin W. Williams)
Subject: Re: Strange Pulse Dialing Behavior
Organization: gte
Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1992 20:53:44 GMT


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

> While playing around with pulse dialing, I observed some strange
> behavior which I'm hoping some readers can shed light on.

> I have two lines here. Using one line, I pulse dial the other line's
> number, pick up the call, and the two are in communication. Now, if I
> dial further pulse digits from the _calling_ phone, the exchange cuts
> me off fairly often. I find I can dial one or two or three as many
> times as I want, but when I dial a high digit like six or so, the call
> is broken, and the calling phone immediately gets a dial tone starting
> out with two (three ?) interruptions.

> The strangest part is: if I pulse dial digits from the _called_
> phone, no such behavior is noticed.

> Is this intended behavior, and if so what purpose does this serve?  Or
> is it a bug (widespread?). My numbers are 617-876 and 617-547, and I'm
> paying for DTMF service on both.

You don't say what kind of switch you are on, but I can guess what
could be causing it that would be pretty much generic. Most modern
switches will scan for hangup by sampling the line state at some
infrequent interval (100 milliseconds or so). If your dial pulse rate
lines up with the scan rate, it could see the on-hook pulses as a
continuous on-hook.  Continuous on-hook for a short-period of time
would be recognised as a flash. Stuttered dial tone would be the
signal for you to call the next party for your three-way.

The called/calling number behavior could be a result of whether you
are set to called or calling party hangup control, or whether you have
three-way calling.

Flash recognition would have to be set to a pretty low value to make
this occur. Any idea what kind of switch you are on?


Kevin Wayne Williams      AGCS nee Automatic Electric

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

From: [e-mail] (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Strange Pulse Dialing Behavior
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: SCN Research/Qic Laboratories of Tigard, Oregon.
Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1992 21:11:13 GMT


[e-mail] (Jon Sreekanth) writes:

> While playing around with pulse dialing, I observed some strange
> behavior which I'm hoping some readers can shed light on.

> I have two lines here. Using one line, I pulse dial the other line's
> number, pick up the call, and the two are in communication. Now, if I
> dial further pulse digits from the _calling_ phone, the exchange cuts
> me off fairly often. I find I can dial one or two or three as many
> times as I want, but when I dial a high digit like six or so, the call
> is broken, and the calling phone immediately gets a dial tone starting
> out with two (three ?) interruptions.

> The strangest part is: if I pulse dial digits from the _called_
> phone, no such behavior is noticed.

> Is this intended behavior, and if so what purpose does this serve?  Or
> is it a bug (widespread?). My numbers are 617-876 and 617-547, and I'm
> paying for DTMF service on both.

It's "intended" behavior. Pulse dialing is accomplished by doing the
same thing (electrically) that you'd be doing if you pressed down and
released the switch-hook! That what a "pulse" *is*.

As the calling party, it's not surprising that you lose the
connection.

The called party has different behavior because the phone system is
*supposed* to let him hang up for as long as 20-30 seconds without
losing the connection. This is intended to let you move to another
extension.


Leonard Erickson   [e-mail]
CIS: [70465,203]   [e-mail]
FIDO:   1:105/56   [e-mail]
(The CIS address is checked daily. The others infrequently)

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

From: [e-mail] (Ken Abrams)
Subject: Re: Strange Pulse Dialing Behavior
Organization: Athenanet, Inc.,  Springfield, Illinois
Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1992 15:38:59 GMT


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

> times as I want, but when I dial a high digit like six or so, the call
> is broken, and the calling phone immediately gets a dial tone starting
> out with two (three ?) interruptions.

> The strangest part is: if I pulse dial digits from the _called_
> phone, no such behavior is noticed.

Some people try the strangest things ...

The action of the pulse dial is the same as opening and closing the
switch hook (hang-up button) manually but the timing of the dial is
(more) closely controlled.  I think the interrupted dial tone is the
key to this "mystery".  It tends to indicate that the originating line
in your example is equipped with three-way calling.  Eventually, one
(or more) of the pulses is interpreted as a switch hook flash and that
is the signal to envoke three-way calling (add-on conference).
Chances are good that the called line does not have this feature.

If you are really that bored that you have to play with your phones,
I can recommend some good computer games ;-).


Ken Abrams         nstar!pallas!kabra437
Springfield, IL    [e-mail]
      (voice) 217-753-7965

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

Date: Sun, 21 Jun 92 17:46 PDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Strange Pulse Dialing Behavior


> If I dial further pulse digits from the _calling_ phone, the exchange cuts
> times as I want, but when I dial a high digit like six or so, the call
> is broken, and the calling phone immediately gets a dial tone
> If I dial at the called phone, no such behavior is noticed.

    What is happening is that the exchange is integrating the on hook
portion of the series of pulses, when they reach the threashold that
signals caller hangup, the called party is dumped. This explains your
ability to dial small numbers (less than six) without releasing your
call.  When the dial reaches the return position you are again
continuously drawing loop current so you find yourself staring at dial
tone.

    The results from your trials at the called party is the same as
what would happen if the called party disconnected for a short period.

 This behaviour does not occur in any electrmechanical exchanges that
I have tried in the past but does occur on #1ESS and derivatives. I
would be interested in learning of the response in other electronic
exchanges if know the pedigree of your CO and can dust off your 500
sets or switch your set into pulse mode, let me know what you
discover.


Alan Rubinstein WB1EST   3COM Corp. Santa Clara, CA.
[phone]    Internet [e-mail]

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

Date: Sun, 21 Jun 92 09:40:25 MDT
From: [e-mail] (Paul Houle)
Subject: Re: Funny Intercept on 1-710-555-1212
Organization: New Mexico Institute of Mining & Technology


I found a few more odd things.  For one, our institutional phone
system at Tech usually blocks any attempt to dial a long-distance
number from most phones unless you dial a "TAC" number for billing
authorization.  Dialing 1-710-555-1212 caused a phone company
intercept recording to come on; I don't remember exactly which one,
which was a bit odd.

    At coin phones, calls to some exchanges in 710, such as 555
and 222 were routed to an operator intercept.  Attempting to call
1-710-424- xxxx generated the intercept "We're sorry, but your call
did not go through".  Generally the phone would not return dial tone
for about a minute after this.  Twice upon calling 1-710-555-1212, an
operator laughed and asked about who I was trying to reach.  BTW, the
operator claimed to be an AT&T operator.

    It seems to me that the best way for FEMA or some similiar
organization to keep a secret area code is to have one or more special
phone switches that recieve ANI -- some numbers might be blocked from
it completely and always get an intercept.  Others might always go
through, or always go through to 710 services that they are authorized
to use.  The rest of the numbers will go to an "AT&T operator" (even
if you place the call through Sprint or MCI). This operator will
pretend it's an ordinary intercept unless you know exactly what to say
to get through.


[Moderator's Note: It seems an awful lot of low-level employees have
to be experienced Pretenders then, doesn't it?  AT&T has a few
thousand operators who might answer such calls.  PAT]

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

Date: Sun, 21 Jun 92 09:21:09 -0700
From: David W. Barts <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Funny Intercept on 1-710-555-1212


The Moderator notes:

> [Moderator's Note: Illinois Bell intercepts after 1-710; no further
> digits are accepted. You receieve the tones and "Your call cannot be
> completed as dialed, please check the number and dial again, or ask
> your operator to help you." So I guess 'any kid at a payphone' can
> stand there and dial all he wants. I think a bit has to be set
> somewhere which says the phone being used is able to call those
> numbers. Otherwise you are 7448 outta luck.
                             ^^^^
Shame on you, PAT!  This is a Family Digest!  :-) :-)

US West (Pacific Northwest Bell) does nothing in particular after
1-710 is dialed.  But if you complete the number by dialing seven more
digits, you get the familiar "<SIT> We're sorry, your call cannot be
completed as dialed.  Please check the number, and try again."
recording.


David Barts  N5JRN              UW Civil Engineering, FX-10
[e-mail]   Seattle, WA  98195


[Moderator's Reply-in-Kind: You may accuse me of distributing a Family
Digest using taxpayer supported facilities, but at least no one can
claim I am Socially Responsible. :)    PAT]

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

Date: Sun, 21 Jun 92 11:37:37 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Rich Greenberg)
Subject: Re: Funny Intercept on 1-710-555-1212


One more datapoint: from the 310 a/c (Tinsletown), PacBell allows the
eleven digits of 1-710-555-1212, and then Jane tells me that my call
cannot be completed as dialed.


Rich Greenberg - N6LRT - 310-649-0238 - [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: Speaking of Just Plain Jane, I received a few more
replies about her, and I will try to get them out Sunday night.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (david.g.lewis)
Subject: Re: Any News of CWA and AT&T?
Organization: AT&T
Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1992 13:40:51 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail].
PacBell.COM writes:

> I've been following the various articles on the negotiations between
> the CWA and AT&T...  However, the thread has kind of
> dried up ...

> [Moderator's Note: I haven't heard a thing recently. I guess they are
> still negotiating (?). Comments from any insiders?     PAT]

Not that I'm an insider or anything ... taken from AT&T Today, the AT&T
Public Relations newswhatever ...


BARGAINING UPDATE *** Informal discussions continue in Washington,
D.C.  Several outstanding issues remain to be resolved.  Newsline and
AT&T TODAY will keep you informed when significant developments occur.

Wow.


David G Lewis                              AT&T Bell Laboratories
[e-mail] or !att!houxa!deej     Switching & ISDN Implementation


[Moderator's Note: Outstanding issues = 'how long do we get for coffee
break?'; 'how far is my desk from the drinking fountain and bathroom?';
'how long do you have to work here (no, I meant 'be here') to get
vacation?', etc.  :) PAT]

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

From: An Insider in Management <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Any News of CWA and AT&T?
Organization: AT&T
Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1992 14:41:31 GMT


> [Moderator's Note: I haven't heard a thing recently. I guess they are
> still negotiating (?). Comments from any insiders?     PAT]

Pat,

ON CONDITION OF ANONYMITY

They are still negotiating a few sticky points, notably job security
and a management-proposed pay cut to Phone Center employees (they
currently make a flat hourly around $11 - $12 and management wants to
go to hourly of $6 - $7 plus commission).  If the other employees in
the mall knew how much they were making, the whole shopping mall would
go on strike!

The unions are trying to get their workers to do certain "job
actions", etc.  They have demonstrated in front of muckity-mucks'
homes.  One day, they all wore black to one location.  Another day,
they all wore shorts.  On Monday, they are all supposed to wear read
and stand up for five minutes at 10:00 am to show support for the NJ
Bell negotiations starting that day.

I get the impression the union leadership is concerned that these
actions are having little affect.  That's probably because I don't
think it really bothers management.  More than that is a "feeling" of
defensiveness I get when they tell each other how effective the job
actions have been.  For a recorded message giving a union perspective,
call 201-276-7771.

I should say that, though I am considered management, I don't rub
shoulders with the managers over these union employees.  It may bug
*them* more than the people I work with (I guess the union people hope
it does).  Of course, we have a developer down the hall from me that
wears shorts to work every day the outside temperature goes above 50
degrees (that's basically all year except for three or four months).
One day, he showed up shoeless.  Really!

Again, please quote this as much as you want, just keep me anonymous.


[Moderator's Note: I do not like anonymous messages. I occassionally
make exceptions when *I* know who wrote them as is the case here.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Jan De Ryck)
Subject: Re: Cycolac (Was How Bell Labs Selects Ringers)
Organization: College Business Administration, University of Hawaii
Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1992 00:42:40 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail].
edu (David W. Barts) writes:

> John Levine writes:

>> Trivia question: What else do they use cycolac for?

> I always thought the name for the plastic they made 500 sets from was
> ABS.  On the theory that cycolac and ABS are one and the same, I'll
> answer "plastic drain pipes" to your question.

I seem to recall that cycolac was used for the body of one of
Citroen's cars (The Mehari???). The big advertising gimmick was that
it was colored all trough, i.e. you could scratch it and still have it
be the same color.


Jan DE RYCK, systems engineer
College of Business Administration, University of Hawaii at Manoa

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Cycolac (Was How Bell Labs Selects Ringers)
Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1992 23:36:13 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, David W. Barts <davidb@
zeus.ce.washington.edu> writes:

> John Levine writes:

>> Trivia question: What else do they use cycolac for?

> I always thought the name for the plastic they made 500 sets from was
> ABS.  On the theory that cycolac and ABS are one and the same, I'll
> answer "plastic drain pipes" to your question.

Wasn't Cycolac ABS used in football helmets?

I worked on a phone project at a local major vendor and the sets we
used were made out of an ABS made by Borg-Warner.  They were so proud
of it they ran ads featuring the phone sets.  One day, after running
into some frustrating multi-part bugs, I found out how tough the stuff
is.

I took one of the dinky little handsets in my hand and swung it hard
from over my head to the edge of the table.  Had I swung a hammer, I
would have left a very deep scar in the table; instead I left a small
nick (not 5 mm across) in one edge of the handset.

Impressive stuff ...

(This man's opinions are his own.)
 From mole-end        Mark Terribile
uunet!mole-end!mat, Somewhere in Matawan, NJ

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

From: [e-mail] (Barton F. Bruce)
Subject: Re: Cycolac (Was How Bell Labs Selects Ringers)
Date: 20 Jun 92 00:05:48 EDT
Organization: Cambridge Computer Associates, Inc.


In article <[e-mail]>, David W. Barts <davidb@
zeus.ce.washington.edu> writes:

> I always thought the name for the plastic they made 500 sets from was
> ABS.  On the theory that cycolac and ABS are one and the same, I'll
> answer "plastic drain pipes" to your question.

Cycolac is someone's (Marbon Chemical?) brand name for their ABS resin.

If it came from someone else, it is NOT Cycolac, but still is ABS.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #501
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa05283;
          22 Jun 92 0:59 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA31306
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 21 Jun 1992 23:11:25 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA30751
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 21 Jun 1992 23:11:17 -0500
Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1992 23:11:17 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #502

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 21 Jun 92 23:11:22 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 502

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Call Own Phone Back Number Wanted (Erik Rauch)
    Re: Call Own Phone Back Number Wanted (Rich Mintz)
    Re: Call Own Phone Back Number Wanted (Jiro Nakamura)
    Re: The Telco Owns the Numbers (Ron Natalie)
    Re: The Telco Owns the Numbers (Bill Mayhew)
    Re: Jane Barbie (was The Purpose of the Three Tones) (Steven S. Brack)
    Re: Jane Barbie (was The Purpose of the Three Tones) (Robert S. Helfman)
    Re: Jane Barbie (was The Purpose of the Three Tones) (Jeffrey Jonas)
    Re: Longest Phonecall (Brent Whitlock)
    Re: Longest Phonecall (Ron Natalie)
    Re: For National Security Reasons, Stop Talking About 710 (Ron Natalie)
    Re: For National Security Reasons, Stop Talking About 710 (Kenton Hoover)
    Re: RFC For Fax Specs (Eric Brunner)
    Re: FBI Requirement For Wiretaps; Making Someone Else Pay (Paul Robinson)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Erik Rauch <hourglas![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Call Own Phone Back Number Wanted
Date: Sun, 21 Jun 92 10:51:56 EDT


I've been reading about phone companies that charge for some kind of
'intercom' service. In my area under Bell Atlantic, this service is
offered for free -- but Bell, of course, doesn't talk about it. It has
been in existence for about eight years; it involves dialling a
special 55x prefix and then the last four digits of your phone number
(the x in 55x varies as your exchange.)

Of course, you have to put up with a tone while you talk. But a useful
service nonetheless.

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

From: [e-mail] (Rich Mintz)
Subject: Re: Call Own Phone Back Number Wanted
Organization: California State University, Chico
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1992 00:08:14 GMT


I've used the method of getting a ringback described by a user in one
of the earlier messages also. At least in all the areas I've lived in,
there is always a special three-digit prefix which corresponds to the
one you're calling from which will perform this function. For example,
if your phone number is 345-1234, there is an alternate xyz-1234
number which connects you to this "test" number.

I've found this "alternate" prefix many times through sequential
dialing with my modem and using the Hayes 'W' command to wait for a
dial tone after the number is dialed (that's what you get when the
test number answers) and testing whether the result code is "No
Dialtone" or "No Carrier" (which means it DID find the dialtone and
went on to wait for a carrier).

Once the call completes and you get the dial-tone sound, a flash
changes it to a higher pitched tone. From there you just hang up, and
your phone will ring. Upon answering, you'll hear the same high
pitched tone. At this point, you can hang up to stop, or do another
flash so that you'll get yet another ringback when you hang up.

I realize my description of how this works is a little different from
the one described by the user in an earlier message ... perhaps
they're due to variations on the equipment used at the CO, etc.


Rich -> [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Jiro Nakamura)
Subject: Re: Call Own Phone Back Number Wanted
Organization: Shaman Consulting
Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1992 05:53:34 GMT


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

> Pacific Telephone no longer charges for DTMF service.  It is universal
> in this area.

They most probably raised the rates across the board as well, to
"compensate" for the "lack of revenue."

NYNEX does charge for DTMF ...


Jiro Nakamura            [e-mail] (NeXTmail)
NeXTwatch / Technical Editor    76711,542 (CIS)
The Shaman Group        [phone] (Voice/Fax)

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

From: [e-mail] (Ron Natalie)
Subject: Re: The Telco Owns the Numbers
Date: 21 Jun 92 16:12:10 GMT
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.


  Since you now have to get a social security number before you're
weaned, let's just take the next logical step and go down to your
local FCC office (maybe they could open an office within Social
Security) and get your 'for-life' phone number issued. No more of this
silly 700-number stuff from AT&T.

  Then the government will implant a little cellular phone into your
body (shouldn't take to long for things to get to this point,
especially with micro-cells) and we will be able to reach everyone,
everywhere. Not to mention knowing where you are, BROTHER.

You sound like you've sat through The President's Analyst too many
times.

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

From: [e-mail] (Bill Mayhew)
Subject: Re: The Telco Owns the Numbers
Organization: Northeastern Ohio Universities College of Medicine
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1992 01:50:04 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> Jeff Sicherman <sichermn@
beach.csulb.edu> writes:

> Then the government will implant a little cellular phone into your
> body (shouldn't take to long for things to get to this point,
> especially with micro-cells) and we will be able to reach everyone,
> everywhere. Not to mention knowing where you are, BROTHER.
> Wait a second, didn't I just see this scenario in a Borg episode of
> Star Trek ... I KNEW those guys looked familiar.

This reminds me of the classic spy spoof movie, The President's
Analyst, starring James Coburn, Will Geer, et al.

Coburn plays a psychiatrist who is recruited to be the US president's
analyst.  Every time the president suffers an impending break-down red
flashing lights go off in Coburn's office. It turns out that everybody
is spying on everybody else as the movie unfolds.  Ultimately, the
Telephone Company turns out to be the bad guy, taking Coburn hostage
to convince him of a master plan as described below.  The movie ends
with a hillarious rescue sequence and and ending that telecom mavens
would love.  A must-see picture.  Relased in 1967, it is an
interesting social commentary.


Bill Mayhew      NEOUCOM Computer Services Department
Rootstown, OH  44272-9995  USA    phone: [phone]
[e-mail]   (140.220.1.1)

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

Date: 21 Jun 1992 13:27:01 -0400 (EDT)
From: [e-mail] (Steven S. Brack)
Subject: Re: Jane Barbie (was The Purpose of the Three Tones)


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Ed Greenberg)
writes:

> Jane is a real person who recorded for the Bell System for many years.

Here in Ohio Bell territory, it has become rather rare to hear the
pleasant woman's voice admonishing you to "first dial a '1'," or
saying much of anything else for that matter.

Instead we get a recording that sounds like it was made by a tech who
didn't like OBT anymore.  It's extremely scratchy, and typically goes
like this:

    "<unintelligable> call as dialed.  Please <unintelligable>
     try your call again."

Note, no SIT even.  Jane Barbie's gone, at least from OBT, and her
replacement doesn't like me.  8)

This recording style appears all over the Toledo area, so it doesn't
seem accidental.  Who knows, maybe they have to pay Jane a royalty or
something.  8)

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

From: [e-mail] (Robert S. Helfman)
Subject: Re: Jane Barbie (was The Purpose of the Three Tones)
Organization: The Aerospace Corporation, El Segundo, CA
Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1992 21:16:54 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Shaun Case)
writes:

> Jane Barbie is the real name of the woman who did the American
> English Aspen prompts.  There's a signed B&W photo of her up in our
> voice lab, which I just viewed scant moments ago.  Jane also did voice
> work for Pac Bell, specifically directory assistance (411) and
> time-of-day (767xxxx).  Yah, she's the Time Lady.  If we had a scanner
> handy, I'd post a GIF, but ... alas.

Jane Barbie was also the female voice heard on the voice-overs for
WWVH (the Hawaiian version of WWV).


[Moderator's Note: Her voice was also used for Time of Day here in
Chicago for many years (312-CAThedral-8000). She had recorded the
phrase 'at the signal, the time will be' and the digits which were
then patched together as appropriate.  PAT]

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

Date: Sun, 21 Jun 92 13:00:15 -0400
From: krfiny![e-mail]
Subject: Re: Jane Barbie (was The Purpose of the Three Tones)


Here's an article of tangental TELCOM interest I'm forwarding from
sci.electronics:

 from [e-mail] (Robert S. Helfman)
 Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
 Subject: Re: Accurate Clock thru RS-232??

Visiting WWV was a real kick for me as an adult, because as a kid, I
remember hearing that voice booming out of the night "National Bureau
of Standards WWV.  When the tone returns, Eastern Standard Time is: xx
hours xx minutes".  Of course the wording changed when Washington
discovered someone lived west of the Mississippi and they went first
to Greenwich Mean Time, then UCT.

The voice announcements were done by Don Elliott of Atlanta; the guy
now (the format changed a couple of years ago, I think) seems to have
a distinctly Eastern-seaboard sound, to my ears. (Does anyone know any
more about who it is?)  The "At the tone, xx hours xx minutes
Coordinated Universal Time" has a slightly stilted "lilt" to it that
conjures up "The East".

The announcer for WWVH in Hawaii was Jane Barbe of Atlanta, who was, I
believe, the "Time Lady" and several other announcements for the
former Bell System and the Baby Bells (y'all devotees of 'comp.dcom.
telecom' probably know that already!)

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

Jeffrey Jonas     [e-mail]


[Modertator's Note: Did you know that to avoid interference with each
other in the western USA (where both are heard with equal clarity)
WWVH states the time about fifteen seconds before the minute, then
remains silent while WWV repeats the announcement about seven seconds
before the minute. Then both resume their tone simultaneously.
Likewise, when either station has a longer message to read, the other
one discontinues the tone for the minute or two the first one is
speaking (but they continue the ticking in the background). The two
stations never speak at the same time; announcements are read one
minute by WWV and a minute later (or earlier) by WWVH. As soon as one
finishes speaking, listen carefully -- you will hear the other one
start with the same message, and the silence is reversed.  When they
are finished, both resume their tone signal simulataneously.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Brent Whitlock)
Subject: Re: Longest Phonecall
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1992 16:20:15 GMT


> Speaking of phone calls, I remember hearing a story once about a girl
> who went to Paris for the summer, while her boyfriend went to Hawaii.
> They were going to miss each other so much they had to talk often, but
> they couldn't afford a hefty phone bill.  So what they did was to leave
> the phone off the hook at both ends for the entire month of July.  They
> would talk, make arrangements for what time they'd come back, and talk
> some more.  When the phone bill eventually arrived, it was for a couple
> thousand dollars, and the girl took it to the phone company and complained
> that this COULDN'T be right, and they decided it was a computer glitch
> and deleted it.

> It was told to me as a FOAF, has anybody heard anything similar?

It is, at least, plausible.  I had an experience in 1986 which
supports my statement.

One evening I called a friend in Illinois from Virginia.  We talked
for maybe 20 minutes, said goodbye, and hung up.  The next evening,
after I had come home from work, I went to pick up the phone and call
someone.  I noticed that the phone was not properly seated in its
holder, and there was no dial tone.  I thought that I probably didn't
put it back in place properly the night before.  I pressed the switch,
got a dial tone, and thought nothing more of it.

In about a month, our phone bill arrived.  There was a nearly 24 hour
long distance phone call to Illinois billed on it.  When my housemate,
who had the phone in his name, told me this, I was astonished.  The
number called belonged to my friend who I had called that night.  I
figured that what happened was that the switch didn't disconnect the
call after my friend hung up because my phone didn't get hung up
properly.  My housemate called the long distance company (I don't
remember which it was) and told them that there had been a mistake.
This phone call only lasted for a few minutes, yet was billed for 24
hours.  We could prove that all of us were at work all day, and that
the person at the other end was also at work all day.  The L.D. rep.
agreed that a 24 hour phone call was a little ridiculous, and removed
it from the bill.


    * * * * * * --> DISCLAIMER:  I speak only for myself. <-- * * * * * *
Brent Whitlock        Beckman Institute for Advanced Science & Technology
[e-mail]    Dept. of Electrical & Computer Engineering
            University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

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

From: [e-mail] (Ron Natalie)
Subject: Re: Longest Phonecall
Date: 21 Jun 92 13:53:46 GMT
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.


There's a story about two students, one from MIT and one from Stanford
who left a phone off the hook for a semester.  They avoid billing by
having the phone service terminated before they ever hung up.


Ron


[Moderator's Note: Cute, but I think everyone is aware that telco
sends out post-disconnect billings all the time for any unfinished
business at the time service was discontinued. And of course the call
would have terminated when the service did.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Ron Natalie)
Subject: Re: For National Security Reasons, Stop Talking About 710
Date: 21 Jun 92 14:00:02 GMT
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.


> I don't know anything about 710, but it probably isn't a good idea to
> give it tons of net.coverage if it is used for anything to do with
> national security.

Oh, come off it.  If the information gets anywhere close to here were
in deep kimche anyhow.  The TELECOM Digest is probably the most benign
of the forums for "telecommunications enthusiats."

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

From: [e-mail] (Kenton A. Hoover)
Subject: Re: For National Security Reasons, Stop Talking About 710
Date: 21 Jun 92 21:52:11 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: GenBank Computing Resource for Mol. Biology


I just tried 1 710 555 1212 from a trunk in the 415-962 exchange.  I got
an intercept, which said:

"We're sorry, it is not necessary to dial a 1 or 0 before dialing this
 number.  Please hang up and dial again."

There are these guys in black hats floating around outside the
building now.

In a more serious vein, perhaps its all something to do with FTS2000 ...

Kenton A. Hoover
BIOSCI Network Administrator (bionet newsgroups)    [e-mail]
GenBank/IntelliGenetics, Inc.   415 962 7300      [e-mail]


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

From: adobe![e-mail] (Eric Brunner)
Subject: Re: RFC For Fax Specs?
Organization: Adobe Systems Incorporated
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1992 17:41:32 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Monte Freeman) writes:

> I need the RFC (or some other type of "oficial document" ) that
> gives the specs for fax transmissions. A description of the protocol,

> Anyone have any idea where I can find something like this?
> Preferably in on-line Internet accessible format ...

See rfc1314, "A File Format for the Exchange of Images in the
Internet", but A. Katz and D. Cohen of ISI, April 1992, in any
up-to-date rfc repository near you.


#include <std/disclaimer.h>
Eric Brunner, consulting at and not speaking for Adobe
uucp: uunet!practic!brunner or uunet!adobe!brunner

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

Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Date: Sun, 21 Jun 92  19:57:16 EDT
Subject: Re: FBI Requirement for Wiretaps; Making Someone Else Pay.


It's funny, when Pat mentioned Ayn Rand's {Atlas Shrugged}, (my
favorite book; I've read it seven times!), a line from the book came
to mind.  Francisco D'Anconia is talking to Rearden:

    A worse act than murder is to sell someone suicide
    as an act of virtue; worse than that is to convince
    them to jump into a furnace, voluntarily, as an act
    of charity; worse than that is to get them to build
    the furnace, besides.

To translate that, the FBI wants the ability to make traces and
monitorings of communications equiment at any time they want to do so
(remember, a court order is done by request of the agency).  Further,
they want the provider of communications to make it easier for someone
to spy on their customers, and further; to make them pay the cost of
allowing the government to spy on them in the first place!

If I own an apartment building and the government wants to tap into a
telephone, they don't turn around and make ME pay the cost of
installing the line running to their office, (what they probably do is
declare the building confiscated for Civil Forfeiture, then, since
they own the building, put the taps in themselves!  :( )

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #502
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa21209;
          22 Jun 92 9:04 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA13747
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 22 Jun 1992 07:15:44 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA10163
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 22 Jun 1992 07:15:36 -0500
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1992 07:15:36 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #503

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 22 Jun 92 07:15:30 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 503

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: UK Directory Enquiries (David Lesher)
    Re: UK Directory Enquiries (Nigel Allen)
    Re: UK Directory Enquiries (Alan Barclay)
    Re: UK Directory Enquiries (Leonard Erickson)
    Re: Influencing PUCs (Charlie Mingo)
    Re: Influencing PUCs (Jon Baker)
    Re: Is This Phone Legal? (R. Kevin Oberman)
    Re: The Telco Owns the Numbers (Jeff Sicherman)
    Re: C&P To Revoke Telephone Number (William Degnan)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: David Lesher <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: UK Directory Enquiries
Date: Sun, 21 Jun 92 18:12:15 EDT
Reply-To: [e-mail]  (David Lesher)


Others said:

> [story about free directory enquiries from BT when using payphones]
> This is the way it is in California as well, both from Bell and
> COCOTS.
> [Moderator's Note: Ditto here in Chicago, where IBT payphone calls to
> Directory Assistance are at no charge.   PAT]

Here's a repeat unanswered question. Do the FCC rules on COCOTS cover
DA? In Miami, all the COCOTS gave free DA. Here in suburban VA, they
want $0.50 or more.


[e-mail]

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

From: Nigel Allen <[e-mail]>
Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1992 20:00:00 -0400
Subject: Re: UK Directory Enquiries
Organization: Echo Beach, Toronto


In Volume 12, Issue 487, [e-mail] (Stephen Graham),
notes that British Telecom charges for Directory Enquiry calls from
residential and business lines, but not from pay phones.

Most North American telephone companies charge for most calls to
Directory Assistance, with exceptions for the elderly and persons with
a disability (in some jurisdictions) and for new numbers that are not
yet listed in the directory (in Bell Canada territory, at least).
Calls for local directory assistance from telephone company-operated
pay phones are invariably free in North America, as far as I know.

BT does not provide directories in its pay phones, and when you
complain about this, says that Directory Enquiry calls are free. I
don't think public opinion or the Office of Telecommunications (Oftel)
would allow BT to charge for Directory Enquiry calls unless
directories were once again installed in pay phones.

I can understand removing directories from pay phones along the street
or in public parks, but I think it's unfair to remove directories from
railway stations, shops and other locations which have reasonably good
security.  Besides, if you want to look through the yellow pages to
locate a restaurant or hotel, being able to call Directory Enquiries
free isn't particularly useful.


Nigel Allen, Toronto          [e-mail]
Canada Remote Systems  - Toronto, Ontario/Detroit, MI
World's Largest PCBOARD System - 416-629-7000/629-7044


[Moderator's Note: Doesn't your Directory service include a supervisor
to do yellow pages lookups? Many telcos in the USA have that. They are
not permitted to recommend or give only one listing unless you tell
them the category (restaurant), what you think the name is, and the
street address. If they cannot find it exactly, then they tell you
places with similar names or addresses on the same street, etc.  PAT]

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

From: Alan Barclay <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: UK Directory Enquiries
Date: Sun, 21 Jun 92 13:33:55 BST


[e-mail] (Stephen Graham) discussed BT charging for
non-payphones and not charging for BT payphones for number advice.

> payphones, I get the impression that if you dial 192 on a public
> payphone that this is still a free service and no coins are cashed.
> Can anyone confirm this as I think it's a bit of an oversight on the
> part of BT not to charge payphone users for this service. It would

It is true, basically BT was told by OFTEL (Office Of
Telecommunications, the UK-wide equivilant of the PUC's) that if they
charged for enquiries they would have to have paper telephone
directories available in the box.  BT decided that it would be more
economical to not charge for enquiries from BT payphones. Private
payphones are still charged for, and it's up to the owner of the
payphone to provide a telephone number service.


Alan Barclay, iT, Barker Lane, CHESTERFIELD, S40 1DY, Derbys, England
[e-mail], ..!uknet!ukpoit!alan, FAX:[phone], VOICE:[phone]
iT - The Information Technology Business Of The Post Office
In Tune With Technology


[Moderator's Note: Does anyone remember when the old style pay phone
booths in the USA had the little shelf mounted on the side of the
booth, a small electric light attachment and a dozen or more phone
books there attached with a chain to keep them from walking away?  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: UK Directory Enquiries
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: SCN Research/Qic Laboratories of Tigard, Oregon.
Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1992 00:45:57 GMT


[e-mail] (Steve Forrette) writes:

> In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
> (Stephen Graham) writes:

> [story about free directory enquiries from BT when using payphones]

> This is the way it is in California as well, both from Bell and
> COCOTS.  The line of reasoning is that many pay stations don't have
> directories, so it is in the public interest to allow people to get
> the numbers for free.  Presumably, when calling from home, you have
> your paper directory handy, and get to pay for the convenience if it
> is too much trouble for you to use it.

Yes, but what gets annoying is when you *have* to call directory
assistance because the number is too recent to have been included in
the current directory! I tend to resent having to pay for information
that I *cannot* get without going through DA.


Leonard Erickson              [e-mail]
CIS: [70465,203]             [e-mail]
FIDO:   1:105/56     [e-mail]
(The CIS address is checked daily. The others infrequently)

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

From: [e-mail] (Charlie Mingo)
Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1992 16:47:50 -0500
Subject: Re: Influencing PUCs


[e-mail] (Corinna Polk) writes:

> So then, what does the normal $35-$50 line installation fee cover? My
> impression was that paying that standard installation fee gave me a
> phone line, regardless of the situation. If I had the lines already
> running into the house, then it was a simple install that required a
> data entry (aka "Customer Service") person to type on a terminal. If
> it required a new drop then someone was to do that. But either way,
> the price was the same, the former installs covering the cost of the
> latters. Isn't this the way PacBell works?

   When I was getting service from Illinois Bell in Chicago, there was
a $35 charge to create a billing record in the telco computer, plus
another $23 "line activation" charge (ie, throwing a switch on the
computer).  This was if you actually had a line in place, waiting to
be turned on.  If you needed a service visit, there was a flat $90
surcharge.

   My solution?  Since this was in a University of Chicago dorm, I ran
phone cables through the wall sockets and split the cost of a phone
with my two neighbours.

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

From: asuvax!gtephx![e-mail] (Jon Baker)
Subject: Re: Influencing PUCs
Organization: AG Communication Systems, Phoenix, Arizona
Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1992 15:01:04 GMT


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

> [e-mail] (Andrew M. Dunn) writes: (in response to this from
> me:)

>> I have been following this out of the corner of my eye. What is this
>> "third line cost" business? Why does it cost more to put in line three
>> than line one or two?

I called a USWorst service rep, about additional lines, and she said
that it costs the same to put in line one, line two, line three, and
so forth.  Basic residential service is $19/month.  Installation fee
is $46.  There is an additional first-time-only 'construction charge'
of $75 to cover US Worst's costs of laying all the initial cable in
the subdivision.  It is NOT a charge to do any ADDITIONAL construction
 -- it is a charge for construction they have already done.  Once I pay
that $75 for a line, no one who ever occupies my house ever again will
have to pay for it.

Any additional construction, ditch-digging, cable-laying,
house-wiring, etc, that is required is going to cost more, or you can
do it yourself.

>> Because the two-pair cable that carries lines one and two is installed
>> at the time the house is built.

> And in whose infinite wisdom was a TWO line cable deemed adequate for
> your residence? Did you make that decision? Did telco? Did the
> developer? If it was someone other than yourself, why do YOU have to
> pay for someone else's lack of planning?

Four-wire telephone cable is standard for new homes, at least out
here.  Most people don't have 16 residence lines in their house, John!
It would be very, very rare to have more than two lines.

>> Everybody is entitled to whatever they want.  They are NOT entitled to
>> expect the other subscribers to pay for it, if their usage exceeds the
>> norm. If you PAY for a third line (ie. pay what it costs to get one
>> put in you can HAVE one.

I don't expect the subscriber base to subsidize my extra lines, but
it's bullshit to make me pay for initial cable laying just because I'm
the first guy to occupy this house.  That should be amortized over the
expected life of the line, and built into the standard residential
rate.

> Side note: Please, PLEASE do not feed me the PC "socially responsible"
> bull about how residence is subsidized. First, I do not believe it.

It was subsidized pre-divestiture, but I don't think it is any more.
I think basic residential service pretty holds it's own these days.
Especially at $20/month, $50 start-up, and $75 first-time hookup
charge.

> providing it). And give me a break: does USWest charge BUSINESSES a
> cool grand to install a third line? I will bet that if they did, the
> word "bypass" would start to figure heavily in many Southwestern
> businesses' vocabulary.

If they're going to charge me $1K+ for a third line, I might as well
put in a T1 and multiplexer.


J.Baker      asuvax!gtephx!bakerj

DISCLAIMER : I am not an official representative of US Worst, just a
dissatisfied customer.

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Is This Phone Legal?
Date: 21 Jun 92 15:39:24 GMT

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

> This thing was lime green and it looked like a standard desk set with
> a thyroid problem.  It had a big master padlock and a hand lettered
> sign that said "Public Phone - 25 cents for 3 Minutes"

In California the phone is NOT legal. The PUC has set a maximum charge
for local calls of $.20 and mandates free access to 911 (no coin
required). I don't recall the minimum time required, but it's over
three minutes.

While I'm not about to call the PUC on this, someone should let the
owner know that it is in violation of CPUC regulations and that the
fine ($1000?) would certainly blow away any profits!


R. Kevin Oberman        Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
Internet: [e-mail]    [phone]

Disclaimer: Don't take this too seriously. I just like to improve my typing
and probably don't really know anything useful about anything.

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

Date: Sun, 21 Jun 92 18:15:07 -0700
From: Jeff Sicherman <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: The Telco Owns the Numbers
Organization: Cal State Long Beach


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail].
edu (Gary Skaggs) writes:

> Jeff Sicherman's comment (tongue-in-cheek :-)) regarding SSNs and
> implanted cellphones brought to the surface one of my pet peeves: nine
> digit zip codes.

> Number of nine digit zips  : 1,000,000,000

> That's four zip codes for every man, woman, and child in the US.  You
> could have one for your home, one for your office, one for your
> vacation home in the Ozarks, and one for your mistress' house :-).

> Why then is my zip code only down to the route carrier level?

 Even though this is not comp.usps, a few points are in order.
Carrier Route is not exactly the same as ZIP code. Without going into
boring, excrutiating detail, the current ZIP coding takes delivery
down to buildings, parts of buildings, apartments houses or parts
thereof (depending upon number of units) or, for residential areas
with houses or small business areas, a side of a street. The intent is
to reduce the sorting burden on the mail-delivery-person who currently
spends, on average, up to half of each work day sorting the mail
before going out on the delivery route.

  The Postal Services goal is to get this down even further by having
the current sorting machinery (which reads the postnet bar codes you
will find on the bottom of envelopes) to sort down to the delivery
point order so that the in-house preparation is reduced to about an
hour or so. Anyway, to get to this point, mass mailers and others
doing there own postnet coding (for rate incentives) will be expected,
within the next few years, to encode an 11-digit POSTNET code. Note
that the 11 digits will not be expected to be on the readable address,
just the bar coding. In most cases, the last two digits will come from
your street address or will default to 99 in cases where there is
none.

> My 73160-2135 just gets it into the carrier's bag.

> I should be able to get mail addressed to 73160-2135 with nothing else
> on it ... no name, no address, no city (listed as OKC not Moore for
> zip purposes, grumble) but NOOOOOOOOOOOOO.  That just goes to the
> carrier's bag.  What a waste!  Let's raise the rates some more!

  I see, you want BIG UNCLE to know where you are at all times to get
your mail to you ?? Actually, the elevn-digit code will pretty much do
that but, as you see, it is an automation artifact, not a formal
addressing mechanism as you propose.

> [Moderator's Note: My unique <Z>one <I>mprovement <P>lan code is
> 60690-1570.  Put just that on an envelope; it comes to my box.   PAT]

  Carerful, PAT, there might be a few people out there who might like
to send you some contraband material ...


Jeff Sicherman

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

From: [e-mail] (William Degnan)
Date: 21 Jun 92  14:42:47
Subject: Re: C&P To Revoke Telephone Number


Michael Harpe ([e-mail]) writes to all:

> Every time I have ordered telephone service from South Central Bell,
> they have always told me my number when I ordered the service.  No
> disclaimer about it not being guaranteed at all was given.  I would
> think that if the telco's databases were worth a darn, they would be
> able to guarantee that.  After all, you're gonna use SOME number, why
> not that one?

With all the circuit orders I have issued on behalf of clients, I have
only had one TN that wasn't the number that was preassigned. But "not
guaranteed until in and working" is still a good admonition.

The further ahead you reserve a number, the more time there is for
somebody else to get it assigned to them. If you order all your
company's printing to be done based on a number reservation, you get
what you deserve.

I normally suggest that we have the telco turn the number on -- even
if it is only as an RCF before the order goes to the printer. When
they are actually ready for the number it can be installed at their
new premises.

Much of the discussion is about a telco changing numbers long after
they are installed.

The general exchange tariff for your telco likely states that they own
the numbers and that they can change them whenever they want. Just the
same, I always cringe when I see that a major rehome is being done and
that thousands of customers numbers are being changed. I would hope
that they had exausted all other options first. It just isn't good
customer relations.


William Degnan,  Communications Network Solutions
Independent Consultants in Telecommunications and Technology-
P.O. Drawer 9530       | [e-mail] | [e-mail]
Austin, TX 78766-9530  | ![e-mail]  | Voice [phone]
Origin: Private Line - Stealth Opus in Austin (1:382/39.0)

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #503
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa23011;
          22 Jun 92 9:42 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA29652
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 22 Jun 1992 07:55:51 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA15595
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 22 Jun 1992 07:55:43 -0500
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1992 07:55:43 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #504

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 22 Jun 92 07:55:30 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 504

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Government and Corporate Sysops Monitoring Users and Email (Jim Warren)
    Joan Kennelly (was Jane Barbie) (Tony Harminc)
    AT&T Uses Manual Billing For Some Calls to San Francisco (John L. Shelton)
    Bell of PA Overtaxing the 'Burbs (Scott Green)
    Bell Canada Appeals Competition Ruling (David Leibold)
    Payphone Pornography Without the Price (David Leibold)
    Motorola Watch Pagers (Karl Bunch)
    Ameritech PCS (Monty Solomon)
    List of no Calling Card Surcharge Carriers Wanted (Paul Robinson)
    California CLASS Ruling on Call Trace Question (R. Kevin Oberman)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sun, 21 Jun 92 17:46:26 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Jim Warren)
Subject: Government and Corporate Sysops Monitoring Users and Email


Last month, I gave a morning talk to an all-day meeting of an
organization of systems administrators of mini-class, mostly-shared
systems -- most of them employed by Fortune 500 companies and
government agencies.

Initially titled, "Dodging Pitfalls in the Electronic Frontier," by
mutual agreement with the organizers, we re-titled it, "Government
Impacts on Privacy and Security." However, it was the same talk.  :-)
It was based on information and perspectives aired during recent
California Senate Judiciary privacy hearings, and those presented at
the 1991 and 1992 conferences on Computers, Freedom & Privacy. (I
organized and chaired the first CFP and co-authored its transcripts,
available from the IEEE Computer Society Press, 714-821-8380, Order
#2565.)

The talk was long; the audience attentive; the questions and
discussion extensive.  The attendees were clearly and actively
interested in the issues.

At one point, I asked "How many have *NOT* been asked by their
management or superiors to monitor their users and/or examine or
monitor users' email."  Only about 20% held up their hands -- even
though I emphasized that I was phrasing the question in a way that
those who would be proud to hold up their hands, could to do so.


Jim Warren, [e-mail]  -or-  [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: I present this as food for thought, and suggest
that continued discussion with Mr. Warren continue in the comp.
privacy forum or email.  PAT]

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

Date: Mon, 22 Jun 92 01:02:51 EDT
From: Tony Harminc <[e-mail]>
Subject: Joan Kennelly (was Jane Barbie)


On Feb. 4th, 1991, the CBC Radio program "As It Happens" interviewed
Joan Kennelly (my guess at spelling) of Oakland, California.  Ms.
Kennelly is the recorded voice of several services, including Northern
Telecom Meridian Mail, Pacific Bell Message Centre, various
supermarket checkout counter UPC readers, and "interstate calls in the
eastern US".

The interview is about ten minutes, and discusses what is special
about her voice that makes it suitable for digitizing and editing.
She gives a number of examples, including lessons to the interviewer
on "smiling while you speak" and so on.  She does sound familiar to me
from somewhere.

The interviewer (Michael Enright -- who is usually one of the best in
the world) is a little out of form in this one, but it's still very
interesting.  The recording quality is excellent.

Cassette tapes of the interview can be ordered from the CBC for about
$20 (I forget the exact amount I paid, but it was less than $25).

PLEASE NOTE: I cannot copy my tape for you.  I signed a copyright
agreement that prohibits other than personal use of the tape.

Tapes can be ordered from:

As it Happens
Canadian Broadcasting Corporation
Radio Current Affairs Dept.
Box 500, Station 'A'
Toronto, Ontario   M5W 1E6

Specify the date (Feb 4/91) and the interview title "Electronic
Voice".  The CBC will send you a copyright form which you sign and
return with payment.  I managed to do the first part over the phone,
thus avoiding one mailing out of four.  The number is [phone].

As it Happens is heard across the country on CBC AM stations, overseas
on Radio Canada International, and in the US on many NPR stations.

I have no connection with the CBC or Ms. Kennelly.


Tony H.

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

Date: Mon, 22 Jun 92 06:09:59 -0700
From: [e-mail] (John L. Shelton)
Subject: AT&T Uses Manual Billing For Some Calls to San Francisco


Yes, it's true.

Last night I needed to page a co-worker, who has a San Francisco
beeper rented from Pagenet.  I was in NYC, and called using my AT&T
calling card.  Before AT&T even asked for my card number, I got a
message that the number could not be reached as dialed, and the office
code was "212T"; the call was being blocked in NYC.

I had tried this earlier in the week and gotten the same message, but
was in a hurry so didn't track it down.  This time I had the time.
Calls to his beeper worked just fine from the client's office earlier
in the week, but I don't know what LD company they use.  At least I
knew that the number was valid, and that some LD companies can
connect.

Thinking that the hotel might have some special arrangement with AT&T,
I bypassed their standard routing by using 1-800-CALL-ATT but this
didn't work either.  The nice voice asked me to dial the number twice,
then told me to hang up and dial again.  I tried twice.  Finally, I
called the operator, who informed me that she couldn't place the call
on the AT&T network.  She said the company owning the exchange was
refusing calls from AT&T.  To solve the problem, she called a Pac Bell
operator, and had that operator complete the call.  Both operators
stayed on the line during the five second duration of the call (long
enough for me to punch in my number).  The AT&T operator told me I'd
have to go through this ritual next time, and informed me that she
would submit a manual (paper?) ticket for billing purposes.

How many questions does this episode bring to mind?


John

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

Date: Sun, 21 Jun 92 11:02:11 -0400
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Bell of PA Overtaxing the 'Burbs


October 1 last year, the PA state legislature allowed the City of
Philadelphia to collect an additional 1% sales tax on top of the
state's 6%.  In April, I happened to notice that I, a suburbanite just
outside the city, was being charged this 1% local tax.  My CSR down at
Bell looked at my record and noticed immediately (these folks are
*amazaing*) that neither my address nor exchange was not in
Philadelphia.  "No Problem," she said.  "We'll change the coding and
issue the refund."  Case closed.  Not.

The following month (no credit, no change), a different CSR reached
similar conclusions about my account.  "Perhaps," he said, "the code
change was entered too late to be reflected on the bill."  That could
be.  It *was* only two weeks before my closing date that CSR 1 made
the change.  The computer can be awfully slow sometimes.  As far as
the credit for tax paid in error, "perhaps Accounting was backed up.
You should definitely see it on the next bill."  The next bill arrived
with the credit.  And the tax continuing to show up.

CSR 3 had a couple of real good explanations for this one.  "For the
purposes of 911 emergency services, I (suburban exchange, zip, and
fire and police services) was considered part of Philadelphia County.
We are aware of the problem, but it is a very complicated computer
system and takes time to reprogram."  More than nine months?  It was
time to play the trump card.  "P-U-C," I said.  Well, he practically
begged me to speak with his Customer Assurance people instead of the
PUC.  Since Bell was already aware of the problem, it really wouldn't
help to bring them in, he explained.  Well, after declining his offer
to speak with others, he told me that he would vigorously pursue the
problem, and has called back once to tell me that he was still working
on it.

The moral, of course, is Check Your Phone Bill[sm].  We'll see what
happens.  In the meantime, instead of the PUC, I've contacted the
{Philadelphia Inquirer}, because they love utility-bashing, plus
they've got the resources to track down other victims.


scott

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

Date: Sun, 21 Jun 92 19:23:45 EDT
From: David Leibold <[e-mail]>
Subject: Bell Canada Appeals Competition Ruling


Bell Canada has decided to fight portions of the historic CRTC
decision that allows Unitel and BCRL/Call-Net to provide competing
long distance networks, despite statements in {The Toronto Star} which
suggest that Bell has retracted an earlier intention not to appeal any
decision on the competition proposal.

Bell maintains that it accepts competition in principle, but at issue
are the terms under which the CRTC granted Unitel and BCRL the access.
Bell claims it must subsidise local service with long distance
revenues to the tune of 17c/minute while the CRTC decision only
requires Unitel and BCRL to pay out 11c/min. Bell is also objecting to
having to assume the large share of costs to install competitive
access as per CRTC order.

The appeal will likely delay competition in Canada; however, it
appears unlikely that the fact of competition will be altered. More
battles to come yet ... watch this Digest.


[e-mail]

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

Date: Sun, 21 Jun 92 19:35:20 EDT
From: David Leibold <[e-mail]>
Subject: Payphone Pornography Without the Price


A Canadian Press despatch reported on payphones in the Ottawa area
which allowed access to 976 numbers toll-free. The Bell Canada tariffs
do not allow for 976 access from payphones, thus this situation would
be a switch programming error somewhere along the way.

The result was a flurry of free fone porn calls which started in late
1990. The situation came to light only when an Ottawa Citizen reporter
advised Bell Canada. Of course, one would not expect the callers
themselves to be hasty to report this find to the telco.

Such cheap thrills were well-known in the high school community; one
Grade 10 student remarked "It's perverted". Specifically, payphones in
the west end of Ottawa and Nepean had the 976 bug.


[e-mail]

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

Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1992 23:08:09 GMT
From: [e-mail] (Karl Bunch)
Subject: Motorola Watch Pagers
Reply-To: ![e-mail]
Organization: Think Tank Software, Norwalk, CA


Anybody have experience with the "watch" pagers made by Motorola?

I've been carrying a cell phone and pager for quite some time now.  It
seems the best solution for my needs.  But, I am tired of having the
pager on my belt.

The local "paging" services have told me they've "had a lot of
problems" with the watches.  They claim they break down a lot and
waste batteries like mad.  The current pager I have eats batteries, so
that's no big supprise.  But, if they are prone to failure I certainly
don't want to plop $350.00 down just to have it break on me.

Are there other alternatives?

Email to me and I'll summarize if there is enough interest.

Thanks in advance,


Karl Bunch            UUCP: ..!uunet!cerritos.edu!ttank!karl
Think Tank Software   INTERNET: [e-mail]

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

Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1992 06:09:36 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <[e-mail]>
Subject: Ameritech PCS


Ameritech Wednesday began an 18-month consumer test of a revolutionary
portable phone that will allow users to make and receive phone calls
using regular phone lines instead of a cellular phone network.

The new system -- called personal communcations services, or PCS --
uses miniaturized cordless telephones that are connected to regular
phone lines through a digital radio system.

The phones can be used on the street, in shopping areas, business
districts or residential areas as long as they are within range of
small transmitting antennae.

Antennae are being installed at intervals of around 200 yards
throughout the downtown Chicago area and in selected suburban
locations for the PCS test.  The new phones must be used from within
the designated areas, though calls can be made to anywhere.

Initially, 200 people will take part in the PCS test.  The number of
participants will be expanded to 1,000 by the end of the year.

Ameritech spokesman Steve Ford said in the first phase of the test PCS
users will only be able to make outgoing calls.  But he said users
will be able to both make and receive calls by the end of the year.

In an interim phase, PCS users will be able to receive pages on the
portable phones and automatically return those calls.

The PCS phones, made by suburban Schaumburg-based Motorola, have a
feature that allows pages to be returned by simply pressing two
buttons.  Ameritech and Motorola estimate the phones eventually will
be priced at less than $100, though they did not provide any estimate
of initial pricing.

PCS customers pay only for the calls they make, with the price of a
local call approximating that of a public telephone call.
Long-distance service will be provided by Sprint, and Bank Illinois
will provide billing services.

Unlike car phones, PCS units initially cannot be used while traveling
because the technology is not yet able to pass calls between
transmitters.  Users must remain in the coverage area of the
transmitter where the call initiated or the connection will be broken.

But Ameritech said a feature allowing communcation "on the move" is
expected to be available later in the trial.

The key advantages of PCS are the high-quality sound, reduced power
requirements and longer battery life, The phones are about as big as a
deck of cards.

Information gathered in the Ameritech test will be shared with the
Federal Communications Commission.  The FCC has granted Ameritech and
more than 70 other firms experimental licenses for PCS systems, but
has not yet determined who will be authorized to provide the services
on a commercial basis.


[Moderator's Note: Ameritech/IBT are certainly very progressive and
technologically advanced telcos. I'm glad to be in their region.  PAT]

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

Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: Paul Robinson, Contractor <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 92  06:34:48 EDT
Subject: List of no Calling Card Surcharge Carriers Wanted

I'd like to collect a list of telephone carriers that the users on
here are currently using which operate using calling cards (their own
or telephone company ones) that the carrier does not impose a
surcharge for calls placed via a calling card, either credit or
prepaid.  And except for those that use predeposit calling cards
(where you are pre- purchasing the value of calls on the card in
advance, and even then the only charge should be for the amount of
value purchased), there should be no special charges, i.e. no monthly
minimums, and no extra charges imposed (if they require it, I'll
accept a fee of 50c in any month that bills are mailed; if the carrier
uses credit cards or predeposit, there should be no surcharge).

I'll post (and E-Mail those who request) the list of carriers I get,
if any.  Please respond via E-Mail to [e-mail].

What I am looking for are companies that either use an 1-800 number or
(in rare cases) use the 950 exchange in most of the country; I am
looking specifically for companies which can be accessed essentially
anywhere in the U.S. (They may exclude calls made from Alaska and
Hawaii).  I know there is at least one company because I used to use
one that did exactly this.

While the usual rates for a telephone call by most carriers are within
1-2c a minute, the usual 75-85c surcharge for each call can make them
unfeasable for short or non-business calls.

Also, does anyone know how a carrier gets an 800 number for this
purpose?  One can't offer long distance calls at 12c a minute for
night rates when 800 access lines run 15c a minute, now can they?


Paul Robinson       Opinion not necessarily anyone else's.

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: California CLASS ruling on Call Trace question
Date: 21 Jun 92 15:54:12 GMT


News reports of the ruling have one feature that I'm unclear on,
Call-Trace. I have two newspaper articles on the subject and one says
that it will be available on all phones on switches supporting the new
features at $10 per use.  Another said that it would require a $5
activation fee and $5 per use.

Anyone know which it is? I think, from a public safety perspective,
that everyone should have this available. I want them to catch the
caller after the FIRST call, not after the first call, a day to call
in the request for service and N days getting it into the switch.


R. Kevin Oberman        Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
Internet: [e-mail]    [phone]

Disclaimer: Don't take this too seriously. I just like to improve my
typing and probably don't really know anything useful about anything.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #504
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa26766;
          23 Jun 92 10:24 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA14294
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 23 Jun 1992 07:50:01 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA11869
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 23 Jun 1992 07:49:53 -0500
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1992 07:49:53 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #505

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 23 Jun 92 07:49:57 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 505

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Call For Help re: Denmark (Carl Wright)
    NTC Long Distance Telephone (Frank Keeney)
    Renaming CuD as comp.society.cu-digest (Usenet Group) (CUD Moderators)
    Phone Keypad Interfaces to Enhanced Telephone Services (Craig Hubley)
    Telephone Tone Control (Craig Hubley)
    New List: Cellular and Related Technologies Mailing List (Youngblood
    With NETel, is it an UPgrade or a DOWNgrade? (Scott Fybush)
    Strange Message on Answering Machine (Satish Pai)
    MCI Phone Bill (John Staub)
    CID/California (Steven H. Lichter)
    Batman Well Connected? (Dr. Ross Alan Stapleton)
    Messages Were Overflowing Again (TELECOM Moderator)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Carl Wright)
Subject: Call For Help re: Denmark
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 92 16:15:43 EDT
Organization: UMCC - Ann Arbor, MI  USA


I have an assignment involving phone calling from Denmark. I would
like to contact six or more people in Denmark whom I can ask questions
about making calls in Denmark. The answers will be obvious to people
who use the Danish system.

Please contact me via email or phone.


Carl Wright                 Lynn-Arthur Associates, Inc.
Internet: [e-mail]    2350 Green Rd., #160
Voice: 1 313 995 5590 EST   Ann Arbor, MI 48105

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

Date: Mon, 22 Jun 92 13:02 EDT
Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail] (Frank Keeney)
Subject: NTC Long Distance Telephone


Announcement of new features with NTC long distance telephone service:

*  6 second billing after the first 18 seconds.
*  No surcharge calling cards.
*  800 inbound service as low as $5.00 per month, plus usage.
*  Daytime rates as low as $.1699 with usage greater than $350/mo.
*  No advance fee or monthly fees for Dial-1 service.


Frank Keeney            Internet: [e-mail]
Calcom Communications               or
PO Box 2912             [e-mail]
Culver City, CA 90232   BBS [phone] v.32bis

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

Date: Mon, 22 Jun 92 12:27 CDT
From: Cu Digest <[e-mail]> ([e-mail])
Subject: Renaming CuD as comp.society.cu-digest (Usenet Group)


Chip Rosenthal has taken the initiative to propose that the Usenet
version of Cu Digest (CuD) be changed from ALT.society.cu-digest to
COMP.society.cu-digest. There are several reasons why the alt-to-comp
shift would be useful.  First, the number of Usenet sites carrying ALT
groups seems to be decreasing, which reduces the availability of CuD.
Changing to a COMP group would allow access for many more sites and
readers. Second, expansion of readership would also expand the range
of articles by broadening the pool of contributors.  This should
improve the quality of CuD by stimulating more feature-length articles
especially from academic sites.

CuD, which began at the suggestion and with the encouragement and help
of Pat Townson, focuses on computer issues relevant to scholars,
researchers, and the media in much the same way as other comp groups
(EFF, Telecom Digest, RISKS) do. The primary difference is that we
encourage articles (rather than short posts, although we try to
include as many posts as space allows). Our primary interest is on the
legal and cultural aspects of cyberspace, and we try to keep readers
informed of relevant computer conferences, computer-related news, book
reviews, and summaries of research on computer technology and culture.

We appreciate the support we have received for re-naming, and we
encourage readers to **VOTE IN SUPPORT** of the change in two weeks.
Discussions and other relevant information on voting can be found on
Usenet's news.groups,


Jim Thomas / Gordon Meyer
CuD co-editors

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

From: [e-mail] (Craig Hubley)
Subject: Phone Keypad Interfaces to Enhanced Telephone Services
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1992 21:35:06 GMT


Many new telephone-based services are being offered by the Baby Bells
and their equivalents in other countries.  All of these services are
more or less the same (call forwarding, multiple numbers/rings on one
line, call waiting, caller id, and now on-the-switch answering
service) but I am trying to find out how much, if any, their user
interfaces differ.

That is, *70 seems to pretty universally suppress call waiting, but I
don't know if the code to retrive messages from your answering service
is the same everywhere, North-America-wide, or just across a single
company's jurisdiction.  Are there FCC standards for this, or CCITT
standards?

If there is a standard source for this information/standard I would
like to hear about it.  Please email me and I will repost results.


Craig Hubley      Craig Hubley & Associates
[e-mail] - Boston  617-322-8574 (days only please)
[e-mail] - Toronto  416-969-2826 (24 hours)

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

From: [e-mail] (Craig Hubley)
Subject: Telephone Tone Control
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1992 21:45:35 GMT


I am trying to find sources of chips/schematics/electronics to
translate telephone tones (and possibly also pulses) into specific
control signals that can be used to control other electronics.  It
would be great if the device could be powered by the phone line itself
(12 VDC?) and even better if it could step down to provide standard 5V
or 3V control signals to other chips.  All I want to do is to get the
tones (and other activity on the phone line such as ringing or call
waiting beeps) into a CPU.  Anyone out there built an answering
machine on a board?

Pretty much any answering machine which responds to touch tones would
incorporate a similar device, so I'm sure there are lots of such
sources.  I am willing to rip up old answering machines to find them
if I know what I'm looking for, and also interested in commercial
sources of complete programmable phone control systems.

Even if you don't know of anything specific, names of periodicals and
catalogs that publish/sell electronics useful in telephony would be
very welcome.  I will post back anything useful that I find but please
email me so that I can collect the material in a sane way.


Thanks,

Craig Hubley        Craig Hubley & Associates
[e-mail] - Boston  617-322-8574 (days only please)
[e-mail] - Toronto  416-969-2826 (24 hours)

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

Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1992 21:00:53 CDT
Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: Gregory Youngblood <[e-mail]>
Subject: New List: Cellular and Related Technologies Mailing List


CELLULAR on [e-mail]

The CELLULAR list is for the discussion of cellular telephoney and
technology.  This also includes technologies relating to the cellular
industry such as microwave, RF, telco and more.  Subjects could range
from topics dealing with marketing ideas, test equipment, phones
preferred for different reasons, system and site engineering and just
about anything that was related to cellular.

All traffic will be archived and stored using the format CELLmmyy.ZIP.
'mm' will refer to the month, and 'yy' the year.  These archives can
be retrieved by sending a message to: [e-mail]
For help with the Mail-Server, put HELP in the message body.  For an
index to the files available, put INDEX in the message body.  It is
recommended that you send a HELP and INDEX request before attempting
to retrieve files from the Mail-Server.

To subscribe to the CELLULAR mailing list, send a message to:

             [e-mail]

In the body of the message put:

             SUBSCRIBE CELLULAR

The default is NOECHOMAIL, which means when you send a message to be
distributed, you will not receive an acknowledgement.  If you want to
get a response letting you know your message was received, put:

             ECHOMAIL CELLULAR

in your subscription message as well.

o send a message to the mailing list for distribution, send it to:

             [e-mail]


Owner:   Gregory S. Youngblood    [e-mail]

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

Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1992 23:25 EDT
From: Scott Fybush <[e-mail]>
Subject: With NETel, is it an UPgrade or a DOWNgrade?


You'd think that paying more for a higher grade of local service would
mean adding more exchanges to one's flat-rate dialing area without
losing any, right?

Apparently not so in New England Tel.  I moved within Waltham MA last
month.  At the old location, I had had Local Unmeasured service, about
$12/mo plus the gouges for touchtone, "Local Access Fee," and what
have you.  This service is considered basic -- there is local measured
for much less, but it's a lifeline sort of thing and no line in the
same house can have a higher grade if one line has local measured --
and is what NETel pushes on undecided customers.  With it, you get
flat-rate calling to Waltham and about seven adjacent towns, along
with Wayland and Natick, in the 508 area code.  Waltham is on the
outer fringe of what NETel calls "Metropolitan Boston."  In "Metro,"
local unmeasured is just the adjacent towns or exchanges.  In areas on
the border of Metro, you thus get local service to the towns just
outside Metro.  So far so good.

When I moved, I figured I'd upgrade service as part of the service
order (otherwise there's a $15 charge to change service levels.)  My
bills for measured calls to non-adjacent Metro areas made a switch to
the next level, Suburban service, economically wise.  So I switched.
Suburban service gives flat-rate calling to all of "Metro" except the
Boston Central exchange, for about $19 a month plus the gouges.
Here's where the problem starts.  Remember how I could call Natick for
free with the "basic" service?  Turns out with the "enhanced" service,
Natick becomes a "Zone 1" call, at 1 cent per call plus 1.6 cents per
minute.  And, wouldn't ya know it, my new net access is in Natick, so
the 1.6 cents would have added up but fast.

What else could I do?  I called up my NETel service rep this morning
and had her upgrade me to the NEXT higher service, "Metropolitan."
For a whopping $25 a month plus the usual gouges, I'll now be able to
call all of 617 except for seven exchanges way to the south, along
with huge chunks of 508, including Natick.

To her credit, the service rep was willing (in fact said she would
have OFFERED) to waive the $15 upgrade fee (I wouldn't have upgraded
anyway, since I'll have another service order in two months and could
have lumped it in with that).  To her discredit, she came back after a
minute of really bad MOH to ask "What was your phone number again?  I
think I wrote it down wrong!"  (pity the poor shmoe who jumps from
local measured to Metropolitan because of the wrong entry :-)

I think I should be annoyed at NETel.  I've never heard of a tiered
system in which the lowest and highest service tiers both get
something that the middle one doesn't.  Of course, it's also silly
that I should be able to call free to Marshfield, some 40 miles from
here, but not to my office in Lowell, less than half the distance.

Anyone else have some Metropolitan Boston service oddities to share?

Oh yeah, BTW, I'm also annoyed that there's no real way for me to
verify that the service order has been carried through on a change
like this, until the bill comes, and even then the calls aren't
itemized.  I'll just have to keep repeating to myself, "You could be
served by GTE ... you could be served by GTE ... you could be served
by GTE..." until I wake up grateful for even a simple dialtone. :-)


Scott Fybush -- please reply to my NEW net access of:
       [e-mail]
which I can now dial up without incurring toll charges :-)

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

From: A. Satish Pai <[e-mail]>
Subject: Strange Message on Answering Machine
Organization: Yale University Computer Science Dept., New Haven CT 06520, USA
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1992 23:39:41 GMT


This is something that's probably not a serious problem, but I'm
curious to know the reasons for it. The setup I have at home is two
phones and an answering machine on one plain telephone line. (Telco is
SNET, 203-776 exchange.)

Several times (about once in two weeks) I have had the following
message recorded on my answering machine: "<steady tone> <pause>
Please hang up and try your call again. This is a recording.
Two-oh-three-two-one." I presume that this is some sort of automatic
message generated by the telco's equipment. There were no calls
attempted from the phones at the time the message must have got
recorded (in fact, this seems to happen when no one is at home), so
the part about hanging up and trying again makes no sense. There is no
possibility that the phones were left off the hook, either. In any
case, for a message to get recorded, it would seem that there was an
incoming call, and not an outgoing one, so is the telco's equipment
calling me erroneously, or are incoming calls being hijacked, or what?

Other than this the phones and answering machine behave normally.


Internet: [e-mail]                      A. Satish Pai
UUCP:     ...!{uunet,harvard,decvax,ucbvax}!yale!pai
Bitnet:   Pai@YaleCS                                  [phone] [Off.]
Mail:     Box 2158, Yale Station, New Haven, CT 06520 [phone] [Res.]


[Moderator's Note: Someone calls and the phone rings. Just before your
answering machine picks up, they disconnect, but too late to stop your
machine from answering. Telco sees you have gone off hook, and sends
dial tone, which plays through your outgoing message. After 15-25
seconds or so, you have not dialed a number -- your machine is still
talking to no one with an outgoing message. Telco decides you are not
going to place a call and must have left your phone off hook, or if
you are going to call it is too late this time around, 'so please
hang up and try your call again ... ' about the time telco starts
urging you to 'hang up and try your call again', your answering
machine outgoing message finishes and the machine starts recording
what it hears on the line, namely the intercept telco has started
playing. Had the hang-up caller stayed on the line even another few
seconds to hear some of your outgoing message, your machine probably
would have a recording of dial tone on it instead.  PAT]

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

From: John Staub <[e-mail]>
Subject: MCI Phone Bill
Date: 22 Jun 92 17:44:00 GMT
Organization: NCR-FESC BETHLEHEM, PA.


I received my phone bill on Saturday. There were $148 worth of phone
card charges. I called MCI. They checked and told me that my local
company had assigned my phone number to another person. MCI had then
gived them a phone card. They were the ones that made the calls. They
took the charges off the bill. Fine and dandy. I have had the number
for 24 years. I am going to be checking my phone bill very closely
from now on. I wonder HOW that could happen or *how many times * it
could have happened in the past.


JOHN STAUB           Phone      [phone]
FESC                 Voice Plus 397-1000
2156 CITY LINE RD.   Fax        [phone]
BETHLEHEM PA 18017   address    john.staub@bethlehemPA

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: 22 Jun 92 13:29:00 UT
Subject: CID/California


There are a lot more costs than placing the equipment. Cost of
taking the order (customer rep.), processing order, inputing the order
to the switch, testing customers service. Each of these jobs has to be
paid for since the PUC requires that no other service pay for another.
This is in part because of the breakup and deregulation.

What I state is not official GTCA policy which may differ, but I try
to put correct information out.


Steven H. Lichter     GTCA COEI
Mad Dog (Steven)            Sysop: Apple Elite II -- an Ogg-Net BBS
UUCP: [e-mail]   [phone]  1200-2400 bps 8N1

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

Subject: Batman Well Connected?
From: [e-mail] (Dr. Ross Alan Stapleton)
Date: 22 Jun 1992 06:46 MST
Organization: University of Arizona MIS Department


I just saw "Batman Returns" over the weekend, and am almost positive I
saw the following: there are several scenes in the Batcave, with
various high-techy devices arrayed around ... in one, Batman is standing
in front of some telecom-looking equipment, and one of the many
lighted red buttons on the panel reads "AUTOVON" ...


Ross

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

Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1992 08:04:26 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <telecom>
Subject: Messages Were Overflowing Again


I am always gratified by the tremendous amount of traffic in this
group and the large number of replies received on the topics
presented. But as in the past, sometimes there can be too much of a
good thing. 450 messages offering replies to various topics; seminar
and convention notices; requests for area code listings; and a raft of
other messages were dumped from the queue Monday morning.

Yes, I know two weeks ago I put out ten issues of the Digest over the
weekend to select 100+ of the articles waiting, but I cannot produce
at that rate all the time, nor do I think anyone really wants to read
*that much*.  So the queue is 'zeroed out' ... what you received
Sunday or Monday thus far is what was used. Let's close out all the
old topics and start fresh.  Thanks.


Patrick Townson

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #505
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa19527;
          24 Jun 92 3:36 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA11410
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 24 Jun 1992 01:27:17 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA00822
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 24 Jun 1992 01:27:08 -0500
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1992 01:27:08 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #506

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 24 Jun 92 01:27:00 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 506

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Need Used Voice Frequency Repeaters (Toby Nixon)
    US West Embarrassed in Moscow (Ken Jongsma)
    Two Year Sentence For 900 Fraud (Jack Winslade)
    Telephone Connection to Yugoslavia? (Radivoje Zonjic)
    Concert-Goers Blast 911 Service (Barry Mishkind)
    Z-Modem, Y-Modem Under the SunOS (Nayel Shafei)
    Database For Phone Bills (Carl Moore)
    FREE Broadband Equipment!! (Todd Tannenbaum)
    In-State Regulations For COCOTs (Andy Rabagliati)
    NZ Telecom Security "Lose" Phone Logs in Court Case (Pat Cain)
    Where to Buy Special Gadgets, One-of? (Dave Mitton)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Toby Nixon <[e-mail]>
Subject: Need Used Voice Frequency Repeaters
Date: 23 Jun 92 18:18:22 GMT
Organization: Hayes Microcomputer Products, Norcross, GA


I am on the board of directors of a non-profit educational foundation
(501 (c)(3) -- all contributions tax deductible) which gives seminars
and distributes information on free-market principles. This group
operates a teleconferencing bridge to make it easy to have meetings
between members of the board, presidents of local chapters, etc.

The phone lines coming into this bridge are currently amplified by
Lear-Siegler VFR-7608 (Issue 2) two-wire to two-wire Electronic Voice
Frequency Repeaters.  Unfortunately, many of these VFR-7608's have
burned out, greatly reducing the number of conferencing circuits
available.  We've finally diagnosed the problem as not enough capacity
in the power supply at startup (these things draw only 60 milliamps
normally, but one amp when they start after a power failure).  Because
the digital components are damaged, we've found that repairing them is
not feasible; it would cost more to repair them than to buy new ones.

All of the VFR-7608's we now have were donated surplus from various
telephone companies, and before we invest in new ones (at something
like $200/each), I thought I'd post here and ask if anyone out there
might be aware of a source for used voice frequency repeaters like the
VFR-7608.  Our understanding is that the VFR-7610 (Issue 1) would also
work, and that there are other similar boards that we could also use
(R-TEC VFR-5050, WESCOM 7306-32, etc.).  We'd like something that is
adaptive or that can be fairly easily balanced and tuned to the
circuit (none of us have a great deal of expertise; the VFR-7608's are
fully adaptive digital devices).  Like I said, a donation of these
boards would be fully tax deductible; we'd also be willing to pay a
reasonable amount, and of course we'd pay shipping.

If you have some of these laying around as surplus, or know of any
potential sources, would you please reply by email?  Thanks very much
in advance.


Toby Nixon, Principal Engineer      | Voice   [phone]  Telex 401243420
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] (Ken Jongsma)
Subject: US West Embarrassed in Moscow
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 92 21:03:12 EDT


For the second time in the past few weeks, an RBOC has been hammered
by {Forbes} magazine for messing around in business other than local
service. Some excerpts from an article in the current issue:

[begin]

 _Pick Russian business partners with care. US West didn't, and is about
to have its lunch eaten by tiny Plexsys Corp._

One overriding lesson emerging from the frenzy of American dealmaking
in the former Soviet Union: Wisely choosing a Russian partner matters
more than anything else.

US West, the Denver based Bell telephone holding company, forgot this
when it got into the Russian cellular telephone market. And, boy, is
it embarrassed now.

Back in 1988 former Senator Gary Hart introduced US West to some
Soviet telecommunications officials. Since then US West has managed to
set up the first two cellular phone systems in Russia. Its Moscow
system, which became commercial in April, now has 400 subscribers;
there are 300 customers on the eight month old St. Petersburg system.

But US West just got a nasty surprise. This month privately held
Plexsys Corp., based in Naperville, Ill., will turn on its own
cellular system in Moscow. Plexsys' system immediately makes US West's
project obsolete.  How come? US West's license restricts it to what
has become an old fashioned cellular frequency, 450MHz, where
interference can be a big problem and the number of calls that can be
made at one time is limited.  [I wonder if they are describing an IMTS
system? - Ken] The Plxsys system uses the 800MHz band, the same as in
the US, and there the technology is much more advanced.

[...End]

Wouldn't it be nice if someone said, "That's enough! Sell off all non-
regulated activities and concentrate on being a utility." and all the
money that they are wasting on these fiascos could be put towards
improving the local telephonic infrastructure?


Ken Jongsma                        [e-mail]
Smiths Industries             [e-mail]
Grand Rapids, Michigan    [e-mail]

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

Date: Tue, 23 Jun 92 20:40:32 CST
From: [e-mail] (Jack Winslade)
Subject: Two Year Sentence For 900 Fraud
Reply-to: [e-mail]
Organization: DRBBS Technical BBS, Omaha


[JSW note: This is a followup to two items I sent to the Digest.]

Excerpted from an article in the {Omaha World-Herald} by David
Thompson, WS staff writer.

'Omahan Gets 2 Years in Phone Fraud'

Ellis B. Goodman was sentenced Tuesday to two years in prison and was
fined the maximum of $50,000 for a conviction arising from the use of
a 900-toll telephone number in which callers were defrauded.

The business that Goodman headed, Bedford Direct Mail Service, Inc.,
was fined $750,000 by Chief U.S. District Judge Lyle Strom.

Postal inspectors said the case was one of the first nationally in
which a conviction was obtained for abuse of a 900-toll number.

Bedford sent 'Phone/Mail-a-grams' to thousands of people telling them
they were eligible to win two prizes, one cash and another a discount
shopping spree.

When recipients phoned the 900-number, they heard a recorded message
that they had won a prize, the shopping spree from a catalog that
Bedford would send.

During the sentencing hearing Tuesday, Assistant U.S. Attorney Ellyn
Grant told the judge that Goodman, a successful promoter, was walking
a fine line between good promotion and fraud.

'Here, your honor, he crossed that line.' ...

[Goodman's attorney] Wyrsch said that at the time of the Bedford
promotion, there was uncertainty about regulations for 900-number
promotions and that it was only after the promotion had started that
the FCC issued guidelines.  Strom said that the basis for the
conviction was a scheme to defraud.
 ...

Strom ordered Goodman to report July 27 to a prison designated by the
U.S. Bureau of prisons.  The judge said he would recommend the Federal
Prison Camp at Yankton SD.


Good day.     JSW

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

From: plains![e-mail] (Radivoje Zonjic (CE))
Subject: Telephone Connection to Yugoslavia?
Date: 24 Jun 92 04:58:29 GMT
Organization: North Dakota State University, Fargo


There has been no way to reach Yugoslavia today by phone. In fact,
I've tried only Serbia. Given that Mr. James Baker today introduced
new sanctions to be imposed on Serbia and Montenegro, I'm just
wondering if there's a possibility that this kind of cutoff is in
fact, of a political meaning?

I've also tried numbers in two former YU republics (Croatia and
Slovenia) who have the same country code, and everything was O.K.


Rade Zonjic,      Grand Forks, ND

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

From: [e-mail] (Barry Mishkind)
Subject: Concert-Goers Blast 911 Service
Organization: Datalog Consulting, Tucson, AZ
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 92 04:52:51 GMT


 From the {Tucson Citizen}, 6/23/92:

The Tucson area's 911 line was snarled yesterday when callers trying
to get tickets to a concert overload the local telephone system, a US
West spokeswoman said.

Louise Rebholz, community relations manager for the phone company,
said jammed lines resulted in some calls not being routed to 911. In
some instances, people trying to reach the police and emergency line
got a busy signal or a recorded message instead of 911 operators, she
said.

It was not known whether some callers failed to receive help in
emergencies because of the problem.

The problems occurredduring a two hour span beginning at 10 AM as fans
tried to buy tickets by telephone to a July 26 Tucson concert by Garth
Brooks.

Between 10 and 11 AM alone, US West handled 192,000 calls in the
Tucson area. Normally, it handles 70,000 calls during that hour on
Mondays, officials said.

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

And not an apology in the house! Of course, _not one_ employee of US
Worst saw this coming, nor told a supervisor about it, nor cared: "We
don't have to care, we're the phone company."

I can verify that for over an hour I couldn't even get a number in my
own exchange (on the far east side of the city), much less across
town. It shut down my access to the Internet (oh, my!) and was
downright annoying for those of us trying to conduct business.


Barry Mishkind    [e-mail]    FidoNet 1:300/11.3


[Moderator's Note: Come now, do you *really* think US West or any
telco relishes these situations and ignores them 'because they are the
phone company'?  And had telco known in advance (did any of the
concert promoters advise telco of the times, etc?), what in your
estimation might telco have done about it, other than possibly block
off access from certain exchanges when traffic was heavy?    PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Nayel Shafei x6268)
Subject: Z-Modem, Y-Modem Under the SunOS
Date: 23 Jun 92 19:18:49 GMT
Organization: Computervision, A Prime Computer Company, Bedford, MA, USA


Where can I find a version of Z-modem, Y-modem, or similar comm
protocols to run on a SPARC2?


Nayel Shafei     Computervision
14 Crosby Dr., MS. 5-21    Bedford, MA 01730
W. [phone]x6268       Fax [phone]
[e-mail]   [e-mail]

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

Date: Tue, 23 Jun 92 14:45:48 EDT
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject: Database For Phone Bills


I recently had some calls to area 809 on my phone bill.  I saw some
differences in the display of prefixes for such areas between the MCI
and AT&T parts of the bill.

Via MCI, I saw only the country name, with the 10-digit number
(809+7D) crunched together.  Example: "BAHAMAS".  But via AT&T, I got
the city name, the country abbreviation, and the phone number
displayed with the usual embedded blanks (809 xxx xxxx); example for
city: NASSAU, BA.

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

Date: Mon, 22 Jun 92 10:15:01 cdt
Subject: FREE Broadband Equipment
Organization: U of Wisconsin-Madison College of Engineering
From: [e-mail] (Todd Tannenbaum)


We have several pieces of Sytek broadband communication electronics
that we would be willing to GIVE AWAY.  These are broadband coaxial
cable to RS-232 boxes.  They come in a two, eight and 32 port
versions.  The 32 port unit has two port cards that plug in.  You may
pick them up or pay for shipping.  If intrested contact:


Kenneth Bartz
Computer Aided Engineering Center
Network/Hardware Program Manager
Internet address: [e-mail]
Phone: [phone]


Todd Tannenbaum, Network Manager   | e-mail: [e-mail]
Computer Aided Engineering Center  | Voice Ph: [phone]
University of Wisconsin-Madison    | Fax Ph: [phone]

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

Date: Tue, 23 Jun 92 00:25:06 -0400
From: wizzy![e-mail] (Andy Rabagliati)
Subject: In-State Regulations For COCOTs
Reply-To: wizzy![e-mail]


David Lesher <[e-mail]> asks:

> Do the FCC rules on COCOTS cover DA?

When I lived in Colorado, I had occasion to question the PUC on
COCOTs.

I tried to use the COCOT for DA a year ago. Southern Colorado
Communications, I remember. I paid, it swallowed my money and gave me
dialtone again.

The PUC said that operators in Colorado have practically no
regulations.

They were not even required by state law to provide free 911 -- I
didn't try it. They suggested I contact the local police department to
see if they had regulations.

The FCC have teeth, but they were very clear that they ONLY regulate
inter-state traffic. If I remember rightly, DA was not covered.


Cheers,

Andy Rabagliati | W.Z.I. RR1 Box 33, Wyalusing PA 18853 | [phone]

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

Subject: NZ Telecom Security "Lose" Phone lLgs in Court Case
From: Pat Cain <[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 92 23:39:31 +1300
Organization: thesidewaysmachine, WCC City Net, Wellington, New Zealand


Here's an unusual item from Auckland, New Zealand ...

Summary: For the first time in NZ history: a case against a woman
charged with *plotting* to murder her former lover.  The lawyer
representing the woman summoned phone call logs from Telecom NZ (owned
by Ameritech and Bell Atlantic). The department which looks after
these is run by five ex-cops and instead of producing those logs they
went and told the woman's ex-lover about the request and their
particular dislike for the lawyer. The records covering the two hour
period requested have mysteriously disappeared. The lawyer is calling
for a government inquiry into the matter.

Paraphrased from {The Dominion} 22 June 1992:

A defence lawyer in a murder plot case is seeking a government inquiry
into what he claims is deliberately lost or destroyed computer phone
call logs relating to a critical two-hour period.

The lawyer, Christopher Harder, claims Telecom's Auckland security
division, run by five former police officers, was like a
"second-class, unofficial police force whose actions were dictated by
their attitude to the individual they were dealing with".  Harder
claims the Telecom security staff interfered with the data because
they disliked him.

In the case, Harder is representing a North Shore (Auckland) woman,
aged 47, charged with counselling to murder her former lover -- the
father of her two children -- after a bitter custody battle.  It is
believed to be the first time such a charge has been brought in New
Zealand.

Harder summonsed Telecom employee Christopher Martin, an ex-policeman,
to produce Telecom records of the calls the complainant made and
received.  Martin said in court that he had told the complainant, the
alleged target of the murder plot, that Harder was inquiring about his
telephone records.  He said he had contacted the complainant because
he felt like it and he had a negative attitude toward Harder as a
result of having being a policeman.

The complainant claimed to have been visited by a Telecom official and
told about Harder requesting the records and also that all of
Telecom's security staff had a similar dislike for Harder.  In the
meantime Harder is refusing to pay a $13,000 Telecom bill for time
spent using the company's billing computer, because he says Telecom
has not fully compiled with the requirement of the summons.  He said
he would ask Communications Minister Maurice Williamson to hold a
commission of inquiry into the activities of Telecom's Auckland
security section.

Telecom spokesman Chris Galloway refused comment saying it was not
company policy to discuss matters that were sub judice.


Pat Cain, PO Box 2060, Wellington, New Zealand.  [e-mail]

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

Date: Tue, 23 Jun 92 06:40:38 PDT
From: NaC Token Ring Program <[e-mail]>
Subject: Where to Buy Special Gadgets, One-of?


I'm looking to buy one RJ31-X jack for a home security alarm system.
This jack hooks the alarm in series to the circuit, if the connector
is engaged.  (it even has some spare contacts to sense this, if you
care) This information is from the alarm installer's manual.

The local AT&T store gave me the national number.  The national AT&T
800 number said they don't stock it.

Where can I easily get one of these? (Other than paying an installer.)


Dave Mitton  (In the greater Boston area)

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #506
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa20023;
          24 Jun 92 3:56 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA00510
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 24 Jun 1992 02:12:55 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA03499
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 24 Jun 1992 02:12:47 -0500
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1992 02:12:47 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #507

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 24 Jun 92 02:12:50 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 507

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Connect Voice Mail/Centrex to Suns? (Joan Eslinger)
    AT&T USADirect and Calling Card (Kauto Huopio)
    Pay Phones in San Francisco (John Higdon)
    Ameritech/IBT (Bill Nickless)
    AT&T and Area Codes 706/404 (Monty Solomon)
    Questions About Boxes (Golando Gathings)
    Computer Aided Dispatching (Gilbert Amine)
    Who Makes Inverse Multiplexers? ([e-mail])
    Pennsylvania Local Phone Call Costs (Andy Rabagliati)
    Re: Call Own Phone Back Number Wanted (Paul S. Sawyer)
    Re: Call Own Phone Back Number Wanted (Laurence Chiu)
    Re: Call Own Phone Back Number Wanted ([e-mail])
    Re: Jane Barbie (was The Purpose of the Three Tones) (Robert L. McMillin)
    Re: Jane Barbie (was The Purpose of the Three Tones) (Gregory M. Paris)
    Re: Bell of PA Overtaxing the 'Burbs (Dave Niebuhr)
    Re: Antitrust Reform Act of 1992 (HR 5096) (Carl Moore)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Joan Eslinger)
Subject: Connect Voice Mail/Centrex to Suns?
Date: 23 Jun 92 19:26:37 GMT
Organization: Amdahl Corporation, Advanced Systems, Fremont CA


I'm trying to find out if there's a way to connect our phone system
and/or voice mail into one of our servers. I'm not even certain what
needs to be connected to what, but here's the scenario. We recently
chucked our old phone system and went to a Centrex ISDN system. We
also have Octel Aspen voice mail. The new phone system came with a
choice of two telephones, one with no ISDN (and apparently for that
reason no message light) ability and a more expensive ISDN phone. So a
few people got ISDN phones and most people didn't. Now, to find out if
you have messages, most people have to pick up the handset to listen
for a special dialtone, kind of annoying and inconvenient.

What I wonder is if there is some kind of board we could stick into
one of our Sun SPARC servers that would interface with the phone
system, letting people run some kind of daemon process on their
workstations to notify them of voice mail messages (or even play them
back through /dev/audio). Does such a thing exist?


Joan Eslinger / [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Kauto Huopio)
Subject: AT&T USADirect and Calling Card
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 92 19:44:31 GMT
Organization: Lappeenranta University of Technology, Finland


Is there an FTP site containing ALL rates using AT&T USA Direct with
AT&T card from around the world? It seems to be ratder difficult to
get full and accurate rates for a person like me (living in Finland).
Now, does anyone know rates to/from Finland from/to USA using USA
Direct and calling card?


Kauto Huopio ([e-mail])
Mail: Kauto Huopio, Punkkerikatu 1 A 10, SF-53850 Lappeenranta,Finland

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

Date: Tue, 23 Jun 92 14:38 PDT
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Pay Phones in San Francisco


Unfortunately, yesterday's {Chronicle} has already hit the bird cage
so this is all from memory. It was reported that San Francisco city
officials are upset at the proliferation of private pay phones.
Welcome news, you think? Not exactly.

The concern is not over the tariff non-compliance, rip-off rates, poor
quality of service, or any of the other COCOT topics mentioned at
length on this forum. What the city fathers are concerned about is
making sure that San Francisco gets its cut of the action. They are
concerned that these one-armed bandits are actually operating on city
property (pole, sides of buildings, etc.) and the owners are not
paying for the privlege. "If phones are going to be in the public way,
the taxpayer should reap a benefit," (or words to that effect) said
some city official.

In other words, apparently, public phones are considered a nuisance
rather than a convenience. If the public is going to have to endure
them, there might as well be money flowing into the leaky public
coffers. You have to understand that businesses of every description
are lining up to leave San Francisco. The city has a hefty payroll
tax, a receipts tax, regulations that you would not believe, no place
to park, and virtually every other disincentive to conduct business
that you could imagine. I once had an office in Pacific Heights and I
swear that I will never again have a San Francisco address for a
business.

Now the city is greedily looking over the matter of enforcing its "pay
phone permits". The city claims that it wants, for aesthetic reason,
to control the proliferation of phones. An example is the fact that
there are seven phones on Mission Street between 18th and 19th. But of
course the real concern is collecting the $50 a month from each phone
(or 20% of the gross, whichever is greater). The estimates are that
the city would collect more than $25,000 monthly.

Maybe we could come up with some more people who could get a cut of
the action. Perhaps the cost of a coin-paid local call should be
raised to a buck so everyone can reap a reasonable reward. I would be
very happy if the city was really interested in quality and wanted to
exercise control over what is frequently an inferior product. But just
having another hand in the till is something we can all well do
without.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Bill Nickless)
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 92 01:03:06 -0500
Subject: Ameritech/IBT


> [Moderator's Note: Ameritech/IBT are certainly very progressive and
> technologically advanced telcos. I'm glad to be in their region.  PAT]

 ... until you want things like ISDN.  Ameritech/IBT seems to be among
the slowest to offer data services to the home.  I am under the
impression that they're behind some un-named California telcos.


Bill Nickless  System Support Group  <[e-mail]>  [phone]

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

Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1992 02:02:13 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <[e-mail]>
Subject: AT&T and Area Codes 706/404


AT&T ran the following ad in the 7/23/92 {Boston Globe}:

Notice to AT&T Customers in Massachusetts:

Due to increased usage, Bell Communications Research, Inc., the
administrator of the North American Number Plan, implemented the 706
area code on May 3, 1991.  At that time, customers were able to place
calls using either the new 706 or the existing 404 area code.

On August 3, 1992, this period of permissive dialing will end.
Therefore, AT&T is making changes in its tariff FCC #2, which may
result in a change of service area and charges per area for calls
between Massachusetts area code 617 and the 404 area code, for AT&T
800 READYLINE, AT&T 800 MasterLine, AT&T MEGACOM 800 and AT&T Gold
Service (Egress Arrangements-Switched, Dedicated and Nodal).

For more information, customers may call their AT&T Account Executive
or 1 800 222 0400.

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

Date: Mon, 22 Jun 92 12:45:51 -0400
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Questions About Boxes


I would like to know that the following boxes are and their functions
in the networking world:

   DSU /CSU units
   statistical multiplexers
   routers
   gateways
   bridges

Please reply via email.


golando

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

From: Gilbert Amine ([e-mail])
Subject: Computer Aided Dispatching
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1992 17:52 GMT


A friend of mine is putting together a digital radio-based
computer-aided dispatching system, and is looking for a source of
information or a consulting engineering resource in the area of RF
networking/polling/GPS.  I would appreciate any information or
referrals on this subject. Please address responses to gamine@mcimail.
com,  and I will summarize and post responses on the telecom user
group.


Regards,

Gilbert Amine    Rochelle Communications, Inc.   Austin, Texas

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Who Makes Inverse Multiplexers?
Date: 23 Jun 92 18:15:51 GMT
Organization: College of Engineering, Boston University, Boston, MA, USA


As the subject line says ...

Basically, I need something which will take a fixed speed dedicated
line and add on additional switched 56/64 as we need additional
thruput.

 -It must be able to handle up to a full T1.
 -The addition of switched circuits must be under manual control (some
  serial port?)
 -Automatically dial switched circuits if the dedicated line is lost.

What is out there and has anyone worked with them?  What kind of
interfaces can I expect (V.35, ethernet, RS-422)?


Doug     [e-mail]

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

Date: Tue, 23 Jun 92 00:46:15 -0400
From: wizzy![e-mail] (Andy Rabagliati)
Subject: Pennsylvania Local Phone Call Costs
Reply-To: wizzy![e-mail]


I am priviliged to be served by Commonwealth Telephone, a quaint
little operation in Northern PA.

When I asked for a rate chart for calling within PA but outside their
LATA (i.e. most of the 717 area code) they seem totally unable to
provide one. Within their LATA, they can price a call, given the two
exchanges, but I wanted a chart.

They referred me to my LD carrier (AT&T), for outside the LATA, who
after checking, told me they did not provide service between the two
points. When I pointed out that calls appeared on my bill billed by
them, not Comm. Tel., they explained that they do not have access to
Comm. Tel's computers. They apparently mail them a tape, from which
Comm. Tel does the billing. They did seem suprised, though, that the
calls were appearing on their section of the bill.

What really annoys me, though, is that local calls to Williamsport,
maybe 40 miles away IN THE SAME LATA, are more expensive than calling
California on my Reach Out America plan. And the most expensive place
in America to call is Scranton, two hours drive away, billed by AT&T
but not subject to any of my plans. So, -- can anyone give me a
newsfeed?

The AT&T rep (very helpful) blamed the lack of de-regulation of
in-state calls (pardon the double negative).

Will this ever change ?

Cheers,


Andy Rabagliati | W.Z.I. RR1 Box 33, Wyalusing PA 18853 | [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Paul S. Sawyer)
Subject: Re: Call Own Phone Back Number Wanted
Organization: UNH Telecommunications and Network Services, Durham, NH
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1992 13:50:32 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Jiro
Nakamura) writes:

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

>> Pacific Telephone no longer charges for DTMF service.  It is universal
>> in this area.

> They most probably raised the rates across the board as well, to
> "compensate" for the "lack of revenue."

> NYNEX does charge for DTMF ...

NYNEX (New England Telephone) recently stopped charging N.H. TouchTone
customers more than pulse ...  but as you note, we now ALL pay more!


Paul S. Sawyer    - University of New Hampshire CIS - [e-mail]
Telecommunications and Network Services             - VOX: [phone]
Durham, New Hampshire  03824-3523                   - FAX: [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Laurence Chiu)
Subject: Re: Call Own Phone Back Number Wanted
Organization: GCS Limited, Wellington, New Zealand
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1992 22:45:18 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> hourglas!erikr@wisdom.
bubble.org (Erik Rauch) writes:

> I've been reading about phone companies that charge for some kind of
> 'intercom' service. In my area under Bell Atlantic, this service is
> offered for free -- but Bell, of course, doesn't talk about it. It has
> been in existence for about eight years; it involves dialling a
> special 55x prefix and then the last four digits of your phone number
> (the x in 55x varies as your exchange.)

> Of course, you have to put up with a tone while you talk. But a useful
> service nonetheless.

Well in New Zealand where, although two Bell's now own the Phone
Company, the existing policies still prevail, we can have this
intercom service for free also. And there is no annoying dial tone.
When I want to talk to my wife in the kitchen upstairs when I am
sitting on my PC downstairs, rather than shout or hike up the stairs,
I just call the number here which causes your phone to ring. But here
once you pick up the phone, there is no dial tone, and two parties can
talk. So I let it ring, let her pick it up and then flick the hook on
switch on my speakerphone. Certainly beats installing an intercom in
the house!


Laurence Chiu

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Call Own Phone Back Number Wanted
Date: 22 Jun 92 13:19:11 PST
Organization: Science Applications Int'l Corp./San Diego


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Jiro
Nakamura) writes:

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

>> Pacific Telephone no longer charges for DTMF service.  It is universal
>> in this area.

> They most probably raised the rates across the board as well, to
> "compensate" for the "lack of revenue."

> NYNEX does charge for DTMF ...

Sorry, but NO they did not raise rates for this.  It was just a matter
of aggressive placement of new digital COs, and a policy set by CPUC
some ten years ago that they provide DTMF service FREE when a certain
percentage of COs went digital.  I think the threshold was 96%.

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

Date: Mon, 22 Jun 92 06:50:23 -0700
From: rlm@ms_aspen.hac.com (Robert L. McMillin)
Subject: Re: Jane Barbie (was The Purpose of the Three Tones)


Responding to a message from Robert S. Helfman <[e-mail]>, our
Moderator writes:

> Jane Barbie was also the female voice heard on the voice-overs for
> WWVH (the Hawaiian version of WWV).

> [Moderator's Note: Her voice was also used for Time of Day here in
> Chicago for many years (312-CAThedral-8000). She had recorded the
> phrase 'at the signal, the time will be' and the digits which were
> then patched together as appropriate.  PAT]

Can you tell us how they 'patched together' the digits prior to
digital recording?  I envisioned two dozen or more very short tape
loops all run by some kind of switch.


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


[Moderator's Note: Very good point. Can anyone comment on how the time
of day was handled *after* they quit using live people speaking it but
*before* it went digital?  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Gregory M. Paris)
Subject: Re: Jane Barbie (was The Purpose of the Three Tones)
Organization: Motorola Codex, Canton, Massachusetts
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1992 17:19:17 GMT


I don't know if it was Jane or not, but in Flint, Michigan where I
grew up, the time was available at [phone] and the message was
"at the tone the time will be" (not "signal").  Hey, I just called the
number now and it's still working.  It said, "Good afternoon" --
something it didn't used to do -- but the voice is still the same one
I remember ...


Greg Paris <[e-mail]>
Motorola Codex, 20 Cabot Blvd C1-30, Mansfield, MA  02048-1193

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

Date: Mon, 22 Jun 92 11:17:05 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Dave Niebuhr)
Subject: Re: Bell of PA Overtaxing the 'Burbs


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

[... text about billing for extra tax in Philadelphia by Bell of
PA deleted ...]

> The moral, of course, is Check Your Phone Bill[sm].  We'll see what
> happens.  In the meantime, instead of the PUC, I've contacted the
> {Philadelphia Inquirer}, because they love utility-bashing, plus
> they've got the resources to track down other victims.

This is similar to the same problem I'm having with NYTel except it
concerns an overcharge for calls to one exchange from a group of
others.

The telco's are afraid of the PUCs/PSCs and certainly don't like it
when complaints are lodged against them.  I know my telco was upset
that I went to the NY PSC.  I agree, it is one big big run-around that
the telcos give and it looks like they have a standard answer: "We're
working on it."

I guess I'll bring out the next *big gun* in New York, the Consumer
Protection Board whose head is not exactly on friendly terms with any
utility.


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

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

Date: Mon, 22 Jun 92 11:29:36 EDT
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Antitrust Reform Act of 1992 (HR 5096)


It's OK to display 800-54-PRIVACY as opposed to 800-54-PRIVA, because
the equipment ignores the extra numbers.  But if you don't dial the
extra numbers in the first place, you're still OK.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #507
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa22541;
          24 Jun 92 5:33 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA26026
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 24 Jun 1992 02:40:16 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA04733
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 24 Jun 1992 02:40:07 -0500
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1992 02:40:07 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #508

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 24 Jun 92 02:40:10 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 508

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Longest Phonecall (Jack Winslade)
    Re: Longest Phonecall (Hoyt A. Stearns Jr.)
    Re: Longest Phonecall (Lawrence V. Cipriani)
    Re: The Telco Owns the Numbers (Phil Howard )
    Re: The Telco Owns the Numbers (Mark W. Schumann)
    Re: Pacific Bell Car Theft Protection (Justin Leavens)
    Re: Pacific Bell Car Theft Protection (Scott Colbath)
    Re: Strange Pulse Dialing Behavior: Summary (Jon Sreekanth)
    The Quintessence of Quiescence (Jeffrey Jonas)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 22 Jun 92 11:09:34 CST
From: [e-mail] (Jack Winslade)
Subject: Re: Longest Phonecall
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: DRBBS Technical BBS, Omaha


In a message dated 21-JUN-92, Brent Whitlock writes:

>> Speaking of phone calls, I remember hearing a story once about a girl
>> who went to Paris for the summer, while her boyfriend went to Hawaii.
>> They were going to miss each other so much they had to talk often, but
>> they couldn't afford a hefty phone bill.  So what they did was to leave
>> the phone off the hook at both ends for the entire month of July.  They
>> would talk, make arrangements for what time they'd come back, and talk
>> some more.  When the phone bill eventually arrived, it was for a couple
>> thousand dollars, and the girl took it to the phone company and complained
>> that this COULDN'T be right, and they decided it was a computer glitch
>> and deleted it.

>> It was told to me as a FOAF, has anybody heard anything similar?

Back in the 1970's, there was some speculation by phone 'enthusiasts'
that if a call was established and not terminated for quite some time,
the 'system' (this was in the days of THE system) would forget about
it and no billing record would be generated.  I don't know anyone who
tried it.  A twist on this was that if the service was disconnected
before the call was terminated, no billing record would be generated.

I am aware of a number of cases where mailer software on both ends of
a connection has failed to disconnect and the connection remained up
(with Ma's meter running) for many hours until somebody realized what
was going on and killed it.  About two years ago this happened to one
of our machines which was using a PC Pursuit (Sprintnet) connection
between Omaha and Denver.  It normally would have been no big deal,
but it made the call penetrate the prime-time barrier, thus making the
entire call billed as a prime-time call.  (Penetration, however
slight, is sufficient to complete the offense. ;-) If I remember, it
was something like $12.00 or so.

We had a similar case shortly after where a system in Houston called
us.  Ours shut down after the session, but his end remained up and for
some reason he was billed for several hours of LD time.  If I remember
correctly, he had no hassle getting the charges removed.  (Marc, you
listening in down there ??)

I would hate to see what the bill would be like if these were
international calls.  ;-)


Good day!     JSW
Ybbat (DRBBS) 8.9 v. 3.14 r.1   (1:285/666.0)

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

From: isus![e-mail] (Hoyt A. Stearns jr.)
Subject: Re: Longest Phonecall
Organization: International Society of Unified Science
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1992 23:29:25 GMT


I once called Phoenix from a hotel phone in France. The duration was
about one half hour.  The hotel billed by counting pulses on the line,
which I could hear, once a second or so.  These pulses incremented an
electromagnetic mechanical counter.  Later, after checking out, I
noticed the phone bill was unexpectedly low, it then occurred to me
that the three digit counter had overflowed!

Attempts at explanation to the hotel failed, as I don't speak French,
and they didn't speak English (or wouldn't speak English, and didn't
care).


Hoyt A. Stearns jr.  hoyt@
4131 E. Cannon Dr.   isus.tnet.com
Phoenix, AZ. 85028   ncar!enuucp!
voice_602_996_1717   telesys!isus!hoyt

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

Date: Mon, 22 Jun 92 13:03:40 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Lawrence V Cipriani)
Subject: Re: Longest Phonecall
Organization: Ideology Busters, Inc.


A coworker told me the story of how in the "good-old-days" they would
leave long-distance lines open in lab-to-lab tests for months at a
time, and that since the switch word length to record the call time
was small enough [e.g., 16 bits maybe] it would overflow to 0 and they
wouldn't have much of a call charge!  Once the switching people at
AT&T figured out what they were doing they increased timer length
several bits.


Larry Cipriani, att!cbvox1!lvc or [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Phil Howard)
Subject: Re: The Telco Owns the Numbers
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 92 07:21:41 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest)


[e-mail] (Lauren Weinstein) writes:

> Greetings.  Unfortunately, rearrangement of numbers and areas by
> telcos is not particularly rare.  The telcos essentially *own* the
> numbers.  You rent them.

> A large number of Pac*Bell subscribers in the Woodland Hills area (an
> 818 area code, Valley suburb in the city of L.A.) recently were not
> only moved into a different local/toll calling area, but were all
> forced to change their seven digit numbers as well.  This was not the
> result of any errors, "simply" the result of central offices and toll
> areas being realigned.  As you can imagine, the subscribers affected
> were none too pleased.

When people go to the effort to get vanity numbers, do they at least
get the chance to try for the same vanity number in the new exchange
if it is available?

I am wondering how this process works.  Do they randomly pick new
numbers or do they at least try to keep the last four digits if at all
possible?  Is there a phase in period where both numbers will work as
they with area code splits (I'd imagine this would be hard to do for
anything short of an exact prefix change)?


Phil Howard --- KA9WGN --- [e-mail]

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

Date: Tue, 23 Jun 92 15:59 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Mark W. Schumann)
Subject: Re: The Telco Owns the Numbers
Organization: Akademia Pana Kleksa, Public Access UNI* Site


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail].
edu (Gary Skaggs) writes:

> My 73160-2135 just gets it into the carrier's bag.

> I should be able to get mail addressed to 73160-2135 with nothing else
> on it ... no name, no address, no city (listed as OKC not Moore for
> zip purposes, grumble) but NOOOOOOOOOOOOO.  That just goes to the
> carrier's bag.  What a waste!  Let's raise the rates some more!

> [Moderator's Note: My unique <Z>one <I>mprovement <P>lan code is
> 60690-1570.  Put just that on an envelope; it comes to my box.   PAT]

I once got a package from my dad addressed to:

                              12-39
                           50112-0805

The 12-39 was my in-house box number at the college, and -0805 is
designated for Grinnell students.  Got there in a couple of days from
Connecticut (to Iowa).


Mark W. Schumann/3111 Mapledale Avenue/Cleveland, Ohio 44109-2447 USA
Preferred: [e-mail] | Alternative: [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Justin Leavens)
Subject: Re: Pacific Bell Car Theft Protection
Date: 22 Jun 1992 12:54:40 -0700
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA


> [Moderator's Note: The same ad is playing on the radio here in Chicago
> a lot these days. Apparently some sort of radio detection to keep
> track of where you are going in your car. Sounds like a great deal for
> privacy enthusiasts!   :)    PAT

I talked to someone who worked with a similar service here in LA, and
was interested to hear that indeed, the service had been used for some
uses outside of simply locating stolen cars. Apparently, from what
they said, there were two or three instances where police kept track
of suspects using the locator system, including a suspected child
molestor and a suspected crooked police officer. Apparently, the
transmitter unit is activated automatically if the car is started
without the unit being deactivated, but it can be activated by the
police monitoring station. I wonder what the installation contract
says about this "covert" activation.


Justin Leavens  University of Southern California  Microcomputer Specialist

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

From: [e-mail] (Scott Colbath)
Subject: Re: Pacific Bell Car Theft Protection
Date: 23 Jun 92 13:27:55 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> red-eft!abaheti@valley.
west.sun.com (Arun Baheti) writes:

> I was just in my car and heard an add for Pacific Bell's new auto
> theft systems.  Apparently, when a car is stolen, they will auto-
> matically track its location and notify the police.  There was also an
> amorphous mention of a guarantee.  Does anyone have any details on
> this service -- and how (if) it works?

> [Moderator's Note: The same ad is playing on the radio here in Chicago
> a lot these days. Apparently some sort of radio detection to keep
> track of where you are going in your car. Sounds like a great deal for
> privacy enthusiasts!   :)    PAT

This sounds like a thing I remember while living in Massachusetts
called Lojack. When your car was stolen, you reported it to the police
and Lojack. A transmitter hidden in your car would send out a signal
which was moitored by the Massachusetts State Police. They had four
antennae on the roof of a few selected patrol cars. Using this device,
they could chase the signal and find the car within a couple of hours.
The advantage over a typical car alarm being that thieves never had a
chance to strip the car. If the car was hidden in a garage or
something, it was still able to be found.


Scott Colbath     Stratus Computer
Phoenix, Az.  [phone]
Internet:[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Jon Sreekanth)
Subject: Re: Strange Pulse Dialing Behavior: Summary
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1992 17:14:46 GMT


This is a summary of email and posted responses to my question about
pulse dialing. Briefly, I found that if pulse digits are dialed
during a stable call, the exchange would mistake it for a hangup or
hook flash. This is unexpected and annoying, because even if a voice
mail front end was smart enough to decode pulse digits, the exchange
would probably not let the caller transmit them.

Summary responses follow.

  ------

Pulse dialing works by alternately opening and shorting the line.
Now, an open line is the same as hanging up the phone, so all this has
to be distinguished by timing.  The nominal values are as follows:

Pulse-dialed digit: 100ms repetition rate (60/40 make/break ratio)
Hookflash (for Call Waiting and Three-Way, generally): 500ms On-hook
(disconnect): 1500ms if hookflash means something, 500ms otherwise.

So, if the calling party goes on-hook for more than 500ms, the CO is
expected to treat it as a drop request.  If the called party goes
on-hook, the disconnect timer is much longer, ranging from forever (in
an electromechanical office) to about 15 sec (typical setting in most
electronic offices).

  -----

This is intended behavior in the USA, and my best guess is to
discourage the use of pulse dial detection on incoming calls.  Pulse
dial costs the telco alot more than DTMF and I can see the PTT's going
to any extent to discourage pulse!

  -----

> This was a suspicion that occured to me, that the switch thought pulse
> dialing was like going back on hook. But surely the switch should be
> smarter than that! It's capable of detecting 60ms/40ms edges on the
> dc voltage while it's picking up pulse digits, so it has the sensing
> capability inherently. Is it throwing away the capability and
> averaging the loop with some large time constant ?

I doubt that it has it in the first place.  Originally it was done
with relays.  The "A" and "C" relays were slow to release and the "B"
relay would follow any change very quickly.  The A relay monitored
your line current, the C relay (I think it was called a C relay ...
I'm sure that it controlled what was called the C lead.) provided a
"Control" signal to the next switching unit (selector or connector
unit).  And the B relay detected dialing.  (Some switches had the
nerve to all it a P relay!)

So an off hook closed the C relay.  Dialing would pulse the A and the
B relays, but the A would snap closed when the pulsing started, and
not release until the end of the digit.  The B relay pulsed with each
pulse.

Pure time constants.

It has been many many years since I looked at a step-by-step switch,
and I hated them then.  So I may be remembering it all wrong.  But the
point is that the new switch is designed to do as close to what the
old one did as could be.  No edge triggering at all.  Just, is there
current for a long enough period of time, or not.

  -----

Generally not true outside N. America.  A caller can pulse dial all he
wants here and in every other country in Europe I've been too.  I
worked on a phone information system in San Francisco, and I found
that you could not pulse dial more than a three from any modern
exchange in the USA or Canada.  Tone dialers are very cheap and its
not much to ask one to purchase one.  On the other hand, trying to
detect the double pops that pulse dialing produces is very unreliable.
There have been a few attempts here, but mostly have been abandoned
and besides Dutch has a way of really faking it out!

  -----

In most switches, when you are dialing the number, you are connected
to an Originating Register, which counts the pulses or tones.  Once
the call is connected to a trunk somewhere, the OR goes off-line to
serve someone else.  It is possible that your switch checks the
off-hook status less rigorously when tied to a trunk.

  -----

You don't say what kind of switch you are on, but I can guess what
could be causing it that would be pretty much generic. Most modern
switches will scan for hangup by sampling the line state at some
infrequent interval (100 milliseconds or so). If your dial pulse rate
lines up with the scan rate, it could see the on-hook pulses as a
continuous on-hook.  Continuous on-hook for a short-period of time
would be recognised as a flash. Stuttered dial tone would be the
signal for you to call the next party for your three-way.

  -----

What is happening is that the exchange is integrating the on hook
portion of the series of pulses, when they reach the threashold that
signals caller hangup, the called party is dumped. This explains your
ability to dial small numbers (less than six) without releasing your
call.  When the dial reaches the return position you are again
continuously drawing loop current so you find yourself staring at dial
tone.

  -----

This behaviour does not occur in any electrmechanical exchanges that
I have tried in the past but does occur on #1ESS and derivatives. I

  -----  end of summaries

Just to confirm things, it turns out that if an extension phone is
picked up, so it holds the line steadily off hook, and pulse dialling
is attempted now with the main phone, the exchange dosen't mis-behave.
The condition where the exchange, either by sampling the line at
regular intervals or by integrating loop current, decides that there
is on-hook, does not occur. Same result when I substituted a simple,
one-transistor 15mA current sink for the extension phone (current
source instead of resistor avoids damping audio level).

The whole experience was rather interesting to me, in bringing out an
unexpected telco feature (bug ...). Thanks to everyone who replied.


Jon Sreekanth
Assabet Valley Microsystems, Inc.     Fax and PC products
5 Walden St #3, Cambridge, MA 02140   [phone]
[e-mail]

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

Date: Mon, 22 Jun 92 15:00:18 -0400
From: krfiny![e-mail]
Subject: The Quintessence of Quiescence


Responding to Volume 12, Issue 499, Message 2 of 10:

>> While quiescent is a perfectly good word, I hardly ever see it used
>> outside a data processing context.

In Electrical Engineering, the "Q" point of a transistor means
quiescence.  It's the balance point of the transistor's operation with
no signal present.  Properly biasing a transistor sets the desired Q
point.

> I can recall at least one use: on the wrapper of a PopSicle(R), which
> reads "a quiescently frozen treat".

I hope that was a joke.  A quietly frozen dessert?  Does everybody in
the factory have to whisper?  "Be vewwy vewwy qwiet - we're making
Popsicles!  Heh heh heh".

A trip to the dictionary reveals a more appropriate q word:
quintessence:

1) the 5th and highest element in ancient and medieval philosophy
   that permeated all nature and is the substance composing the
   celestial bodies.

2) the essence of a thing in its purest and most concentrated form.

Being the quintessential poster that I am, I am ending this right
here.


Jeffrey Jonas    [e-mail]
PS: no PS this time.  This page intentionally left blank.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #508
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa21291;
          25 Jun 92 1:53 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA01080
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 24 Jun 1992 23:40:00 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA03663
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 24 Jun 1992 23:39:52 -0500
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1992 23:39:52 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #509

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 24 Jun 92 23:39:55 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 509

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Jane Barbie (was The Purpose of the Three Tones) (John Higdon)
    Re: Jane Barbie (was The Purpose of the Three Tones) (Hans Mulder)
    Re: Jane Barbie (was The Purpose of the Three Tones) (Scott Dorsey)
    Re: Jane Barbie (was The Purpose of the Three Tones) (James J. Menth)
    Re: Jane Barbie (was The Purpose of the Three Tones) (Bob Clements)
    Re: Jane Barbie (was The Purpose of the Three Tones) (Martin McCormick)
    Re: Jane Barbie (was The Purpose of the Three Tones) (Terry Kennedy)
    Re: Jane Barbie (was The Purpose of the Three Tones) (Robert S. Helfman)
    Re: Jane Barbie (was The Purpose of the Three Tones) (Tony Harminc)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wed, 24 Jun 92 02:29 PDT
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: Jane Barbie (was The Purpose of the Three Tones)


On Jun 24 at  2:12, TELECOM Moderator writes:

> [Moderator's Note: Very good point. Can anyone comment on how the time
> of day was handled *after* they quit using live people speaking it but
> *before* it went digital?  PAT]

And what makes you think that it is digital now? In most places, the
old mechanical drum announcers are still very much in service.
Although I have never seen one, the machines are very simple. There is
a magnetic drum upon which all the various digits with up and down
inflections are recorded. The drum is scanned by a multiple head
assembly and the appropriate head is switched on line in sequence.
Pac*Bell originally used a "Jane Barbie" machine when it first went
with automatic referral that sounded very clean and had the
distinctive voice of Jane Barbie.

This was replaced with a wretched piece of excrement that was
identical to those in common use on the east coast. It has
track-to-track crosstalk and the female announcer sounds as though she
is miffed for not actually getting the part as Wicked Witch of the
East. I just dialed a recently-changed number. That machine is still
in use. And it is very mechanical.

Just because technologies exist (such as digital voice) does not mean
that telcos use it!


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

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

Date: Wed, 24 Jun 92 12:24:14 +0200
From: [e-mail] (Hans Mulder)
Subject: Re: Jane Barbie (was The Purpose of the Three Tones)


In article <[e-mail]> Robert L. McMillin asks:

> Can you tell us how they 'patched together' the digits prior to
> digital recording?  I envisioned two dozen or more very short tape
> loops all run by some kind of switch.

Those two dozen very short tapes were duplicated many times over and
spliced manually to form a set of longish tapes, with a total playing
time of 24 hours.  You can guess the rest ...


Have a nice day,

Hans Mulder    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] ( Scott Dorsey)
Subject: Re: Jane Barbie (was The Purpose of the Three Tones)
Organization: NASA Langley Research Center and Reptile Farm
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1992 13:02:55 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> rlm@ms_aspen.hac.com
(Robert L. McMillin) writes:

> Can you tell us how they 'patched together' the digits prior to
> digital recording?  I envisioned two dozen or more very short tape
> loops all run by some kind of switch.

The system that I saw at WWV many years ago had a magnetic drum about
a foot in diameter, with a number of tracks on it, and one head per
track.  There was a large relay control unit which selected the tracks
to be played back in sequence based upon a BCD input.


scott

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

From: [e-mail] (james.j.menth)
Subject: Re: Jane Barbie (was The Purpose of the Three Tones)
Organization: AT&T
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1992 13:27:28 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> rlm@ms_aspen.hac.com
(Robert L. McMillin) writes:

> Responding to a message from Robert S. Helfman <[e-mail]>, our
> Moderator writes:

>> Jane Barbie was also the female voice heard on the voice-overs for
>> WWVH (the Hawaiian version of WWV).

>> [Moderator's Note: Her voice was also used for Time of Day here in
>> Chicago for many years (312-CAThedral-8000). She had recorded the
>> phrase 'at the signal, the time will be' and the digits which were
>> then patched together as appropriate.  PAT]

> Can you tell us how they 'patched together' the digits prior to
> digital recording?  I envisioned two dozen or more very short tape
> loops all run by some kind of switch.

The article mentions putting together the digits for a time signal
and, by coincidence, I just finished a section in "A History of
Engineering and Science in the Bell System-Switching Technology
1925-1975" Around 1930-31 in New York city there was a mix of dial
offices (panel and step-by step) and manual offices. When a dial call
was placed to a manual office an operator would complete the call
using digits displayed on lamps.  This was improved using technology
developed by Bell Laboratories for the film industry: Sound on film.
The book contains a picture of a chest high cabinet called a "call
announcer" containing loops of film on a series of readers.  A manual
call would be presented to a completion operator and the required
digits would be repeated in the operator's headset using pasted
together speech from the call announcer.

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

Subject: Re: Jane Barbie (was The Purpose of the Three Tones)
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 92 10:00:08 EDT
From: [e-mail]


I can't figure out the attributions, but various people wrote:

>> Jane Barbie was also the female voice heard on the voice-overs for
>> WWVH (the Hawaiian version of WWV).

> Can you tell us how they 'patched together' the digits prior to
> digital recording?  I envisioned two dozen or more very short tape
> loops all run by some kind of switch.
> [Moderator's Note: Very good point. Can anyone comment on how the time
> of day was handled *after* they quit using live people speaking it but
> *before* it went digital?  PAT]

Sure.  I have, in my vacation scrapbook, a set of photos of the WWVH
site from a couple of years ago.  I posted a long note about it in
comp.protocols.time.ntp at the time.

I have peered into the amazing gizmo in which Ms. Barbie's soul was
entrapped.  It is a leased device, made by the same people who made
them for the phone companies.  I was told that that company (something
like "Audichron", in Atlanta, I think) does not sell their
announcement machine, but only leases them.  So WWV and WWVH were
paying lease charges for decades on the darned things. (As do all the
telcos.)

To save money, there were just two of them at each site (WWV and
WWVH), rather than the three (voting, triply redundant) copies of
everything else in the system.  Still, that added up to a lot of
bucks.  These lease charges were one of the reasons for switching to
the new digital voice announcements.

I'll omit the information about the timecode generators, transmitters,
antennas and all that, and just answer the question about the
announcement machines.

The guts of the machine is a pair of rotating magnetic drums, mounted
on a horizontal axis and rotating at 1 RPM.  The drums' rotation is
synchronized by a pulse from the time code generators, driven by the
cesium atomic clocks.

There are also magnetic heads on worm gears which slide along parallel
to the axis of the drums.  The gearing on the heads is such that one
head takes sixty different tracks across one drum during any hour, and
the other head takes twenty-four different tracks across the other
drum during any day.

A third head does not move, so it always reads the same track, which
contains the station break which is played every half hour.

So one head has twenty-four messages of the form "At the tone, twenty
three hours" and the second head has sixty messages of the form "fifty
nine minutes, Coordinated Universal Time".

The gearing, and the whole concept, would make Rube Goldberg proud.  I
was real glad to see the thing.  Sadly (or not), all the above should
be in the past tense.  It's now all just silicon.


Bob Clements, K1BC, [e-mail]
[who thought the Jane Barbie thread had been closed]

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

Subject: Re: Jane Barbie (was The Purpose of the Three Tones)
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 92 13:53:56 -0500
From: [e-mail]


A common practice before the days of digital hardware was to record a
pleasant human voice saying all the words which would be needed to
provide the service such as time and temperature or stock quotes and
putting each frays on a separate track of a drum which was coated with
the same iron oxide material as is found on magnetic tape or computer
disks.  The drum spun at a carefully controlled speed and a pickup
head was guided by the machine's logic to the proper tracks on the
drum.  If the time was 7:45, the head would first hit the track
containing "seven," followed by the one containing "forty," and then
the one containing "five."  If the voice was to sound really good,
there would be multiple versions of some phrases, depending upon
whether they were to be spoken at the end of an expression or in the
middle.  Believe me, it makes a difference.

     I recall, once, hearing a figure of $100,000 as the price of a
drum-based time and temperature system.

     There were some other interesting things going on in the sixties
with electromechanical voice retrieval systems.  I remember a news
report about a system called Audre which stood for "Automatic Digit
Recognition."  The report featured a little demonstration of the
system.  Audre was used to allow bank customers to make transactions
via Touchtone phone.  The voice was female, maybe Jane's, and was
stored as a series of photographic film loops affixed to a clear
plastic drum.  Words and phrases were selected by enabling photo
pickups like the ones found in movie projectors to change the
modulated light back into audio.  In the report, the frays "My name is
Audre." was obviously recorded as one statement.  It sounded perfectly
normal.  Everything else, had a military-style cadence to it as all
the speech was timed to the spinning of the drum.  I remember hearing
a pop each time the pickup was changed to a new track.

     The voices which were heard on the time signal stations of WWV
and WWVH, up until about a year ago, were recorded on magnetic drums.
The same was also true for the Canadian time signal station CHU.  A
report on Radio Netherlands' "Media Network" program said that the
drum system at WWV was over 20 years old.

     The drum systems seemed to be very robust.  A year or so before
our local time and temp number turned digital, the drum-based system
began to show its age.  It would, sometimes, have difficulty in
placing the pickup head on the right track.  The result was a garbled
mixture of two tracks' audio.

     After our local time number went to a digital system, it worked
right for a few weeks and then would deliver a stuttering salad of
word bits and static for a while.

     Hopefully, there is somebody on the network who actually used to
work on those systems and can tell us what it was like.  Maybe there
were even systems using phonograph recordings, but I would suspect
that they wouldn't have been very trustworthy.


Martin McCormick WB5AGZ   Stillwater, OK
O.S.U. Computer Center Data Communications Group

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

From: Terry Kennedy <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Jane Barbie (was The Purpose of the Three Tones)
Organization: St. Peter's College, US
Date: 24 Jun 92 17:53:38 EDT


In article <[e-mail]>, rlm@ms_aspen.hac.com
(Robert L. McMillin) writes:

> [Moderator's Note: Very good point. Can anyone comment on how the time
> of day was handled *after* they quit using live people speaking it but
> *before* it went digital?  PAT]

  In the units I've seen, there are short loops of 2" wide audio tape
in a removable assembly. These loops are only about 6" long. The
carrier assembly plugs into a socket which has a drive motor,
multi-track read head, and a transducer.

  The different tracks have various messages recorded on them. Some
tracks have the single numbers, while others have pieces of the
message (which can be chained together across tracks).

  Amazing technology for its time.


Terry Kennedy        Operations Manager, Academic Computing
[e-mail]    St. Peter's College, Jersey City, NJ USA
[e-mail]    [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Robert S. Helfman)
Subject: Re: Jane Barbie (was The Purpose of the Three Tones)
Organization: The Aerospace Corporation, El Segundo, CA
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1992 16:32:07 GMT


> Can you tell us how they 'patched together' the digits prior to
> digital recording?  I envisioned two dozen or more very short tape
> loops all run by some kind of switch.

At WWV, the voice 'snatches' were recorded on a rotating magnetic
drum.  (I visited WWV in the late '70's). The drum was about a foot in
diameter.  A set of read heads would jump around over the drum to pick
off the appropriate numbers. ("At the tone" "four" "hours" "thirteen"
"minutes" "Coordinated Universal Time") The drum appeared to rotate at
about 1 rpm.  (Understand, I'm remembering this from my single
breathless visit to WWV. I posted a description of the visit in
'sci.electronics' about a month ago, but I'll briefly reiterate:

When I worked for the U.S. Forest Service's Forest Fire Laboratory in
Riverside, CA, I used to frequently go to Fort Collins where their
Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station is located. During
one visit, I was driving to Waverly to have dinner with some Japanese
cowboys (!!!) I had met in Fort Collins (these were Japanese from
Japan, who were working on cattle ranches near the Wyoming border and
attending animal husbandry courses at the University of Nebraska at
Scott's Bluff). I passed the WWV 'antenna farm', noticed that the
visiting hours were 1-3 pm Wednesdays only, and vowed to make a trip
out there. It was at least three years before I managed to have a free
afternoon to kill, I was in Fort Collins, and it was a Wednesday!

I showed up at WWV, the sole engineer on duty gave me a grand tour of
the whole deal, including the 3 Cesium standard atomic clocks, the
nixie tube (!) displays of WWV time, the majority-vote circuitry that
resolved differences between the clocks, the transmitters, the
antennas, the works. It was delightful, since I had been hearing WWV
since high school days and had always tried to imagine this mysterious
facility whose faithful ticking boomed out of the night on my
shortwave receiver.

One interesting tidbit: the 100hz power used to operate the motors
which drove the voice drum was also derived from the same Cesium
standard atomic clocks as the carrier frequencies and the audio
modulating tones. EVERYTHING at WWV is derived that way.

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

From: Tony Harminc <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 92 06:50:23 -0700
Subject: Re: Jane Barbie (was The Purpose of the Three Tones)


Many years ago there was an exhibit in the South Kensington Science
Museum in London that showed how the British "Speaking Clock" worked.
My recollection is hazy (I was about ten when I saw it), but I
remember multiple gramophone disks each with a pickup arm, and a
mechanical selection mechanism.  I believe the disks were mounted on a
common horizontal shaft.  It is worth keeping in mind that the timing
of the voice segments is not critical -- the tone is what counts, and
that was not on the disks, of course.

Perhaps someone who was a little older at the time remembers better.


Tony H.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #509
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa23041;
          25 Jun 92 2:34 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA12622
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 25 Jun 1992 00:14:59 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA08153
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 25 Jun 1992 00:14:51 -0500
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1992 00:14:51 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #510

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 25 Jun 92 00:14:45 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 510

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Concert-Goers Blast 911 Service (Peter Clitherow)
    Re: Concert Goers Blast 911 Service (Lauren Weinstein)
    Re: Concert-Goers Blast 911 Service (Jon Baker)
    Re: Ameritech/IBT (Scott Dorsey)
    Re: Ameritech/IBT (Matthew Holdrege)
    Re: Ameritech PCS (Ang Peng Hwa)
    Re: Pac*Bell Posturing (Andrew Klossner)
    Re: You Can Ring My Bell (David Cornutt)
    Re: You Can Ring My Bell (Julian Macassey)
    Re: Toggles Are Bad Design (Justin Leavens)
    Re: Toggles Are Bad Design (James Elliott)
    Re: For National Security Reasons, Stop Talking About 710 (Jim Speth)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: <bellcore![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Concert-Goers Blast 911 Service
Reply-To: <bellcore![e-mail]>
Organization: Bellcore - IMS, Morristown, NJ
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 92 11:39:29 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Barry Mishkind) writes:

> The Tucson area's 911 line was snarled yesterday when callers trying
> to get tickets to a concert overload the local telephone system, a US
> West spokeswoman said.
 ....

> And not an apology in the house! Of course, _not one_ employee of US
> Worst saw this coming, nor told a supervisor about it, nor cared: "We
> don't have to care, we're the phone company."

There might have been problems on a switch (perhaps a memory upgrade
would have helped?) but most likely, U S WEST would have known about
this sort of thing before.  In particular, the operator services
department in most Bell Operating Companies has a staff line or two to
monitor local/national events to ensure that enough operators are
available to handle needs.  It sound like there needs to be better
communication between this group and the CO admin people though.


peter clitherow <[e-mail]> [phone], DQID: H07692
bellcore, 445 south street, room 2f-085, morristown, nj 07962

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

Date: Wed, 24 Jun 92 09:27:43 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Lauren Weinstein)
Subject: Re: Concert Goers Blast 911 Service


Greetings.  Pat, you asked what the solution is to these recurring
"concert fans saturate phone system" events.  The solution is
simplicity itself.  Until such a time as the phone networks are
capable of handling such concentrations in a more reasonable manner,
you either voluntarily request (or legislate, if that doesn't work)
that ticket sales which are likely to cause such saturations will not
be conducted by phone.  It's not as if these concerts usually pop out
of thin air -- they're typically planned far in advance.  The
rationale for such restrictions would be the denial to customers of
necessary phone services, both emergency and normal, that otherwise
results.

Ticket purchases in such cases could be by mail, with priority by
postmark date, perhaps with a number of tickets preallocated for
different parts of the city/areas to avoid unfair skewing of orders.
Print little forms in the local magazines/newspapers to make it all
simple for the buyers.  While they're at it, some limits on the number
of tickets that can be sent to any one address might be a good idea as
well, to help avoid the massive "blocks" of tickets which are later
sold or scalped at way above face value, often locking many "average"
people out of the shows.

There are some applications for which our current phone networks just
aren't the best choice.


 --Lauren--

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

From: asuvax!gtephx![e-mail] (Jon Baker)
Subject: Re: Concert-Goers Blast 911 Service
Organization: AG Communication Systems, Phoenix, Arizona
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1992 17:44:24 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Barry Mishkind) writes:

> [Moderator's Note: Come now, do you *really* think US West or any
> telco relishes these situations and ignores them 'because they are the
> phone company'?  And had telco known in advance (did any of the
> concert promoters advise telco of the times, etc?), what in your

It is not the responsibility of the promoters to notify the telco.
However, prudent network managers do keep tabs on upcoming events,
such as this, by monitoring the radio and newspapers.  An ounce of
prevention is worth a pound of cure.

> estimation might telco have done about it, other than possibly block
> off access from certain exchanges when traffic was heavy?    PAT]

They can do quite a bit about it.  That's why we have network
managers.  They can choke, or throttle, calls to the particular phone
number for the ticket line during the periods of heaviest traffic.
All CO's in the affected area would be notified, via network
management control systems, to NOT attempt to complete calls to that
directory number, but issue re-order (or some other appropriate
treatment) instead.  This way, each CO is a bit busy handling all of
the attempts, but they don't tie up the trunking network in the
region, nor do they overload the target CO.

Similar network controls, on a broader scale, can be applied in the
event of natural disasters or other events that might cause a large
number of people to attempt to place calls to a particular CO.  If you
figure that only about 10% of calls will get through to 602/889, then
we can block 90% of them at the originating CO's, rather than tieing
up trunks all the way, only to get blocking or a busy signal near the
end of the path.


J.Baker     asuvax!gtephx!bakerj
DISCLAIMER : I am not an official representative of AGCS.

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

From: [e-mail] (Scott Dorsey)
Subject: Re: Ameritech/IBT
Organization: NASA Langley Research Center and Reptile Farm
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1992 13:00:08 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Bill Nickless) writes:

>  ... until you want things like ISDN.  Ameritech/IBT seems to be among
> the slowest to offer data services to the home.  I am under the
> impression that they're behind some un-named California telcos.

ISDN?  In the home?  I'm in a C&P area and we just got touch-tone
service for the first time last year.  I asked the craftsman who came
out to install a second line last month about ISDN services, and he
said that he had recently been at a seminar on the systems, but said
that the chances of it being available in my lifetime were slim.
Sigh.


scott

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

Date: Wed, 24 Jun 92 18:02 GMT
From: Matthew Holdrege <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Ameritech/IBT


>> [Moderator's Note: Ameritech/IBT are certainly very progressive and
>> technologically advanced telcos. I'm glad to be in their region.  PAT]

>  ... until you want things like ISDN.  Ameritech/IBT seems to be among
> the slowest to offer data services to the home.  I am under the
> impression that they're behind some un-named California telcos.

I found Ameritech/IBT to be very responsive to business. I received a
great deal of support when I had some ISDN circuits installed in
Chicago last year.  Ameritech is also rapidly installing ISDN gear at
a lot of other CO's. Of course the first sites to get ISDN were in
business and high-tech areas.

I asked about getting ISDN to my home in the Chicago suburbs and they
showed me the CO map and a rough implementation schedule. Right now
you can get ISDN at home if you live in the right area. In 1993 and
1994 most everyone in IBTland will be able to get ISDN.

BTW, the IBT tariffs for ISDN seem to be among the best in the country
and decidely better than Pacific Bell.


Matt Holdrege   Pacificare Health Systems   [e-mail]

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

Date: Tue, 23 Jun 92 22:12:09 SST
From: Ang Peng Hwa <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Ameritech PCS


Monty Solomon's description of Ameritech's new cordless phone sounds a
lot like CT2. You can only send, and only when you are within 50 yards
of a transmitter point.

To my knowledge, it has failed everywhere it has been tried except
here in Singapore. Sales were so successful that the PTT here was
taken by surprise.

There is an element of prestige in having one of those CT2 phones as
they are extremely compact -- with less electronics. And apparently
people are willing to pay for prestige.

It'll be interesting to see the result of the test, first with send
only and then with send and receive.

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

From: [e-mail] (Andrew Klossner)
Subject: Re: Pac*Bell Posturing
Date: 22 Jun 92 21:29:43 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Tektronix, Wilsonville, Oregon


> The expense has already occurred. The system is ready. All that has
> to be done is to "turn it on".

This isn't true from the telco's perspective.  To "turn on" the
system, they must:

  -- Market the service, otherwise they won't get enough demand to
     justify their costs;

  -- Train their rep and service people in the features;

  -- Turn their graphics -- the existing subscriber instructions don't
     discuss CLASS;

 ... and so on.  There's a lot more to providing telecom service than
wiring a switch.


Andrew Klossner  ([e-mail])
 (uunet!tektronix!frip.WV.TEK!andrew)

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

From: [e-mail] (David Cornutt)
Subject: Re: You Can Ring My Bell
Organization: NASA/MSFC
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1992 18:23:25 GMT


krfiny![e-mail] writes:

> (1) This gives me yet another silly project idea: how about a MIDI
> interface so upon ring detect, a song of your choice is played,
> turning your electronic music equipment into a phone ringer.  I have a
> Caller-ID converter on my PC. I could use the PC's internal speaker
> (or Sound Blaster if I had one) to play when the phone rings.

Now here's an idea: a Caller ID-to-MIDI interface.  What you do: (1)
Get a sampler. (2) Get your friends to come over to your house and say
their names into the sampler. (3) Map each sample to a different key
number. (4) Build a Caller ID interface that can map the calling
number into a database that gives you the key number that contains the
voice sample for the person who's calling, and then send a MIDI Note
On to the sampler with the appropriate key number.

This way, the phone will tell you who's calling -- in *their* voice!

Hmmm ...


David Cornutt, New Technology Inc., Huntsville, AL  [phone]
([e-mail]; some insane route applies)
"The opinions expressed herein are not necessarily those of my employer,
not necessarily mine, and probably not necessary."

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

From: [e-mail] (Julian Macassey)
Subject: Re: You Can Ring My Bell
Date: 19 Jun 92 02:53:57 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Julian Macassey)
Organization: The Hole in the Wall  Hollywood California U.S.A.


In article <[e-mail]> krfiny![e-mail]
writes:
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 491, Message 6 of 10

    stuff deleted

> TELECOM readers have long known that the original brass two gong ringer
> is hard to beat for volume, durability, ability to locate, recognize
> and hear above many background sounds.  How much time and money must
> be spent to verify the obvious?  Why has the free market not produced
> better phones?

    First of all, the driving force in any product - especially a
consumer product - is cost.

    So a good gong ringer will cost about $4.00 and a piezo jobbie
about $2.00. That is an important factor. It is easy to make a cheaper
ringer than a gong ringer. It is almost impossible, given current
technology, to make better ringer that is cheaper.

    And as I have said in an earlier posting, it is hard to beat
the 2500 set. You can buy a new 2500 set for $25.00, you can find them
at garage sales for $1-3. So what would be a better phone than a 2500
set? You can add gimmicks, but that is fashion. I am talking
telephony.  The origial Mickey Mouse phone was a blend of fashion and
telephony. It looked cute and met the same specs as an AT&T 2500,
including the drop test. People were reluctant to pay $125.00 for this
phone. They bought $9.95 pieces of crap by the carload. None of those
peices of crap are around anymore.

> (1) This gives me yet another silly project idea: how about a MIDI
> interface so upon ring detect, a song of your choice is played,
> turning your electronic music equipment into a phone ringer.  I have a
> Caller-ID converter on my PC. I could use the PC's internal speaker
> (or Sound Blaster if I had one) to play when the phone rings.  I could
> even key the songs to:

>    - the Caller-ID
>    - the phone line used (for multiple lines)
>    - distinctive ringing (for ident-a-ring, ring master, etc)
>    - time of day
>    - day of week

> Voice syntheses so the phone talks to me -- naaa, too unnerving.
> (well, perhaps for a Star Trek motif "engineering to Captain Kirk!")
> This is starting to sound like a David Letterman sketch (the Addams
> family phone screams, Agathe Christie's phone sounds like a gunshot
>nand body falling, Walter Cronkite's says "and now here's the phone".

    Ok, you want a phone that always works, just like your phone
does now. When the lights go out, the phone still works? Then you have
to power the cutsie ringer from the ring current. I looked at this in
the past to make R2D2 (Starwars) phones tweet and diddle instead of
ring. Alas, there is not much energy left for volume after the cute
sound effects chips have done their thing.

    You want the stereo to play Metallica or Wagner when the phone
rings? Easy. You use a ringer chip and use the warble output to drive
a gate (switch or relay) to turn on the stereo. Bear in mind though,
that it won't work when the power fails and you may not always want
that much racket. So, you want silent periods, also no problem, add a
timer chip to the chain. Or go the whole hog and have a PC run it.  So
now you have a $600.00 phone. It's all yours, but they are not going
to stand in line at Wallmart to buy it ...


Julian Macassey, [e-mail]  N6ARE@K6VE.#SOCAL.CA.USA.NA

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

From: [e-mail] (Justin Leavens)
Subject: Re: Toggles Are Bad Design
Date: 24 Jun 1992 11:51:36 -0700
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Gordon Burditt) writes:

> Is the *XX number space really that full?  What are all those codes
> used for?  Does anyone have a "standard list" of them?

I don't think there is a 'standard' list of these codes. After almost
a year of thinking that my 'Cancel Call Waiting' "feature" simply
didn't work, I found out that GTE uses 73# to cancel call waiting. I
suppose that I could have checked an instruction list somewhere, but I
had always assumed that *70 was a standard since I'd never seen
anything else.

But it looks like we won't have to worry about any of those pesky
codes for Caller-ID here in GTEland. Thank goodness I'm moving back to
PacBell land next week. I never knew how good I had it until I moved
to a GTE area ...


Justin Leavens   University of Southern California   Microcomputer Specialist

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

From: [e-mail] (James Elliott)
Subject: Re: Toggles Are Bad Design
Organization: U of Wisconsin CS Dept
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1992 21:53:39 GMT


I agree. Toggles are almost always bad design. The number of times I
have been frustrated in my efforts to set up computer control of
devices in my home (such as timed, coordinated unattended operation of
my VCRs and receiver to tape simulcast shows) and been frustrated by
the fact that the control computer has no way of knowing the initial
state of a toggle-controlled option, is large. The same principle
applies to control of options on phone lines. This is above and beyond
straightforward human-centered design issue.

Don't use toggles; use separate controls.


Jim Elliott    [e-mail]

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

From: James G. Speth <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: For National Security Reasons, Stop Talking About 710
Date: 22 Jun 92 17:43:40 GMT
Organization: University of California, Santa Cruz


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Ron
Natalie) writes:

> Oh, come off it.  If the information gets anywhere close to here were
> in deep kimche anyhow.  The TELECOM Digest is probably the most benign
> of the forums for "telecommunications enthusiats."

Out of curiosity, what are some of the LESS benign forums?


Jim Speth    [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: Would anyone like to address Mr. Speth's question?
For the sake of neutrality, I will refrain for now.  PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #510
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa17102;
          26 Jun 92 22:37 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA28915
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 26 Jun 1992 20:42:20 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA03701
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 26 Jun 1992 20:42:10 -0500
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1992 20:42:10 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #511

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 26 Jun 92 20:42:00 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 511

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Contemporary Remote Controls (Jacob DeGlopper)
    Re: With NETel, is it an UPgrade or a DOWNgrade? (Fred Goldstein)
    Re: Phone Keypad Interfaces to Enhanced Telephone Services (Justin Leavens)
    Re: Telephone Connection to Yugoslavia? (Carl Moore)
    Re: The Telco Owns the Numbers (Lauren Weinstein)
    Re: Pacific Bell Car Theft Protection (Arthur L. Rubin)
    Re: Pay Phones in San Francisco (Darren Alex Griffiths)
    Re: Strange Message on Answering Machine (Bill Cattey)
    Re: Strange Message on Answering Machine ([e-mail])
    Re: AT&T and Area Codes 706/404 (George Mitchell)
    Re: Influencing PUCs (Andrew M. Dunn)
    Re: Funny Intercept on 1-710-555-1212 (Greg Price)
    Re: Computer Aided Dispatching (John Nagle)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Jacob DeGlopper)
Subject: Re: Contemporary Remote Controls
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Jacob DeGlopper)
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 92 13:28:37 GMT


In a previous article, [e-mail] (Laird P. Broadfield)
says:

> Incidental question: Do any of the setups make allowances for more
> than one device in range (e.g. a stack of TVs) such that they can be
> controlled individually?

Technics audio products certainly don't!  That's one reason our
college radio station hangs on to the remote controls for any new
equipment we get.  For example, when we installed a pair of new CD
players about two months ago, of course the techs got to play with
them before anyone else :).  Pointing one remote at the two players
would make both open at once, or start playing, or (worst for on-air
operations) stop.  Since we have glass walls between the studios, you
could sit in the next studio and make the CD players do strange things
 ... all the remotes are locked up in the tech shop where only some can
get at them.


     Jacob DeGlopper, EMT-A, Wheaton Volunteer Rescue Squad
      -- CWRU Biomedical Engineering - [e-mail] --
                         [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Fred Goldstein)
Subject: Re: With NETel, is it an UPgrade or a DOWNgrade?
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Fred Goldstein)
Organization: Digital Equipment Corp., Littleton MA USA
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1992 17:26:00 GMT


> Remember how I could call Natick for free with the "basic" service?
> Turns out with the "enhanced" service, Natick becomes a "Zone 1" call,
> at 1 cent per call plus 1.6 cents per minute.  And, wouldn't ya know
> it, my new net access is in Natick, so the 1.6 cents would have added
> up but fast.

Frankly, I'd call up the DPU and complain.  Waltham was NOT a local
call to Natick before November 18, 1990, when the DPU ordered that all
contiguous exchanges in NET's Mass. territory become local.  The bill
insert said that Natick was to be added to Waltham's local area.

I seriously doubt that the DPU intended that 1SR (suburban) service
would not get flat-rate calling for something that's flat-rate with
1FR (contiguous) service.  NET may be playing games with semantics, or
may have a glitch in their billing.  Of course, 1SR _does_ charge for
calls to Boston Central from exchanges like Cambridge which are
contiguous, while it's free on 1FR or 1ER (metro).  But that's the
main anomoly of 1SR (an obsolete hack if you ask me).

Of course, the DPU can decide that NET was right.  1SR is just one
option, after all.  And their service tiers are _not_ defined to be
inclusive of lower tiers.


Fred R. Goldstein   [e-mail]
k1io             or [e-mail]   voice:[phone]
Standard Disclaimer:  Opinions are mine alone; sharing requires permission.

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

From: [e-mail] (Justin Leavens)
Subject: Re: Phone Keypad Interfaces to Enhanced Telephone Services
Date: 26 Jun 1992 11:45:13 -0700
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Craig
Hubley) writes:

> That is, *70 seems to pretty universally suppress call waiting, but I
> don't know if the code to retrive messages from your answering service
> is the same everywhere, North-America-wide, or just across a single
> company's jurisdiction.  Are there FCC standards for this, or CCITT
> standards?

Here in GTECA land, a 73# is required to suppress call-waiting. I
couldn't tell you if that's a GTE standard, but that's what it is
here.


Justin Leavens               University of Southern California
Microcomputer Specialist     [e-mail]

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

Date: Fri, 26 Jun 92 10:28:14 EDT
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Telephone Connection to Yugoslavia?


Nothing about Bosnia-Herzegovina?

What messages do you get in trying to call these various parts of the
former Yugoslavia?  For example, there was a recording (via AT&T)
about emergency conditions in Kuwait after it was invaded in 1990 by
Iraq, and AT&T apparently was intercepting calls to Kuwait before the
connection proceeded beyond the U.S.  borders.

It's understood that the various republics splitting off from Yugo-
slavia are still under that country code (given the previous dis-
cussions about the former East Germany and the former Soviet Union,
not to mention what I have seen in newspapers about Czech and Slovak
republics proposed for what is now Czechoslovakia).

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

Date: Fri, 26 Jun 92 09:35:15 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Lauren Weinstein)
Subject: Re: The Telco Owns the Numbers


Greetings.  Someone asked if the subscribers had any choice in the
selection of new numbers, in the situation of being forced to change
numbers by telco.  In the case of the Woodland Hills event I
originally mentioned, I believe the subscribers were allowed to pick
their new four digit numbers in the new prefix, but could only choose
numbers within fairly limited ranges, i.e. they did not have the
entire 10,000 possibilities from which to choose.


 --Lauren--

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Pacific Bell Car Theft Protection
Date: 26 Jun 92 17:40:23 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Arthur Rubin)


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

> This sounds like a thing I remember while living in Massachusetts
> called Lojack. When your car was stolen, you reported it to the police
> and Lojack. A transmitter hidden in your car would send out a signal
> which was moitored by the Massachusetts State Police. They had four
> antennae on the roof of a few selected patrol cars. Using this device,
> they could chase the signal and find the car within a couple of hours.
> The advantage over a typical car alarm being that thieves never had a
> chance to strip the car. If the car was hidden in a garage or
> something, it was still able to be found.

PacTel Teletrak (?) and Lojack are provided by different companies.
(There may be a third major system, as well.)  My recollection of the
systems is the Lojack is automatically activated if the car is started
without the key.  Teletrak advertised that, if your car is stolen,
(and it is not automatically activated, by whatever means), you can
activate the system by letting them know.  (Of course, this means you
can let someone use the car, and then have the police pick him up for
stealing the car, but ... you could do that anyway.  This just makes
it more reliable.)


Arthur L. Rubin: [e-mail] (work) Beckman Instruments/Brea
[e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail] (personal)
My opinions are my own, and do not represent those of my employer.
Our news system is unstable; if you want to be sure I see a post, mail it.

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

From: [e-mail] (Darren Alex Griffiths)
Subject: Re: Pay Phones in San Francisco
Organization: Open Systems Solutions Inc.
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1992 18:48:17 GMT


[e-mail] (John Higdon) writes:

> Now the city is greedily looking over the matter of enforcing its "pay
> phone permits". The city claims that it wants, for aesthetic reason,
> to control the proliferation of phones. An example is the fact that
> there are seven phones on Mission Street between 18th and 19th. But of
> course the real concern is collecting the $50 a month from each phone
> (or 20% of the gross, whichever is greater). The estimates are that
> the city would collect more than $25,000 monthly.

I used to be involved with a bar about a block from there, 19th and
Valencia Street.  About six months before we sold out to some friends
someone came in the place and offered to put a COCOT on the wall
outside.  Since we had a lot of people asking to use the bar phone I
said sure.  In return we'd get $50 a month and the supplier would take
care of all the permits.

All things went well at first, it took the supplier (I forget the name
but I can find out if anyone is really interested) about a month to
secure permits with what seemed like every agency from the CIA on down
and the phone was installed.  The day after it was setup this patrol
officer came storming in the bar while I was working there and said,
quite loudly, in front of customers "What the hell do you think your
doing with the phone out there".  It seemed that he was rather upset
that he hadn't been consulted about the phone and demanded that it be
removed the next day because he was afraid that the phone would
attract drug dealers to the area.  I guess he didn't think that drug
dealers would want to use the dozen or so city phones in the area and
it seems he wasn't a very good cop because one with any sense would
have known that there are plenty of drug dealers already there.

In any case, the next day the phone was moved inside, as a result the
COCOT cut our take to $25 because it wasn't in a place where anyone
could get at and people still asked to use the bar phone because the
office was often far quieter than the bar with loud music playing.


Cheers,

Darren Alex Griffiths         [e-mail]
Open Systems Solutions, Inc   [phone] x139
Fujitsu                       Fax: [phone]
6121 Hollis Street            Emeryville, CA 94608-2092



[Moderator's Note: This is a good example of how rotten to the core
municipal government can be. All those permits and foot-dragging by
the city to do something of value -- install a telephone -- for the
residents. I could tell you dozens of stories about how abusive the
City of Chicago is to the few people still around who own real
property and pay taxes, etc. The idiots in our city council are now
trying to put all sorts of requirements on pay phones here, as if that
would solve the myriad of problems we endure.  PAT]

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

Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1992 11:59:50 -0400 (EDT)
From: Bill Cattey <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Strange Message on Answering Machine


Thanks for bringing up this question.  (I've always wondered about the
hangup call message but was unable to ask about it as succinctly as
you.)

Thanks also Pat, for explaining how it happens.

Now I have a question: Where can I get an answering machine that
recognizes the hangup call and doesn't record it?  If no such machine
exists, is there one with a remote command "Skip over this stupid
hangup call message"?

By far the largest number of messages I get are these annoying hangup
calls, and it's driving me nuts!


Bill Cattey


[Moderator's Note: There are answering machines available with CPC
(called party control) which abort on detecting a hangup.    PAT]

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 92 10:26 EDT
Subject: Re: Strange Message on Answering Machine


> Several times (about once in two weeks) I have had the following
> message recorded on my answering machine: "<steady tone> <pause>
> Please hang up and try your call again. This is a recording.
> Two-oh-three-two-one." I presume that this is some sort of automatic
> message generated by the telco's equipment. There were no calls
> attempted from the phones at the time the message must have got
> recorded (in fact, this seems to happen when no one is at home), so

Or ...

There's this fun one.  Call your friend's answering machine, while
simultaneously three-way-calling a joke line, "heavy breathing" line,
intercept, or other answering maching, so that your friends answering
machine records the message being played on the second line!  Leaves
them scratching their head every time.


[Moderator's Note: Wow ... what a lot of fun! This is just a variation
on the stupid prank immature phreaks (yes, I know that may be
considered redundant by some readers) which involves calling two
unrelated people via three-way calling then remaining silent as each
accuses the other of placing the call. And if you have two physical
lines, each with three-way, then you patch the lines together and get
four people in on the 'joke' ... all of whom are convinced as a result
the telco must be more screwed up than ever. It helps if at least a
couple of the victims are older people you wake up at 2 AM.   PAT]


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

From: [e-mail] (George Mitchell)
Subject: Re: AT&T and Area Codes 706/404
Organization: Test Systems Strategies, Inc., Beaverton, Oregon
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1992 15:25:27 GMT


[e-mail] (Monty Solomon) writes:

> AT&T ran the following ad in the 7/23/92 {Boston Globe}:

I'd love to borrow your crystal ball one of these days.


[e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: It should have been *6*/23/92. Thanks for catching
the typo. Sorry for any confusion caused.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Andrew M. Dunn)
Organization: A. Dunn Systems Corporation, Kitchener, Canada
Subject: Re: Influencing PUCs
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 92 03:21:25 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Corinna
Polk) writes:

> So then, what does the normal $35-$50 line installation fee cover? My
> impression was that paying that standard installation fee gave me a
> phone line, regardless of the situation. If I had the lines already
> running into the house, then it was a simple install that required a
> data entry (aka "Customer Service") person to type on a terminal. If
> it required a new drop then someone was to do that. But either way,
> the price was the same, the former installs covering the cost of the
> latter.

It seems to vary by jurisdiction.  I've seen both scenarios, where:

  (a) you pay a flat fee, no matter what, or
  (b) you pay a flat fee UP TO SOME "REASONABLE" LEVEL OF SERVICE

I think the latter is growing more popular.  Somebody decides what is
a reasonable level of service (ie. two lines) and says "OK, for the
flat installation fee you can have whatever is needed to provide you
with service up to that limit".  Anything beyond the limit, you pay
time and materials for (plus a healthy dose of good ol' profit).

That's not how it's done here in Bell Canada territory.  The flat fee
seems to cover ANY type of installation.  This included the sixth line
here recently, and the 25-pair cable from the street to the house.

It varies.  Your mileage may vary.  Check the tariffs which are
required to be available for your perusal everywhere that I've seen.


Andy Dunn ([e-mail])  ({uunet...}!xenitec!mongrel!amdunn)

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

From: [e-mail] (Greg Price)
Subject: Re: Funny Intercept on 1-710-555-1212
Organization: Computer Services Centre, Australian National University
Date: 26 Jun 92 19:04:39 GMT


[e-mail] (Rich Greenberg) writes:

> One more datapoint: from the 310 a/c (Tinsletown), PacBell allows the
> eleven digits of 1-710-555-1212, and then Jane tells me that my call
> cannot be completed as dialed.

Why not try changing the 555 to a some other randomish type sequences?
If you were really going to hide something 555 is a choice I wouldn't
use. What is really needed is a telco person to give a few hints on
the routing of those area codes, or possibly if anyone calls these
area codes. Anyone work in a trunk exchange?


Greg

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

From: [e-mail] (John Nagle)
Subject: Re: Computer Aided Dispatching
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 92 07:18:36 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest)


Gilbert Amine ([e-mail]) writes:

> A friend of mine is putting together a digital radio-based
> computer-aided dispatching system ...

         Systems that do this job right now are available from Etak,
Inc, of Mountain View, CA.  The Etak Vehicle Management System
interfaces with existing two-way radios, and reports in the vehicle
position with data bursts on the radio link.  The vehicle carries the
Etak navigation system (which uses CD-ROM based maps, a magnetic
compass, a two-axis rate gyro, a two-axis tilt meter, and wheel
encoders) and provides the driver with a map display.  The dispatching
center has map displays showing the location of all vehicles on the
system, and can transmit coordinates of destinations to the vehicles,
where they show up on the driver's display.

          Doesn't use GPS; doesn't need it.


John Nagle

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #511
******************************

NOTE: ISSUES 512 THROUGH 519 ARRIVED OUT OF ORDER AND ARE FILED HERE
AS FOLLOWS:  515, 514, 512, 516, 517, 513, 518, 519, THEN IN NORMAL
ORDER 520 THROUGH 550.











Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa04120;
          28 Jun 92 12:39 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA00964
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 27 Jun 1992 21:42:54 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA08044
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 27 Jun 1992 21:42:46 -0500
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1992 21:42:46 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #515

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 27 Jun 92 21:42:45 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 515

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Interesting Phone Circuit (The Famous Harmonica Bug?) (Augustine Cano)
    Who Makes Inverse Multiplexers? (Doug A. Chan)
    Need Standards/RFCs/Docs For OSI/Object Modelling/X-Windows (S. Johnson)
    SDS/ISDN Interoperability (Matthew Holdrege)
    Looking For Info on Dialog Between PAD and Async Terminal (John Saldanha)
    Ringer Equivalency Numbers (RENs) (Steven S. Brack)
    Fiber Channel Standards Info Wanted (Alfredo Cotroneo)
    Part 15 Compatible Transceivers (Joseph E. Baker)
    Switch Question (Tom Streeter)
    Missouri Requires Modernization (J. Philip Miller)
    Update on CWA-AT&T Battle (Phillip Dampier)
    AT&T Knows I am Moving. How? (Naddim Massoud)
    Telecomics (David Leibold)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Interesting Phone Circuit (The Famous Harmonica Bug?)
Date: 27 Jun 92 09:54:50 CDT (Sat)
From: [e-mail] (Augustine Cano)


I picked up an original Western Electric phone besides a dumpster.
The plate around the keypad was gone and a small reddish box with 4
wires attached was bouncing around inside.  The phone works just fine
although audio volume seems low.  The little plastic box (1" X 2" X
3/8") with the numbers 840364202 and 3-80 on the cover contains a PCB.

The box looks like this:

        +---------------+ ^
        |   840364202    | |
        |     3-80    | | 1"
        \        | |
         \--------------+ v
        <--------------->
            2"

The circuit board inside (component side, same scale):

             green wire        o    wire connections to PCB
        +--------|------+        0    screws
   white wire ---0  -R1- | DDDD |        -R1- orange white gold gold
   brown wire ---0  -R2- o  T   |        -R2- orange white gold gold
        |-\\\\\\\--R3- o-- white wire    -R3- brown green gold gold
        +---------------+        DDDD diode (521)
                        T    transistor (WE9 803A)
                        -\\- a spring (inductor?)

On the back, beside the traces it says: AM-2 220.  Some traces and
some holes on the board are not used, the remaining make up the
following schematic:

                 spring
 brown wire --0-\\\\\\\\-+-R3---+-----------+
                |           |
                   ---          |
                         diode \ / gr. wire |
                                v        |  |
                               ---      -|--|-
                    |       \++++/ transistor
                |        \||/
                    |      ||
 white wire --0--R1--+---R2-----+---------+|
                       |
                    white wire

So, is this the famous harmonica bug?  I haven't had a chance to test
if this circuit actually does anything.  Can somebody shed some light
on this without the complete schematic of the rest of the phone?
Assuming standard color coding (what is the color coding standard in
WE phones?) are the right signals going in/out of this circuit for
this to actually do what it's supposed to do?

Speculation: the low volume could be due to losses in this
non-standard circuit.  This was not a standard part of WE phones, was
it?  If this is really a bug, the transistor is really a switch in
parallel with the off-hook switch.  Unfortunately, the block with 19
screws where all the wires go is riveted securely to the base and I
haven't attacked that part yet, so I don't know what's underneath.


Augustine Cano        INTERNET: [e-mail]
            UUCP:     ...!{ernest,egsner}!shibaya!afc

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

From: [e-mail] (Doug A. Chan)
Subject: Who Makes Inverse Multiplexers?
Date: 27 Jun 92 15:10:16 GMT
Organization: College of Engineering, Boston University, Boston, MA, USA


As the subject line says ...

Basically, I need something which will take a fixed speed dedicated
line and add on additional switched 56/64 as we need additional
thruput.

 -It must be able to handle up to a full T1.
 -The addition of switched circuits must be under manual control (some
  serial port?)
 -Automatically dial switched circuits if the dedicated line is lost.

What is out there and has anyone worked with them?  What kind of
interfaces can I expect (V.35, ethernet, RS-422)?


Doug      [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (S JOHNSON)
Subject: Need Standards/RFCs/Docs For OSI/Object Modelling/X-Windows
Date: 27 Jun 92 14:44:41 GMT
Organization: University of Bradford, UK


Hi,

Basically the subject header says it all. I need all and any text
files or spare documents anyone can lay their hands on all about the
above subjects, particularly dcom standards for the 7-layer model. Any
info about X would be great too - ftp sites gracefully accepted.


Thanks in advance,

Steve Johnson     [e-mail]

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

Date: Sat, 27 Jun 92 23:58 GMT
From: Matthew Holdrege <[e-mail]>
Subject: SDS/ISDN Interoperability


We are planning to implement a number of switched 56k backup circuits
for our WAN in California. Pac Bell has given us a list of SDS
availability for each site. I was surprised to see that a number of
sites were offering ISDN as the _only_ switched option available.

I found out that the 5ESS switch does not offer SDS so they had to
install ISDN on it to provide switched 56K. The DMS-100's can handle
SDS or ISDN but PacBell charges less for SDS. PacBell says that I can
call an ISDN number from an SDS number without any problems. Has
anyone else tried this?


Matt Holdrege   Pacificare Health Plans   [e-mail]

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

From: john saldanha <[e-mail]>
Subject: Looking For Info on Dialog Between PAD and Async Terminal
Organization: University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1992 21:16:57 GMT


A friend of mine is looking for information on the dialog between a
PAD (Packet Assembler Disassembler) and an async terminal.  He asked
me about this but I didn't have the faintest clue what he was talking
about.  Some of the jargon he was using was X.25, HDLC, DATEX-P, and
Datapak. I am hoping there is someone on the net who knows about
such stuff and can help him out.  If you think you can help, please
send me e-mail letting me know how to get in touch with you
(preferably a phone number as my friend is from Germany and is
currently travelling in the U.S.)


Thanks,

John Saldanha    [e-mail]   Tel: [phone]

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

Date: 27 Jun 1992 17:34:45 -0400 (EDT)
From: [e-mail] (Steven S. Brack)
Subject: Ringer Equivalency Numbers (RENs)


I recently made a tour of my new home, and added up all the RENs of
all the phones, just to see what I would get.

Total RENs: 7.4 *!*   (Must really increase Ma's electric bill 8)
Highest rated device: ConAir "prestige" phone, 1.7B
Lowest rated device:  Genuine Bell answering machine, 0.3B
Lowest rated phone:   AT&T 100 pushbutton phone, 0.7B

Anyway, this brought up some questions.

1) Some phones give their REN as X.XA  (X being any number),
   while others give theirs as   X.XB.  What do the A & B mean?

2) Why should the least feature-filled phone, a $15 one-piece
   phone have a higher REN than the AT&T phone, which does quite
   a bit more, and rings more loudly, as well?

3) Does the length of wire run figure into REN calculations?
   (I have an extension phone connected to a 250' cord.)

So, I thought I'd give it to the manually implemented database (that's
you).  8)

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

Date: Sat, 27 Jun 92 15:03:28 +0200
From: [e-mail] (Alfredo Cotroneo)
Subject: Fiber Channel Standards Info Wanted


I am looking for the ultimate ANSI specs of the Fiber Channel
standards, but I could not find either the exact document number, nor
where could I obtain a copy from.

Can anybody help, please? I suppose that the standard document numbers
should be available from ANSI.

Does anybody have the address of ANSI (phone/fax/email) handy?.

Any help or further pointer to the Fiber Channel standard documents
will be greatly appreciated. Thanks.


Alfredo E. Cotroneo       Bull HN Information Systems Italia
Pregnana Milanese (Milano)  Italy   email: [e-mail]

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

Date: Sat, 27 Jun 92 09:50:12 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Joseph E. Baker)
Subject: Part 15 Compatible Transceivers


I am interested in purchasing Part 15 compatible spread spectrum
transceivers for use in some system prototypes.  The various
prototypes may cover a fairly wide portion of the range of part 15
allowable bandwidths, so I'm interested in just about anything (at
least anything that actually demodulates the spread signal).  I would
be grateful for any pointers to manufacturers or to sources of
information.  Please reply by email to me, and I will summarize any
responses.


Thanks,

Joe Baker   [e-mail]  [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Tom Streeter)
Subject: Switch Question
Organization: University of North Carolina at Asheville
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1992 21:11:09 GMT


A brief question about something I've been watching all afternoon
(instead of getting any real work done) ...

Crews from AT&T and Southern Bell have been installing what I assume
is a switch outside the building where I work.  A large (maybe
25'x10'x8') metal-and-concrete unit has been placed in a hole that was
dug to accomodate it.  The outer part of the unit is a concrete shell
that is split into a lower and upper half.  The lower half of the
shell consists of a series of equipment racks framed together .  The
metal frames are blue, and the equipment in them looks -- well-- like
the equipment one sees in a phone closet, except more of it.  The top
half of the concrete shell has what looks like a large air conditioner
unit on the top that will be above ground when the hole is filled in.

The only person on the site who didn't look too busy when the lower
half of the unit was being placed in the hole was the guy who is going
to connect the power.  He said the unit was a switch, but couldn't
find any sort of model number in his documentation (he's one of the
few non-SB or AT&T people out there).  He said that he'd been told
that it was being installed to serve only the campus (which is about
to build a couple of new buildings) and is connected to the CO by a
fiber line that was installed last week.

No one who ever played with Tonka toys when they were a kid (or later,
for that matter) could help but to be impressed at the installation
procedure.  The crew guiding the unit into the hole did it with a
nonchalance I'm not sure I could muster standing under anything with
"Wt. 42,000" stenciled on it.  The supervisor (a woman who's obviously
done this more than a couple of times) would give hand signals to the
crane operator asking for adjustments of about six inches or so, fully
expecting him to make such fine adjustements (which he did).  All in
all, it was a smooth operation.

I have a couple of questions I hope someone might be kind enough to
address.  The switch was an AT&T product (based on the number of
things that came in AT&T boxes and the AT&T techs who were running
around).  What kind of switch might this be?  Is it possible that it's
one of those legendary 5ESS's that are discussed here with such vigor,
or are those the sort of things that are only found in COs?  Any
speculation as to what it might be?

My other question is even more speculative (and probably not asked as
directly as possible considering my general ignorance about such
things).  "Campus" numbers are considered those that fall in
704-251-6xxx, that is, those are the numbers that one can use all the
bells and whistles with (call forwarding, park and pickup, three-way,
etc.)  Some campus offices are served on 704-255-9xxx and are reached
from "campus" phones as if they were off-campus (i.e., having to dial
'9' and the whole number to reach them).

A request for a new phone line is considered a relatively big deal
here, and the reason generally given is that there's a shortage of
lines.  Is it possible that the campus will be given an exchange of
its own?  Or is it possible that it will be used to tie the already
existing numbers together under a single set of services (e.g, making
it possible for two 2-6xxx numbers to conference with a 5-9xxx
number).  Are the two possibilities mutually exclusive?  Have I
provided enough information to allow someone to make a decent guess?
Am I missing the point?

Please respond by e-mail, and I'll summarize all that give me
permission to do so.

Thanks.


Tom Streeter                                [e-mail]
Dept. of Mass Communication                 704-251-6227
University of North Carolina at Asheville   Opinions expressed here are
Asheville, NC 28804                         mine alone.

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

From: [e-mail] (J. Philip Miller)
Subject: Missouri Requires Modernization
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 92 6:10:32 CDT


 From the {St. Louis Post Dispatch} 6/25/92

The MO Public Service Commission approved new rules that could prod
the state's 41 telephone companies to modernize their networks and
improve service.  The companies have until next March to submit plans
on how they will comply and what it will cost.  Included among the
particular areas are:

    upgrading all phones to one-party service;
    all customers have touch-tone service;
    provide electronic switch to accomodate enhanced 911;
    support new services like call blocking and call return;
    offer custom calling services to all customers;
    offer equal access for LD between area codes within MO.


     J. Philip Miller, Professor, Division of Biostatistics, Box 8067
     Washington University Medical School, St. Louis MO 63110
     [e-mail] - Internet  [phone] [362-2694(FAX)]

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

From: [e-mail] (J. Philip Miller)
Subject: Update on CWA-AT&T Battle
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 92 6:16:30 CDT


SWBT and the CWA which represents 39,000 of its employees have agreed
to refrain from sanctioing a strike or lockout during negotiations on
a new labor contract.  The agreement can be rescinded only after the
current contract expires.  The company or the union must give 30 days
notice before either side can terminate the agreement.

Vic Crawley, vp of CWA said both sides accept risks in signing the
agreement, "but the upside of the agreement is very positive.  It sets
a productive tone for negotiations where the two sides will be more
like partners than adversaries."

The Communications Workers of America is continuing their "electronic
picketing" by asking people to give the CWA the authority to switch
their long distance carrier.  No one seems to know which carrier will
be blessed with the business.

CWA's latest press releases have been ultra dull stuff about the
merger between their union and one representing broadcast engineers.
I suspect there will be further updates in the CWA newsletter which
should show up any day now.

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

Organization: The American University - University Computing Center
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1992 19:17:27 EDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: AT&T Knows I am Moving. How?


About a week ago I notified US Sprint (my LD carrier) and C&P
telephone (local carrier) to disconnect my service on June 30th,
because I am moving.  Today I received junk mail from AT&T offering me
a "$50 long distance savings bond" if I select them as my LD carrier
for my new home.  Am I correct in assuming that C&P telephone gave
them the information, probably so that my Bell Atlantic phone card
stops working after this date?


Nadim Massoud    [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: AT&T probably buys information like that from the
local telco also.   PAT]

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

Date: Sat, 27 Jun 92 23:32:35 EDT
From: David Leibold <[e-mail]>
Subject: Telecomics


The daily comic Shoe on 18th June featured a character who was working
a fax machine and wound up attempting to fax his tie ...

Any other examples of telecom references in the funnies?


[e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #515
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa04515;
          28 Jun 92 12:51 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA27096
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 27 Jun 1992 20:43:24 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA14609
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 27 Jun 1992 20:43:16 -0500
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1992 20:43:16 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #514

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 27 Jun 92 20:43:19 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 514

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Strange Message on Answering Machine (Bob Yazz)
    Re: Strange Message on Answering Machine (John I. Hritz)
    Re: Telephone Tone Control (Mike Willey)
    Re: Concert-Goers Blast 911 Service (Neil R. Ormos)
    Re: Pac*Bell Posturing (John Higdon)
    Re: Ameritech/IBT (Robert L. McMillin)
    Re: Ameritech/IBT (Charles Mattair)
    Re: The Telco Owns the Numbers (Joel M. Snyder)
    Re: Funny Intercept on 1-710-555-1212 (Alan Boritz)
    Re: Call Own Phone Back Number Wanted (Erik Rauch)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Bob Yazz <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Strange Message on Answering Machine
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1992 20:02:11 GMT


PAT writes:

> Had the hang-up caller stayed on the line even another few
> seconds to hear some of your outgoing message, your machine probably
> would have a recording of dial tone on it instead.  PAT]

My local DMS switch did this a few years back but it's fixed now.
Commonly, the hang-up caller is the machine's owner checking for
messages, and hanging up when a certain number of rings has occurred
(the "toll-saver" feature).

When dialtone runs out, a CPC disconnect should be sent before the
"please hang up" recording.  (Both actions are instructions to hang up
and start again, with the CPC referring to machines and the recording
referring to humans.  A CPC disconnect signal is essentially a
complete drop of the line voltage for 0.8 (or if you ask them to
change it for you) 1.2 seconds.)  My DMS switch wasn't doing this but
it does now.

A CPC should also be sent out when the hang-up caller hangs up, but I
went around and around on this issue with Code-A-Phone techies who
said that line voltage is not guaranteed to be stable for up to two
seconds after a phone is answered, so their machine is programmed to
ignore all line voltage fluctuations, including CPC disconnect
signals, during the first two seconds after it answers the phone.

I eventually got rid of that machine.  Extra delay in sending out the
hang-up CPC disconnect (about one ring cycle's worth of delay) would
also get around the problem.  I don't know how DMS's are doing this
now, but I never get those messages at all anymore.

Of course, maybe the poster's switch is doing everything perfectly, and
his answering machine is just ignoring the CPC.


Bob Yazz

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

From: [e-mail] (John I. Hritz)
Subject: Re: Strange Message on Answering Machine
Date: 27 Jun 92 15:39:59 GMT
Organization: OTA Limited Partnership, Ann Arbor MI 48104 USA


In article <[e-mail]> A. Satish Pai <Pai-Satish@CS.
YALE.EDU> writes:

> Several times (about once in two weeks) I have had the following
> message recorded on my answering machine: "<steady tone> <pause>
> Please hang up and try your call again. This is a recording.
> Two-oh-three-two-one." I presume that this is some sort of automatic

    Kind in the same vane.  I periodically get recordings on my
machine that consist of a <beep> and then a pause of about five
seconds.  This repeats for a couple of minutes.  That's it nothing
else.  I was at home once when the call came in and picked it up.
Just this regular beep.  My guess is that it is some marketing
department trolling for fax machines or (less likely) a cracker
hunting for modems.  The regularity of the beeping makes me thing it's
a recording device with the prerequisite warning tone.

    Any similar experiances?  Or opinions on origin and purpose.
This is one case where CID/ANI would be handy.


John Hritz, [e-mail]    O.T.A. Limited Partnership
101 N. Main, Suite 410    Ann Arbor, MI 48104 [phone]

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

From: mike@uunet!ctbilbo (Mike Willey)
Subject: Re: Telephone Tone Control
Organization: Communications Technology Systems, Inc.
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1992 15:18:56 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Craig
Hubley) writes:

> I am trying to find sources of chips/schematics/electronics to
> translate telephone tones (and possibly also pulses) into specific
> control signals that can be used to control other electronics.

> Even if you don't know of anything specific, names of periodicals and
> catalogs that publish/sell electronics useful in telephony would be
> very welcome.  I will post back anything useful that I find but please
> email me so that I can collect the material in a sane way.

Check the Teltone T-310, it communicates line activity and provides
limited line control through an RS-232C async port.  This is really
good pooky, we use them to help test our equipment from time to time.

I don't have an exact address or TN handy, but they are headquartered
in Kirkland, Washington.


Cheers,

Mike Willey   Communication Technology Corporation   Dallas, Texas

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

Date: Sat, 27 Jun 92 15:15:01 -0600
From: Neil R. Ormos <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Concert-Goers Blast 911 Service


In <[e-mail]> (24 Jun 92 04:52:51 GMT)
[e-mail] (Barry Mishkind) quotes the {Tucson Citizen},
6/23/92 as reporting:

> The Tucson area's 911 line was snarled yesterday when callers
> trying to get tickets to a concert overload the local telephone
> system...

and laments:

> And not an apology in the house! Of course, _not one_ employee of
> US Worst saw this coming, nor told a supervisor about it, nor
> cared ...

to which our Moderator responds:

> And had telco known in advance (did any of the concert
> promoters advise telco of the times, etc?), what in your
> estimation might telco have done about it, other than possibly
> block off access from certain exchanges when traffic was heavy?

We've had similar problems in the Chicago area with telephone problems
associated with the computer ticket services.  The ticket services,
the telco, and the utility regulators are responsible to prevent them.
These problems are essentially public nuisances, and they ought to be
treated as such.

In any case, the telcos can help prevent these problems.  The telcos
are well aware of the potential for unusual load-induced service
disruption and have developed tools to avoid or remedy it.  It is not
unusual for telcos to assign subscribers who are expected to receive
high peak call volumes to a selected exchange.  (For example, in
Chicago, the studio/contest lines of most radio stations are 591-xxxx
numbers.  This allows other switches to recognize excessive call
attempts to the selected exchange and block such calls, when
necessary, without blocking normal calls.

Thus, the telco should be responsible for knowing the type of business
its subscribers conduct and assigning problem subscribers, at the
subscriber's expense, to high volume exchanges.  It is clearly
forseeable that ticket selling services and the like will cause
load-induced problems.  (There are probably some exceptions to this;
e.g.  a rush of calls to a drug-company's product information hotline
as a result of publicity about product tampering is probably not a
forseeable event of sufficiently high probability to justify such
assignment).

Where it is not possible or feasable to provide a suitable
technological solution to the problem, telephone service should be
tariffed to prohibit such improper uses of the telephone system and to
hold the subscriber responsible (i.e. liable) for intentional abuse.
We have land use policy (i.e. zoning), pollution control law, and
other regulation to control similar anti-social behavior; the fact
that this particular nuisance occurs in the telphone system should not
prevent us from protecting the public interest in reliable
communications.

I might add that there are better (and socially fairer) ways to
distribute high-demand tickets, but as long as the concert promoters
and ticket sellers are permitted to use a public-resource-intensive
mechanism without paying the fully loaded cost, they have no incentive
to investigate them.


neil ormos  [e-mail]

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

Date: Thu, 25 Jun 92 02:37 PDT
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: Pac*Bell Posturing


[e-mail] (Andrew Klossner) writes:

> This isn't true from the telco's perspective.  To "turn on" the
> system, they must:

Really? Let us look at each of these in relation to the real world and
Pac*Bell's stated intentions.

> Market the service, otherwise they won't get enough demand to
> justify their costs;

Pac*Bell intends to market the other CLASS features. How much more
does it cost to market CNID in conjuction with the CLASS services in
general as opposed to all of those services without CNID? I submit
that the cost is negligible.

> Train their rep and service people in the features;

As well as for the other features--again an negligible, incremental
cost.

> Turn their graphics -- the existing subscriber instructions don't
> discuss CLASS;

But the new ones will, with or without Caller-ID. And how much more
will it cost for the CNID space?

>  ... and so on.  There's a lot more to providing telecom service than
> wiring a switch.

This whole argument would hold water a lot better if the company had
not intended to go ahead and offer all of the other CLASS features. It
costs virtually the same to promote, train, and educate in the matter
whether it be for five services or for six services.

BTW, I got these points from someone who actually works for Pac*Bell
and who agrees that the whole public announcement is indeed posturing.


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

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

Date: Sat, 27 Jun 92 03:45:39 -0700
From: rlm@ms_aspen.hac.com (Robert L. McMillin)
Subject: Re: Ameritech/IBT


Scott Dorsey <[e-mail]> writes:

> In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
> (Bill Nickless) writes:

>>  ... until you want things like ISDN.  Ameritech/IBT seems to be among
>> the slowest to offer data services to the home.  I am under the
>> impression that they're behind some un-named California telcos.

> ISDN?  In the home?  I'm in a C&P area and we just got touch-tone
> service for the first time last year.  I asked the craftsman who came
> out to install a second line last month about ISDN services, and he
> said that he had recently been at a seminar on the systems, but said
> that the chances of it being available in my lifetime were slim.

Yes -- from C&P.  Demand dial tone competition now.  Residential ISDN
will continue to be telephonic vaporware unless we can break out the
crowbar of legal competition against the arrogant RBOCs, whose
managements are largely interested in using their profit-guaranteed
POTS to subsidize other, more potentially lucrative ventures -- which
they frequently know nothing about.  If they applied the same
imagination and capital to upgrading the telephone system, we might be
well on our way to an all-digital network by now.


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

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

Date: Sat, 27 Jun 92 12:04:11 CDT
From: [e-mail] (Charles Mattair)
Subject: Re: Ameritech/IBT
Organization: Synercom Technology, Inc., Houston, TX


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

> In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
> (Bill Nickless) writes:

>>  ... until you want things like ISDN.  Ameritech/IBT seems to be among
>> the slowest to offer data services to the home.  I am under the
>> impression that they're behind some un-named California telcos.

> ISDN?  In the home?  I'm in a C&P area and we just got touch-tone
> service for the first time last year.  I asked the craftsman who came
> out to install a second line last month about ISDN services, and he
> said that he had recently been at a seminar on the systems, but said
> that the chances of it being available in my lifetime were slim.
> Sigh.

Ditto for Houston.  I called re ISDN for my home.  $200 or so per month.

SW Bell has only wired two offices for ISDN: one downtown and the
other somewhere out in the hustings.  I'm not in one of them.  The
cost was for the FX number and dedicated cable pairs they would have
to allocate.  Also, ISDN does not go outside those offices.

Trying to find out this much took a week and several many phone calls.
The most frustrating thing was finding someone to talk with.  Say ISDN
and you get a referral to the business side; as soon as those people
determine the number is residential, they won't talk with you.  Gotta
call the residential side.  Those poor, helpful souls have never heard
of ISDN.

Reminds me of a parody of one of SWB's slogans.  "We may be the only
phone company in town and we damn well act like it."


Charles Mattair     (preferred) [e-mail]
  (or)    [e-mail]
Any opinions offered are my own and do not reflect those of my employer.

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

Subject: Re: The Telco Owns the Numbers
From: [e-mail]
Date: 27 Jun 1992 17:34 MST
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: University of Arizona MIS Department


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Mark W.
Schumann) writes:

> I once got a package from my dad addressed to:

>                              12-39
>                           50112-0805

The stories go on: the University of Arizona's ZIP is 85721.  Anything
sent to that ZIP gets sorted by our mailroom.  That means you can
address something to Joel Snyder, 85721, and it'll get there just fine
 -- in fact, no slower than the normal mail.

ZIP + 4 normally selects at the block level (there's a ZIP + 4 book in
your post office for your town); for some places, obviously, the + 4
gets it a lot closer, such as a PO Box (mentioned previously), a
single office building, etc.


Joel M Snyder, 1103 E Spring Street, Tucson, AZ, 85719
Phone: [phone] (voice) .4095 (FAX) .4093 (data)
BITNET: jms@Arizona  Internet: [e-mail]  SPAN: 47541::telcom::jms

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

Subject: Re: Funny Intercept on 1-710-555-1212
From: Alan Boritz <[e-mail]>
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 92 12:51:32 EST
Organization: Harry's Place BBS - Mahwah NJ - [phone]


[e-mail] (David W. Barts) writes:

> US West (Pacific Northwest Bell) does nothing in particular after
> 1-710 is dialed.  But if you complete the number by dialing seven more
> digits, you get the familiar "<SIT> We're sorry, your call cannot be
> completed as dialed.  Please check the number, and try again."
> recording.

New Jersey Bell gives the same "cannot be completed as dialed"
intercept, but the same number (1-710-555-1212) provokes an
interesting intercept when dialed with a 10XXX.  NJ Bell says that a
long distance access code is not required.


[e-mail] (Alan Boritz)
Harry's Place BBS - Mahwah NJ - [phone]

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

From: Erik Rauch <hourglas![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Call Own Phone Back Number Wanted
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 92 16:16:25 EDT


[e-mail] (Rich Mintz):

> if your phone number is 345-1234, there is an alternate xyz-1234
> number which connects you to this "test" number.

> I've found this "alternate" prefix many times through sequential
> dialing with my modem and uning the Hayes 'W' command to wait for a
> dial tone after the number is dialed (that's what you get when the
> test number answers) and testing whether the result code is "No
> Dialtone" or "No Carrier" (which means it DID find the dialtone and
> went on to wait for a carrier).
> Once the call completes and you get the dial-tone sound, a flash
> changes it to a higher pitched tone.

Yes, this seems to be the most common mode. You don't have to go
dialing random "special" exchanges, however; they usually are
clustered, most of the time having the same two first digits.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #514
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa06806;
          28 Jun 92 13:45 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA03488
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 26 Jun 1992 22:01:06 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA21739
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 26 Jun 1992 22:00:57 -0500
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1992 22:00:57 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #512

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 26 Jun 92 22:01:00 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 512

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Concert-Goers Blast 911 Service (Mark Cavallaro)
    Re: Concert-Goers Blast 911 Service (Adam M. Gaffin)
    Re: Concert Goers Blast 911 Service (Leonard Erickson)
    Re: Concert-Goers Blast 911 Service (John Rice)
    Re: For National Security Reasons, Stop Talking About 710 (Foster Schucker)
    Re: For National Security Reasons, Stop Talking About 710 (L. Erickson)
    Re: For National Security Reasons, Stop Talking About 710 (Ron Natalie)
    Re: Longest Phonecall (David B. Whiteman)
    Re: Longest Phonecall (Richard Nash)
    Re: Longest Phonecall (Gary Morris)
    Re: Longest Phonecall (Stephen Davies)
    Re: Longest Phonecall (David Schachter)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Concert-Goers Blast 911 Service
Date: 25 Jun 92 09:12:26 PST
Organization: Science Applications Int'l Corp./San Diego


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Barry Mishkind) wrote:

> Louise Rebholz, community relations manager for the phone company,
> said jammed lines resulted in some calls not being routed to 911. In
> some instances, people trying to reach the police and emergency line
> got a busy signal or a recorded message instead of 911 operators, she
> said.
                   -----

> And not an apology in the house! Of course, _not one_ employee of US

> [Moderator's Note: Come now, do you *really* think US West or any
> telco relishes these situations and ignores them 'because they are the
> phone company'?  And had telco known in advance (did any of the
> concert promoters advise telco of the times, etc?), what in your
> estimation might telco have done about it, other than possibly block
> off access from certain exchanges when traffic was heavy?    PAT]

Pat, I may be mistaken, but I believe CO switches can be programmed
and/or configured to ensure that 911 ALWAYS has reserved trunking/and
priority for calls.


Mark


[Moderator's Note: Yes, true IF your local CO can get around to
providing you with a dial tone and IF the CO can then find time to
look at and translate what you have dialed. Until that point -- if
there are delays in that stage -- HOW is telco supposed to know you
want to call 911?  Once it is ascertained calling party wants 911,
then fine -- give the customer what he wants.  But what about the
calls lost before that point? People don't have direct lines to 911,
you know.    PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Adam M Gaffin)
Subject: Re: Concert-Goers Blast 911 Service
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1992 17:45:12 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> asuvax!gtephx!bakerj@
ncar.UCAR.EDU (Jon Baker) writes:

> It is not the responsibility of the promoters to notify the telco.
> However, prudent network managers do keep tabs on upcoming events,
> such as this, by monitoring the radio and newspapers.  An ounce of

When I visited New England Telephone's Network Operations Center a few
months back, I was curious why they had CNN showing on the largest of
the Dr.-Strangelove-style screens in the middle of the room.  Turns
out that whenever an ad comes on that network with an 800 number, NET
experiences a surge of calls to the 800 provider (ditto with any
breaking stories, particularly of the international variety).


Adam Gaffin
Middlesex News, Framingham, Mass.
[e-mail]
Voice: [phone]. Fred the Middlesex News Computer: [phone].

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

From: [e-mail] (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Concert Goers Blast 911 Service
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: SCN Research/Qic Laboratories of Tigard, Oregon.
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1992 04:52:06 GMT


[e-mail] (Lauren Weinstein) writes:

> Greetings.  Pat, you asked what the solution is to these recurring
> "concert fans saturate phone system" events.  The solution is
> simplicity itself.  Until such a time as the phone networks are
> capable of handling such concentrations in a more reasonable manner,
> you either voluntarily request (or legislate, if that doesn't work)
> that ticket sales which are likely to cause such saturations will not
> be conducted by phone.  It's not as if these concerts usually pop out
> of thin air -- they're typically planned far in advance.  The
> rationale for such restrictions would be the denial to customers of
> necessary phone services, both emergency and normal, that otherwise
> results.

> Ticket purchases in such cases could be by mail, with priority by
> postmark date, perhaps with a number of tickets preallocated for
> different parts of the city/areas to avoid unfair skewing of orders.
> Print little forms in the local magazines/newspapers to make it all
> simple for the buyers.  While they're at it, some limits on the number
> of tickets that can be sent to any one address might be a good idea as
> well, to help avoid the massive "blocks" of tickets which are later
> sold or scalped at way above face value, often locking many "average"
> people out of the shows.

> There are some applications for which our current phone networks just
> aren't the best choice.

Actually, as has been described many times in the past here, the phone
system *is* set up to handle this sort of things. That's what "choke"
prefixes are for.

The tricks is to force these outfits to use them. If *I* were drawing
up a law to prevent such outages, I'd merely authorize the phone
company to charge the business responsible for the overload for all
lost revenues *plus* any extra costs incurred by the overload *plus*
some sort of damages. The only allowable defenses would be if the
business could not have reasonably foressen the demand, or if the
phone company had been asked for a number on the choke exchange, but
not responded in a timely manner.

Yes, I know there'd need to be a lot more detail. But I also think
that businesses should be responsible for this sort of abuse of the
network!


Leonard Erickson   [e-mail]
CIS: [70465,203]   [e-mail]
FIDO:   1:105/56   [e-mail]
(The CIS address is checked daily. The others infrequently)

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Concert-Goers Blast 911 Service
Organization: Teradyne Inc., Telecommunications Division
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 92 18:32:43 GMT


> [Moderator's Note: Come now, do you *really* think US West or any
> telco relishes these situations and ignores them 'because they are the
> phone company'?  And had telco known in advance (did any of the
> concert promoters advise telco of the times, etc?), what in your
> estimation might telco have done about it, other than possibly block
> off access from certain exchanges when traffic was heavy?    PAT]

Pat,

   I'd have to disagree. Proper design of a "Life and Death" emergency
system should preclude ANY intruption of that service based on trunk
loading. 911 trunks should be Independent of any other traffic.


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


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

Subject: Re: For National Security Reasons, Stop Talking About 710
From: tredysvr!nzkites![e-mail] (Foster Schucker)
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 92 19:40:36 NZT
Organization: Kiteflyers Roost


[e-mail] (James G. Speth) writes:

> Out of curiosity, what are some of the LESS benign forums?

> [Moderator's Note: Would anyone like to address Mr. Speth's question?
> For the sake of neutrality, I will refrain for now.  PAT]

Pat, Pat, Pat, how could you miss "alt.sex.phone" for the 900 fans and
"alt.sex.bondage.phone" for our GTE readers?  ;-)


Foster Schucker -- "You are welcome to my opinion, I'm done using it."

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

From: [e-mail] (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: For National Security Reasons, Stop Talking About 710
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: SCN Research/Qic Laboratories of Tigard, Oregon.
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1992 04:37:05 GMT


After much hacking, I've solved the secret of the 710 areacode ...

First you %I&*))_*_

NO CARRIER


Leonard Erickson   [e-mail]
CIS: [70465,203]   [e-mail]
FIDO:   1:105/56   [e-mail]
(The CIS address is checked daily. The others infrequently)


[Moderator's Note: Now we see what happens to people who try to
reveal the secrets of area code 710.  :)    PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Ron Natalie)
Subject: Re: For National Security Reasons, Stop Talking About 710
Date: 25 Jun 92 13:50:41 GMT
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.


> Out of curiosity, what are some of the LESS benign forums?

When I was back doing security work for the Army, the security office
used to forward me things like the 2600 newsletter and TAP.  Actually
2600 was very much like the TELECOM Digest.  A lot of discussions of
things like how payphones actually worked and things like that.  Every
once and a while there would be articles on how to hack into some
large companies internal long distance system or computer network.  (I
seem to recall, hacking Telenet, as easy as 123456.  Frankly, having
been a legitimate Telenet user, I can't imagine anyone havig the
patience to hack it).  TAP is less technically oriented, but more a
dissemination on how to get into things.

These are mass market things, I would suspect that a whole culture of
phreak BBS is probably out there for the serious cracker.


Ron

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

From: [e-mail] (David B. Whiteman)
Subject: Re: Longest Phonecall
Organization: Crash TimeSharing, El Cajon, CA
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1992 07:51:57 GMT


Eight years ago I first tried a new long distance phone company that
was setting up in San Diego.  My first phone call with them was placed
on 3/30/84 to my father.  I don't remember how long the call lasted,
but it was no longer than a few minutes.  About a week later I got my
first statement with a closing date of 3/31/84, and a postmark of
4/5/84.  This statement listed only my first phone call to my father.
According to the statement the call lasted 999 hours, 59 minutes, and
9 tenths of a second, and the call took placed on 5/11/84.

It took me three calls until I reached a supervisor that took the
charge off my phone bill.  I kept asking the billing reps how their
computer can predict that I would be making the phonce call a few
weeks in the future.  One rep said the computer must have made a
mistake and was just billing for the phone call a year late, but the
company was not in existance the preceding year.

I eventually cancelled my account when I discovered that the calling
card travel codes were only six digits long, and issued in consecutive
numerical order.  The phone company had a booth on campus to sign up
students as customers and my two friends and myself who signed up
after each other had travel codes that were in sequence.


David Whiteman [e-mail]

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

Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1992 21:51:57 +0100
From: [e-mail] (Richard Nash)
Subject: Re: Longest Phonecall


In a message dated 21-JUN-92, Brent Whitlock writes:

>> Speaking of phone calls, I remember hearing a story once about a girl
>> who went to Paris for the summer, while her boyfriend went to Hawaii.
>> They were going to miss each other so much they had to talk often, but
>> they couldn't afford a hefty phone bill.  So what they did was to leave
>> the phone off the hook at both ends for the entire month of July.  They
>> would talk, make arrangements for what time they'd come back, and talk
>> some more.  When the phone bill eventually arrived, it was for a couple
>> thousand dollars, and the girl took it to the phone company and complained
>> that this COULDN'T be right, and they decided it was a computer glitch
>> and deleted it.

>> It was told to me as a FOAF, has anybody heard anything similar?

> Back in the 1970's, there was some speculation by phone 'enthusiasts'
> that if a call was established and not terminated for quite some time,
> the 'system' (this was in the days of THE system) would forget about
> it and no billing record would be generated.  I don't know anyone who
> tried it.  A twist on this was that if the service was disconnected
> before the call was terminated, no billing record would be generated.

This may have been already mentioned by someone, but in the DMS
100/200 switches, an AMA Long Duration log is generated whenever a
call exceeds a predefined interval as engineered by the operating
telco.  Operations surveillance computers can flag these calls for
maintenance staff to investigate as to whether the circuit is actually
being used.


Richard Nash        Edmonton, Alberta Canada T6K 0E8
UUCP:            trickie![e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Gary Morris)
Subject: Re: Longest Phonecall
Organization: TeleSoft, San Diego, CA, USA
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1992 20:37:08 GMT


In <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Jack Winslade) writes:

> I would hate to see what the bill would be like if these were
> international calls.  ;-)

We had one of those about three years ago.  Someone using an outbound
modem here in San Diego was logged into a system in Sweden.  The port
got hung and they thought the connection was dropped and went home,
but the modems were still connected.  It was a Sunday and the
port/modem didn't get reset until Monday morning.  The bill for that
one call, about 15 hours, was about $700.  We now have idle timeouts
on the modems.


GaryM

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

From: [e-mail] (Stephen Davies)
Subject: Re: Longest Phonecall
Date: 25 Jun 92 12:10:32 GMT
Organization: Compustat (Pty) Ltd


[e-mail] (Jack Winslade) writes:

> We had a similar case shortly after where a system in Houston called
> us.  Ours shut down after the session, but his end remained up and for
> some reason he was billed for several hours of LD time.  If I remember
> correctly, he had no hassle getting the charges removed.  (Marc, you
> listening in down there ??)

> I would hate to see what the bill would be like if these were
> international calls.  ;-)

This has happened to me.  My mailer software crashed whilst connected
from South Africa to the UK.  The call stayed up about three hours
before I noticed it.  Here is South Africa we are still in the days of
the big monopoly.  International rates are over R400 ($160) per hour,
and there is no cheaper after-hours rate.

There is no itemized billing here, but by my reckoning that crash cost
me over R1000 ($400).  Telkom were not interested in letting me off
the hook (so to speak).

Nowadays I watch for that sort of bug quite a bit more carefully!

Pat, I must say the the TELECOM Digest is quite mind-boggling reading
for us South Africans.  Here we have a growing number of digital
exchanges but still many-many crossbars.  Most South Africans don't
even have a telephone at all.

We have quite a few manual exchanges around too.  A couple of years
back there was a program showing on TV called "Nommer, Asseblief"
(Number, please).  This is the phrase you would usually hear after you
cranked your phone (!)  and the operator came on the line.

So hearing about all your post-divestiture "problems" tends to make my
mouth water ...


Regards from a rainy Cape Town,
Steve Davies

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

From: [e-mail] (David Schachter)
Subject: Re: Longest Phonecall
Organization: Greenwire Consulting
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 92 18:31:26 GMT


We had a VAX 730 in Mountain View, CA, with a dial-up X.25 connection
to our Israel R&D subsidiary.  Due to a bug, allegedly in DEC's X.25
software, the connection was held for a month.  The phone bill was in
the tens of thousands of dollars.  We paid half and the phone company
ate the rest.  We also turned the machine off.

This was in the mid 1980's.


David Schachter
internet:    [e-mail]
uucp:        ...!{mips,decwrl,sgi}!llustig!david


[Moderator's Note: Amoco Oil here in Chicago once had a connection
that stayed up for gawd knows how many months (years?). It was an
incoming 800 line into an ACD (automatic call distributor) which never
got disconnected. No one wanted to hear about it; all my complaints
were in vain. I finally got a repair foreman interested; once he
yanked down the connection, the bill turned out to be over a hundred
thousand dollars. It took me a month to get anyone to listen to reason
and locate the problem; who knows how long it had been bad before
that.  This was back in 1974.

IBT had to eat it, which annoyed them no end, but it was their ACD,
their consoles and lines, etc. They actually billed Amoco for the call
at first; an Amoco attorney told IBT he'd sue them in a minute if they
pulled something like that again. I wrote a little blurb about this in
Harry Newton's {Teleconnect Magazine} several years ago. Maybe some of
you read the article.  PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #512
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa02776;
          29 Jun 92 0:14 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA10638
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 28 Jun 1992 22:17:54 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA30177
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 28 Jun 1992 22:17:43 -0500
Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1992 22:17:43 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #516

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 28 Jun 92 22:17:46 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 516

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    We Were Isolated Saturday (TELECOM Moderator)
    911 Circuitry Can Detect 91 (Bruce Schlobohm)
    Sorry, But 911 is Not in Service at This Time (Paul Robinson)
    911 in Australia (David B. Whiteman)
    Voiding 911 (Barry Mishkind)
    Newfoundland Province Code 709 (Carl Moore)
    Massachusetts Deregulates AT&T (John R. Levine)
    Massachusetts DPU Relaxes Rules on AT&T (Monty Solomon)
    Bronx Discrepancies (Carl Moore)
    Professor Seeks Telecom Sabbatical Position (Bruce Klopfenstein)
    Two Questions From a Newcomer (Sam Israelit)
    AT&T Billing (Part 2) (John Higdon)
    Caller-ID Comes to Toledo -- Maybe (Steven S. Brack)
    First Pics via Cellular (Martin McCormick)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1992 12:14:15 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <telecom>
Subject: We Were Isolated Saturday


 From about 2 AM Saturday morning until about 11 AM Sunday morning,
for some reason we were unable to get out to the world. All I was able
to get was a message 'host name lookup failure' in response to
attempts to mail the Digests (512-513-514-515) and post them to the
net using our nntpxmit program.

Likewise, no incoming mail during all that time. Then a couple hours
ago, whatever was holding things up got fixed, and the mail started
rolling in again. Indications are the above issues of the Digest did
finally get delivered, and I reposted them to comp.dcom.telecom as
well.

I got this response from an administrator here:

   Subject: Re: network links down on Saturday?
   Date: Sun, 28 Jun 92 13:02:33 -0500
   From: Bill Westphal <[e-mail]>

Sorry 'bout that.  The department router was down.  We've rebooted it.

Bill

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

So there you have it. If issues 512-513-514-515 did not reach your
site, please let me know, or try to get them from the Telecom Archives
if possible.  (ftp lcs.mit.edu)


PAT

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

From: [e-mail] (Bruce Schlobohm)
Subject: 911 Circuitry Can Detect 91
Date: 28 Jun 92 18:05:40 GMT
Organization: Pyramid Technology, San Jose, Ca.


At work, our PBX requires that we dial 9 + 1 + areacode+ phone-number
for calls outside of the 408 areacode.  A colleague here has become
very adept at starting most phone calls with 9 + 1. A couple of days
ago, he was at home, and started dialing 9 + 1, and then remembered he
was not at work so he hung up.  A few minutes later he received a call
from a dispatcher asking if he was in any trouble, and that there was
a police car on its way to help him out!

After things calmed down, the dispatcher told him that they knew he
had only dialed 91, and not 911, and had debated as to whether to
consider it to be a distress call or not.

I didn't realize that 91 can be detected by the 911 circuitry.  I
wonder how often this type of thing happens?

(For the curious, this person lives in the Los Gatos or Campbell area;
I'm sorry I can't be more precise at the moment.)


bruce schlobohm      [e-mail]

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

Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Date: Sun, 28 Jun 92  11:42:02 EDT
Subject: Sorry, But 911 is Not in Service at This Time


Reported on DC-Area Based Cable Channel "News Channel 8":

A man in Australia had been watching the U.S. program "Rescue 911,"
one of a series of "reality based" TV shows that depict re-enactments
of actual events.  This show generally shows the effectiveness of the
U.S. 9-1-1 virtually universal emergency telephone number.

In this gentleman's case, however, it was not effective.  The
gentleman kept trying to call 911 in order to get the fire department
to put out a fire in his building!  By the time he got through to the
fire department, an extra nine minutes had elapsed; the fire destroyed
the entire second floor of the building.

Now, when the show is broadcast in Australia, they post an
announcement that the correct number there is 0-0-0.


Paul Robinson     This opinion is MINE, and nobody else's (who'd want it?)

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

From: [e-mail] (David B. Whiteman)
Subject: 911 in Australia
Organization: Crash TimeSharing, El Cajon, CA
Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1992 07:55:48 GMT


The radio had a news story about a fellow in Australia who loved to
watch the TV show Rescue 911.  When his house was on fire he kept
frantically trying to dial 911 without sucess.  He forgot that where
he lived one dials "0 0 0" (three zeros) for emergency services.


David Whiteman [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Barry Mishkind)
Subject: Voiding 911
Organization: Datalog Consulting, Tucson, AZ
Date: Sun, 28 Jun 92 19:50:51 GMT


Headline in Wednesday, June 24 {Tucson Citizen}:

DISASTER MAY RENDER 911 VOID

Fans of Country singer proved the point Monday.

Tucson's 911 emergency number might be useless during a disaster such
as a large explosion or earthquake, even if 911 equipment survived
undamaged, city officials concede.

Apparently someone at (are you ready?) the newspaper office had a
stroke, and no one could reach 911. After trying several times, a
co-worker decided it was faster to drive the person to a clinic than
trust to the 911 system.

So who's at fault here? The country singer's promo guys for rigging
the ticket sales to do this? The city for not having any real
alternative (they claim they would use two-way radio in the event of a
real emergency)? the US West for not choking the system faster?

I wonder if this pattern will continue until someone "important" dies.
Nah, after all, the Congress has its own ambulance ready at all times
 -- remember no civilian can use it.


Barry Mishkind     [e-mail]   FidoNet 1:300/11.3

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

Date: Sun, 28 Jun 92 12:09:12 EDT
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject: Newfoundland Province Code 709


It's my understanding that area codes originally came out in late
1940s?  Anyway, a Wilmington, Del. radio station had a trivia-contest
question about which parts of North American continent (excluding
Caribbean Islands) were still British colonies in the 1940s.  The
answer is British Honduras (now Belize) and Newfoundland, the latter
being a surprise to me.  I have since read that Newfoundland was not
incorporated as a province of Canada until 1949.  Newfoundland (which
includes mainland Labrador) is area code 709.  Notice that the French
islands of St. Pierre et Miquelon are right next to Newfoundland, but
have country code 508.


[Moderator's Note: Someone said to me that despite the different
country code noted above, there is 'local community dialing' between
some points in southern Newfoundland and the islands. Either a
straight seven-digit connection, or some code followed by the local
number on the islands. Can anyone comment on this?   PAT]

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

Subject: Massachusetts Deregulates AT&T
Date: Sun, 28 Jun 92 12:28:52 EDT
From: John R. Levine <[e-mail]>


The local papers report that the Massachusetts DPU has deregulated
AT&T's intrastate interlata service, since the market is now
considered competitive.  Other companies' interlata rates have never
been regulated.  Operator assisted calls are still regulated, and
there is some sort of price cap for people whose long distance phone
bills are under $5/month.

Note that this is only for calls between the 413 area and the 617/508
areas; anything else is either interstate or intralata.  I don't know
if Mass. allows intra-lata competition, but the New England Tel rates
are low enough that it's not a big issue -- a maximum of 31 cents
first minute, 13 cents/extra minute day rate anywhere within the LATA.

AT&T applied for this a year ago.  NET, who appear to believe that the
only good regulator is a dead regulator, supported them.  MCI, Sprint,
and the state Attorney General opposed them.


Regards,

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

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

Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1992 20:30:00 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <[e-mail]>
Subject: Massachusetts DPU Relaxes Rules on AT&T


 From the 6/24/92 {Boston Globe}:

The Department of Public Utilities yesterday removed some of the
regulatory shackles on AT&T in Massachusetts.  In its ruling, the DPU
essentially agreed with AT&T that intrastate long-distance calling was
now a competitive market.

In its decision, the DPU declared that AT&T was no longer bound by
rate-of-return regulations -- that is, profitability analysis performed
by the DPU -- in setting rates for long-distance calls within the
state.

The DPU also removed many of AT&T's filing requirements, saying it
would now review rate changes in 30 days, rather than six months.  But
the DPU retained regulations in two marketplaces, where it determined
that AT&T did not face sufficient competition from rival carriers such
as MCI and Sprint.

For customers who make no more than $5 worth of calls a month, AT&T
was required to freeze prices at the 1990 level.  Also, if AT&T wants
to change the rate for operator services -- any calls requiring the
assistance of an operator -- it must file comprehensive cost data, as
in the past.

AT&T has been seeking less regulation for several years, but the DPU
has traditionally argued that the market had not sufficiently
developed to prevent it from engaging in anticompetitive behavior.

With yesterday's decision, the DPU follows the trend of most states,
which have relaxed regulations on interstate calling.  Such
regulations date back to before 1982, when the court ordered a breakup
of the Bell System.

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

Date: Sun, 28 Jun 92 9:13:48 EDT
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject: Bronx Discrepancies


I have now located some recent New York City phone books in the Newark
(Delaware) library.  One set of yellow pages has "Effective July 1,
1992 718 is the new area code for the BRONX", but a white-pages call
guide says "Starting May 16, 1993, Area Code 718" in a footnote of a
listing of Bronx in 212.

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

From: [e-mail] (Bruce Klopfenstein)
Subject: Professor Seeks Telecom Sabbatical Position
Date: 28 Jun 92 15:23:03 GMT
Organization: Bowling Green State University B.G., Oh.


I teach new telecommunications technologies in a social science (not
engineering) program at Bowling Green State University in Ohio.  I am
interested in identifying potential sabbatical positions for all or
part of the 1993-1994 academic year.  I must have a proposal written
by 15 October 1992.

The purpose of this faculty improvement leave is to allow the scholar
to pursue new or existing research interests.  I am very interested in
the future telecommunications infrastructure, the advanced intelligent
network, and broadband services to the home.  My degrees are in
communication (social science) with the graduate degrees coming from
Ohio State, site of the current Center for the Advanced Study of
Telecommunications (CAST).

I want to identify possible positions in the telecommunications
industry that would allow me to learn and write about any or all of
the topics named above.  An example project for me would to be to work
on a telecommunications technology text for non-engineering students
(broadcast students, for example).  As a teacher in this area, I can
safely say there are no good texts available right now.  Such a
project could be underwritten, for example, by a foundation supported
by a telecommunications organization (GTE, Northern Telecom,
Ameritech, AT&T, etc.).

What's in this for me is a chance to write a book that I have not had
time to write (again, that's the purpose of a sabbatical).  What's in
it for a telecommunications sponsor is a work that can be used by
non-engineering students around the country (if I do the job right)
that will better prepare them for entry into the telecommunications
industries.  I expect the students who are now preparing themselves
for employment in the broad- casting industry will be attractive to
the telecommunications industry in the very near future.

I also am interested in telecommunications policy as well as
forecasting consumer adoption of telecommunications innovations as
other possible research topics.

All reactions, suggestions, contacts, and other ideas cheerfully
accepted.  An electronic version of my resume is available upon
request.

Thanks for your help.


Bruce C. Klopfenstein, Ph.D.      |  [e-mail]
Associate Professor and Chair     |  [e-mail]
Department of Telecommunications  |  [e-mail]
322 West Hall                     |  Voice: [phone] or 2224
Bowling Green State University    |  Home: [phone]
Bowling Green, OH  43403-0235     |  fax [phone]

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

Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1992 11:07:52 -0800
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Two Questions From a Newcomer


I have two questions:

1). Is there a forum on the Internet that is dedicated to ISDN? What
about ATM?

2). Has anyone heard of an ISDN interface for Macintosh computers?

Thanks in advance for any useful info!


Sam Israelit
Engineer, Businessman, ... Brewer     Portland, OR

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

Date: Sun, 28 Jun 92 13:49 PDT
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: AT&T Billing (Part 2)


This month's bill from Pac*Bell contained two more calls to (you
guessed it) the UK billed by AT&T. But this time when I called for
adjustment, things went a bit differently.

As you will recall, last month I was flatly told that if the calls
appeared as direct-dialed, there could be no mistake and there could
be no credit issued. After creating a fuss, AT&T issued, reluctantly,
a "one time" credit. After that, I was told, future calls would have
to be paid for (whether I made them or not was the implication).

This time when I called AT&T to point out the two new calls, I was
immediately put on hold. When the gentleman came back he told me that
a credit would be issued for those calls and to deduct them from my
bill.  Period.

Conclusions? Either AT&T has a very inconsistent policy, or some notes
have been made on my records. In any event, the number to which those
calls were billed has been changed. It will be interesting to see what
happens in the future.


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

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

Date: 28 Jun 1992 17:22:26 -0400 (EDT)
From: [e-mail] (Steven S. Brack)
Subject: Caller-ID Comes to Toledo -- Maybe


Ohio Bell hasn't announced any plans to offer Caller*ID in my area
(Toledo, Ohio) that I know of.  But, upon wandering around in the
phone section of a local store, what do I find?  A Caller*ID box.

It's selling for around $100, can recall the last number it received,
and has a "Bell Products" label on it.  Shades of things to come?

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

Subject: First Pics via Cellular
Date: Sun, 28 Jun 92 06:13:07 -0500
From: [e-mail]


     A fellow member of one of our local amateur radio clubs is doing
an intern-ship at KOCO TV Channel 5 in Oklahoma City.  He was able to
give me some more information on the First Pics system which lets them
transmit still pictures via cellular phone.  The major components of
the system are a Sony Betacam, a celular phone, and, what I'll call
the heart of the system, a small Sony digitizer and modem package
which connects the video system to the cell phone.

     My information source believes that the interface box connects to
the cell phone through the handset interface.

     When a reporter wants to send a picture, he or she connects the
monitor output from the Betacam to the video input on the digitizer
and watches the monitor until just the right shot is observed.  At the
push of a button, a single frame of color video is digitized and
buffered.  It is, then, able to be transmitted via the cell phone back
to the station.

     Transmission time for one frame is 45 seconds.  The picture is
full-color, but slightly grainier than a standard frame of NTSC video
which indicates that the buffer doesn't store every pixel of the NTSC
frame.  The system is bidirectional, allowing the TV station to send
weather map video or shots of the radar display back to the field
crew.  Since the Betacam is used as the video input to the system,
lots of flexibility is possible.  The crew can take full- motion
video, send the best stills back over the cellular phone, and play the
full-motion shots when the crew returns to the station.

     We will most surely see these systems at work in all possible
types of situations.  They represent the sort of telecommunications
technology which is just waiting for people to apply it.


Martin McCormick  WB5AGZ  Stillwater, OK
O.S.U. Computer Center Data   Communications Group

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #516
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa05733;
          29 Jun 92 1:35 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA04162
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 28 Jun 1992 23:49:50 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA22432
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 28 Jun 1992 23:49:42 -0500
Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1992 23:49:42 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #517

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 28 Jun 92 23:49:46 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 517

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Combinations of Names From Phone Digits (Kamran Husain)
    "Legal" Phreaking? (Bryan Lockwood)
    What Are These Specs? (Ged Weare)
    Cellular / Video Help! (Todd Langel)
    Interactive Cable TV (Jeff Sicherman)
    ISDN Availability to Residence Customers in Chicago Area (Neil R. Ormos)
    Telescam Again? (Bob Frankston)
    AGT Cellular Gets First North American Digital Cellular Running (D Leibold)
    Sprint Bill Case (David Lesher)
    Telecom Things to See Across the USA (Ed Greenberg)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (K Husain)
Subject: Combinations of Names From Phone Digits
Date: 28 Jun 92 16:38:52 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail]


Hi gang!

This is a simple program to generate alphanumeric combinations of the
digits a telephone number. I did this to figure out if my phone number
could make a meaningful word from the letters on the keypad. (Mine
does'nt!)

I am sure a lot of folks can simply do this in their heads, but this
might be of help in case you have not had your coffee in the morning.
If sources such as these have to posted elsewhere, I will do so.

Kamran

     --------cut here-------
/*
** This program is for fun, not profit. If you can miraculously figure
** out a way to make money off this... let me in on it for a %age ;-)!!!
** Just do please do keep the authorship around should you decide to
** make copies. Feel free to copy.
** I assume NO responsiblities, etc. for use, etc.
** In other words Use At Your Own Risk!!!
**
** Kamran Husain, MPS Inc. Sugarland, Texas
** [e-mail]
*/

#include "stdio.h"
#include "stdlib.h"


typedef struct Letter {
    int count;
    char list[3];
    } LTR;

LTR  map[10] =
    {
    { 1, '0', '0', '0'} ,
    { 1, '1', '1', '1'} , { 3, 'a', 'b', 'c'} ,{ 3, 'd', 'e', 'f'} ,
    { 3, 'g', 'h', 'i'} , { 3, 'j', 'k', 'l'} , { 3, 'm', 'n', 'o'} ,
    { 3, 'p', 'r', 's'} , { 3, 't', 'u', 'v'} , { 3, 'w', 'y', 'z'}
    };
/*
**    Global counters
*/
int lpr;                /* words printed so far */
int charspercombo;
int numberFlag = 0;
int callme(char *str, int i); /* recursive function */
void usage();

/* Main begins here.
** Generates combinations of letters from strings of
** telephone numbers. Useless really except that you
** might want to know some of the words YOUR phone
** number might come up with.
**
** The output can be passed to the uniq filter to parse
** out duplicates.
** Kamran Husain MPS Inc Sugarland Texas
** [e-mail]
*/
int main(int argc, char *argv[])
{
register int len, i;
char *tcp, *cp;

if (argc < 2) usage();
cp  = argv[1];
if (*cp == '-')
    {
    cp++;
    if (*cp != 'n') usage();
    numberFlag++;
    cp = argv[2];
    }
tcp = cp;
len = strlen(cp);
for (i=0; i< len; i++, cp++)
    {
    if (*cp == 0) break;
    if ((*cp < '0') || (*cp > '9')) exit(2);
    }
charspercombo = len+2;
callme(tcp, 0);
printf("\n");
}

void usage()
{
printf("\n Usage:\n ncomb [-n] #####\n");
exit(1);
}

/*
** Recursive function to try all combinations of phone number
** given null terminated string and current location within string.
*/
int callme(char *str, int i)
{
int j, ndx;
char ch;

if (str[i] == '\0')
    {
    if (lpr > 80)  /* print if more than about 80 columns */
        {
        lpr = 0;
        printf("\n");
        }
    printf("%s ", str);
    lpr += charspercombo;
    return;
    }
ch = str[i];
ndx = ch - '0';
/* try numeric combinations as well  if flag is set */
if (numberFlag) callme(str,i+1);
/* try all combinations for this digit. */
for (j =0; j < map[ndx].count; j++)
    {
    str[i] = map[ndx].list[j];
    callme(str,i+1);
    }
str[i] = ch;
}


[Moderator's Note: I tried the above and could not get it to work.
Maybe I did something wrong. Readers with questions should address the
author direct.     PAT]

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

Subject: "Legal" Phreaking?
From: [e-mail] (Bryan Lockwood)
Date: Sun, 28 Jun 92 03:51:20 PDT
Organization: The Coldbox- [phone]. World's northernmost site?


Quoted from the email bin:

> (I will call back, since it is after all legal for me to use a
> bluebox for personal use, among other things which I understand are
> legal there too.

The author lives in Holland. This line of the message made me curious,
and so I asked for amplification. Here's what I got:

> I'm no lawyer, but in a quick nutshell I'll try to explain the
> law here with examples.  If I were to set up a small bank of phones
> and offer calls to anywhere in the world for say a Guilder a minute
> (about $.60 and what the max for any call SHOULD be) I would be a
> criminal.  This would be "false competition".  However in Holland,
> the rights and freedoms of the individual are held above the rights
> of business, and therefore I can legally play with the phone.  I
> would be in violation of the law if I gave away or sold actual
> methods of bypassing the bill however.  In comparison to the USA,
> Canada, France and England where there are laws against this type of
> activity, it is much harder here to use the phone this way here in
> Holland.  I feel that a legal cure for a technical problem is never
> the answer, and will allways embrace a legal attitude of this type
> over outright prohibition.  The war on drugs is another good example
> where the law makes a problem worse.  Here it is not viewed as a
> social problem and making hash legal has kept the drug problem out of
> Holland.  BTW ... its legal in Alaska isn't it?  (at least for personal
> use and growing like here) Keep it that way!  You don't want the
> problems and embarassment the lower 48 has.

Anybody care to comment on this? It's a very *interesting* philosophy
of law, one that seems to lead to startling practices if applied to
other areas of life! I was a bit startled by such a concept ... I
suppose my upbringing is showing.


Author: Bryan Lockwood (system@coldbox)
Originating system: The Coldbox- [phone]. World's northernmost site?
WWIVnet: @501 | Usenet: uunet!coldbox!system | Direct: [phone]


[Moderator's Note: Yes I guess your upbringing is showing. The fellow
in Holland has written to us here at TELECOM Digest on a few
occassions also, expressing much the same philosophy. If what he says
is true -- I don't think it is -- then why in the world would *any*
telecom organization want to do business in Holland; or for that
matter, any business at all if it is, as the fellow suggests,
perfectly legal to rip off a company 'for personal use'. I wonder if
he subscribes to the same ethics where other businesses are concerned
in his country: clothing, food, household supplies, other utility
services, places of entertainment, etc?  Since anything he needs for
his personal consumption would be by definition for 'personal use',
maybe he rips them all off, deadbeating his way through life. Actually
though, I think telecom is his main target; he probably has a grudge
against them going way back, and he has developed this rationale in
order to synch his ethics with actual practice. We need to devise
these concepts, ie 'what I rip off is okay' in order to avoid the
complaint expressed by John Bunyan who noted, "what I think and what I
do in real life are often two ..."  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Ged Weare)
Subject: What Are These Specs?
Organization: Boston Technology, Wakefield, MA
Date: Sun, 28 Jun 92 16:12:28 GMT


We are trying to locate some specs that were referenced in a recent
article in IEEE Communications Magazine (Feb 92).  The article was
called "Intelligent Network Concepts in Mobile Communications", and
was by Bijan Jabbari.

The specs are listed in the article as:

    [9]  IS-41.1, .2, .3 and .4, Rev B December 1991
    [10] ETSI TC GSM, Recommendations GSM 3.09 and 3.12, Feb 1990.

Both are related in some way to cellular phones or ISDN.  [10], we
think, is put out by a European body, but we have no clue about [9].

Any help as to what these specs are, and where we can get copies, would be
appreciated.


Jed Weare             [e-mail]
Boston Technology     [phone] x3519
100 Quannapowitt Parkway    Wakefield, MA 01880.

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

From: [e-mail] (Todd Langel)
Subject: Cellular / Video Help!
Date: Sun, 28 Jun 92 00:00:04 EDT
Organization: FidoNet node 1:3603/230 - CSFSO Telecomm, Clearwater FL


        I am currently working on a cellular project here in Tampa.
We are using Hewlett Packard 8590, 8591, and 8592's Spectrum Analysers
to monitor linear amplifier controllers in cell sites in the area.

        We are using three HP's in each of the twelve sites we are
monitoring and are trying to use the monitor output on the back to
hook up to a Quadraplexer (A device that lets you take four video
inputs and put them on one screen with four quadrents. We are using a
Burel Quadraplexer.) Then take the single output of the quad to a VCR
for recording.

        The problem I am having is that the output on the back of the
HP's are 19.2Khz and that standard TV signals are at 15.7Khz NTSC.
From what I have been told by the people at HP,the only monitor that
will work is something like a non-interlaced Super VGA monitor, And
know of no way to convert the signal down to be acceptable for a VCR
recording. I also want to point out that I am not sure of the 15.7Khz
NTSC being acceptable either. This is what I have been told is the
standard for regular TV's by several manafacturers in California that
I have talked to in the past few days.

        My question is: Does anyone know of a way to convert a 19.2Khz
video signal to another signal that could be recorded on a VCR ???

        Any Help would be greatly appreciated!

        (Also - I am Guessing that NTSC stands for National Television
        Standard C????????) Anyone???


Thanks,

Todd

 ... OFFLINE 1.38 * <T. Langel> <AT&T Network Systems - Tampa, Fl>
Internet: [e-mail]
UUCP: ...!uunet!myrddin!tct!psycho!230!Todd.Langel

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

Date: Sun, 28 Jun 92 12:35:02 -0700
From: Jeff Sicherman <[e-mail]>
Subject: Interactive Cable TV
Organization: Cal State Long Beach


  I would appreciate references to articles, books, journals on the
technology and applications of interactive cable-TV and any case
studies of systems that have been tried.


Jeff Sicherman

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

Date: Sun, 28 Jun 92 15:14:35 -0600
From: Neil R. Ormos <[e-mail]>
Subject: ISDN Availability to Residence Customers in Chicago Area


In <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Bill Nickless) comments:

>> [Moderator's Note: Ameritech/IBT are certainly very progressive and
>> technologically advanced telcos. I'm glad to be in their region.  PAT]

>  ... until you want things like ISDN.  Ameritech/IBT seems to be among
> the slowest to offer data services to the home.  I am under the
> impression that they're behind some un-named California telcos.

Coincidentally, I happened to query Illinois Bell regarding the
availability of ISDN service to my home (served by the Elk Grove CO
(708 228)) earlier this week.  I was told that my CO, and many others,
are already equipped for ISDN and that availability in such cases
depends on the length of the subscriber loop (i.e. the length of the
wiring between the the CO and service location), and whether or not
you are served by a "remote" CO (some are not equipped for ISDN even
though the real CO is).  They quoted installation charges of about
$95, a monthly charge of $37, and usage-sensitive charge of about $.12
per minute.  The monthly charge varies depending on whether you want
zero, one, or two of the B channels to be voice-capable; the
above-cited price assumes one.

As a side note, in contrast to other Chicago-area utilities, Illinois
Bell provides excellent customer service.  The residential customer
service rep I initially spoke to had never heard of ISDN.  However,
instead of just telling me to call one of the business customer
service reps, he courteously elicited information to enable him to
contact the right department, and arranged for a rep who was
knowlegable about ISDN to call me back.  The ISDN rep was also helpful
and courteous.


neil ormos  [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Telescam Again?
Date: Sun 28 Jun 1992 19:35 -0400


I've been getting pages from 540-1278 on my pager.  I've got a 718
number (in addition to my Boston one) so I presume it is coming from
there.  The lack of an area code is a further indication since my
Boston recording reminds the caller to leave an area code.  Anyone
know about this one?  I tried dialing it from Boston (knowing I won't
be charged above the LD rates) but it is blocked.

To pursue this, I called the "annoyance call bureau" at 800-522-1122
and was assured that it was callable from Boston. Of course, that
isn't dialable from Boston.  On my next call they gave me the same
number despite my explanations.  Once again, 800 Brain Damage strikes.

Speaking to information some more, it turns out that there is only the
800 number and the corporate headquarters number.  BTW, NET has the
same 800 number problem.  So I called 212-395-2552 (corporate HQ) who
was more helpful and gave me 315-738-8111.  I got lost in voice mail
hell with no category to report this kind of scam.  OK, one is
supposed to remember to call to report this the next day at telco's
convenience.  The idea of a way to report a problem with fax (forget
about email) would never occur to a pretechnology company like Nynex.
So I'll just pass on it realizing that telco just doesn't care about
this kind of scam.

If you are in NY and can find out more about this, please tell us
(though not at the risk of your job).

Of course all of this is out of proportion to the problem, but regular
Telecom readers understand that proportionality is not a virtue when
dealing with causes.

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

Date: Sat, 27 Jun 92 22:50:48 EDT
From: David Leibold <[e-mail]>
Subject: AGT Cellular Gets First North American Digital Cellular Running


AGT Cellular in Alberta, Canada, announced that it has North America's
first digital cellular system in operation, beating out other cellular
companies including its competitor, Cantel. AGT Cellular placed ads in
recent newspapers trumpeting this achievement, stating that the heavy
use of digital technology in AGT's network helped establish digital
cellular service, and joked about digital not being in "Mister Rogers
Neighbourhood" (a reference to Rogers Communications which owns AGT's
competitor Cantel, which had announced plans to go digital, but hasn't
put them into effect yet).


[e-mail]

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

From: David Lesher <[e-mail]>
Subject: Sprint Bill Case
Date: Sun, 28 Jun 92 11:02:24 EDT
Reply-To: [e-mail]  (David Lesher)
Organization: NRK Clinic for habitual NetNews abusers - Beltway Annex


This is a bit out of date, but some time back there was a thread about
a "Fatal Attraction" type case in which a Sprint bill was a vital
piece of evidence. The defense introduced one bill, and the
prosecutation another. The defense's version came under scrutiny
because it lacked the proper advertising blurp line for that month.

Well, I read that the defendant was convicted, and addition charges
were pending regarding forgery of evidence.

Gee, if she'd switched to MCI, she could have used Friends and
Family ...


[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Ed Greenberg)
Subject: Telecom Things to See Across the USA
Date: Sun, 28 Jun 92 05:28:38 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest)


I'll be taking a five week motorcycle trip across the USA and back.
I'd be interested in pointers to Telecom related things to see as I
travel.

Some of the things that might interest me are:

    * Toll, Radio and other facilities that might give tours.
    * Places with oddball CO's like manual or other strange service.
    * Small telco's that might show off their inside plant.
    * Telephone and commuications museums.
    * Whatever else is radio, electronics and telco related that is
          seeable by the public (or a member of the public who calls up
          and asks nicely.)

States I'll visit include:  California, Nevada, Utah, Colorado, Kansas,
Missouri, Kentucky, West Virginia, Virginia, District of Columbia,
Maryland, Delaware, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, New York, then back to CA
by the most northern states (north of I-80, and probably north of I-90.)

Blatant Plug:  If you're on my route and operate something techie that
you think I'd enjoy, and feel like showing it off, please send Email.

adTHANKSvance,


Ed Greenberg          Home: [phone] | [e-mail]
P. O. Box 28618         Work: [phone] | DoD#: 0357
San Jose, CA  95159  Fax:  [phone] | KM6CG (ex WB2GOH)

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #517
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa08489;
          29 Jun 92 2:51 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA07331
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 29 Jun 1992 01:08:05 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA16377
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 29 Jun 1992 01:07:39 -0500
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1992 01:07:39 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #513


TELECOM Digest     Sat, 27 Jun 92 20:02:05 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 513

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Jane Barbie (was The Purpose of the Three Tones) (Michael G. Katzmann)
    Re: Jane Barbie (was The Purpose of the Three Tones) (Jeff J. Carpenter)
    Re: Jane Barbie (was The Purpose of the Three Tones) (Roy Smith)
    Re: Jane Barbie (was The Purpose of the Three Tones) (Martin McCormick)
    Re: Jane Barbie (was The Purpose of the Three Tones) (David Schachter)
    Re: Jane Barbie (was The Purpose of the Three Tones) (Clive Feather)
    Re: Jane Barbie (was The Purpose of the Three Tones) (John Rice)
    Re: Jane Barbie (was The Purpose of the Three Tones) (Alan Gilbertson)
    Re: You Can Ring My Bell (Bill Mayhew)
    Re: You Can Ring My Bell (John R. Levine)
    Re: C&P To Revoke Telephone Number (Seth Breidbart)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: vk2bea![e-mail] (Michael G. Katzmann)
Subject: Re: Jane Barbie (was The Purpose of the Three Tones)
Date: 26 Jun 92 22:26:47 GMT
Reply-To: vk2bea![e-mail] (Michael G. Katzmann)
Organization: Broadcast Sports Technology, Crofton. Maryland.


In article <[e-mail]> rlm@ms_aspen.AC.com (Robert
L. McMillin) writes:

> Responding to a message from Robert S. Helfman <[e-mail]>, our
> Moderator writes:

>> [Moderator's Note: Her voice was also used for Time of Day here in
>> Chicago for many years (312-CAThedral-8000). She had recorded the
>> phrase 'at the signal, the time will be' and the digits which were
>> then patched together as appropriate.  PAT]

> Can you tell us how they 'patched together' the digits prior to
> digital recording?  I envisioned two dozen or more very short tape
> loops all run by some kind of switch.

The talking clock in Sydney (Australia) used to come from the G.P.O.
and was (when I saw it in the late 70s), a series of three discs. These
were optical devices (presumably working like motion picture soundtracks).
The sequence was ... At the third stroke the time will be Ten ...
         ... forty three ...
         ... and twenty seconds ...

The "strokes" came by landline from the Sydney Observatory.  I imagine
the Post-Master General's department installed these at each capital
city. The machine was under glass, so that the workings were clearly
visible, and was about the size of a small billiard table.  The voice
was that of Graham Conolly, an announcer on ABC radio.

The machine was made by the English Muirhead Company, who also made
the 'picture-gram' machines that were used by newspapers to send
photographs around the world before the digital era.


Michael Katzmann     Broadcast Sports Technology Inc.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~     Crofton, Maryland. U.S.A
Amateur Radio Stations:
NV3Z / VK2BEA / G4NYV     opel!vk2bea![e-mail]

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

Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1992 08:16:31 -0400 (EDT)
From: Jeffrey J. Carpenter <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Jane Barbie (was The Purpose of the Three Tones)


Excerpts from netnews.comp.dcom.telecom: 21-Jun-92:

> [Modertator's Note: Did you know that to avoid interference with each
> other in the western USA (where both are heard with equal clarity)
> WWVH states the time about fifteen seconds before the minute, then
> remains silent while WWV repeats the announcement about seven seconds
> before the minute.

If you do not live on the west coast, you can hear what it sound like
by calling both at the same time.  WWV [phone] and WWVH +1 808
335 4363.


    jeff

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

Date: Sat, 27 Jun 92 11:36:58 EDT
From: Roy Smith <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Jane Barbie (was The Purpose of the Three Tones)
Organization: Public Health Research Institute (New York)


John Higdon <[e-mail]> writes:

> Although I have never seen one, the machines are very simple. There is a
> magnetic drum upon which all the various digits with up and down
> inflections are recorded. The drum is scanned by a multiple head assembly
> and the appropriate head is switched on line in sequence.

    A few years ago, I spent a day in the Science Museum in
London.  They had on exhibit an early (the first?) talking time
machine.  Just like John said, each digit and phrase was recorded on a
different track and various heads moved about to pick up the different
pieces of voice in the proper sequence.  The interesting part is that
the recordings were made optically on glass disks (like the optical
sound track on movie film).  The machine, probably 50 years old at the
time, was still working fine, chattering away with "The time at the
beep will be", "five minutes", "and", "twenty seconds", "past", "3
O'Clock PM", (pause), "Beeeeep!", or some such.  Of course, talking
time machines only have to access the words in a set sequential order,
so it's simplier than a random-access recording like "the number you
have dialed xxx-xxxx, is not in service".  Still, it was neat to
watch.


[e-mail] (Roy Smith) Public Health Research
Institute 455 First Avenue, New York, NY 10016, USA

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

Subject: Re: Jane Barbie (was The Purpose of the Three Tones)
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 92 13:28:22 -0500
From: [e-mail]


It appears that I have goofed in a major way.  In my last posting
regarding sound retrieval technology from the electromechanical era, I
misspelled phrase.  The spell checker caught it, but I was in too big
a hurry and selected the first choice which was "frays," a perfectly
valid word, but not a substitute.  Frays more aptly describes what
making such discoveries does to one's nerves.


Martin McCormick WB5AGZ   Stillwater, OK
O.S.U. Computer Center Data Communications Group

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

From: [e-mail] (David Schachter)
Subject: Re: Jane Barbie (was The Purpose of the Three Tones)
Organization: Greenwire Consulting
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 92 18:27:31 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> rlm@ms_aspen.hac.com
(Robert L. McMillin) writes:

> Can you tell us how they 'patched together' the digits prior to
> digital recording?  I envisioned two dozen or more very short tape
> loops all run by some kind of switch.

The audio was recorded on a magnetic drum and selector heads picked
off the appropriate segments.  In 1991, NIST replaced the voice and
time code generators with digital technology and added new bits to the
time code transmission to improve the ability of radio clocks, such as
the Traconex Time Source, to provide accurate, reliable time.
Originally, Jim Eason, ex-announcer for KGO AM, was recorded for the
male voice (WWV) but I believe someone else ended up "in the bits."

To hear for yourself, tune your shortwave receiver to 2.5, 5, 10, 15,
or 20 megaHertz.  (Lower frequencies are better at night, higher
frequencies during the day.)  To hear the time code, insert a low-pass
filter to pick out the 100 Hz sub-carrier.  You will hear one pulse
(bit) per second; the width of the pulse identifies it as a zero, a
one, or a marker.  To hear the voice signal, insert a high-pass filter
to strip out the sub-carrier.  (The crummy speaker in most shortwave
receivers makes an excellent high-pass filter already!)


David Schachter
internet:    [e-mail]
uucp:        ...!{mips,decwrl,sgi}!llustig!david

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

From: [e-mail] (Clive Feather)
Subject: Re: Jane Barbie (was The Purpose of the Three Tones)
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 92 14:22:06 BST


> [Moderator's Note: Very good point. Can anyone comment on how the time
> of day was handled *after* they quit using live people speaking it but
> *before* it went digital?  PAT]

The British Telecom TIM machine had three sets of recordings. One set was:

    "one" "two" ... "twelve"

The second set was:

    "o'clock" "one" "two" ... "fifty-nine"

The third set was:

    "precisely" "and ten seconds" ... "and fifty seconds"

Two fixed recordings ("At the third stroke, it will be" and "<beep>
<beep> <beep>") were then wrapped around these.

The original machine is in the London Science museum. I seem to recall
that some parts rotated every hour, minute, and ten seconds,
respectively. The word "drum" comes to mind, but I can't say why.


Clive D.W. Feather     | IXI Limited
[e-mail]          | 62-74 Burleigh St.
Phone: [phone] | Cambridge   CB1 1OJ
Fax:   [phone] | United Kingdom

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Jane Barbie (was The Purpose of the Three Tones)
Organization: Teradyne Inc., Telecommunications Division
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 92 19:00:45 GMT


The Audichron systems I remember seeing used magnetic cylinders. Same
composition, essentially, as magnetic tape. Multiple tracks were
recorded, with multiple record/playback heads, on the cylinders. The
first track would be the "At the tone, the time will be" message, and
following tracks would be the hours, minutes and seconds (in 10 second
increments), each recorded on a separate track And offset on the
cylinders to put them in the proper position in the voice message.

Track selection was by mechanical selection of the proper combination
of playback heads, which were switch selected with clock motor driven
multi-switches. With five heads selected at a time, changing every 10
seconds.  The first head read the "At the tone ..." portion, the second
head read the Hour, third, the minute, 4th seconds and 5th "AM" or
"PM".

The cylinders were in constant rotation with callers connected to the
output at the beginning of each ten second cycle.

There were some variations, but that's how I remember it. It's been a
long time since I saw one of the machines (about 20 years).
Temperature machines worked similarly, with a mechanism to select the
right combination of playback heads based on a temperature sensor.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Alan Gilbertson)
Subject: Re: Jane Barbie (was The Purpose of the Three Tones)
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 92 01:32:14 EDT
Organization: FidoNet node 1:3603/230 - CSFSO Telecomm, Clearwater FL


> [Moderator's Note: Very good point. Can anyone comment on how the time
> of day was handled *after* they quit using live people speaking it but
> *before* it went digital?  PAT]

I don't have any direct information on how things were handled in the
US, but the old UK PTT system used analog optical disks with sound
tracks exactly like those used to record analog optical sound on movie
film.  Moving "read heads" selected the appropriate track from each
disk in order to stitch together the following:

    "At the third stroke, the time will be"

    "<hour>"

    "o'clock"||"<minute>"

    "and <number> seconds."||"precisely."

    "{pip} {pip} {pip}"

This cycle was timed to repeat every ten seconds.  The "stroke"
referred to was a beep at about 1200 Hz or so, from memory, and was
the last of the three "{pip}"s, which were spaced one second apart.
The thing was quite accurate, and mercifully free of advertising or
other gimmicks.  I think the Post Office claimed they kept it accurate
to within a tenth of a second.


Alan

Internet: [e-mail]
UUCP: ...!uunet!myrddin!tct!psycho!230!Alan.Gilbertson

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

From: [e-mail] (Bill Mayhew)
Subject: Re: You Can Ring My Bell
Organization: Northeastern Ohio Universities College of Medicine
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1992 15:25:47 GMT


It would be pretty hard to surpass the twin gong ringer in a 2500
style instrument.  The ringer really is an elegant design.  People
that stare at computer chips all day long should take time to look at
an elegant electromechanical device from time to time for a reality
check.

Speaking of 2500 instruments, I recently found a clear plastic housing
ITT 2500 set at the local discount store.  The classic 2500 has a lot
more soul than those cheap esatz trimline-like phones with clear
plastic.  ITT only made one desinger concession; the coiled cord for
the hand set has color coded wires instead of all the same color that
would be usual.  The 2500 has undergone considerable evolution over
the years.  This is real obvious when comparing a ca 1968 against the
newest one I have.  The hybrid network used to be a rather large metal
box, now it is a little PC board with something that looks like an
interstage audio transformer.  There is a lot less bulk of wiring
inside too; I'm sure that when you make several million phones, saving
a few inches of wire each adds up to a lot of savings.  The handset
cotton is now a piece of styrofoam.  Even the MIC and earpiece have
undergone sublte changes to reduce bulk of materials.  The most
radical change for the tone set has been in the keypad, now using
bubble contacts and an IC/3.58 MHz crystal for tone generation.  The
old style pad with germanium transistors and cup core inductors was
also an example of quite neat engineering.

Despite the many subtle changes, outside appearance of the 2500 is the
same, the performance is as good as or better than ever, and the
reliability likely much higher -- especially in the keypad.

I've been told Raymond Lowe designed the improved Bell System logo
introduced in the 1970s.  I don't know if Mr. Lowe had anything to do
with the 2500 style, but even almost 40 years after its introduction,
it still looks stylish; I'm sure he would approve.

By the way, the ITT part number for the clear 2500 is "250070-TRA-20M
CLEAR PC2500CLR", or at least that is what is on the label on the box.


Bill Mayhew      NEOUCOM Computer Services Department
Rootstown, OH  44272-9995  USA    phone: [phone]
[e-mail]   (140.220.1.1)

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

Subject: Re: You Can Ring My Bell
Organization: I.E.C.C.
Date: 25 Jun 92 14:50:16 EDT (Thu)
From: [e-mail] (John R. Levine)


> The origial Mickey Mouse phone was a blend of fashion and telephony.
> It looked cute and met the same specs as an AT&T 2500, including the
> drop test. People were reluctant to pay $125.00 for this phone.

Not me, and it was worth every penny of the roughly $80 it cost in
about 1978.  Since I bought it pre-dereg, they explained that I was
only buying the case, and the guts still belonged to SNET (I lived in
New Haven at the time.)  I asked what would happen when I moved, and
got varying answers.  One was that they'd do the paperwork to sell the
guts to the telco where I moved to, another was that they'd come out
and degut the phone when they turned off service.  Assuming the first
answer was true, I was prepared to tell them that I was moving to
Shoreham VT, so they'd sell it to the Shoreham Telephone Co. and its
proprietor, who was also my grandfather, would sell it or give it to
me.

In practice, of course, they immediately lost track of the thing and I
just took it with me.  Still looks and works great.  I also got one of
those Noteworthy wall phones with a corkboard and a box to store the
phonebook, though since it's rotary dial I use it less than I used to.
It uses a regular trimline handset, so I suppose if I could find an
old dung-brown TT trimline with the ringer in the base, I could swap
handsets.


Regards,

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

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

From: [e-mail] (Seth Breidbart)
Subject: Re: C&P To Revoke Telephone Number
Organization: Morgan Stanley & Co., New York, NY
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1992 22:06:10 -0400


In article <[e-mail]> William.Degnan@mdf.
FidoNet.Org (William Degnan) writes:

> I normally suggest that we have the telco turn the number on -- even
> if it is only as an RCF before the order goes to the printer. When
> they are actually ready for the number it can be installed at their
> new premises.

I'd be careful about advertising a number even if you're certain it's
yours.

When I moved about five years ago, I was given my phone number in
advance, and told that I would "probably" get it.  The service was
turned on on Friday, using that number.  I moved on on Saturday.

On Monday, I called the phone company and told them that the number
had to be changed.  I don't know what the person who had previously
had it was running, but whatever it was generated way too many calls
at 3 AM.


Seth    [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #513
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa08535;
          29 Jun 92 2:53 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA02028
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 29 Jun 1992 01:04:24 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA02468
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 29 Jun 1992 01:04:12 -0500
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1992 01:04:12 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #518

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 29 Jun 92 01:04:00 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 518

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: We Were Isolated Saturday (Monty Solomon and TELECOM Moderator)
    No Obvious L.A. Telecom Effects From Yucca/Big Bear Quakes (L. Weinstein)
    A Piece of Long Distance History (Mark Terribile)
    Information Wanted on PC Pursuit (Daniel L. Schneider)
    KTLA 45th Anniversary Program (Barry Mishkind)
    900Mhz Cordless Phones: Which One? (James J. Dempsey)
    "Choke" Prefixes (was Concert Goers Blast 911) (Lauren Weinstein)
    Re: Strange Message on Answering Machine (Bill Mayhew)
    Re: Strange Message on Answering Machine (Art Hunter)
    Re: Strange Message on Answering Machine (S. Spencer Sun)
    Re: Strange Message on Answering Machine (Nick Sayer)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1992 00:59:59 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: We Were Isolated Saturday


> From about 2 AM Saturday morning until about 11 AM Sunday morning,
> for some reason we were unable to get out to the world. All I was able
> to get was a message 'host name lookup failure' in response to
> attempts to mail the Digests (512-513-514-515) and post them to the
> net using our nntpxmit program.

We received two copies of #512 here.  One of them was actually #511.

We didn't receive copies of #513 or #514.

At your convenience, would you please send them to monty%roscom.uucp@
think.com

Thanks.


Monty Solomon / PO Box 2486 / Framingham, MA  01701-0405
[e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: I have several reports of non-reciept of 513 and
514. They will be transmitted early Monday morning, following this
issue. Readers should change the header on 511 so it reads that way.
In the process of trying to shove that one out Friday overnight or
Saturday morning, one of the attempts (the one that succeeded!) got
mis-numbered.   PAT]

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

Date: Sun, 28 Jun 92 09:35:31 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Lauren Weinstein)
Subject: No Obvious L.A. Telecom Effects fFom Yucca/Big Bear Quakes


Greetings.  Just a quick note to mention that an informal survey shows
no significant L.A. area telecom-related effects from the pair of
quakes this morning (one centered in the Yucca Valley about 100 miles
from the L.A. metro area (prelim 7.4), and one near Big Bear Lake in
the San Bernardino area (prelim 6.5, apparently triggered by the first
quake).  No dial tone sluggishness was noted after either the 5 AM or
8:10 AM quakes.  Pacific Bell was issuing routine warnings about not
clogging up the phone system.

Computers I routinely check after such events stayed up, and interlata
calling also seemed normal.  Power, cable service, etc. was apparently
generally unaffected, with small pockets of trouble.  No significant
structural damage has been reported in the L.A. area (other than a
couple of apparently cosmetic cracks in the Disneyland hotel and
similar things), nor any related deaths in the L.A. area.

Shaking was fairly prolonged from the first quake, but at least from
my location in the Santa Monica Mountains nothing fell, nothing broke,
and other than three rather concerned cats everything seems pretty
much under control.  No doubt with time there will be reports of more
minor damage from old concrete building facades, cracks and such.

There was more damage in Yucca Valley at the epicenter of the first
quake, where a number of buildings had wall or roof collapses and one
child was killed when a fireplace/chimney fell on him.

It is worth noting that the 1971 6.3 San Fernando quake, being so much
closer to the L.A. area, did *far* more damage.  Also, it is mainly
old, brick and unreinforced concrete buildings that are at most risk
during such events.  That's why quakes of this magnitude can be
devastating in some parts of the world where such construction, or
even worse (e.g. mud, etc.), is common, unlike here.

All in all, even though more aftershocks are expected as usual,
everything seems to be returning rapidly to normal ... even the cats.


 --Lauren--


[Moderator's Note: John Higdon has also checked in with me and noted
that Sunday morning's quakes were a bit too close -- and too strong --
for comfort in his 'desert hideaway'. But he was unharmed and will be
writing to us again soon. Just as we have all heard the 'AIDS is God's
punishment for homosexuals' routine, one clever writer suggested to me
that the earthquake was God's punishment for having the LA Gay Pride
Parade yesterday ... but his aim was a little off and he forgot that
his watch was set on Vatican Time.  :).   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: A Piece of Long Distance History
Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1992 00:39:34 GMT


Here's an isolated bit of telecom history:

When the [Signal Corps] started drafting and commissioning Ma Bell's
managers and engineers, AT&T convinced Olmstead not to spread the
wealth but to concentrate it in a single brainy battalion.  These
experts proceeded to create a dial telephone system for the
battlefield.  At the time, there wasn't long-distance dialing
anywhere.  In 1944, if you made a long-distance phone call in the
U.S., you had to go through the operator.  If you were an Army officer
fighting in a muddy field in the middle of France, you dialed it
yourself, whether the person you wanted was in the next field or in
England.

(From _There's A War To Be Won_, Geoffrey Perret, in a chapter
entitled _Logs, Lists, Logic ... Logistics_.  My copy cost me $30 a
while ago, but I've seen it recently for much less in one of the big
discount catalogs, probably B&N.  Truly a wonderful book, though
telecom crops up only in isolated places.  A marvellous story of
working with what you have instead of worrying about what you lack.)


(This man's opinions are his own.)
 From mole-end        Mark Terribile
uunet!mole-end!mat, Somewhere in Matawan, NJ

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

From: [e-mail] (Daniel L. Schneider)
Subject: PC Pursuit?
Date: 27 Jun 92 06:21:50 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Daniel L. Schneider)
Organization: The University of Texas at Austin, Austin TX


Could anyone here tell me a lot about PC Pursuit?  Is there an email
address for PC Pursuit where I could get some info?  Maybe a FTP site?
Information about other similar services would also be appreciated.


Thanks in advance,

Dan      [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: You can pull a file from the Telecom Archives which
discusses this public data network in detail.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Barry Mishkind)
Subject: KTLA 45th Anniversary Broadcast
Organization: Datalog Consulting, Tucson, AZ
Date: Sun, 28 Jun 92 16:36:15 GMT


A friend who comes from LA just asked about the 45th anniversary
program shown by KTLA ...

I'd like to acquire a dub of this tape to give him. He saw the writeup
in {Daily Variety} or {Hollywood Reporter}, and is drooling for a
chance to see it.

If anyone has access ...

Thanks.


Barry Mishkind     [e-mail]   FidoNet 1:300/11.3

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

From: [e-mail] (James J Dempsey)
Subject: 900Mhz Cordless Phones: Which One?
Date: 28 Jun 1992 18:22:36 GMT
Organization: Bolt Beranek and Newman Inc., Cambridge MA
Reply-To: [e-mail] (James J Dempsey)


I've been waiting a year or so to buy a cordless phone until the
900Mhz phones were generally available.  So far I have seen two in the
stores: A Tropez unit and a Panasonic unit.

I have seen reviews in this forum for the Tropez phone.  Generally, I
recall pepole saying that it worked but that voice quality was low,
probably due to an underdesigned digital transmission format.

I haven't seen any reviews of the Panasonic phone.  For just under
$400, I'd prefer to hear what people think before I go out and
purchase.  Has anyone used the Panasonic 900Mhz cordless?

Are there any other models on the market?  About to be on the market?
Both the Panasonic and Tropez are pretty much basic cordless phones.
I'd prefer one with a speaker phone in the base and two batteries
similar to some current 49Mhz phones from Sony.  Anyone heard of
900Mhz versions like this?

Thanks a lot!


Jim Dempsey     [e-mail]     ..!{decvax, harvard}!bbn!jjd

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

Date: Sun, 28 Jun 92 12:59:15 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Lauren Weinstein)
Subject: "Choke" Prefixes (was Concert Goers Blast 911)


Greetings.  It has been suggested that so-called "choke" prefixes
(e.g. 213-520) are the solution to saturation problems from ticket
purchasing events and the like.  There are some cases, in some areas,
where they help.  But in many areas they don't solve the problem and
can even make matters worse.

First off, and the least important point, is that such prefixes are
generally chargeable numbers.  The people trying to sell tickets don't
usually want people to have to pay for those calls, for obvious
promotional reasons.  In theory you could set up any random prefix as
toll-free, but there are logistical reasons why this is not usually
done.  Outside of using a conventional choke prefix, you could also
use 900 numbers, and take advantage of the flow control built into at
least *some* 900 services.  But it isn't clear how effective this
would be depending on the carrier, the type of service, and the like.
Even worse, many people would refuse to call a 900 number to order
tickets, and many have 900 numbers blocked in any case.

Secondly, choke prefixes (and 900 numbers, if flow controlled) can
actually generate *more* calls.  In an age of automatic redial
features and daemon dialers, people will just redial constantly trying
to get through the busy signals that result from choke prefix use.
The result is even worse saturation of local exchanges, including the
denial of dialtone problems that really put people at risk when it
comes to reaching emergency services.

That's the key point actually.  Choke prefixes can prevent overloading
of the target office and interoffice trunks.  But they do nothing to
stop the local dialtone and related local switch problems in
individual offices resulting from many people attempting (usually over
and over again) to draw dialtone and dial out to that prefix.  Given
the large areas that are frequently handled by a single switch, a
significant ticket event in a metro area can easily result in denial
of dialtone to hundreds of thousands of people, even if choke prefixes
*are* being used.

I stand on my original observation; there are some activities for
which the current phone system is just not suitable today.


 --Lauren--

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

From: [e-mail] (Bill Mayhew)
Subject: Re: Strange Message on Answering Machine
Organization: Northeastern Ohio Universities College of Medicine
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1992 03:49:36 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (John I.
Hritz) writes:

> Kind in the same vane.  I periodically get recordings on my
> machine that consist of a <beep> and then a pause of about five
> seconds.  This repeats for a couple of minutes.  That's it nothing

That is indeed a fax machine.  It really makes me mad as h*** when I
get one of those calls on my voice line about 3:00 in the morning.  I
suspect that one or more companies have access to various professional
mailing lists and trolling for fax machines on to which to dump junk
mail.  We get a *lot* of junk fax messages at work.

Curiously, only the IEEE has my home phone number.  I have all the
trade magazine pubs sent to the office.  On warranty cards, I write,
"please, no fax calls," in the spot where the number would go.  I omit
my actual number.

Makes me *really* whish we had caller ID here so that I could return
the favor to those jerks!

I have a Cobra answering machine that detects CPC.  One nice featuere
is that it backspaces over any dialtone at the end of the call.
Pretty nifty!  The manual doesn't mention that the machine has that
nifty feature, but I've watched the machine in action.  If the machine
detects nothing but dialtone, it even decrements the call counter back
to the previous number of calls.  The operation seems pretty reliable;
I've never had the machine expunge a real call.  Occasionally, the
machine errs, and there is one or two seconds of dialtone, but I can
live with that.


Bill Mayhew      NEOUCOM Computer Services Department
Rootstown, OH  44272-9995  USA    phone: [phone]
[e-mail]   (140.220.1.1)

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

Subject: Re: Strange Message on Answering Machine
From: [e-mail] (Art Hunter)
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Art Hunter)
Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1992 07:48:29 -0400
Organization: AFI Communications - Ottawa, Ontario, Canada


> Now I have a question: Where can I get an answering machine that
> recognizes the hangup call and doesn't record it?  If no such machine
> exists, is there one with a remote command "Skip over this stupid
> hangup call message"?

    What I do is record every call with my Caller-ID recording system
and when callers are directed to my answering machine I look at my log
of who called and then return the calls.  In fact I often just rewind
the tape and never listen to the messages as I have already contacted
the callers.  It sort of make the answering machine redundant.  I have,
however, overcome the issue of having people hang up and never say a
word.  The reverse is now happening in that folks know that I have
recorded their phone number and their name and the time of the call
and so they don't respond to the answering machine.  If they are new
callers, then they often leave a hollow message that says "Hi this is
John Smith at 123-4567 could you call me back".  I get that much of
the message from reading my log of calls and don't need the words to
tell me the above.

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

From: Shih-ping Spencer Sun <[e-mail]>
Date: Sun, 28 Jun 92 01:04:13 EDT
Subject: Re: Strange Message on Answering Machine
Reply-To: [e-mail] (S. Spencer Sun)
Organization: Live Organ Transplants


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

> [fun with 3-way calling and answering machines]

> [Moderator's Note: Wow ... what a lot of fun! This is just a variation
> on the stupid prank immature phreaks (yes, I know that may be
> considered redundant by some readers) which involves calling two
> unrelated people via three-way calling then remaining silent as each
> accuses the other of placing the call. And if you have two physical
> lines, each with three-way, then you patch the lines together and get
> four people in on the 'joke' ... all of whom are convinced as a result
> the telco must be more screwed up than ever. It helps if at least a
> couple of the victims are older people you wake up at 2 AM.   PAT]

OBDisagreementWithPAT: Actually more of a request for distinction.  As
with any sort of prank, I think intent/motive play a big part in
determining the reasonableness of an action.  If you want to screw
with your friend's mind, and get a mutual friend to play one of the
parts while you stay silent, I don't think that's bad as, say, someone
just randomly and senselessly doing it in the middle of the night.

Sure, it may be immature, but we all need to cut loose every now and
then :-)  Note I don't condone the second category (i.e. the random,
senseless type).  The first type may or may not be appropriate
depending on the mentality of your victim-friend.


The opinions expressed in this article are solely mine.
sss/PU'94 Dept of CS ([e-mail])/JvNCnet ([e-mail])


[Moderator's Note: Actually, the first type may or may not be
appropriate depending on *your* mentality.    PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Nick Sayer)
Subject: Re: Strange Message on Answering Machine
Organization: The Duck Pond public unix: [phone], log in as 'guest'.
Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1992 17:23:32 GMT


[e-mail] (Bill Cattey) writes:

> Now I have a question: Where can I get an answering machine that
> recognizes the hangup call and doesn't record it?

I have two such machines (one just replaced the other). One works too
well and sometimes disgards messages from my mother, who speaks
softly, the other occasionally leaves messages with just a single
click as the switch recycles.

> If no such machine exists, is there one with a remote command "Skip
> over this stupid hangup call message"?

There are new answering machines that record messages digitally in
battery-backed RAM. The advantage is that you can delete individual
messages. So if you have an important one, an empty message, a survey
taker, a collection agency, and a message from your rich uncle
Snerdley, you can delete the three in the middle and just keep the
first and last ones for later perusal.

Sony makes one that costs a lot, and AT&T makes a cheap one.

No, I don't have any connection with Sony or AT&T, apart from owning
the AT&T machine (which apart from being tapeless really isn't so hot,
IMHO). I'm thinking of making a little module to hook up to a serial
port on my Sun and to the audio I/O port to turn my ELC into an
answering machine. Seems the only way I'll be happy with an answering
machine is if I get to make it work the way I like it. :-)


Nick Sayer <[e-mail]>   N6QQQ @ N0ARY.#NOCAL.CA.USA.NA
37 19 49 N / 121 57 36 W    [phone], log in as 'guest'

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #518
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa10891;
          29 Jun 92 3:42 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA30257
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 29 Jun 1992 01:59:24 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA10658
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 29 Jun 1992 01:59:13 -0500
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1992 01:59:13 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #519

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 29 Jun 92 01:59:10 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 519

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Pacific Bell Car Theft Protection (Vince Hartung)
    Re: Pacific Bell Car Theft Protection (Alan Boritz)
    Re: Pacific Bell Car Theft Protection (David B. Whiteman)
    Pac$Bell Tentacle-Stretching (was Pacific Bell Car Theft) (Nick Sayer)
    LoJack (was Pacific Bell Car Theft Protection) (Leroy Donnelly)
    Re: Jane Barbie (was The Purpose of the Three Tones) (Jack Winslade)
    Re: Jane Barbie (was The Purpose of the Three Tones) (David Lesher)
    Re: Jane Barbie (was The Purpose of the Three Tones) (David E. A. Wilson)
    Re: Jane Barbie (was The Purpose of the Three Tones) (Monte Freeman)
    Jane BARBE (was Jane Barbie) (George S. Thurman)
    National Security (John Draper)
    More Strange 710 Stuff (was Funny Intercept on 1-710-555-1212) (T Lofaro)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Vince Hartung)
Subject: Re: Pacific Bell Car Theft Protection
Date: 28 Jun 92 22:51:44 GMT
Organization: U.C.L.A. Computer Aided Design Laboratory


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Arthur Rubin) writes:

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

>> This sounds like a thing I remember while living in Massachusetts
>> called Lojack. When your car was stolen, you reported it to the police
>> and Lojack. A transmitter hidden in your car would send out a signal

> PacTel Teletrak (?) and Lojack are provided by different companies.
> (There may be a third major system, as well.)  My recollection of the
> systems is the Lojack is automatically activated if the car is started
> without the key.  Teletrak advertised that, if your car is stolen,
> (and it is not automatically activated, by whatever means), you can
> activate the system by letting them know.

Actually, the way PacBel's Teletrak works, is that it triangulates the
signal sent from the car using *MANY* fixed sites. (VERY ACCURATE) The
activation is done by a car alarm.  Teletrak then sends the raw
received data to a computer where it is the postion of the vehicle is
computed. (The more fixed triangulation points the more accurate the
bearing.)  Then Teletrak H.Q. calls the cops in the stolen car's area
and tells the cops the moving location of the car, direction of
travel, and the approximate speed (speed not that accurate).  The
Teletrak H.Q. operator is looking at a Thomas Guide type map.  The
cops can then set up an intercept to bag the bad guy, and haul him off
to jail.

Lojack is a *LESS* superior technology when compared to Teletrak.
(Speaking radio direction finding wise.) YOU have to call the cops to
let them know your car has been stolen.  (Not that great at 2 a.m. if
you discover it at 8 a.m. before work ... it could be in Mexico by
then.) Once Lojack officials are aware, they activated the beacon
transmitter and get a rough estimated of where the car is.  Then they
call the cops in that jurisdiction and the cops have to try to look
for it, instead of being told where it is, and which way it's going.

The technical problems with Lojack, is that the frequency that the
transmitter is on is subject to multipath and flutter like your car
radio.  When using a doppler direction finder, this can cause
incorrect reading of direction.  Plus you have cops that AREN'T radio
techs working the system.  (Push mic button and talk ... that's the
extent of their knowledge many times.)  They may not be familiar with
the causes of refection, or even be aware of it.  Well, there you have
it.  Based on it's technical merit.

In *MY* (Radio Technician) opinion, Teletrak is *FAR* superior a
method of stolen vehicle recovery.  The only reason Lojack is more
popular, is because it came out earlier and is cheaper than Teletrak.
BUT, it does not come with the same warranty as Teletrak.  I could be
wrong, but I *THINK* Teletrak will guarantee a 50K refund on a
unrecovered car protected using their system.  Lojack only offers free
replacement of the Lojack unit.  That tells me that PacTel is pretty
confident in their product.


Vince

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

Subject: Pacific Bell Car Theft Protection
From: Alan Boritz <[e-mail]>
Date: Sun, 28 Jun 92 12:45:14 EST
Organization: Harry's Place BBS - Mahwah NJ - [phone]


red-eft![e-mail] (Arun Baheti) writes:

> I was just in my car and heard an add for Pacific Bell's new auto
> theft systems.  Apparently, when a car is stolen, they will auto-
> matically track its location and notify the police.  There was also an
> amorphous mention of a guarantee.  Does anyone have any details on
> this service -- and how (if) it works?

> [Moderator's Note: The same ad is playing on the radio here in Chicago
> a lot these days. Apparently some sort of radio detection to keep
> track of where you are going in your car. Sounds like a great deal for
> privacy enthusiasts!   :)    PAT

The system doesn't always track vehicle location (like an AVM system),
but the vehicle units are always listening.  The service vendor
transmits a code that activates a transponder hidden in the vehicle.
Then a police agency, or someone, DF's it to find the vehicle.
There's no privacy issue there, unless if the transponder transmits
any time OTHER than when a theft is reported.


[e-mail] (Alan Boritz)
Harry's Place BBS - Mahwah NJ - [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (David B. Whiteman)
Subject: Re: Pacific Bell Car Theft Protection
Organization: Crash TimeSharing, El Cajon, CA
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1992 07:26:56 GMT


There was a news story on TV about a car equipped with one of the car
theft protection systems that was stolen.  Police tracked the stolen
car to a locked garage.  The owner of the house that the garage was a
part of, and who was in the house at the time the police came by,
denied any knowledge of how the stolen car made it into his garage.
Criminal charges were not filed against him; however, the owner of the
stolen car was sucessful in his civil law suit against the garage
owner.


David Whiteman [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Nick Sayer)
Subject: Pac$Bell Tentacle-Stretching (was Pacific Bell Car Theft)
Organization: The Duck Pond public unix: [phone], log in as 'guest'.
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1992 06:30:56 GMT


This is disgusting.

Pac$Bell seems to want to get its greasy little fingers on every sort
of enterprise possible, save that of providing good service to its
"tariffed" customers.

More grist for the mill:

I got a mailer from them with a proposal similar to the "funny muney"
catalog schemes run by some comsumer credit cards. Well, now you too
can buy overpriced junk if you make enough phone calls. Thank you, no.

Meanwhile, _REAL_ residential ISDN is nowhere to be found.

What have we got to do to get Pac$Bell involved with the telephone
business?


Nick Sayer <[e-mail]>   N6QQQ @ N0ARY.#NOCAL.CA.USA.NA
37 19 49 N / 121 57 36 W        [phone], log in as 'guest'

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

Date: Sun, 28 Jun 92 19:22:36 CST
From: [e-mail] (Leroy Donnelly)
Subject: LoJack (was Pacific Bell Car Theft Protection)
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: DRBBS Technical BBS, Omaha


Questions have been asked about LoJack vehicle recovery systems.  If
you want to listen to the locators on your scanner check out the
frequency of 173.730.  This is a frequency that has been assigned to
the company for use in the U.S.


Ybbat (DRBBS) 8.9 v. 3.14 r.1     DRBBS  (1:285/666.0)

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

Date: Sun, 28 Jun 92 11:32:14 CST
From: [e-mail] (Jack Winslade)
Subject: Re: Jane Barbie (was The Purpose of the Three Tones)
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: DRBBS Technical BBS, Omaha


In a message dated 22-JUN-92, Robert L. Mcmillin writes:

> Can you tell us how they 'patched together' the digits prior to
> digital recording?  I envisioned two dozen or more very short tape
> loops all run by some kind of switch.

Although I never saw one, I was told that the announcing machines
consisted of a wide multi-track magnetic tape with each track having
one of the many phrases necessary to make the thing work.  For
example, the spoken numeral 'nine' might appear on two tracks, once
with an upward inflection as in 'the time will be nine thirty-six' and
again with a downward inflection as in 'the time will be six
thirty-nine'.  The loop apparently ran continuously and the audio
outputs were switched as needed.

Back in NYC in the days of the mechanical announcers, the time number
was published as 637-1212 but EVERYONE knew that to get the time, the
word N-E-R-V-O-U-S would be dialed.  Every phone enthusiast knew that
637-anything would get the time.

TelecomUrbanLegend: ;-) Back in those days (and probably in these
days) when it was advantageous to give someone a real-sounding phone
number but one which was phony (picture the stereotypical singles'
scene), the prefix 637 or NE7 was often used.  Of course when he
dialed ... another famous one (I'll never admit to falling for it ;-)
was CIrcle 6-4200 aka 246-4200 which was (and probably still is) a
Dial-a-Prayer number.  (Hell, she said it was her office number and it
sounded right for a midtown business number.)

Here's the strange part -- deja vu or whatever -- A few months ago I
was watching a late-night rerun of Kojak.  The title to the episode
was, believe it or not 246 4 200.  During the episode it was suspected
that it might be a phone number.  Kojak (sucking the Tootsie-Roll Pop)
dialed the number and reported 'nope, Dial-a-Prayer'.  I wonder if the
screenwriter had the same stunt pulled on him?  BTW, the significance
of the numbers in the teleplay were hotel room numbers.

Well, I guess that's enough digression for one day.  ;->


Good day.        JSW
Ybbat (DRBBS) 8.9 v. 3.14 r.1     (1:285/666.0)

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

From: David Lesher <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Jane Barbie (was The Purpose of the Three Tones)
Date: Sun, 28 Jun 92 13:31:17 EDT
Reply-To: [e-mail]  (David Lesher)
Organization: NRK Clinic for habitual NetNews abusers - Beltway Annex


An interesting sidelight on the Autochron {sp?} machines. They were
rented, and VERY expensive. (Somehow, I have a warm spot in my heart
for anyone that out-screwed "We own it -- you gotta rent it" Ma, but
that's beside the point.)

Anyhow, at one point, Ma RENTED out time service. You could get a
local pair with the time audio on it. The only users I knew of were
police and fire departments with logging recoders on their incoming
lines. The time was put down on another channel of these machines.
This was to solve the usual issue of when the cops got the call, vs
when they got to the scene.

Of course, modern, mega-track, digitized logging machines don't need
such. And besides, with last decade's $5.00/month LMC circuit costing
$500.00, I doubt anyone would buy it anyhow ;-}


[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (David E A Wilson)
Subject: Re: Jane Barbie (was The Purpose of the Three Tones)
Organization: Dept of Computer Science, Wollongong University, Australia
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1992 01:17:48 GMT


rlm@ms_aspen.hac.com (Robert L. McMillin) writes:

> Can you tell us how they 'patched together' the digits prior to
> digital recording?  I envisioned two dozen or more very short tape
> loops all run by some kind of switch.

I seem to recall that in the UK and possibly Australia as well that
the various digits were recorded on different tracks of a glass disc
and that the appropriate reader was selected to get the correct digit
at each point in the phrase. This would be longer lasting than any
magnetic media and selecting one of many optical readers would be
fairly easy to achieve.


David Wilson      (042) 21 3802 voice, (042) 21 3262 fax
Dept Comp Sci, Uni of Wollongong     [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Monte Freeman)
Subject: Re: Jane Barbie (was The Purpose of the Three Tones)
Date: 28 Jun 92 16:33:36 GMT
Organization: Georgia Institute of Technology


  Interesting bit of trivia about Mrs. Barbie: She still lives here in
Atlanta (Audichron, the comapny that manufactured the drum machine
that so many telcos used for these recordings, is still here and in
business).

  She is the voice that is heard on the 146.760 Alford Memorial Radio
Club Stone Mountain repeater saying "From the top of Georgia's
beautiful Stone Mountain, this is W4BOC repeater," as well as about
five other IDs.  Audichron donated one of these recording devices to
the club YEARS ago, and Mrs. Barbie did the recordings for us. Several
years ago, the machine just stopped working. It was removed from the
top of the mountain to be repaired, and just somehow got lost. When we
went through and did our repeater upgrade two or three years ago,
someone made the comment that it would be nice to have "Ms.
Calabash's" voice back. (Ms. Calabash is the name someone gave to this
mysterious sexy voice shortly after it went into use on the repeater,
and it just sort of stuck ...)

  Anyway, we started trying to track down what had happened to the
Audichron.  Eventually, we found it stuck in someone's basement. He
had no idea how it got there, what it was, or who it belonged to. He
was however glad to see it leave. This thing weighs close to 75
pounds!

  We took it to Audichron, and they restored it back to it's origianl
factory condition. They asked us if they could have it to go in their
museum. We said that if we could get the stuff that was recorded on it
off and onto a tape so we could put it in out digital voice recorder,
that they could have the old machine. They happily agreed of course.

  Several months after the recording went into service, Mrs. Barbie
came to one of our club meetings. It was a real treat to meet the lady
behind the voice! :-)


Monte Freeman  --  Operations Department / Information Technology
Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta Georgia, 30332
uucp:      ...!{decvax,hplabs,ncar,purdue,rutgers}!gatech!prism!ccoprfm
Internet: [e-mail]

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

Date: Sun, 28 Jun 92 17:44 GMT
From: George S. Thurman <[e-mail]>
Subject: Jane BARBE (was Jane Barbie)


With all of the messages recently about "Jane Barbie", I thought that
I would let everyone know that the correct spelling of her last name
is BARBE.


George S. Thurman     [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (John Draper)
Subject: National Security
Date: Sun, 28 Jun 92 16:20:53 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest)


> 710 is indeed assigned for "Government Special" use.  It's actual
> function is highly classified.  Doesn't surprise me that you couldn't
> get any information without a need to know.  I respectfully suggest
> that you not pursue the matter any further, least someone from the
> Government might start asking YOU a lot of questions!!

Ken,

If you are SO concerned about national security, then why are you
broadcasting to the world that 710 has anything special in it at all?

Now every phone hacker on the net will be encouraged to start
"scanning" the 710 area code for their "special classified" numbers.

Just by mentioning things like this can cause problems, so you were
better off not even mentioning it.

WolfGang,

There are a number of sites in Russia that have Email gateways, and
very soon will have full internet access.

Email me:  [e-mail] for more details.


John D.

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

Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1992 01:14:51 -0400 (EDT)
From: Frank T Lofaro <[e-mail]>
Subject: More Strange 710 Stuff (was Funny Intercept on 1-710-555-1212)


    My dorm phone (at CMU) uses AT&T ACUS service (a college
student phone plan) where all the dorm phones use AT&T long distance
and one places a call by dialing 9 for an outside line, then the area
code and number. It then asks for your personal access (used for
billing) code and connects you. Strange thing is if I dial a bogus
area code and number I get the intercept right away after the last
digit is dialed (and before I can get to enter my security code), but
if I dial the 710 area code and a number, it asks for my code, and
only then does it give me the intercept.

So maybe 710 isn't only using line-based access control. Why an
eight-digit security code related to a college calling plan would be
involved in access granting/denying is beyond me, if that is the case
(we have ROTC students here, but I'd really doubt they'd have 710
access). Anyway, it seems 710 is not processed by the local CO, but
just handed off to the LD carrier. So the fact the intercept only
comes after I enter the code could be because some codes might give
access, weird routing at AT&T, or because Big Brother wants to get it
on record that it was I that tried to access 710 :)

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #519
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa09406;
          30 Jun 92 0:24 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA25695
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 29 Jun 1992 22:43:21 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA00851
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 29 Jun 1992 22:43:11 -0500
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1992 22:43:11 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #520

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 29 Jun 92 22:43:15 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 520

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Administrivia: Something Cross-Connected Somewhere (TELECOM Moderator)
    Tour of US West Data Center in Omaha (Paul W. Schleck)
    SWBT Organizational Changes (Tim Gorman)
    An Oops in ncomb.c (Kamran Husain)
    Bix Block Punch-Down Tool (Andrew M. Boardman)
    A Response to "Legal" Phreaking (Bill Squire)
    The Depths of Sliminess (Paul Fuqua)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1992 20:11:09 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Subject: Administrivia: Something Cross-Connected Somewhere


For the past several days, every single message posted to
alt.dcom.telecom has been finding its way here to comp.dcom.telecom as
well. Naturally my autoreply then sends a receipt and the person
writes back saying 'what did you sent me a reciept for ... I sent
nothing to comp.dcom.telecom'. I try to catch all these articles and
avoid using them here, but some have gotten missed, leading to
needless duplication in the two groups.

It looks to me like a site called taurus is doing this ... running
some version of news which is taking what comes in to alt and tossing
it over to me. But whoever is doing it, please stop.  Thanks.


Patrick Townson

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

From: [e-mail] (Paul W. Schleck)
Subject: Tour of US West Data Center in Omaha
Organization: University of Nebraska at Omaha
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1992 17:06:37 GMT


Thanks to some inside connections between US West and an organization
I am a member of, /usr/group/nebraska (a Unix user group), I was able
to participate in an evening tour of the new US West Data Center at
Landmark Plaza between 12th and 13th Streets and Farnham near the Old
Market in Omaha, Nebraska.  Those who have read the digest for any
length of time know that US West is both a very customer-oriented,
economical, local service provider and a very shifty RBOC looking to
branch out in to areas that regulated monopolies shouldn't, but the
PUC doesn't have the "regulatory horsepower" (to quote a John
Higdonism) to slap them back.  For this reason, I couldn't resist the
offer for an "inside look."

The new data center replaces the one on Dodge Street, which had become
too small and run-down to support the kind of hardware a 14-state RBOC
needed.  The result was a completely new 5-story building, set on a
quite massive concrete foundation.  The basic layout is one of
perimeter offices with large, traditional, computing rooms in the
center of each floor.  The tour guide claimed it was one of the
largest data centers in the country.  When the inevitable "What about
the NSA?" question emanated from the back of the crowd, the guide
quickly corrected his statement to "one of the largest PRIVATE data
centers" :-).

One of the floors that we viewed was still unfinished.  The floor was
covered with a welded metal plate to offer complete grounding.  Around
the edges were gutters to catch possible leaks from the cold-water
air-conditionign system (which makes an awe-inspiring "whoosh" when
you walk up to the building).  Interesting enough, the computer rooms
do NOT use Halon (too much trouble with the EPA, which has labelled it
hazardous, and effectively cut off most manufacturing of it), but
rather a system of water sprinklers (they know what they are doing, I
guess).

Most of the finished floors housed a collection of top-of-the-line IBM
and Amdahl MVS/XA iron with positively huge tape cartridge silos to
feed them.  The rest was a mixture of Vaxen running "old" Unix (I
guess they mean pre-SVr4), including one to manage tracking of reports
to 611.  Of course, being a Unix user group, we found most of this
"ho-hum" and were wondering aloud "where are the workstations?" :-).

The tour guide (a middle-manager, as far as we could tell), noted that
most of the maintenance headaches with the billing system came from
1.)  integrating the billing systems of the three local Bells that
became US West (Northwestern Bell, Mountain Bell, and Pacific
Northwest Bell) and

2.)  conforming to the sometimes vagarious requirements of the Public
Utilities Commission (an interesting perspective from the other side
of the customer service counter).

The overall goal of the Data Center is to provide fault-tolerant,
self-sufficent computing power (totalling over 200 MIPS) 24 hours a
day, seven days a week with no down time.  One of the solutions to
this end is a half-a-dozen V-16 Cummins Diesel generators, providing
about 1.75 MW apiece.  They are mounted on spring-mounted concrete
slabs, and the springs themselves were mounted to a solid concrete
floor that had about 2000 three-inch-thick bronze screws that were
used during construction to raise the floor a little under a foot (to
better cushion the lower floors from the noise).  Reliable power in a
place like Omaha (which doesn't really have it) was a major concern.
Remembering the AT&T New York incident, I asked the guide if there
were any formal or informal arrangements with the local utilities to
go off city power during periods of high demand.  He said that he
didn't know of any off-hand, nor has US West been asked to yet (I
tried not be too smart-assed, lest they realize that I was a Digest
reader and sic Security on me :-).

The center is not even dependent on city water for its
air-conditioning system, having drilled a 650-foot-deep well as a
backup.

As a side note, the presence of the Communications Workers of America
union was quite noticable, ranging from the arbitration bulletins
sprinkled on bulletin boards, to the occasional "Union Yes!" bumper
sticker stuck on various physical-plant assets, all the way to the
fact that everyone we were introduced to was a "Specialist" of some
sort or another.  Others have done a good job of "union-bashing" on
this forum, so I will defer to their, ummm, "wisdom" on this matter.

All-in-all I was quite impressed.  On one hand, I applaud US West for
reaffirming its committment to keep a major part of its operations in
Omaha (a sore spot for many of us who saw 13 out of 14 Omaha VP's move
to Denver over the past ten years).  On the other, I have to wonder
what they are "up to."  Any deeper speculations from other Digest
readers?


Paul W. Schleck  [e-mail]

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

Date: 29 Jun 92 08:41:13 EDT
From: tim gorman <[e-mail]>
Subject: SWBT Organizational Changes


6-26-92

(Any spelling errors are mine!  TPG)

      SOUTHWESTERN BELL CORPORATION ANNOUNCES
               ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGES

        ST. LOUIS, June 26, 1992 -- Southwestern Bell Corporation
announced today that it is reorganizing its largest subsidiary,
Southwestern Bell Telephone Company, into three separate operating
units.

        "The restructuring is another part of Southwestern Bell's
commitment to continuing to meet rapidly increasing competition in the
telecommunications business and to keep our focus on the needs of our
customers," said Edward E.  Whitacre Jr., chariman and chief executive
officer of Southwestern Bell Corporation.

        The reorganization becomes effective on July 1.  Under the
reorganization:

        - Royce S. Caldwell, 53, currently group president of
Southwestern Bell Corporation, becomes president of Southwestern Bell
Services, which will have headquarters in St. Louis and be responsible
for providing network, marketing, finance, planning and other staff
and operational services to Southwestern Bell Telephone.

        - William E. Dreyer, 54, president of the Texas division of
Southwestern Bell Telephone Company, becomes president of Southwestern
Bell Telephone Company of Texas.  This organization will be
headquartered in Dallas.

        - J. Cliff Eason, 44, currently president of Metromedia Paging
Services, a subsidiary of Southwestern Bell Corporation, becomes
president of Southwestern Bell Telephone Company of the Midwest. This
organization will be responsible for the provision of telephone
services in Arkansas, Kansas, Oklahoma and Missouri, and will be
headquartered in St. Louis.

        Under this organization, Messrs. Eason, Dreyer and Caldwell
will be members of Southwestern Bell's Executive Policy Council and
report directly to Whitacre, who additionally assumes the role as
chairman and CEO of Southwestern Bell Telephone.

        In other changes announced today James E. Adams, 53, currently
president of Southwestern Bell Telephone, becomes group president of
Southwestern Bell Corporation and will be responsible for all of the
company's international operations. Adams replaces Caldwell, and will
continue as a member of the EPC and report to Whitacre.

        Metromedia Paging Services also announced the appointment of
John M Kesley, 33 as president, replacing Eason.

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

From: [e-mail] (K Husain)
Subject: An Oops in ncomb.c
Date: 29 Jun 92 22:25:41 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail]


Not too many flames to me just yet about this one.  In the source file
digit 9 is assigned WXZ whereas it should be assigned WXY.

Sorry about that ... but since only one person has caught it so far I
guess I wont be needing my asbestos suit for a while! ;-)


Kamran

[Moderator's Note: Kamran submitted another version of his program
with the change noted above, and also changes to allow for older
compilers.  It is presented below.   PAT]

            ------------  cut --------------
/*  This program is for fun, not profit.  If you can miraculously
    figure out a way to make money off this, let me in on it for
    a percentage.  :-)  Just do please do keep the authorship
    around should you decide to make copies.  Feel free to copy.
    I assume NO responsiblities, etc. for use, etc.  In other
    words Use At Your Own Risk!

    Kamran Husain, MPS Inc. Sugarland, Texas
    [e-mail]                                      */

#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>

typedef struct Letter {
    int  count;
    char list[3];
} LTR;

LTR map[10] = {
    { 1, '0', '0', '0'}, { 1, '1', '1', '1'},
    { 3, 'a', 'b', 'c'}, { 3, 'd', 'e', 'f'},
    { 3, 'g', 'h', 'i'}, { 3, 'j', 'k', 'l'},
    { 3, 'm', 'n', 'o'}, { 3, 'p', 'r', 's'},
    { 3, 't', 'u', 'v'}, { 3, 'w', 'x', 'y'}
};
/*   global variables */
int  lpr,                            /* columns printed so far */
     charspercombo,
     numberFlag = 0,
     callme();                           /* recursive function */
void usage();

/*  main begins here
    This program generates combinations of letters from strings
    of telephone numbers.  It is useless really except that you
    might want to know some of the words YOUR phone number might
    come up with.  The output can be passed to the uniq filter to
    parse out duplicates. */
main(argc, argv)
    int  argc;
    char *argv[];
{
    register int len,
                 i;
    char         *tcp,
                 *cp;

    if(argc < 2)
        usage();
    cp = argv[1];
    if(*cp == '-') {
        cp++;
        if(*cp != 'n')
            usage();
        numberFlag++;
        cp = argv[2];
    }
    tcp = cp;
    len = strlen(cp);
    for(i = 0; i < len; i++, cp++)
        if((*cp < '0') || (*cp > '9'))
            exit(2);
    charspercombo = len + 2;
    callme(tcp, 0);
    printf("\n");
}

void usage()
{
    printf("\nUsage:\n    ncomb [-n] #####\n\n");
    exit(1);
}

/*  Recursive function to try all combinations of phone number
    given null terminated string and current location within
    string */
callme(str, i)
    char *str;
    int  i;
{
    int  j,
         ndx;
    char ch;

    if(str[i] == '\0') {
        if(lpr > 80) {  /* print if more than about 80 columns */
            lpr = 0;
            printf("\n");
        }
        printf("%s ", str);
        lpr += charspercombo;
        return;
    }
    ch = str[i];
    ndx = ch - '0';
    /*  try numeric combinations as well if flag is set */
    if(numberFlag)
        callme(str, i + 1);
    /*  try all combinations for this digit */
    for(j = 0; j < map[ndx].count; j++) {
        str[i] = map[ndx].list[j];
        callme(str, i + 1);
    }
    str[i] = ch;
}

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

Date: Mon, 29 Jun 92 17:50:53 EDT
From: andrew m. boardman <[e-mail]>
Subject: Bix Block Punch-Down Tool


I am in need of a punch-down tool for NTI's almost-but-not-quite-110
Bix blocks.  All of the usual sources say that Northern Telecom is the
only source of these.  Can anyone out there tell me who to talk to at
NTI?


andrew boardman    [e-mail]

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

Subject: Response to "Legal Hacking"
From: [e-mail] (Bill Squire)
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 92 21:41:03 WET/D
Organization: Hack-Tic Magazine


I was really caught off guard by a piece of private mail getting
posted to such a public group.  This topic has been pounded into the
ground on this group as my mailbox has been filled with fire.  I'm no
expert on any of the "soft sciences" like politics and psychology and
tend to skip over what is not of a technical nature on this group.
Politics are boring!  Politics get in the way of "hard science".
Politics are an excuse for not getting things done, etc., etc, etc.  I
am not a lawyer, and I have no interest in law except to stay away
from it and out of trouble.  I've accepted the fact some time ago that
'mis-use' of the phonenet is in the grey of the law.

I also agreed some time ago there would be no more posts to this or
any other group on that subject.  I have no control of what people
re-post or in the case of this group what Pat decides is appropriate.
IMHO this was not!  If anyone cares to hear more on this topic they
can purchase a copy of the next {2600 Magazine} where some technical
aspects of phone switching will be discussed with a warning that there
may be specific laws against certain aspects it in some countries.
From here on out my posts on this group will be of a technical nature
only.  I apolgize to Pat or anyone who may have been offended by that
post, since even if it wasn't mine, the subject was.


Bill

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

Date: Mon, 29 Jun 92  18:13:44 CDT
From: Paul Fuqua <[e-mail]>
Subject: The Depths of Sliminess


I thought I'd heard everything about telemarketing slime, until I read
a column in the {Dallas Morning News} a couple of weeks ago.  This is
really the pits:

     Bob Harshaw, a 63-year-old resident of Garland, has been retired
due to disability (multiple sclerosis) for twelve years.  Since he's
home all day and is tired of phone solicitors, he's somewhat impolite
with them -- he says, "Get lost," and hangs up.

     One day a solicitor called, representing one of the many law
enforcement associations (the subject of an earlier column, these
groups solicit donations via the phone, but 75% or more goes to the
solicitors rather than the group).  Mr Harshaw hung up.  The solicitor
called right back, claiming to represent another group.  Mr. Harshaw
hung up again.  The man called again.

     During the next several days, the man called repeatedly.  Then he
changed strategy: apparently, whenever he encountered an answering
machine during his calls, he left a fictitious message and Mr. Harshaw's
number.  One man received an obnoxious and obscene complaint about a
(nonexistent) barking dog.  Others were told Mr. Harshaw could give
them a high-paying job.  Another was told that Mr. Harshaw had details
of his girlfriend's infidelities.

     Mr. Harshaw's phone has been ringing off the hook, and all he wanted
was to be left alone.


Paul Fuqua   [e-mail], ti-csl!pf
Texas Instruments, Dallas, Texas


[Moderator's Note: Very dramatic story, but is it really the truth?
What telemarketer do you know with enough spare time on his hands to
waste call after call on someone who obviously is not buying anything?
To those boys, time *is* money, and people (who they call) wasting
their time 'looking for a pen', etc are anathema. Usually the quota
they keep requires several dozen calls per hour, and at least a few
positive results per hour. He is giving up all this money and messing
up his quota in order to play games with Harshaw? How could he be
making all these calls without someone along the way identifying him
or detirmining what organization employs him?  How come Harshaw and/or
telco haven't trapped him by now?  Has Harshaw heard the taped
messages left in his name and identified the voice with the person who
originally called him? Are Harshaw and the {Dallas Morning News} each
complimenting the other's story for their own reasons; Harshaw for his
fifteen minutes of fame and the newspaper in a campaign to dump on
telemarketers?  I don't believe their story.  PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #520
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa12147;
          30 Jun 92 1:22 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA29557
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 29 Jun 1992 23:42:28 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA11739
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 29 Jun 1992 23:42:14 -0500
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1992 23:42:14 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #521

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 29 Jun 92 23:42:16 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 521

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Cordless Phones in the Business Environment? (Laird P. Broadfield)
    Corrections to USA Area Code List (Paul Robinson)
    Where is the Best Place to Find a Used Office Phone System? (David Kovar)
    Can't Reach ANAC or 700-555-4141 From My Dorm (Frank T. Lofaro)
    Caller ID in Southern California? (Javier Henderson)
    Survey: Is Big Brother Watching You? (Lorrayne Schaefer)
    Still 1-800-1-RECYCLE ! (Carl Moore)
    Re: 911 Circuitry Can Detect 91 (Bill Mayhew)
    Re: 911 Circuitry Can Detect 91 (John Higdon)
    Re: Motorola Watch Pager (Mark Earle)
    Re: Where to Buy Special Gadgets, One-of? (William Degnan)
    Re: Pay Phones in San Francisco (Paul W. Schleck)
    Re: You Can Ring My Bell (Vance Shipley)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Laird P. Broadfield)
Subject: Cordless Phones in the Business Environment?
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1992 02:03:59 GMT


I saw a couple of pseudo-nano-cell systems at TCA, but they weren't
quite out yet, and a couple of IR based ones, too, but I'm really
looking for something a little more casual.

We've got a cuple of people using conventional cordless sets, and I
keep expecting them to pick up on each other (I didn't think they had
ESNs (or anyhting like it); why does this work?)  In any case (unless
I *really* don't understand) we would be contending among ten
channels, and I'm looking for 20 or 30 ideally.

Any suggestions?


Laird P. Broadfield     [e-mail]    ...{ucsd, nosc}!crash!lairdb

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

Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 92  20:12:01 EDT
Subject: Corrections to USA Area Code List


Last month I uploaded the list of North American Area Codes for
The U.S. and its posessions, carribean countries and Canada.

This list is essentially the same as the list which has appeared in
our agency's telephone book for two years.  Not once did anyone make a
correction.

I posted this area code list to TELECOM Digest and I have gotten more
than a dozen corrections to the list.

I will shortly post a revised and corrected list, to cover all the
corrections, new numbers and changes people have given to me.  All of
you who sent me a correction will receive a thank you for your
corrections.

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

From: [e-mail] (David C Kovar)
Subject: Where is the Best Place to Find a Used Office Phone System?
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1992 00:07:38 GMT


It would be a Meridian since a company we work closely with has a
Meridian and we might link the systems. Where is the best place to
pick one of these up used, or should I just keep an eye on the local
papers and hope to see one show up there?


David

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

Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1992 01:31:56 -0400 (GMT)
From: Frank T Lofaro <[e-mail]>
Subject: Can't Reach ANAC or 700-555-4141 From My Dorm


    I can't reach 700-555-4141 or the ANAC for the area in
Pittsburgh I'm in, 711-6633 (I should send it to the people
maintaining the ANAC list, if they still do.) from my dorm. I get hit
with an intercept (all these intercepts are the standard "(three
tones) Your call can not be completed as dialed, Please check the
number..."  so I don't know where the problem is). Who'd fix those
problems?  They'd probably deny the ANAC unavailability was a problem,
and G*d knows what about the 700-555-4141 number. Also, now it seems
phones here on the CMU system which can reach the ANAC can use
711-XXXX (whereas elsewhere 711-anything other than 6633 doesn't work,
it gives strange tones or silence). The ANAC and 700 number worked
fine until we switched to a new phone system (both the old and new
systems are PBX/Centrex type systems where you dial 9 for outside
lines, etc. but I don't know much beyond that, like whether we have
our own equipment or whether the telco controls it).

    By the way, both the ANAC and 700 number are free, so blocking
them seems like it would not be a useful idea, so it might not be
intentional that those numbers couldn't be reached. I think I might be
that if the system is configured to know that a specific exchange is
valid, it won't go through (and 711 is not a "real" exchange).

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Caller ID in Southern California?
Organization: Pomona College
Date: 29 Jun 92 21:28:27 PDT


Hello, good people,

I tried calling GTE on this, twice, and both times I got basically the
same answer: "what are you talking about???" (okay, so it's a question
actually).

SO I will ask the net: is caller ID available/will be available soon
in So Cal, in the GTE areas? Specifically, the Pomona Valley.

Thank you. You may now continue with your regularly scheduled news
reading.


Javier Henderson     [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Lorrayne Schaefer)
Subject: Survey: Is Big Brother Watching You?
Organization: The MITRE Corporation, McLean, VA
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1992 17:42:09 GMT


For your information, this has been posted on some newsgroups a few
months ago.  This survey has also been distributed to various
conferences over the past few months.  All results will be in the form
of statistical information and keywords.  All partipants will remain
anonymous.

    SURVEY:  MONITORING IN THE WORKPLACE


The purpose of this survey is to collect data for a presentation that
I will give at this year's National Computer Security Conference in
October.  I would like to thank you for taking the time to fill out
this survey.  If you have any questions, you can call me at
703-883-5301 or send me email at [e-mail].  Please
send your completed survey to:

             Lorrayne Schaefer
              The MITRE Corporation
            M/S Z213
           7525 Colshire Drive
             McLean, VA 22102
        [e-mail]

1.    What is your title?

2.    What type of work does your organization do?

3.    Does your organization currently monitor computer activity?  (Yes/No)

a.    If yes, what type of monitoring does your company do (e.g.,
electronic mail, bulletin boards, telephone, system activity, network
activity)?

b.    Why does your company choose to monitor these things and how
is it done?

4.    If you are considering (or are currently) using a monitoring
tool, what exactly would you monitor?  How would you protect this
information?

5.    Are you for or against monitoring?  Why/why not?  Think in
terms of whether it is ethical or unethical ("ethical" meaning
that it is right and "unethical" meaning it is wrong) for an
employer to monitor an employee's computer usage.  In your
response, consider that the employee is allowed by the company to use
the computer and the company currently monitors computer activity.

6.    If your company monitors employees, is it clearly defined in
your company policy?

7.    In your opinion, does the employee have rights in terms of
being monitored?

8.    In your opinion, does the company have rights to protect its
assets by using a form of monitoring tool?

9.    If you are being monitored, do you take offense?  Managers:
How do you handle situations in which the employee takes offense at
being monitored?

10. What measures does your company use to prevent misuse of
monitoring in the workplace?

11. If an employee is caught abusing the monitoring tool, what would
happen to that individual?  If your company is not using any form of
monitoring, what do you think should happen to an individual who
abused the tool?

12. Is it unethical to monitor electronic mail to determine if the
employee is not abusing this company resource (e.g., suppose the
employee sends personal notes via a network to others that are not
work related)?  Why or why not?

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

Date: Mon, 29 Jun 92 18:10:00 EDT
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject: Still 1-800-1-RECYCLE !


The 1-800-1-RECYCLE (where the second 1 should be an I) is still
posted on those recycling bins on Kent Island, Maryland (just east of
the Bay Bridge).  I passed by there eastbound and remembered to go
back over and check them yesterday (June 28).


[Moderator's Note: Isn't it always amusing how much money some
companies waste in advertising with wrong phone numbers, etc ... and
how they are always the outfits with some snippy arrogant person on
the incoming phones to insure that someone like yourself, willing to
save them, oh, several thousand dollars by pointing out their error is
never able to speak with anyone who knows anything ... how many more
thousands of dollars do you suppose they will waste before they catch
on, if they ever do?  In a way, do you hope they never do?  :)  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Bill Mayhew)
Subject: Re: 911 Circuitry Can Detect 91
Organization: Northeastern Ohio Universities College of Medicine
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1992 04:12:08 GMT


The switch uses heuristic rules to route things resembling 911 to the
dispatcher.  The presumption is that people may misdial when in a
state of panic.

This is the basis of the folklore that cordless phones mysteriously
dial 911 as the battery dies.  What actually happens is that probably
something more like 1-1-1 gets pulse dialed as the power falters.


Bill Mayhew      NEOUCOM Computer Services Department
Rootstown, OH  44272-9995  USA    phone: [phone]
[e-mail]   (140.220.1.1)

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

Date: Sun, 28 Jun 92 23:56 PDT
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: 911 Circuitry Can Detect 91


[e-mail] (Bruce Schlobohm) writes:

> I didn't realize that 91 can be detected by the 911 circuitry.  I
> wonder how often this type of thing happens?

> (For the curious, this person lives in the Los Gatos or Campbell area;
> I'm sorry I can't be more precise at the moment.)

Well, it certainly makes a BIG difference which of those two towns
that person lives in. Campbell (the offical exchange -- remember,
telco boundaries do not necessarily precisely track political
boundaries) is served by two Pac*Bell offices: ANdrews and ALpine. Los
Gatos is "served" by three GTE offices: two with GTD-5s, one with a
DMS-10. The DMS-10 serves the rural mountain area. The Campbell/Los
Gatos political and telco boundaries criss-cross in several places.

It is anyone's guess what GTE does with '911'. Since the Pac*Bell
offices that serve Campbell do not require the access code '1' when
calling long distance, it would not make a lot of sense to have things
perform in the manner you describe. How many people might abandon a
call to Kansas (913) or North Carolina (919) and find the gendarmarie
suddenly at the door? I am served out of ANdrews here at home and I
have just dialed '91' waited several seconds and then hung up on each
of nine lines.

There has been no reaction. No police. No calls back. The only
conclusion that I can reach is that your friend is served by GTE and
that GTE in its infinite stupidity and ineptitude has somehow
programmed its _wonderful_ GTD-5 switches to behave in such a manner.
Needless to say, if this is true, GTE has set a new standard in
buffoonery. What a waste of emergency resources! What a waste of a
telephone customer's time! And for what purpose?

My curiousity is arroused. Next time I am up on the mountain, I think
I will try this out. No flames, please. Save them for GTE who may have
programmed this silly nonsense!


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

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

Date: Mon, 29 Jun 92 21:03:51 CDT
From: [e-mail] (Mark Earle)
Subject: Re: Motorola Watch Pager


I've heard no comments good or bad on the watch pager. A similiar
product might fit your needs, and I have used this one. Motorola makes
a small pager designed to fit in the pocket, which takes up the space
of about two pencils. The display is on the side.

The unit uses either rechargeable batteries that last 10-15 hours per
charge (depending on the number of pages). They are a button type
battery. They also offer a longer lasting disposable battery.

The pager can be purchased / configured with either an audio
annunciator or a vibrator. It can also be set to not vibrate or beep,
and stores incoming pages in memory (four numbers max) You can also
'lock' a number so that incoming pages do not overwrite it.

Overall, compared to a BP-2000 and Bravo pager, I found 'range' missed
pages, etc about the same. This pager however can be worn only in a
shirt pocket or carried in a purse. In a "fanny pack" or typical men's
garment pocket it would get bent/broken, probably.

I really liked the light weight, performance etc.


[e-mail] (Mark Earle) [WA2MCT/5]
FidoNet at       Opus 1:160/50.0
Bitnet           [e-mail]1
Internet  [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (William Degnan)
Date: 28 Jun 92  16:48:03
Subject: Re: Where to Buy Special Gadgets, One-of?


On <Jun 23 13:40> NaC Token Ring Program ([e-mail] )
wrote:

> I'm looking to buy one RJ31-X jack for a home security alarm system.
> This jack hooks the alarm in series to the circuit, if the connector
> is engaged.  (it even has some spare contacts to sense this, if you
> care) This information is from the alarm installer's manual.

> The local AT&T store gave me the national number.  The national AT&T
> 800 number said they don't stock it.

The reason they don't sell it is that it doesn't become an RJ31-X
until it is installed as one. Until that moment, it is something else.

For example:

     Leviton's 20278-SBI, 41018-IQS, 20298-SBI, and 40198-SBI can be
wired as an RJ31X (also as RJ32X, RJ33X, RJ34X, RJ35X, RJ36X, RJ37X
and RJ38X).

You'll find a number of manufacturer's products with some "635" series
stock numbers that will do the job. Suttle's 635A8 (in several colors
and designs) will do just fine.


Origin: Private Line - Stealth Opus in Austin (1:382/39.0)
William Degnan,  Communications Network Solutions
Independent Consultants in Telecommunications and Technology
P.O. Drawer 9530       | [e-mail] | [e-mail]
Austin, TX 78766-9530  | ![e-mail]  | Voice [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Paul W Schleck)
Subject: Re: Pay Phones in San Francisco
Organization: University of Nebraska at Omaha
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1992 03:51:50 GMT


In response to yet another article about municipal pay phone bans and
other foolishness, our Esteemed Moderator writes:

> [Moderator's Note: This is a good example of how rotten to the core
> municipal government can be. All those permits and foot-dragging by
> the city to do something of value -- install a telephone -- for the
> residents. I could tell you dozens of stories about how abusive the
> City of Chicago is to the few people still around who own real
> property and pay taxes, etc. The idiots in our city council are now
> trying to put all sorts of requirements on pay phones here, as if that
> would solve the myriad of problems we endure.  PAT]

In other words, the Moderator is inviting us to ask, "OK Pat, how
abusive *ARE* they?"  At the risk of sounding like a kiss-up, Pat's
occasional forays into political activism and his accounts of ongoing
city-politics are part of what makes reading the Digest worthwhile (in
addition to the well-summarized technical information).  In other
words, yes Pat, please tell us! :-)


Paul W. Schleck  [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: Well, its the same old story I have told here
before many times. About a third of the members of our city council
have been sentenced to prison in the past decade. Quite a few of the
others should be committed to the Reed Mental Health Center. They
visit the Cook County Jail to register people to vote (I haven't been
in jail in such a long time I forgot what a bologna sandwich tastes
like!) while systematically working to neutralize the votes of people
who want to see a third-party candidate who can make a difference. I
have no complaint coming, I guess; I haven't voted in 30 years.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Vance Shipley)
Subject: Re: You Can Ring My Bell
Organization: SwitchView Inc., Waterloo, Ontario
Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1992 18:03:01 GMT


Northern Telecom market a software product called Telecenter.  It
currently runs on Macintosh computers and works with Meridian 1 PBX
sets as well as Centrex sets.  I was fooling around with this last
year and had a lot of fun.

I turned the ring off on my telephone and had the Macintosh doing the
alerting for me.  Telecenter offered a number of choices, my favourite
was the bell.  This bell sounded like a single gong unit from a '30's
telephone.  The ringing would vary in intensity sounding like it was
about to fail at any moment.  This was quite a contrast to the high
tech environment it was in!

Although I never did get it to work (I didn't try too hard) you are
supposed to be able to get the Mac to pronounce the names of callers
to alert you.  This works with Calling Party Name Display.

All in all a fairly neat toy.  Supposedly available soon in Windows.


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

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #521
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa17203;
          30 Jun 92 3:05 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA27427
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 30 Jun 1992 01:26:56 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA01981
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 30 Jun 1992 01:26:46 -0500
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1992 01:26:46 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #522

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 30 Jun 92 01:26:00 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 522

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Concert-Goers Blast 911 Service (Jon Baker)
    Re: Concert-Goers Blast 911 Service (Kevin W. Williams)
    Re: Concert-Goers Blast 911 Service (Jacob DeGlopper)
    Re: "Choke" Prefixes (was Concert Goers Blast 911) (Robert L. McMillin)
    Re: "Choke" Prefixes (was Concert Goers Blast 911) (John Nagle)
    Re: Pac$Bell Tentacle-Stretching (was Pacific Bell Car Theft) (Nick Sayer)
    Re: Pac$Bell Tentacle-Stretching (was Pacific Bell Car Theft) (John Higdon)
    Re: United Telephone/Sprint (Bill Huttig)
    Re: Call Own Phone Back Number Wanted (John R. Ruckstuhl,Jr)
    Re: Ringer Equivalency Numbers (Julian Macassey)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 29 Jun 92 07:54:04 MST
From: [e-mail] (Jon Baker)
From: [e-mail] (Jon Baker)
Subject: Re: Concert-Goers Blast 911 Service
Organization: AG Communication Systems, Phoenix, Arizona
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1992 14:53:43 GMT


TELECOM Moderator notes:

> [Moderator's Note: Yes, true IF your local CO can get around to
> providing you with a dial tone and IF the CO can then find time to
> look at and translate what you have dialed. Until that point -- if
> there are delays in that stage -- HOW is telco supposed to know you
> want to call 911?  Once it is ascertained calling party wants 911,
> then fine -- give the customer what he wants.  But what about the
> calls lost before that point? People don't have direct lines to 911,
> you know.    PAT]

Excepting a very poorly engineered CO, this also should not be a
problem unless you have a very significant percentage of your
subscribers going offhook all at the same time.  This is not the case
in a concert ticket hotline, or a radio station giveaway, but might
occur during some sort of emergency (power failure, weather disaster,
large nearby explosion, etc.)  In such a case, certain lines within
the neighborhood can be designated to be 'hot' lines, or 'A' lines,
which get preferential treatment.  The idea being, if we can't serve
100%, and if we tried we'd serve 0%, then let's pick 10%-20% and give
them service.  The rationale being, it's not necessary for every one
of 500 residents in a neighborhood to call 911 to report a fire.


J.Baker      asuvax!gtephx!bakerj

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

From: [e-mail] (Kevin W. Williams)
Subject: Re: Concert-Goers Blast 911 Service
Organization: gte
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1992 16:40:32 GMT


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

>> [Moderator's Note: Come now, do you *really* think US West or any
>> telco relishes these situations and ignores them 'because they are the
>> phone company'?  And had telco known in advance (did any of the
>> concert promoters advise telco of the times, etc?), what in your
>> estimation might telco have done about it, other than possibly block
>> off access from certain exchanges when traffic was heavy?    PAT]

> I'd have to disagree. Proper design of a "Life and Death" emergency
> system should preclude ANY intruption of that service based on trunk
> loading. 911 trunks should be Independent of any other traffic.

Let's be a little realistic here. I could, indeed, design a 911 system
which was indpendent of any other request for service. Unfortunately,
I would have to run a separate phone to each house which only served
the emergency service bureau.

In real life, line service needs to compete for timeslots or codecs,
and get the attention of the servicing processor. In a GTD-5, a group
of 768, 1152, or 1536 lines competes for only 192 timeslots. If 192 of
the subscribers in the group are calling for tickets, the 193rd simply
cannot get through, no matter how important his call may be. Other
machines have their concentrators on even smaller groups (64 lines
competing for 16 codecs, etc.).  There are statistical differences in
the behavior of small groups vs. large ones, but the fundamental math
remains the same: depending on engineering, between 1/8 and 1/4 of
your subscribers can talk at once.

If you want a feature that would work, it would be possible to cut off
any subscriber that called for a ticket, and not allow him to
reoriginate for five minutes or so. This would free up a lot of
resources. Unfortunately, it would also open up the telco for lawsuits
("Aunt Tilly keeled over right after I called for a ticket, and I
couldn't get through.").

Choke prefixes, call gapping, and similar network management
treatments are a compromise for an insoluble problem. No switch
manufacturer can sell totally non-blocking line equipment, because the
telcos won't pay the costs. We cannot predict who is going to call 911
and who is going to call Larry King. The best we can do is make the
machine survive the peaking, give fairly distributed service to all
originators, and try to deal with the problem during routing and
termination.


Kevin Wayne Williams
AG Communication Systems nee Automatic Electric

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

From: [e-mail] (Jacob DeGlopper)
Subject: Re: Concert-Goers Blast 911 Service
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Jacob DeGlopper)
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 92 13:39:58 GMT


> calls lost before that point? People don't have direct lines to 911,
> you know.    PAT]

Well, most people don't.  I happened to be on the direct line to our
communications center from the rescue squad yesterday when a strange
thing happened.  I got a few clicks on the line, silence, and then to
my surprise "Your call cannot be completed as dialed.  Please check
the number and dial again or call your operator to help you.",
followed immediately by the obnoxiously loud "hang up NOW" signal.  I
didn't think the direct line was supposed to do this sort of thing!
Anyone have an idea why?


     Jacob DeGlopper, EMT-A, Wheaton Volunteer Rescue Squad
     -- CWRU Biomedical Engineering - [e-mail] --
                       [phone]

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

Date: Mon, 29 Jun 92 09:20:20 -0700
From: rlm@ms_aspen.hac.com (Robert L. McMillin)
Subject: Re: "Choke" Prefixes


Lauren Weinstein wrote about 'choke' prefixes with respect to their
ability, or lack thereof, to help maintain reasonable phone service in
an area affected by unusually heavy phone usage, such as during
phone-ins for tickets to popular concerts.  On a related matter:
during the recent riots, I was able to get dial tone out of a pay
phone in the part of West Torrance that is served by GTE, even though
my own phone wouldn't give me dial tone after ten minutes off hook.
Do pay phones have a higher priority within the switch in terms of
getting dial tone?

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

From: [e-mail] (John Nagle)
Subject: Re: "Choke" Prefixes (was Concert Goers Blast 911)
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 92 20:02:58 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest)


Overloads due to massive redialing should be fixable by programming
originating switches to apportion originating registers using some
measure of "fairness", such as number of requests for dialtone in the
last N minutes, tallied for each line.  This would effectively
guarantee that if you haven't made multiple call attempts in the last
few minutes, you get dialtone ahead of everyone who has.

        This seems a reasonable feature for modern switches, and I'm
surprised that something like this isn't already implemented.  Perhaps
the areas experiencing problems are on 1ESS machines, or even
crossbar.

        With the rise of mass-media initiated calling storms, future
switch software will have to have something like this, at least until
switches have enough control capacity that everyone can have dialtone
(or ISDN call-control capability) simultaneously.


John Nagle

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

From: [e-mail] (Nick Sayer)
Subject: Re: Pac$Bell Tentacle-Stretching (was Pacific Bell Car Theft)
Organization: The Duck Pond public unix: [phone], log in as 'guest'.
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1992 14:31:02 GMT


[e-mail] (Nick Sayer) writes:

> "tariffed" customers.

Gee whiz, Pat, you ruined a perfectly good pun!

"tarrified" "terrified" Get it?


Nick Sayer <[e-mail]>   N6QQQ @ N0ARY.#NOCAL.CA.USA.NA
37 19 49 N / 121 57 36 W           [phone], log in as 'guest'


[Moderator's Note: What Nick is referring to is my unwitting editing
of his earlier message. When it was put in the Digest, the non-word
shown above was changed to a 'correct' word without my catching on to
Nick's intentions.  Sorry!   PAT]

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

Date: Mon, 29 Jun 92 09:15 PDT
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: Pac$Bell Tentacle-Stretching (was Pacific Bell Car Theft)


[e-mail] (Nick Sayer) writes:

> Pac$Bell seems to want to get its greasy little fingers on every sort
> of enterprise possible, save that of providing good service to its
> "tariffed" customers.

You aint seen nothin' yet. The latest round of "institutional"
advertising is designed to anesthetize you into accepting Pac*Bell
into many aspects of your daily life. These are very slick ads that
talk about how "different" California is and about how Pac*Bell is
ready to introduce "new products and services" that fit in with the
California lifestyle.

Using the slogan, "Good enough isn't", the spots have already
mentioned "RealtyLink", an information service that allows propective
buyers to "tour" properties without leaving the Realty office. And
this is just the beginning.

The major crisis around the bend for Pac*Bell and other LECs is that
of bypass. And we are no longer just talking about shorthaul long
distance. I know of companies that now import local dial tone through
various schemes. As Pac*Bell becomes too lazy to keep its entire plant
up to date, firms are no longer going to accept the excuse that this
feature, or that one is "not available in your area".

Most analysts agree that the latest talk about spinning off the LEC
from the Pacific Telesis empire was a lot of hot air designed to
remove some heat. ("Well, if Pacific Telesis was even willing to TALK
about divesting Pac*Bell, it must not be as evil as we thought.") It
may happen somewhere down the road after the LEC has been run into the
ground, at which point only a massive rate increase or government
intervention would save it. But for now, Pacific Telesis desperately
needs the revenues to finance all these wonderful new services with
which it hopes to eventually make a killing.

> Meanwhile, _REAL_ residential ISDN is nowhere to be found.

Watch out. Last time I pointed that out I got taken to task because I
was not just forking over for business service.


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

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

Date: Sun, 28 Jun 92 14:47:18 -0400
From: [e-mail] (Bill Huttig)
Subject: Re: United Telephone/Sprint
Organization: Florida Institute of Technology, Melbourne USA


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

> Distance.  Since UT is owned by Sprint, I'm assuming that UTLD is just
> another name from Sprint LD service.

It is kinda of strange but I think the UTLD is really a separte comany
or at lease use to be.  Before July 1, 1985 GTE Sprint was one company
and US Telecom was owned by United Telecom (United Telephone). They
merged 7/1/85 to form US SPRINT (along with GTE Telenet and UniNet GTE
and Uniteds packet networks).  GTE sold its part to United over the
last seven years. Now United owns the whole thing and decided to
rename itself to SPRINT.  Anyway in the meantime I noticed a LD
carrier spring up called United Telephone LD which I called once and
they claimed not to be connected with Sprint.  It seems they just
offered service to United Tel customers ... I assume now with the
final take over of Spint that the would merge UTLD into it ... (seems
stupid to compete with yourself).

> UTLD claims one of its advantages over MCI is that UTLD charges can be
> placed on the same bill as UT local charges. (AT&T charges can also be
> placed on the UT bill).  Isn't this unfair?  Doesn't this action give
> UTLD an unfair advantage over MCI because UT does not directly bill
> MCI calls?

I think so but even when the local Exchange Carrier does bill as in
the case of Southern Bell it is still unfair. For example my bill cut
off date is the 18th of the month ... bill dated 19th. All the AT&T
calls show up through the 18th (except calling card calls) while MCI
would have to cut off the calls on the 8th so that they could get the
calls to the BOC.  There is also the problem where I have two numbers
on different exchanges ... if MCI uses the oposite one from the BOC
the billing will be cut off even earlier ... over three weeks. That's
why I get my bills directly from MCI, and their format is nicer.

> Sprint's purchases of small telephone companies (Centel, United
> Telephone) is an interesting contrast to the forced breakup of AT&T.

Sprint did not purchase United Telephone ... United Telephone purchased
the rest of US SPRINT and renamed itself.


Bill     [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (John R Ruckstuhl Jr)
Subject: Re: Call Own Phone Back Number Wanted
Organization: EE Dept at UF
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 92 00:34:47 GMT


In comp.dcom.telecom [e-mail] (Rich Mintz) writes:

> if your phone number is 345-1234, there is an alternate xyz-1234
> number which connects you to this "test" number.
> I've found this "alternate" prefix many times through sequential
> dialing with my modem and uning the Hayes 'W' command to wait for a
> dial tone after the number is dialed (that's what you get when the
> test number answers).

Hopefully, Rich (and others who use this method) remember to restrict
their testing to those prefixes which are not in use for valid
telephone numbers.  One might find such a list in the beginning of the
telephone directory.


Regards,

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

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

From: [e-mail] (Julian Macassey)
Subject: Re: Ringer Equivalency Numbers (R
Date: 29 Jun 92 02:04:07 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Julian Macassey)
Organization: The Hole in the Wall  Hollywood California U.S.A.


In article <[e-mail]>
[e-mail] (Steven S. Brack) writes:
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 515, Message 6 of 13

> I recently made a tour of my new home, and added up all the RENs of
> all the phones, just to see what I would get.

> Total RENs: 7.4 *!*   (Must really increase Ma's electric bill 8)

    The Telco guarantee to ring a total of 5.0 REN. If you have an
REN of 7.4 ringing, it indicates that either the numbers are untrue
(possible) or you are near the CO (most likely).

> Highest rated device: ConAir "prestige" phone, 1.7B

    "Con"Air make some of the worst phones I have seen. But then
they are really an importer of cheap and nasty hair dryers, so why
should they sell a decent phone.

> Lowest rated device:  Genuine Bell answering machine, 0.3B
> Lowest rated phone:   AT&T 100 pushbutton phone, 0.7B

> Anyway, this brought up some questions.

> 1) Some phones give their REN as X.XA  (X being any number),
> while others give theirs as   X.XB.  What do the A & B mean?

    These numbers are referenced in FCC Part 68 and Bell Pub 48005
as well as EIA Doc RS-470.

    Briefly, the letters refer to the frequency response of the
ringer. So A which is usually found on old brass gong ringers, is
responsive to 20 Hz +&- 3 Hz and 30 Hz +&- 3Hz. Most ring frequencies
in the U.S. are 20 Hz. Yes there are exceptions, often on party lines.
The B, usually found on warble ringers means the ringer is responsive
between 15.3 and 68.0 Hz. Often B ringers will happily work at 100 Hz
and above.

    The standard gong ringer has an REN of 1.0 and Frequency
response A.

> 2) Why should the least feature-filled phone, a $15 one-piece
> phone have a higher REN than the AT&T phone, which does quite
> a bit more, and rings more loudly, as well?

    Because the $15.00 phone is a cheaply made piece of crap. When
you sell a phone for $15.00 it means that it has $3.75 worth of parts
and labour in it. The reason some stuff costs more is that it is
better designed and better built. Yes, you do get what you pay for. I
have seen some junk phones with RENs of 3.0.

> 3) Does the length of wire run figure into REN calculations?
>   (I have an extension phone connected to a 250' cord.)

    Yes, but the wire in your house, is a minor fraction of the
total length. The length of wire between your house and the CO is
often three miles or more, so another 300 feet doesn't mean much.


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

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #522
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa16947;
          1 Jul 92 0:42 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA24279
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 30 Jun 1992 22:29:14 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA32159
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 30 Jun 1992 22:29:05 -0500
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1992 22:29:05 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #523

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 30 Jun 92 22:29:09 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 523

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Jane Barbie (was The Purpose of the Three Tones) (Dave Niebuhr)
    Re: Jane Barbie (was The Purpose of the Three Tones) (Peter Chrzanowski)
    Re: More Strange 710 Stuff (was Funny Intercept) (Terry Kennedy)
    Re: More Strange 710 Stuff (was Funny Intercept) (Jacob DeGlopper)
    Re: The Depths of Sliminess (G.T. Stovall)
    Re: The Depths of Sliminess (John De Armond)
    Re: AGT Cellular Gets First North American Digital Cellular (Serdar Boztas)
    Re: Combinations of Names From Phone Digits (Bob Izenberg)
    Re: Two Questions From a Newcomer (Rich Greenberg)
    Re: Two Questions From a Newcomer (Fred R. Goldstein)
    Re: AT&T Knows I am Moving. How? (Byron Burke)
    Re: Interactive Cable TV (Bruce Klopfenstein)
    Re: No Obvious L.A. Telecom Effects From Yucca/Big Bear Quakes (R McMillin)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 29 Jun 92 07:26:28 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Dave Niebuhr)
Subject: Re: Jane Barbie (was The Purpose of the Three Tones)


In a recent post, [e-mail] (Jack Winslade)
writes:

> Back in NYC in the days of the mechanical announcers, the time number
> was published as 637-1212 but EVERYONE knew that to get the time, the
> word N-E-R-V-O-U-S would be dialed.  Every phone enthusiast knew that
> 637-anything would get the time.

I just tried 9-637-1212 (Area Code 516) from my office phone and got a
recording stating that I had dialed my own number in Area Code 718
(Brooklyn (Kings County), Queens, or the start of 718 in the Bronx).


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Peter Chrzanowski)
Subject: Re: Jane Barbie (was The Purpose of the Three Tones)
Organization: Tellabs, Inc.
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1992 22:35:37 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, rlm@ms_aspen.hac.com
(Robert L. McMillin) writes:

> Can you tell us how they 'patched together' the digits prior to
> digital recording?  I envisioned two dozen or more very short tape
> loops all run by some kind of switch.

I don't know how this was done, but I do remember the insides of a
talking alarm clock from the pre-digital era.

The clock had what appeared to be two floppy disks in it, one for
hours and one for minutes.  There was one full track devoted to each
number, and the position of the access arms was mechanically
controlled.  The magnetic recording was analog, however.

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

From: [e-mail] (Terry Kennedy)
Subject: Re: More Strange 710 Stuff (was Funny Intercept on 1-710-555-1212)
Date: 29 Jun 92 05:35:21 EDT
Organization: St. Peter's College, US


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Frank T Lofaro) writes:

> Strange thing is if I dial a bogus area code and number I get the
> intercept right away after the last digit is dialed (and before I can
> get to enter my security code), but if I dial the 710 area code and a
> number, it asks for my code, and only then does it give me the
> intercept.

  If your phone service is Centrex-style, or if you have a
telco-provided PBX, one of the things that comes with it is an
accurate listing of area codes. As 710 seems to be assigned, it would
be accepted by your switch or PBX, only to get you the same intercept
once the CO tried to route it.


Terry Kennedy        Operations Manager, Academic Computing
[e-mail]    St. Peter's College, Jersey City, NJ USA
[e-mail]    [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Jacob DeGlopper)
Subject: Re: More Strange 710 Stuff (was Funny Intercept on 1-710-555-1212)
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Jacob DeGlopper)
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 92 14:51:28 GMT


In a previous article, [e-mail] (Frank T Lofaro) says:

> My dorm phone (at CMU) uses AT&T ACUS service (a college
> if I dial the 710 area code and a number, it asks for my code, and
> only then does it give me the intercept.

> So maybe 710 isn't only using line-based access control. Why an
> eight-digit security code related to a college calling plan would be
> involved in access granting/denying is beyond me, if that is the case

Interesting.  Our ACUS system at CWRU uses a seven-digit code, which
provides fairly good security, since there can't be more than 5000 or
so students living on campus.  I think the billing and code validation
are done locally, since the 800 number to check your account balance
is updated from school records on a non-real-time basis.  The calls
seem to go out on a trunk from the school telecom office -- for
example, although all the dorm phone numbers are 216 754 nnnn, and 800
ANI returns correct numbers, the 404-whatever readback returned 216
368 2000 -- normally the number of the campus operator, and the phone
number listed in the phone book for CWRU!  The 368 prefix is our
administration.  Maybe someone at CMU has a reason to be able to call
710 and the switch is only seeing the outgoing trunk at first?


     Jacob DeGlopper, EMT-A, Wheaton Volunteer Rescue Squad
      -- CWRU Biomedical Engineering - [e-mail] --
                        [phone]

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

Date: 30 Jun 92 10:33:00 CDT
From: Greg (G.T.) Stovall <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: The Depths of Sliminess


The telemarketing firm was known, but not identified in the original
article in order to give the firm and the sponsoring agency (the
Garland Police Officers' Association) a chance to respond to the
allegations.  In a subsequent article, the columnist revealed the
information and stated that repeated phone calls to the telemarketers
and the police association have not been returned.  He ended the
article with a challenge to the officers' association to refute the
story.

Apparently, according to the original story, Mr. Harshaw was
sufficiently rude (possibly obnoxious) to really tick the telemarketer
off.

I have no independent verification of the story, but am unsure as to
why you doubt the article.  There is no discernable campaign by the
newspaper; this story is by one local columnist.  Yes, he has spent
the last couple of months investigating telemarketing firms in Texas,
and has turned up some whopping cases of misdirection (fake police
officer associations hiring telemarketing firms owned by the owners of
the officer association, etc).  As a result, many officer associations
are changing the way they solicit funds.

I can easily imagine some person pulling a stunt like that.
Telemarketers are people, after all, and *some* of them have to be
unhinged.  Telemarketers are not working *all* the time; if one was
sufficiently peeved, he might stay after his shift to wreak some
havoc.


Gregory T. Stovall        [e-mail]
Bell-Northern Research    ESN   444-7009
Richardson, Texas, USA    [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (John De Armond)
Subject: Re: The Depths of Sliminess
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 92 18:33:59 GMT
Organization: Dixie Communications Public Access.  The Mouth of the South.


[e-mail] (Paul Fuqua) writes:

[ Teleslime harrassment story deleted]

> [Moderator's Note: Very dramatic story, but is it really the truth?
> What telemarketer do you know with enough spare time on his hands to
> waste call after call on someone who obviously is not buying anything?
> To those boys, time *is* money, and people (who they call) wasting
> their time 'looking for a pen', etc are anathema. Usually the quota
> they keep requires several dozen calls per hour, and at least a few
> positive results per hour. He is giving up all this money and messing
> up his quota in order to play games with Harshaw? How could he be
> making all these calls without someone along the way identifying him
> or detirmining what organization employs him?  How come Harshaw and/or
> telco haven't trapped him by now?  Has Harshaw heard the taped
> messages left in his name and identified the voice with the person who
> originally called him? Are Harshaw and the {Dallas Morning News} each
> complimenting the other's story for their own reasons; Harshaw for his
> fifteen minutes of fame and the newspaper in a campaign to dump on
> telemarketers?  I don't believe their story.  PAT]

Pat, I know that running this mailing list gives you an all-seeing
overview of the world not available to Paul or the reporter who
investigated the story but consider for a moment the fact that you
don't know all there is to know about teleslime.

Consider that not all teleslime works in boiler rooms and against
quotas.  Consider the increasing problem we have here in Atlanta with
casual teleslime who work out of their homes (judging by the screaming
kids and blaring TV in the background) to make a little extra money.
They have neither the quota to drive them nor the thick skin to let
'em weather insults.  These people get mad at being cussed at or even
hung up on.  They do waste their time getting even by calling back.
And when they call me back, their number from the Caller*ID box goes
in Dixie's UUCP Systems file for day or two.

Yes, it is entirely believable that a teleslime would do such a thing
as described in the media article.


John De Armond, WD4OQC      Rapid Deployment System, Inc.
Marietta, Ga      [e-mail]
Need Usenet public Access in Atlanta?  Write Me for info on Dixie.com.

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

From: [e-mail] (Serdar Boztas)
Subject: Re: AGT Cellular Gets First North American Digital Cellular Running
Organization: Monash University, Melb., Australia.
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1992 05:10:53 GMT


[e-mail] (David Leibold) writes:

> AGT Cellular in Alberta, Canada, announced that it has North America's
> first digital cellular system in operation, beating out other cellular
> companies including its competitor, Cantel. AGT Cellular placed ads in
> recent newspapers trumpeting this achievement, stating that the heavy
> use of digital technology in AGT's network helped establish digital
> cellular service, and joked about digital not being in "Mister Rogers
> Neighbourhood" (a reference to Rogers Communications which owns AGT's
> competitor Cantel, which had announced plans to go digital, but hasn't
> put them into effect yet).

What multiaccess method are they using? Does anyone have more
information about this system? I am interested in things such as
transmission rates for digitized voice, method of voice compression,
etc. Have they started marketing dual-mode or all digital mobile
phones?


Serdar Boztas \\ [e-mail] \\ +(61)3-565-5722

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

From: [e-mail] (Bob Izenberg)
Subject: Re: Combinations of Names From Phone Digits
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 92 1:32:32 CDT


In TELECOM Digest Issue 517, PAT observed of K Husain's program,

> [Moderator's Note: I tried the above and could not get it to work.
> Maybe I did something wrong. Readers with questions should address the
> author direct.     PAT]

It gave some of the compilers here trouble as well, but gcc didn't
have any trouble with it.

Bob   WORK: [e-mail]  HOME: [e-mail]

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

Date: Mon, 29 Jun 92 00:33:53 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Rich Greenberg)
Subject: Re: Two Questions From a Newcomer
Organization: Hatch Usenet and E-mail.  Playa del Rey, CA


In article <[e-mail]> is written:

> I have two questions:

> 1). Is there a forum on the Internet that is dedicated to ISDN? What
> about ATM?

Try comp.dcom.isdn.

> 2). Has anyone heard of an ISDN interface for Macintosh computers?

Ask on comp.dcom.isdn.


Rich Greenberg - N6LRT - 310-649-0238 - [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Fred R. Goldstein)
Subject: Re: Two Questions From a Newcomer
Organization: Digital Equipment Corp., Littleton MA USA
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1992 17:00:00 GMT


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

> 1). Is there a forum on the Internet that is dedicated to ISDN? What
> about ATM?

comp.dcom.isdn and comp.dcom.cell-relay.


Fred R. Goldstein   [e-mail]
k1io             or [e-mail]   voice:[phone]
Standard Disclaimer:  Opinions are mine alone; sharing requires permission.

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

From: [e-mail] (Byron Burke)
Subject: Re: AT&T Knows I am Moving. How?
Date: 29 Jun 92 14:43:24 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Department of Computer Science, Purdue University


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

> About a week ago I notified US Sprint (my LD carrier) and C&P
> telephone (local carrier) to disconnect my service on June 30th,
> because I am moving.  Today I received junk mail from AT&T offering me
> a "$50 long distance savings bond" if I select them as my LD carrier
> for my new home.  Am I correct in assuming that C&P telephone gave
> them the information, probably so that my Bell Atlantic phone card
> stops working after this date?

> [Moderator's Note: AT&T probably buys information like that from the
> local telco also.   PAT]

I was amazed to get something similar -- an offer of a free hour of
long distance if I keep Reach Out America service -- if I keep AT&T
when I move.  However, the only people I've told (other than friends
and relatives) is the apartment complex I'm moving into and the one
I'm moving out of.  I haven't called and hooked up phone/electric
service yet.  I suppose this is more of a privacy issue then telcom
but it is amazing (scary?) what these companies will do for a bit of
service.  (Although I have been making many long long distance calls
to my girlfriend in Massachusetts so I suppose I'm an ideal customer :).


byron      [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Bruce Klopfenstein)
Subject: Re: Interactive Cable TV
Date: 29 Jun 92 14:46:38 GMT
Organization: Bowling Green State University B.G., Oh.


[e-mail] (Jeff Sicherman) writes:

>   I would appreciate references to articles, books, journals on the
> technology and applications of interactive cable-TV and any case
> studies of systems that have been tried.

Here are three quick text cites:

Baldwin, Thomas F. and McVoy, D. Stevens.  (1983). Cable Communications.
    Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall. ISBN 0-13-110171-4

Slater, James N. (1988). Cable Television Technology.  New York: John
    Wiley and Sons.  ISBN #0-7458-0108-0

Deschler, Kenneth T. (1987). Cable Television Technology.  New York:
    McGraw-Hill.

A doctoral student of mine, Dana Roof, has been studying Qube's
interactive cable systems and has chosen that as her dissertation
topic.  She might be an excellent resource as well.


Bruce C. Klopfenstein             [e-mail]
Department of Telecommunications  [e-mail]
322 West Hall                     [e-mail]
Bowling Green State University    [phone]; 372-2224
Bowling Green, OH  43403-0235     fax [phone]

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

Date: Mon, 29 Jun 92 09:29:41 -0700
From: rlm@ms_aspen.hac.com (Robert L. McMillin)
Subject: Re: No Obvious L.A. Telecom Effects From Yucca/Big Bear Quakes


The Moderator writes:

> [Moderator's Note: John Higdon has also checked in with me and noted
> that Sunday morning's quakes were a bit too close -- and too strong --
> for comfort in his 'desert hideaway'. But he was unharmed and will be
> writing to us again soon. Just as we have all heard the 'AIDS is God's
> punishment for homosexuals' routine, one clever writer suggested to me
> that the earthquake was God's punishment for having the LA Gay Pride
> Parade yesterday ... but his aim was a little off and he forgot that
> his watch was set on Vatican Time.  :).   PAT]

Some of us here thought it was God's reaction to reading the news in
the Saturday {Los Angeles Times} Business section that another 6000
Hughes employees are to be dismissed.


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


[Moderator's Note: The Chicago papers made mention of it Sunday, and
that is a pretty awful scenario. I hope the people involved are able
to deal with it and find other work.   PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #523
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa18630;
          1 Jul 92 1:19 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA21296
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 30 Jun 1992 23:22:45 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA03069
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 30 Jun 1992 23:22:34 -0500
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1992 23:22:34 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #524

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 30 Jun 92 23:22:38 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 524

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: 900Mhz Cordless Phones: Which One? (Irving Wolfe)
    Re: Newfoundland Province Code 709 ([e-mail])
    Re: What are "NorTel" and "Centrex"? (Shuang Deng)
    Re: MCI Phone Bill (Steve Forrette)
    Re: Fiber Channel Standards Info Wanted (Jim Smith)
    Re: 1-xxx-555-1212 From Overseas? (Bill Squire)
    Re: Caller ID in Southern California? (Jim Tavakoli)
    Re: Caller ID in Southern California? (John Higdon)
    Re: Contemporary Remote Controls (Doug Humphrey)
    Re: Ringer Equivalency Numbers (John Higdon)
    Re: Bix Block Punch-Down Tool (Barton F. Bruce)
    Re: No Obvious L.A. Telecom Effects From Yucca/Big Bear Quake (M Terribile)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Irving_Wolfe)
Subject: Re: 900Mhz Cordless Phones: Which One?
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Happy Man Corp., Vashon Island, WA 98070-7399
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1992 15:35:17 GMT


As far as I know, only the Tropez and Panasonic phones are out.  Both
have been reviewed on the net, though perhaps only the Tropez in this
newsgroup.  (The other may have been misc.consumers.)

The review of the Panasonic was _very_ negative.  It is also much more
expensive than the Tropez and has fewer features.  My personal
experience with conventional cordless phones suggests that Panasonic
tends to be good on user-interface and poorer-than-average on overall
robust engineering and quality.  (This differs from their quality in
answering machines and wired phones and systems, which is quite good.)

The two reviews of the Tropez were slightly negative to neutral.  The
only real complaints were "dropouts" of communication and inadequate
volume.

I bought a Tropez and liked it enough to order a second one for the
office.  Yes, there are environmentally-effected dropouts.  Yes, I
wish the maximum volume (it's adjustable) were higher.  On the other
hand, sound quality was great and range was perhaps ten times that of
a conventional cordless, maybe 400 to 600 feet.

To get the higher range so I could use it between buildings here and
reduce dropouts, I put the base unit in the attic.  I noticed that the
dropouts were only bad enough to prevent conversation when I was using
it in the hot tub, so I no longer do that.  (I wired in a conventional
phone to that location.)

I like the Tropez.


[e-mail]      Happy Man Corp. 206/463-9399 x101
4410 SW Pt. Robinson Rd., Vashon Island, WA  98070-7399  fax x108

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Newfoundland Province Code 709
Date: 29 Jun 92 12:25:10 PST
Organization: Science Applications Int'l Corp./San Diego


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (VLD/VMB)
writes:

> incorporated as a province of Canada until 1949.  Newfoundland (which
> includes mainland Labrador) is area code 709.  Notice that the French
> islands of St. Pierre et Miquelon are right next to Newfoundland, but
> have country code 508.

> [Moderator's Note: Someone said to me that despite the different
> country code noted above, there is 'local community dialing' between
> some points in southern Newfoundland and the islands. Either a
> straight seven-digit connection, or some code followed by the local
> number on the islands. Can anyone comment on this?   PAT]

Pat,

This is pretty straightforward to implement.  A trunk group is
established in the cooperating COs and the switch is programmed to
route traffic to the trk grp when appropriate.  The use of a straight
seven-digit connection vs a code then seven-digit would tell you
whether there were conflicts due to common exchange numbers in the
cooperting COs.  Of course, the toughest part of this whole setup is
to get it past the regulators.

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

From: Shuang Deng <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re:What are "NorTel" and "Centrex"?
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 92 13:46:33 MDT


[Moderator's Note: 'NorTel' is most likely Northern Telecom, a
prominent manufacturer of telco stuff in the USA ...]

Or, more perciesly, Northern Telecom is a *Canadian* company with
subsidies in many places of the world, including the USA.


Shuang Deng ([e-mail])

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: MCI Phone Bill
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1992 23:14:38 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail].
NCR.COM (John Staub) writes:

> I received my phone bill on Saturday. There were $148 worth of phone
> card charges. I called MCI. They checked and told me that my local
> company had assigned my phone number to another person. MCI had then
> gived them a phone card. They were the ones that made the calls. They
> took the charges off the bill. Fine and dandy. I have had the number
> for 24 years. I am going to be checking my phone bill very closely
> from now on. I wonder HOW that could happen or *how many times * it
> could have happened in the past.

This is apparently one of the many "advantages" of getting service
from MCI.  Some of you may remember my posting about a month ago about
being unable to reach a certain prefix using AT&T.  I was able to
successfully call the same prefix using both US Sprint and MCI.  Well,
the bill for that day finally arrived.  As expected, in addition to my
local and AT&T charges, there were two additional pages of my bill,
from US Sprint and MCI.  The US Sprint page was for a one-minute call
priced at $.14, and the MCI page was for a one-minute call priced at
$.13, with an additional charge of over $6 for "PrimeTime Plus" or
some such thing, for a grand total of almost $7 for a one-minute call.

Of course, I called MCI to get to the bottom of this.  I was told that
according to their computer, my number belonged to someone else, and
they subscribed to the "PrimeTime Plus" plan.  The previous months had
no charges for this plan, as no calls had been placed via MCI.
Apparently, the person who previously had my number was an MCI
subscriber, and MCI had old data in their database.  Combined with
John Staub's message, I gather that this is not an isolated problem
with MCI.  I guess they get neither disconnect or "new service"
notifications from the LEC, or discard them.

I should also note that the MCI rep needed to verify that I was
telling the truth when I said that this was my number and no longer
belonged to Mr X.  How did they do this?  They checked with Directory
Assistance!  The rep came back on the line "Mr. Forrette, your number
was not listed with Directory Assistance, so I was unable to verify
what you've told me.  But, Mr. X is not listed with the number in
question either, so I'll take your word for it."  I'm really glad that
they took the extra effort to verify the facts of the case for
certain!  :-)  Apparently, MCI's method of getting billing names and
addresses for their customers is taking the information directly from
the customer (and not the LEC computer), and verifying it with DA.

Also, I was given a hard-sell by the MCI rep to switch to MCI long
distance.  Especially touted was Friends and Family.  I responded "Oh,
so you can call up all my friends with a bunch of sales calls and
hassle THEM to switch too?"  She replied "No, that's NOT what we do!
When you give us your list of numbers, we now have an option for each
number you give us.  1) call that person and ask if they want to
switch, 2) mail them literature about switching, or 3) do nothing.  In
any event, you get the 20% FAF discount for the first three months for
everyone on your list regardless of their carrier."  Needless to say,
I declined her generous offer.


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Jim Smith)
Subject: Re: Fiber Channel Standards Info Wanted
Organization: Tandem Computers Inc., Cupertino CA
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1992 00:32:01 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]12.
bull.it (Alfredo Cotroneo) wrote:

> I am looking for the ultimate ANSI specs of the Fiber Channel
> standards, but I could not find either the exact document number, nor
> where could I obtain a copy from.

The Fibre Channel standard has not yet been published by ANSI. The
latest working draft, Rev 3.0, is available from the following
source:

  Global Engineering
  2805 McGaw St.
  Irvine, CA  92714
  [phone]
  [phone]

> Can anybody help, please? I suppose that the standard document numbers
> should be available from ANSI.

Fibre Channel Physical and Signaling Interface (FC-PH) Rev 3.0
X3T9/91-062      X3T9.3/92-092    FC-P/92-001R3.0

> Does anybody have the address of ANSI (phone/fax/email) handy?.

Use the Global Engineering address until the document is published
by ANSI. For future reference, ANSI's address is:

  American National Standards Institute
  1430 Broadway
  New York, NY  10018


Jim Smith    [e-mail]     [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Bill Squire)
Subject: Re: 1-xxx-555-1212 From Overseas?
Date: 30 Jun 92 05:02:37 GMT
Organization: Hack-Tic Magazine


[e-mail] (Christian Weisgerber) writes:

> Several times when toying around a friend and I tried to call an
> American directory assistance at 1-xxx-555-1212. (We're here in Germany,
> for that matter). Now, I'd assume that international calls to these
> numbers are generally impossible, however, our results were somewhat
> different:

> (1) "Your international call can not be completed as dialed [...]"
> (2) BUSY
> (3) We got through!

> I think we tried area codes 213, 708 and a few others. There seems to be
> no rule for results (1)-(3). Call now, try again a few minutes later,
> and you may get any of the above. I also wonder whether (2) is a
> variation of (1) or (3).

Same here in Holland.  All NPA + 555-1212 work to California.  Hawaii
always gives a "call cannot be completed as dialed ..." recording.
Most return a busy and some return a recording out of Rotterdam saying
(in Dutch) "The number is not in use, check and call again ..."  Its
like most are caught right here, but to those places that will accept
or soon accept 555-1212 on international trunks, the PTT has chosen to
let them thru, to the relief of the long distance operator. On some
exchanges (out of Holland) dialing 001 + NPA + 131 will do the trick.
This is how directory inquiries is reached out of North America and it
is up to your own CO if such calls are allowed.  Beware you will be
charged normal international rates for these calls.  In the rest of
the world where code 11 is used to get the operator, DTMF "A" often
translates to code 11.  You may or may not be charged for these calls;
again it is up to the program in your central, if it works and if you
get charged.


Bill


[Moderator's Note: The thing here is AT&T charges $3.00 for overseas
directory assistance, and you cannot talk to the overseas operator and
must trust the AT&T operator to state the request correctly if she
splits the connection, which is often the case. I've found a few
countries where 011-xx-555-1212 works from the USA. For example Guam
(670) and Australia (61) both connect 555-1212 with their directory
bureau.  Unlike AT&T's $3.00 charge, a minute to either of those
places is much less, even if I do get charged.    PAT]

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

From: nsc![e-mail] (Jim Tavakoli)
Subject: Re: Caller ID in Southern California?
Organization: National Semiconductor, Santa Clara
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1992 22:55:15 GMT


Dear Net readers,

As you may know, California telephone companies now support Caller-ID.
I waswondering if anybody out there has any information or references
to the design and implementation of Caller-ID. I understand there is a
spec published by Bell. If you could send me the name of the
publication, I would really appreciate it.

Has anybody done an implementation of the Caller-ID on a DAA (NCU)
card?

Any information would be greatly appreicated.


Jim

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

Date: Tue, 30 Jun 92 00:59 PDT
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: Caller ID in Southern California?


[e-mail] writes:

> SO I will ask the net: is caller ID available/will be available soon
> in So Cal, in the GTE areas? Specifically, the Pomona Valley.

GTE has announced that has dropped all plans for Caller-ID. (Actually,
GTE was desperately hoping that it could find some excuse or another
to avoid having to reveal its complete incompetence. The PUC decision
requiring free per-line blocking was the answer to its prayers.)
Specifically, if you live anywhere in California and have GTE as your
LEC, you can kiss Caller-ID goodbye. Maybe forever.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Doug Humphrey)
Subject: Re: Contemporary Remote Controls
Organization: Express Access Public Access UNIX, Greenbelt, Maryland
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1992 02:27:32 GMT


Sony VCR remotes have a switch on them that allows selection of one or
three different units.


Doug

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

Date: Tue, 30 Jun 92 01:48 PDT
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: Ringer Equivalency Numbers


[e-mail] (Julian Macassey) writes:

> The Telco guarantee to ring a total of 5.0 REN. If you have an
> REN of 7.4 ringing, it indicates that either the numbers are untrue
> (possible) or you are near the CO (most likely).

Also, if you are exceeding 5.0 REN watch out for a characteristic of
some offices (notably the 1/1AESS equipped ones). What these switches
do for a self-protection measure is to simply shut off ringing current
to the over-RENed line. The caller gets ringback as usual, but nothing
makes a peep at the called end.

Years (and years) ago, before my PBX-in-home days, I used to have all
kinds of things hanging on the line such as dialers, weird bedside
clock radio phones (with RENs like 1.75), and other gadgets. One day
someone asked where I had been all day since I did not answer the
phone. Upon checking, I discovered that no ring voltage was being
delivered during a call. A call to 611 brought a repairman to the door
who informed me that they "saw" a lot of ringers on the line and if I
took some of them off, things would start working again.

They did.


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

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

From: Barton F. Bruce <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Bix Block Punch-Down Tool
Date: 30 Jun 92 04:52:51 EDT
Organization: Cambridge Computer Associates, Inc.


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (andrew
m. boardman) writes:

> I am in need of a punch-down tool for NTI's almost-but-not-quite-110
> Bix blocks.  All of the usual sources say that Northern Telecom is the

NTI has just figured that lack of general availability of that tool
(and maybe its price) may be loosing them block sales.

I was told at a very recent trade show to watch for trade mag ads for
an upcoming promotion where buying some number of blocks gets you a
tool either free or very cheap.

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: No Obvious L.A. Telecom Effects fFom Yucca/Big Bear Quakes
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1992 04:18:37 GMT


> [Moderator's Note: ...  Just as we have all heard the 'AIDS is God's
> punishment for homosexuals' routine, one clever writer suggested to me
> that the earthquake was God's punishment for having the LA Gay Pride
> Parade yesterday ... but his aim was a little off and he forgot that
> his watch was set on Vatican Time.  :).   PAT]

Pat, this unworthy of you.  And even if it weren't, most of the people
who are heard making this statement are the same ones who would call
the Catholic Church the `Whore of Babylon.'  Know thine enemy, please.
(Iran is not Iraq, fer instance.)  And remember, in NYC there is one
nursing home for Ps'WA.  It is NOT run by the city; it is NOT run by
the GMHC, it is run by the Archdiocese of NY.

Me?  Weeelll ... the earthquake MIGHT be punishment for people who
build near active seismic faults ... but I won't say _whose_
punishment.

(This man's opinions are his own.)
 From mole-end        Mark Terribile
uunet!mole-end!mat, Somewhere in Matawan, NJ


[Moderator's Note: Some people call me the Whore of Usenet. :) You are
correct though; here The Catholic Charities of Chicago spends huge
amounts of money to assist PWA's and other endeavors. I only wish that
the church had done something about all those pedophile priests who
(blush) bother young boys years ago without waiting for the newspapers
here to stink up the place.  Thus far, sixteen priests in Chicago have
been fingered.  I think that even beats the record in Newfoundland a
couple years ago when they had the same problem there.  :(   PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #524
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa11434;
          3 Jul 92 3:15 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA19872
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 3 Jul 1992 01:45:55 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA11331
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 3 Jul 1992 01:45:35 -0500
Date: Fri, 3 Jul 1992 01:45:35 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Technical Problems Halt TELECOM Digest Production



Due to difficulty on this end with software which won't work and/or
hardware which is out of order (undetirmined by me as of yet), all
output from TELECOM Digest has been halted for the time being.

I have spend much time this evening attempting to produce the Digest
only to be constantly greeted with the message "Memory Fault - Core
Dumped".  I have no idea what is going on. All I know is the queue
is overloaded with mail (200 plus messages), nothing is moving, and
with the holiday weekend upon us, I may not find anyone who knows how
to fix the problem until next week.

This system is at present simply refusing to make Digests. I do not
think it is the software.

I will resume the Digest if/when the problem has been corrected. I
must ask for the time being  *** do not send mail to telecom **. I have
more than I can possibly deal with and unfortunatly most will have to
be dumped unread/unused simply to resume a normal flow once things
get moving again.  Send no further submissions until further notice.

In addition, something is wrong with the mailer which sends copies
of the Digest to Bitnet sites (I work at delta.eecs.nwu.edu but the
Bitnet copies are mailed from nuacvm.acns.nwu.edu), and Bitnet readers
are getting 20-30 copies of each issue and have been for several days.

I know this is happening because I get a copy returned to me from a
Bitnet site ... and I am getting the same 20-30 copies ... and finally,
there is still some cross connection somewhere with alt.dcom.telecom
aliased into comp.dcom.telecom, and I am getting all that stuff sent
to me in droves with reciepts going out to those people who then
write and ask me why I sent them a receipt when they did not submit
anything to me ...

So when some of this mess gets straightened out the Digests will
resume, but I am overwhelmed by it all at present. Perhaps after
the holiday things can be worked on.


Patrick Townson
TELECOM Moderator










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa20923;
          3 Jul 92 18:24 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA14225
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 3 Jul 1992 16:34:08 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA22684
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 3 Jul 1992 16:33:59 -0500
Date: Fri, 3 Jul 1992 16:33:59 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #525

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 3 Jul 92 16:34:03 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 525

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Roommates and Long Distance Doesn't Mix (Chris Sherman)
    Satellite Usenet Newsfeeds Available Now (Manfred Frey)
    Trying to Locate Bellcore (Sam Isrealit)
    Help Wanted With AT&T D401A Display Unit (Michael Bender)
    Executive TeleCard (Tom Hofmann)
    Extending Cordless Phone Coverage (Dan Pearl)
    2500 Set and the Local Phone Store (Joshua E. Muskovitz)
    Funny Advertising Goof-Ups (Wrong Numbers) (Mark Walsh)
    CWA-IBEW-AT&T Reach Settlement (Phillip Dampier)
    NBS DES and After? (H. Shrikumar)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Chris Sherman)
Subject: Roommates and Long Distance doesn't mix
Date: Fri, 03 Jul 1992 00:10:36 GMT
Organization: SAS Institute Inc.


I have roommates, and the utilities (including phone) are in my name.
I would like to shut off the dial-1 long distance access from my
phone, yet still have the ability to use LD charge cards for making LD
calls.  (Kind of like a payphone, but with the local calls still
billed like normal).

But, Southern Bell says that they can't do this.  They can block LD
calls completely, for $22 setup, and $2 a month, but this means no
long distance calls PERIOD.  But, they say, if AT&T (or whoever)
offers something called a 950 service (I hope I got the numbers
right), I could get a special number that only I could use to dial LD
numbers.  But I can only get one of these special numbers, and if I
gave it to the others, then I would be right back where I started.

Are there any creative options which would give me what I want without
too much extra cost?  (I could do the LD blocking, I suppose, and get
a payphone ... or, is there a card you can get for a PC that you plug
the phones into which can pre-scan the numbers dialed?)

[I'm asking because I have a roommate that now owes me >$600 for 2
months of LD calls, and he doesn't have the money.  Not surprising,
actually.  Now I have to kick him out (not being able to pay his bills
is only one of his many problems) and take him to small claims, etc
etc. What I'm trying to do is protect myself from these evil-roommates.]

Considering how many college-types live together in similar
arrangements, I'm surprised that Southern Bell doesn't already have
this ability offered as an optional college/dorm service.  It would
sure save a lot of problems like the one I'm having.


Chris Sherman     [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: Why don't you purchase a toll-restriction device
such as the ones sold by Hello Direct? These allow you to program the
unit to only allow calls made with a special password. Hello Direct
will send a catalog if you call them: 1-800-HI-HELLO.    PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Manfred Frey)
Subject: Satellite Usenet Newsfeeds Avaialable Now
Date: Fri, 03 Jul 92 20:33:40 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest)


ISS is now transmitting and offering for sale their Usenet newsfeeds
via satellite. If you are tired of late news,dropped articles or
having only a limited selection of newsgroups, search no longer. We
have the answer! A small Ku-Band satellite antenna and indoor
satellite receiver/ modem that delivers approximately 40 megabytes of
data to your machine in a 24 hour period. Full U.S. continental
coverage as well as southern Canada, and northern Mexico. Cost $1800
per system. Visa,Mastercard,Checks accepted.  For orders,information,
etc. send mail to pagesat\@netcom.com ... please include full
name, address, and telephone number when contacting ISS via electronic
mail.   For faster response, call 1-800-227-6288  9AM 5PM PDT

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

Date: Fri, 03 Jul 1992 15:29:14 -0800
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Trying to Locate Bellcore


Can anyone out there tell me how to get in touch with Bellcore?
Specifically their publications division.

Thanks in advance for any assistance.


Sam Israelit    Intel SCIC   [phone]

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

Date: Fri, 03 Jul 92 15:34:15 PDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Help Wanted With AT&T D401A Display Unit


I was cleaning up my office this afternoon, in itself a remarkable
feat :-), and I came across a box with an AT&T D401A display, with
additional markings of 88321/Series 1.  This looks to be a single-line
flourscent character dot martix display with eight membrane-type push
buttons below the display, one of which says "ON/OFF".  I was
wondering if anyone knew anything about this beast and how I could
supply power to it and communciate with it.


mike

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

From: [e-mail] (Tom Hofmann)
Subject: Executive TeleCard
Organization: Ciba-Geigy Ltd., Basel, Switzerland
Date: Fri, 03 Jul 1992 07:29:10 GMT


Last week I got an ad for the ``Executive TeleCard''.  They provide
cashless phone calls in about 20 countries (via toll-free numbers) and
charge one's credit card.

Has somebody experience with this service and can tell the pros and
cons?  Are there alternatives for cashless phone calls worldwide?


Tom Hofmann     [e-mail]

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

Date: Fri, 03 Jul 92 08:24:21 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Dan Pearl)
Subject: Extending Cordless Phone Coverage


A friend of mine is a manager of a multi-acre summer camp.  She would
like to roam around the property with her cordless phone, but of
course she would be out of range from the base station farily quickly.

Is there a way (via wired-in supplementary antennas, scattered around
the property) to extend the coverage of the phone?

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

Date: Fri, 03 Jul 92 14:29:59 EDT
From: Joshua E. Muskovitz <[e-mail]>
Subject: 2500 Set and the Local Phone Store


A sign of the times:

I went into the local AT&T phone store and asked if they had any 2500
sets.  The person said "I've never heard of that.  What is it?"  I had
to explain it to them.  They did, in fact, have some which they still
lease, and they did have some for sale, but only in the uglier colors.
They save the nicer colors for the bigger profit (read lease)
customers.  $49.95.  If I had the need, I'd shop flea markets first,
but it's still worth it, even at that price, when you amortize it over
the next 20 years.


josh.

"2500?  What's that?"  Sigh.


[Moderator's Note: That's not surprising. Most of them know nothing
about what they are selling and even less about the company they work
for or its traditions and practices, etc. That's one reason why the
company was trying to lower their obscene wages down to what clerks in
other stores in the area are getting. If you want one of the 'prettier
colors' then lease it -- for a month -- and convert the lease to a
buyout. You should see the misinformation they spread when it comes to
their more complex products, ie cordless phones, answering machines,
etc. PAT]

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

Date: Fri, 03 Jul 92 11:10:04 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Mark Walsh)
Subject: Funny Advertising Goof-ups (Wrong Numbers)


[e-mail] (TELECOM Moderator) noted:

> [Moderator's Note: Isn't it always amusing how much money some
> companies waste in advertising with wrong phone numbers, etc ... and
> how they are always the outfits with some snippy arrogant person on
> the incoming phones to insure that someone like yourself, willing to
> save them, oh, several thousand dollars by pointing out their error is
> never able to speak with anyone who knows anything ... how many more
> thousands of dollars do you suppose they will waste before they catch
> on, if they ever do?  In a way, do you hope they never do?  :)  PAT]

When I was in college, my phone number was 457-5611.  Well, many
flyers were distributed for Wednesday Night Bingo at a nearby church
with my number printed on them.  At first, I thought I was the victim
of some silly prank because I was getting lots of calls from old
people wanting to know about the bingo games, and was the food a pot
luck affair, etc.  Suspecting some misrouting of signals, I called the
operator, who wisely told me to find out the name of the establishment
that the people were actually trying to call, and then to look it up
in the phone book.  I did, and the church's number was 457-6511.
Before I decided what to do, somebody from the church called me up,
profusely appologized for the error (5000 flyers had already been
distributed), and invited me over for a free night of Bingo!


Mark Walsh (walsh@optilink) -- UUCP: uunet!optilink!walsh -- AOL: BigCookie
Amateur Radio: KC6RKZ -- USCF: L10861 (was M25220)
"What, me worry?" -- William M. Gaines, 1922-1992


[Moderator's Note: The passing of William Gaines was a loss for
everyone who enjoyed his humor. Does anyone know who is/will be taking
over the reigns at {Mad}?   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Phillip Dampier)
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Date: Thu, 02 Jul 1992 14:36:36 -0500
Subject: CWA-IBEW-AT&T Reach Settlement


CWA-IBEW-AT&T TENTATIVE NATIONAL SETTLEMENT
Communications Workers of America

A tentative three-year national contract settlement covering 127,000
AT&T workers was announced by the unions and the company today.
Bargaining on local issues for specific groups of workers is expected
to be completed next week, after which time a complete settlement
package will be submitted to members for ratification. The mail-ballot
ratification procedure will take several weeks.

Negotiations began March 30 on a new national settlement covering
100,000 AT&T non-management employees represented by the
Communications Workers of America (CWA) and 27,000 represented by the
International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW).  The two
unions bargain jointly with AT&T -- a practice that began with the
last bargaining round in 1989.

Upon contract expiration on May 30th, the parties agreed to extend the
old contract on a day-to-day basis and continue negotiations, even
though both unions had received strike authorizations from their
members.  Last week, the parties accepted an offer from Federal
Mediation and Conciliation Service Director Bernard DeLury to help
facilitate the talks.

Among key issues in the talks, the unions spotlighted employment
security as their top goal in the wake of tens of thousands of layoffs
in recent years by AT&T.

Details of the national settlement are outlined in the following
statement by CWA President Morton Bahr and Vice President James
Irvine, who serves as chief CWA negotiator at AT&T.

"We want to thank FMCS Chairman Bernard DeLury as well as his
assistant Paul Stuckenschneider and Mediator Lynn Sylvester for the
enormous assistance they gave the parties over the past two weeks.
Their ideas, recommendations, and skillful prodding played an
important role in reaching settlement.

We are pleased that this tentative national settlement achieves the
three major objectives set by our Executive Board and rank-and-file
Bargaining Council.  First, this settlement meets, and perhaps
exceeds, the wage and benefit parameters of our settlement last year
with NYNEX, which we set as a pattern for the industry.  Second, it
greatly enhances the employment security of our members.  And third,
it provides organizing neutrality and access by the unions to new AT&T
business units and subsidiaries that currently are non-union.

The settlement provides economic justice to the workers who have built
AT&T's great profitability.  Wage rates will be increased by four
percent, three point nine percent, and three point nine percent in
each of the three years of the agreement.  These increases are the
maximum of each job classification -- and 85 percent of the workers
are at the max.  Compounded over term, this represents a 12.3 percent
wage boost.

The profit sharing plan negotiated in the last contract will be phased
out and a new one will be negotiated three years from now. In the
meantime, workers will receive $1,500 this September and another
$1,800 in September of 1994.  The payments will be made in AT&T shares
with the employees protected against any drop in the share price in
1994.  The base wage and cash payments together amount to just over 24
percent.

Pensions will be increased 13 percent.

Highlights of the employment security package include a whole range of
strong improvements.

The worker transfer system negotiated three years ago didn't work as
well as we envisioned, as evidenced by the fact that some 15,000
employees were hired off the street while thousands of workers were
being laid off.  The settlement provides for two union
representatives, paid for by the company, to run the transfer system.
We believe this kind of close monitoring -- along with several
enhancements in the transfer program -- will bring greater job
opportunities to our members.

We have broken down some of the barriers to jobs that have previously
been off limits to the union workers.  Our people will now have access
to jobs at three of AT&T's subsidiaries -- Universal Credit Card,
American Transtech, and Paradyne.

A new program called Re-Link is being introduced.  An employee who is
declared surplus will have the option of receiving termination pay on
a weekly basis for up to 104 weeks depending on service, and also
receive all benefits and accrue seniority. During that period, the
worker has access to the transfer system in seeking a new permanent
job, and the worker also has first call on temporary jobs.  While
working in a temporary job, the worker continues to draw weekly
termination pay plus wages.  With AT&T's five percent turnover rate,
Re-Link gives surplussed workers a much better shot at finding new
jobs at AT&T.

One of the issues that has prolonged these talks centered around the
treatment of seniority in layoff situations for our 13,000
communications techs and system techs.  And the reason we are able to
announce a settlement today is that their seniority rights have been
preserved.

In the area of subcontracting, the provision for expedited arbitration
reinforces protections we negotiated previously. Justice will no
longer be denied because it has been delayed.

A cornerstone of employment security in the presence and strength of
the union within AT&T, which is now enhanced by the neutrality
agreement in this new settlement.  It gives the unions fair access to
organize workers in non-union units such as Universal Card, Transtech,
and Paradyne, and it applies to any new acquisitions.  The unions
weren't successful in having the provision cover NCR, but we have
commitments that AT&T management will try to persuade NCR management
to accept these principles. Further, we have agreement that bargaining
unit work won't be shifted to NCR.

Among other major highlights of this settlement is agreement to ban
secret monitoring of workers, which has been an objective of CWA for
more than 30 years.  Any monitoring for training purposes or quality
checks can't be done without the employee's knowledge, and can't be
used for disciplinary action.

Funding for the jointly-administered Alliance for Employee Growth and
Development is doubled in this agreement from $40-$80 million.  We
hope to be able to expand education benefits to spouses of members
under certain conditions.  Also, the company will guarantee at least
40 hours job-related training for each employee at AT&T.

Family care provisions were improved in several ways, including an
increase in the Family Care Fund to $7.5 million and expansion of
elder care and adoption programs and extended benefits for family or
child care leave.

The settlement also provides improvements in dental and vision care,
broadening of the pre-paid legal plan to cover adoptions and legal
problems impacting on children, and other gains for our members.

Among the tough issues we have been wrestling with the past week of
two has been the company's demand to move toward commission programs
for the phone center and commercial marketing workers -- and our own
determination that these workers not have their living standards
destroyed overnight by a drastic change in the rules.  We have reached
a compromise that provides a phasing in of commissions, and with less
base pay put at risk than the company sought, as well as cash payments
to longterm phone center workers to cushion the impact of the change.

These have been very tough talks.  To some degree, the company and the
unions appeared to be on a collision course, with AT&T seeking greater
"flexibility" to meet competitive challenges, and the unions holding
firm for employment security demands in the face of the steady layoffs
and disruptions our members have suffered.

AT&T spoke of creating a "workplace of the future."  And we said, fine
 -- but our members and the unions want to make sure that we're a part
of AT&T's future plans.

AT&T spoke of building a "partnership" with its workers.  And we said,
okay -- but let's start laying down the basis of mutual trust that
will be necessary for a true partnership.

The collective bargaining process has been tested, and in the end, we
think it has met the test of producing a fair bargain, an agreement
that makes winners out of both sides.

But the real test for the future of labor relations at AT&T is what
lies before us.  Our settlement today is a positive step toward
forging a true partnership, a successful workplace of the future.  But
the next 1,095 days of this contract, our dealings day in and day out
in the workplace, will determine whether we can build mutual
understanding, respect, and cooperation.

We sincerely hope that is the case.

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

Date: Fri, 3 Jul 92 22:04:19 GMT
From: [e-mail] (H. Shrikumar)
Subject: NBS DES and After?


Now that NBS has decertified DES, ... what now ?

More specifically, my guess is that several of the financial and trade
community would still be using DES, since one has not heard that "DES
is broken".

I do see quite a few flyers and glossies for DES products but steadily
I also see an increase in 512 bit and bigger cypher systems which
claim to be "better than DES".

Also, hows the reaction to the NBS digital signature proposal?  Are
there some reasons why they did not use RSA?

Is it getting murkier or clearer?


shrikumar ( [e-mail] )

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #525
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa11920;
          4 Jul 92 3:05 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA32247
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 4 Jul 1992 01:23:53 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA21751
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 4 Jul 1992 01:23:45 -0500
Date: Sat, 4 Jul 1992 01:23:45 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #526

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 4 Jul 92 01:23:49 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 526

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: United Telephone/Sprint (Ben Harrell)
    Re: 911 Circuitry Can Detect 91 (Scott Colbath)
    Re: SWBT Organizational Changes (Metromedia) (Guy Hadsall)
    Re: Telecom Things to See Across the USA (Guy Hadsall)
    Re: Motorola Watch Pager (Guy Hadsall)
    Re: "Legal" Phreaking? (Bill Sohl)
    More AOS Slime: "ATC" ([e-mail])
    Re: "Choke" Prefixes (Dick Rawson)
    Re: Concert-Goers Blast 911 (Tim Gorman)
    Re: What Are These Specs? (Toby Nixon)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Ben Harrell)
Subject: Re: United Telephone/Sprint
Organization: North Carolina State University
Date: Sat, 04 Jul 1992 12:19:12 GMT


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

> Distance.  Since UT is owned by Sprint, I'm assuming that UTLD is just
> another name from Sprint LD service.

United Telephone Long Distance is not one IEC.  The name is
trademarked by Sprint (United Telecom) and was used by each United
Telephone System telco to incorporate a separate unregulated
subsidiary for the purpose of providing long distance (interLATA)
service to that telco's subscribers.  It is a non-facilities based
reseller of Sprint's long distance services, as are many of the other
IEC's.  It has to obey all the rules that other IEC's do.  The
marketing advantage it has, which is one of the primary reasons for
its existence other than increasing Sprint's LD business, it that the
local United telco can offer true interLATA LD service (unlike the
BOCs) under it's own name.

> UTLD claims one of its advantages over MCI is that UTLD charges can be
> placed on the same bill as UT local charges. (AT&T charges can also be
> placed on the UT bill).  Isn't this unfair?  Doesn't this action give
> UTLD an unfair advantage over MCI because UT does not directly bill
> MCI calls?

No, this is not unfair because under United's interLATA access tariff
(as with the BOCs) all IECs are offered the billing and collection
services of the United telcos.  Some choose to use it and some don't.
UTLD buys this service from the United telco under this tariff, just
like any other IEC.

How do I know these things?  I worked for a United telco for about 12
years, wrote the interLATA (I called them GMAs for Geographic
Marketing Areas) filling for the telco I worked for which was used as
the standard for the other companies, and was a part of the Access
Tariff Task Force for United.


Ben Harrell                   | [e-mail]
Project Manager               | Compuserve:  71477,74
Costing and Tariffing Support | Voice:  [phone]
Public Networks Marketing     | Fax:    [phone]
Northern Telecom Inc.         | My opinions are my own and do
Research Triangle Park, NC    | not represent the views of NTI

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

From: [e-mail] (Scott Colbath)
Subject: Re: 911 Circuitry Can Detect 91
Date: 04 Jul 92 13:17:05 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Bruce Schlobohm) writes:

> At work, our PBX requires that we dial 9 + 1 + areacode+ phone-number
> for calls outside of the 408 areacode.  A colleague here has become
> very adept at starting most phone calls with 9 + 1. A couple of days
> ago, he was at home, and started dialing 9 + 1, and then remembered he
> was not at work so he hung up.  A few minutes later he received a call
> from a dispatcher asking if he was in any trouble, and that there was
> a police car on its way to help him out!

> After things calmed down, the dispatcher told him that they knew he
> had only dialed 91, and not 911, and had debated as to whether to
> consider it to be a distress call or not.

> I didn't realize that 91 can be detected by the 911 circuitry.  I
> wonder how often this type of thing happens?

Something like this happened to my 12 year old daughter more than
once. In Scottsdale, Az., we have a 991-xxxx exchange. One of her
friends has this 991 prefix for a phone number. Sometimes while
dialing, my girl dials a 911 instead of the 991 thing and you know
what happens next. The phone rings and it's 911 emergency on the other
end asking if everything is alright. One time, she ignored the call
waiting tone and the next thing I knew, there was a police car at my
door. The 911 operators have said it happens quite frewquently due to
the 991 exchange. It sounds to me like the this exchange should be
changed to aviod this. Is that something which is difficult to do?


Scott Colbath     Stratus Computer
Phoenix, Az.      [phone]
Internet:[e-mail]

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

Organization: The American University - University Computing Center
Date: Saturday, 04 Jul 1992 01:26:49 EDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: SWBT Organizational Changes (Metromedia)


It appears to me that SWBC changes reflect the "spinning off" of the
corporations paging company Metromedia Paging (hdq - New Jersey).
They have successfully moved the brain of the company into the
corporate staff and replaced the much younger and inexperienced 33
year old.  Sounds as if the increased competition is driving them out
of radio paging.

Whitacker once admitted that the primary reason for the purchase of
Metromedia from John Klugh almost a decade ago was for its Cellular
division commonly known as Cellular One (though its a franchised
name).  The president of SWBMT has not been retrenched back to St.
Louis, hum?!

Maybe I am guessing ... but thats what it looks like to me.  PageNet
1, Metromedia 0.


Guy Hadsall

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

Organization: The American University - University Computing Center
Date: Saturday, 04 Jul 1992 01:16:52 EDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Telecom Things to See Across the USA


Ed,

 From the sounds of the latest press reports out of Missouri (not
Missoura or Missery) you may be spending *alot* of time in that state.
It appears that SWB and UT have succeeded in denying that fair state
the right of dependable and technologically sound service.

SWB is headquartered in St. Louis MO and United Telecom is
headquartered in Overland Park KS (suburb of Kansas City).  I would
venture to say that if asked the corporate staff might arrange a tour.

Good luck, and please take notes or keep a journal.  I for one would
be most interested.  :-)


Guy Hadsall

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

Organization: The American University - University Computing Center
Date: Friday, 04 Jul 1992 01:36:55 EDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Motorola Watch Pager


The pager Mark is discussing is/was called the "sensar".  It came in
both radio paging formats; pocsag and golay.  The sensar was basically
a numeric display unit, though the earlier version was "tone only".

Motorola stopped making them about two years ago due to their
durability.  The sensar is a small unit and thus the internal
componets are more likely to be broken if worn in a "butt pack".
Replacement parts for the sensar were always late, and most national
repair shops no longer service them because of that delay.Once nice
thing about the sensar was that it also came in 24 K gold !  Retail in
1989 was $399 for the gold one.

Now it appears that the wave in the market is "alpha" or alphanumeric
display paging.  A radio pager would have all the capability as the
previous tone, voice, and numeric display pagers, but now it could
recieve actual ASCII text.  The input comes from one or all other the
following; touchtone phone, Modem, remote TTY, or an operator
dispatching service (if you pay $.75 each).

Voice recognition technologies are still a little far off (five years)
for a user to simply call a pager and tell it what to display, but its
an option.  Should this technology be improved I would put my money on
a resurgace of Voice Paging due to the idea of cheap, stored, digital
voice messages.  Digital voice nets are expensive though.

I hope this help, I would be happy to answer a question or two if asked.


Guy Hadsall

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

From: dancer![e-mail] (24411-sohl)
Subject: Re: "Legal" Phreaking?
Reply-To: dancer![e-mail] ()
Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ
Date: Sat, 04 Jul 92 04:40:37 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Bryan Lockwood) writes:

> Anybody care to comment on this? It's a very *interesting* philosophy
> of law, one that seems to lead to startling practices if applied to
> other areas of life! I was a bit startled by such a concept ... I
> suppose my upbringing is showing.

> [Moderator's Note: Yes I guess your upbringing is showing. The fellow
> in Holland has written to us here at TELECOM Digest on a few
> occassions also, expressing much the same philosophy. If what he says
> is true -- I don't think it is -- then why in the world would *any*
> telecom organization want to do business in Holland; or for that
> matter, any business at all if it is, as the fellow suggests,
> perfectly legal to rip off a company 'for personal use'. I wonder if
> he subscribes to the same ethics where other businesses are concerned
> in his country: clothing, food, household supplies, other utility
> services, places of entertainment, etc?

Pat, I think you are taking the gentleman from Holland's perspective
far beyond what he discussed.  In my opinion, what the viewpoint has
to do with leaving the barn door open, not with specific and
deliberate (probably not the best words to use) theft in the classic
sense (ie. going into a store and shoplifting.)

As to the telco "phreaking" situation, the perspective seems to be (in
Holland) that if the network can be activated/manipulated by the mere
dialing of certain tones, then the cure is for the network to
safeguard itself.  Here in the USA, that means going to an CCIS
signaling network.  The writer from Holland said the Dutch court views
the theft of the "open" network services in a much lower light than
say stealing a car.

Another good example I'd suggest is satellite TV.  Many folks, myself
included, see nothing wrong with receiving satellite transmission and
not paying for it because the signal is there to be received.  It
became the responsibility of the satellite broadcasters to encrypt
their signal in order to protect what they previously broadcast in the
clear.  As a comment, I do not have or care to receive satellite
transmission, I just believe that any radio transmission that I can
receive on my property is fair game if I choose to receive it.

Another example might be the computer hacker.  I'd suspect that Dutch
courts would look at what happens and if a company's computer system
had no or minimal security to avoid or eleiminate the possibility of
unauthorized access, then I'd guess the Dutch court wouldn't view an
unauthorized access as being or requiring legal protection.

A perhaps crude analogy/example/question might be you are a Peeping
Tom if you trespass on someone's property to peek in their window
while they are undressing. Are you also a Peeping Tom if you do the
same thing with a pair of binoculars while on your own property?


Just my thoughts,

Standard Disclaimer- Any opinions, etc. are mine and NOT my employer's.
Bill Sohl (K2UNK) BELLCORE (Bell Communications Research, Inc.)
Morristown, NJ             email via UUCP      bcr!dancer!whs70
201-829-2879 Weekdays      email via Internet  [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: Let me ask those of you who persist in the belief
that it is the system operator's fault if there is a break-in to a
system with weak security, do you feel the same way about physical
assaults on other people? That is, if you are attacked by a person
much larger and stronger than yourself, can't we conclude that if he
robs you it is really your fault? After all, you could have taken a
course in judo, karate or some other self-defense procedure if you
were that interested in your safety and your possessions, etc. Should
the court find you guilty, or the person who attacked you? The answer
is rather obvious ... why then is a computer different? Why should a
new or inexperienced sysadmin take the rap for a hacker intrusion
merely because the hacker is more sophisticated at it?  It seems to me
the law is intended to protect the *weakest* members of society.  PAT]

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

Subject: More AOS Slime: "ATC"
Date: Sat, 04 Jul 92 01:06:31 -0400
From: [e-mail]


Just when I thought the slimy AOS industry was disappearing, I ran
across a new one, calling itself "ATC".

At a restaurant the other night, I needed to make a long-distance
call.  The New England Tel. payphone proudly proclaimed that
long-distance service was offered by ATT, so I just dialed 0 + <number>.
I was surprised to hear a synthesized voice weloming me to "ATC".  I
quickly hung up and completed my call by dialing 10288 +0 + <number>.

My curiosity piqued, I dialed 00 and tried to find out how much "ATC"
would have soaked me for the call, had I been less alert:

  "AT<mumble> Operator.  May I help you?"

After I asked for rates, the AT<mumble> operator put me on hold "for a
supervisor" for two minutes, followed by another operator who did the
same thing (for three minutes), followed by a "supervisor" who gave me
an 800 number to call.  The 800 number was just a voice-mail system,
where I could have left a message I hadn't been so disgusted with the
whole thing.

ATC's rates must be truly astronomical, if they're so ashamed that
they won't tell callers about them.  Does anyone have more information
about these folks?

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

From: [e-mail] (Dick Rawson)
Subject: Re: "Choke" Prefixes
Date: 04 Jun 92 05:08:48 GMT
Organization: BT North America (Tymnet)


> Do pay phones have a higher priority within the switch in terms of
> getting dial tone?

Yes, at least if the pay phone is a public phone, in Pac*Bell land.
Certain lines are considered "essential service lines", and given
normal access to dial tone during overloads when dial tone access is
being rationed.  Public telephones, hospitals, emergency services, and
so on, are classed as essential service lines.  An emergency service
employee's HOME phone may be classed that way, too.  These are
examples; I don't have a complete list.


Dick Rawson

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

Date: 04 Jul 92 01:03:31 EDT
From: tim gorman <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Concert-Goers Blast 911


[e-mail] (Jacob DeGlopper) writes in  TELECOM Digest V12 #522:

> I happened to be on the direct line to our
> communications center from the rescue squad yesterday when a strange
> thing happened.  I got a few clicks on the line, silence, and then to
> my surprise "Your call cannot be completed as dialed.  Please check
> the number and dial again or call your operator to help you.",
> followed immediately by the obnoxiously loud "hang up NOW" signal.  I
> didn't think the direct line was supposed to do this sort of thing!
> Anyone have an idea why?

Do you truly have a direct phone-to-phone line? Wired with ringing
generators and all? Or do you have a "nailed-up" connection through
the central office (when you go off-hook, your line is automatically
connected to another line without dialing)?

If you have a nailed-up connection and the switch had no paths
available to get you to the other line, you could very well get such
an announcement.


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

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

From: Toby Nixon <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: What Are These Specs?
Date: 04 Jul 92 00:52:10 GMT
Organization: Hayes Microcomputer Products, Norcross, GA


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Ged
Weare) writes:

> We are trying to locate some specs that were referenced in a recent
> article in IEEE Communications Magazine (Feb 92).  ...
> The specs are listed in the article as:

>     [9]  IS-41.1, .2, .3 and .4, Rev B December 1991
>     [10] ETSI TC GSM, Recommendations GSM 3.09 and 3.12, Feb 1990.

> Both are related in some way to cellular phones or ISDN.  [10], we
> think, is put out by a European body, but we have no clue about [9].

[9] is referring to a multipart Interim Standard [IS] from the
Telecommunications Industry Association.  Here is the information from
the catalog:

EIA/TIA/IS-41.1 Cellular Radiotelecommunications Intersystem
Operations: Functional Overview ($30)

EIA/TIA/IS-41.2 Cellular Radiotelecommunications Intersystem
Operations: Intersystem Handoff ($32)

EIA/TIA/IS-41.3 Cellular Radiotelecommunications Intersystem
Operations: Automatic Roaming ($48)

EIA/TIA/IS-41.4 Cellular Radiotelecommunications Intersystem
Operations: Operations, Administration, and Maintenance ($35)

EIA/TIA/IS-41.5 Cellular Radiotelecommunications Intersystem
Operations: Data Communication ($58)


These documents can all be ordered through Global Engineering
Documents at 800-854-7179 or 714-261-1455.  The ETSI (European
Telecommunications Standards Institute) GSM documents can probably be
ordered through them as well.


Toby Nixon, Principal Engineer      | Voice   [phone]  Telex 401243420
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]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #526
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa25449;
          4 Jul 92 10:25 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA13893
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 4 Jul 1992 08:39:55 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA19080
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 4 Jul 1992 08:39:46 -0500
Date: Sat, 4 Jul 1992 08:39:46 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #527

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 4 Jul 92 08:39:42 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 527

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Contemporary Remote Controls (John Rice)
    Re: Motorola Watch Pager (John Gilbert)
    Re: You Can Ring My Bell (Patton M. Turner)
    Re: AGT Cellular Gets First North American Digital Cellular (Ben Harrell)
    Re: Call Own Phone Back Number Wanted (Rich Mintz)
    Re: Telecom Things to See Across the USA (Ken Thompson)
    Re: What are "NorTel" and "Centrex"? (Ben Harrell)
    Re: What are "NorTel" and "Centrex"? (Gord Deinstadt)
    Re: More Strange 710 Stuff (was Funny Intercept on 1-710-555) (J. Hibbard)
    Re: Caller ID in Southern California? (Rich Mintz)
    Re: Caller ID in Southern California? (R. Kevin Oberman)
    Re: Newfoundland Province Code 709 (John R. Levine)
    Re: Strange Message on Answering Machine (Mitch Wagner)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Contemporary Remote Controls
Organization: Teradyne Inc., Telecommunications Division
Date: Sat, 04 Jul 92 02:54:45 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Jacob
DeGlopper) writes:

> Technics audio products certainly don't!  That's one reason our
> college radio station hangs on to the remote controls for any new
> equipment we get.  For example, when we installed a pair of new CD
> players about two months ago, of course the techs got to play with
> them before anyone else :).  Pointing one remote at the two players
> would make both open at once, or start playing, or (worst for on-air
> operations) stop.  Since we have glass walls between the studios, you
> could sit in the next studio and make the CD players do strange things
>  ... all the remotes are locked up in the tech shop where only some can
> get at them.

A better bet would be to put a piece of tape over the photodiode
sensor.  Technics remote controls are pretty easy to come by.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (John Gilbert)
Subject: Re: Motorola Watch Pager
Organization: Motorola, Inc. Land Mobile Products Sector.
Date: Sat, 04 Jul 1992 00:18:26 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Mark Earle) writes:

> I've heard no comments good or bad on the watch pager. A similiar
> product might fit your needs, and I have used this one. Motorola makes
> a small pager designed to fit in the pocket, which takes up the space
> of about two pencils. The display is on the side.

The pager you describe is called a "Sensar."  It is no longer a
current Motorola product.  It is available used from most paging
carriers, however.  This pager stores five messages but does not have
a vibrate mode. It can be programmed to be silent and store the page
("mem-o-lert mode") or to give a single chirp when paged.

I visited a local RCC yesterday and asked about the price of the wrist
watch pager. They are selling it for $219.  It had been $199, but they
recently raised the price.  I have a friend who has used one and has
been happy with it. He even wears it while water skiing, although
Motorola does not claim the pager is waterproof.


John Gilbert    Secure and Advanced Conventional KA4JMC Systems Division
[e-mail]   Motorola LMPS post: CPGR17 Schaumburg, Illinois

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

Date: Sat, 04 Jul 92 23:28:05 CDT
From: Patton M. Turner <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: You Can Ring My Bell


Bill Mayhew writes, refering to ITT clear 2500 sets:

> The classic 2500 has a lot
> more soul than those cheap esatz trimline-like phones with clear
> plastic.

It also lasts longer, probally has a lower REN. has greater EMI
resistance, and costs only a few dollars more.  It can also be had
from telcom supply houses accross the USA, rather than from mail order
yuppie techno-toys catalogs.

> ITT only made one desinger concession; the coiled cord for
> the hand set has color coded wires instead of all the same color that
> would be usual.

The Cortello (aka ITT Corinth Mississippi Works) set on my desk has
color coded wire (red, black, and two white).  This is very helpful
when you have to crimp on a new modular (RJ-22?) plug, as there is no
"molded line" as with some other coiled cords.

[Interesting notes about changes in 2500 sets deleted.]


Pat Turner  KB4GRZ  [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Ben Harrell)
Subject: Re: AGT Cellular Gets First North American Digital Cellular Running
Organization: North Carolina State University
Date: Sat, 4 Jul 1992 01:43:41 GMT

[e-mail] (Serdar Boztas) writes:

> What multiaccess method are they using? Does anyone have more
> information about this system? I am interested in things such as
> transmission rates for digitized voice, method of voice compression,
> etc. Have they started marketing dual-mode or all digital mobile

AGT Cellular uses our DMS-MTX digital cellular switching system and
radio cell systems.  They have converted to our new analog/digital
(TDMA) dual mode radio channel equipment.  It is based on a digital
signal processor (DSP) design which allows each radio channel's
multiplexing and signal format to be software controlled on a call by
call basis.  Each channel will support one analog channel and three
TDMA channels (in the future, six TDMA channels).

Sorry, but I don't know the specifics of the TDMA protocol, other than
it is digital and that three TDMA channels occupy the same frequency
band as one analog channel.


Ben Harrell                   | [e-mail]
Project Manager               | Compuserve:  71477,74
Costing and Tariffing Support | Voice:  [phone]
Public Networks Marketing     | Fax:    [phone]
Northern Telecom Inc.         | My opinions are my own and do
Research Triangle Park, NC    | not represent the views of NTI

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

From: [e-mail] (Rich Mintz)
Subject: Re: Call Own Phone Back Number Wanted
Organization: California State University, Chico
Date: Sat, 04 Jul 1992 12:39:21 GMT


In comp.dcom.telecom [e-mail] (John R Ruckstuhl Jr)
writes:

> Hopefully, Rich (and others who use this method) remember
> to restrict their testing to those prefixes which are
> not in use for valid telephone numbers.

A very good point, and one I forgot to mention. Once I forgot to have
the dialing script skip over trying the number 911-wxyz and was
greeted by a police officer at my door a few minutes later asking me
if everything was okay! He said 911 had received an emergency call
from my number and that the caller (my modem) had just hung up.

Fortunately for me, he knew exactly what I was referring to when I
explained I was trying to find the "alternate prefix" number for
getting a ringback, and why the accident had happened. I was very glad
his only source of information about computers and phone lines was NOT
the movie "War Games!" 8-)

I was lucky ... the policeman just took my name, wished me goodnight,
and left. I think he could have charged me with breaking the law that
deals with making calls to 911 in non-emergency situations.

So be careful with the prefixes you choose to test dial people!


Rich -> [e-mail]

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

From: Ken Thompson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Telecom Things to See Across the USA
Date: 4 Jul 92 02:36:59 GMT
Organization: NCR Corporation Wichita, KS


***  Stop at the Museum of Early Telephony in Abilene, Ks.
off I-70 20 miles east of Salina ( 130 miles west of Kansas City :-)


Ken Thompson   N0ITL
ncr Corp.  Peripheral Products Division   Disk Array Development
3718 N. Rock Road  Wichita KS 67226   [phone]
[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Ben Harrell)
Subject: Re: What are "NorTel" and "Centrex"?
Organization: North Carolina State University
Date: Sat, 4 Jul 1992 02:42:40 GMT


[e-mail] (Shuang Deng) writes:

> [Moderator's Note: 'NorTel' is most likely Northern Telecom, a
> prominent manufacturer of telco stuff in the USA ...]

> Or, more perciesly, Northern Telecom is a *Canadian* company with
> subsidies in many places of the world, including the USA.

Northern Telecom LTD is actually a *North American* company.  It has
corporate offices in both Washington, D.C. metro area and in the
Toronto, Ottawa, Canada metro area.  It is a Canadian corporation, but
reports its results in US$ only.  It is very unique in that it reports
its "domestic" results as sum of Canada and US, with everything else
reported as "international".

Centrex can be described *roughly* as a virtual PBX or key system
service provided by the local telephone company (also competitive
access providers in New York state).  In Centrex, every station set
has a physical or derived voice equivalent channel from the user's
desk to the serving central office line interface circuit (sometimes
called line relay).  For customers larger than 50-100 station sets,
Centrex is often provided using digital remote line concentrators or
switching systems on the customer's premise.


Ben Harrell                   | [e-mail]
Project Manager               | Compuserve:  71477,74
Costing and Tariffing Support | Voice:  [phone]
Public Networks Marketing     | Fax:    [phone]
Northern Telecom Inc.         | My opinions are my own and do
Research Triangle Park, NC    | not represent the views of NTI

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

From: [e-mail] (Gord Deinstadt)
Subject: Re: What are "NorTel" and "Centrex"?
Organization: GeoVision Systems Inc., Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
Date: Sat, 4 Jul 1992 06:31:55 GMT


In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Shuang Deng)
writes:

> Or, more perciesly, Northern Telecom is a *Canadian* company with
> subsidies in many places of the world, including the USA.
  ^^^^^^^^^

Ack!  NoNoNo!  He meant "subsidiaries"!  Please, don't tell anyone he
said that word!!!!  Keep away the lawyers! Ack!


Gord Deinstadt  [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Jeff Hibbard)
Subject: Re: More Strange 710 Stuff (was Funny Intercept on 1-710-555-1212)
Organization: Bradley University
Date: Sat, 4 Jul 92 06:57:56 GMT


[e-mail] (Frank T Lofaro) writes:

> It then asks for your personal access (used for
> billing) code and connects you. Strange thing is if I dial a bogus
> area code and number I get the intercept right away after the last
> digit is dialed (and before I can get to enter my security code), but
> if I dial the 710 area code and a number, it asks for my code, and
> only then does it give me the intercept.

I don't see how this demonsatrates any special handling of 710 calls.
Since the security code is only used for billing, there's no point in
requesting it when you dial a "bogus area code", because the call
cannot possibly complete and incur charges.  If you dial a valid
number not recognizable as a free call, then standard procedure is to
get a billing code before continuing to process the call.  The only
thing you can safely infer from this behavior is that the local CO
recognizes 710 as a valid area code, and that nobody has ever told the
people programming it that 710 calls are guaranteed not to incur
charges (not surprising ... nobody probably tells them much of
anything about 710).


Jeff Hibbard, Peoria IL

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

From: [e-mail] (Rich Mintz)
Subject: Re: Caller ID in Southern California?
Organization: California State University, Chico
Date: Sat, 04 Jul 1992 13:32:48 GMT


My telco in Northern CA is Pacific Bell. Has caller ID been made legal
in California yet? I've yet to come across any store that sells phone
equipment with any devices which make use of caller ID, and the guy at
Radio Shack seems to believe it's still illegal in CA.

While I'm on the subject, if it *is* legal here (and even if not 8-)
I'm interested in getting a device that will relay the caller ID
information via serial or other port to my computer. Any
recommendations on a manufacturer, source, price info?

Whether or not it has been made legal here, I seem to remember a
Pacific Bell customer service rep telling me that the various services
you lucky people in some other parts of the country have like caller
ID blocking and "blocking blocking", as well as the simpler features
of the "call back the last person that called you" sequence and the
"send ID about prank call to telco investigations" sequence, etc, will
not be available here until 1996. Didn't know how good I had it in
Atlanta with BellSouth 8-)


Thanks,

Rich  -> [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Caller ID in Southern California?
Date: 4 Jul 92 01:33:09 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, nsc![e-mail]
(Jim Tavakoli) writes:

> As you may know, California telephone companies now support Caller-ID.
> I was wondering if anybody out there has any information or references
> to the design and implementation of Caller-ID. I understand there is a
> spec published by Bell. If you could send me the name of the
> publication, I would really appreciate it.

Don't get too excited, Jim.  As noted by John H, GTE has already they
will not be providing Caller-ID. And maybe they will be dropping the
whole CLASS service proposal.

While Pac Bell has stated that CLASS implementation will go on, they
are re-evaluating any implementation of Caller-ID. Can't say that I
blame them.  Under the CPUC ruling where unlisted numbers will
automatically have per-line blocking of CLID, and realizing that in
Alameda county (Oakland, Berkeley and surrounding area) most home
numbers are unlisted, Caller-ID starts to look like a questionable
value.

So I would suggest that you don't put too much effort into something
that may never be used.


R. Kevin Oberman        Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
Internet: [e-mail]    [phone]

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

Subject: Re: Newfoundland Province Code 709
Organization: I.E.C.C.
Date: 4 Jul 92 00:55:50 EDT (Sat)
From: [e-mail] (John R. Levine)


St Pierre, being part of France, has six digit phone numbers and
doubtless uses French phone equipment which has somewhat different
inter-office interfaces than North American equipment does.  Clearly
adapters between the two exist, since you can dial back and forth
between Canada and Europe, but are they simple enough that it'd be
worth it for the small amount of traffic between N.F. and St Pierre?

The numbering would be the least of the problems -- I believe that all
of the St Pierre numbers start with the same digit, so there's really
only a five digit number space.  Going the other way, there are
already a whole bunch of dialing hacks in France (19 for
international, 16 for elsewhere in France, etc.) that another one for
N.F. wouldn't be hard.


Regards,

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

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

From: [e-mail] (Mitch Wagner)
Date: Sat, 4 Jul 92 00:38:20 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Mitch Wagner)
Subject: Re: Strange Message on Answering Machine
Organization: UNIX Today!
Date: Wed, 01 Jul 92 20:38:13 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (John I.
Hritz) writes:

> Kind in the same vane.  I periodically get recordings on my
> machine that consist of a <beep> and then a pause of about five
> seconds.  This repeats for a couple of minutes.  That's it nothing
> else.

I'm pretty sure that's the sound of a fax machine announcing itself to
another fax machine (which of course you're not). It's kind of like
the way baby ducks imprint on the first thing they see and think it's
their mother ... :-)


Mitch Wagner  [e-mail]  CIS:70212,51  GEnie:MITCH.WAGNER

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #527
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa21255;
          4 Jul 92 23:14 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA29490
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 4 Jul 1992 21:33:01 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA16365
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 4 Jul 1992 21:32:52 -0500
Date: Sat, 4 Jul 1992 21:32:52 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #528

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 4 Jul 92 21:32:55 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 528

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Jane Barbie (was The Purpose of the Three Tones) (Andrew C. Green)
    Re: Jane BARBE (was Jane Barbie) (Ralph Neutrino)
    Re: The Depths of Sliminess (Mark Cavallaro)
    Re: The Depths of Sliminess (Robert S. Helfman)
    Re: The Depths of Sliminess (Mike Coyne)
    Re: The Telco Owns the Numbers (Andrew C. Green)
    Re: The Telco Owns the Numbers (Justin Leavens)
    Re: Batman Well Connected? (Allen Robel)
    Re: Ameritech/IBT (Allen Robel)
    Re: "Choke" Prefixes (Gordon D. Woods)
    Re: What is Iridium Project? (John C. Fowler)
    Re: What is Iridium Project? (Charles Neveu)
    Re: Pac*Bell Posturing (Justin Leavens)
    Re: AT&T Knows I am Moving. How? (Justin Leavens)
    Re: RFC For Fax Specs? (H. Shrikumar)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sat 04 Jul 1992 11:36:23 CDT
From: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Jane Barbie (was The Purpose of the Three Tones)


[e-mail] (Monte Freeman) writes:

> When we went through and did our repeater upgrade two or three
> years ago, someone made the comment that it would be nice to
> have "Ms. Calabash's" voice back. (Ms. Calabash is the name
> someone gave to this mysterious sexy voice shortly after it
> went into use on the repeater, and it just sort of stuck ...)

Would that someone have been Jimmy Durante? ("Goodnight, Mrs.
Calabash, wherever you are!") Always wondered who he meant.


Andrew C. Green
Datalogics, Inc.      Internet: [e-mail]
441 W. Huron          UUCP: ..!uunet!dlogics!acg
Chicago, IL  60610    FAX: [phone]

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

From: octela!![e-mail] (Ralph Neutrino)
Subject: Re: Jane BARBE (was Jane Barbie)
Organization: Octel Communications Inc., Milpitas Ca.
Date: Wed, 1 Jul 1992 18:49:11 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(George S. Thurman) writes:

> With all of the messages recently about "Jane Barbie", I thought that
> I would let everyone know that the correct spelling of her last name
> is BARBE.

I can confirm this -- we have a signed photo, last name spelled "Barbe."


Shaun

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: The Depths of Sliminess
Date: 4 Jul 92 07:50:58 PST
Organization: Science Applications Int'l Corp./San Diego


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (John De
Armond) writes:

> Consider that not all teleslime works in boiler rooms and against
> quotas.  Consider the increasing problem we have here in Atlanta with
> casual teleslime who work out of their homes (judging by the screaming
> kids and blaring TV in the background) to make a little extra money.
> They have neither the quota to drive them nor the thick skin to let
> 'em weather insults.  These people get mad at being cussed at or even
> hung up on.  They do waste their time getting even by calling back.
> And when they call me back, their number from the Caller*ID box goes
> in Dixie's UUCP Systems file for day or two.

> Yes, it is entirely believable that a teleslime would do such a thing
> as described in the media article.

Pat,

I can verify that "teleslime" _do_ engage in this sort of activity.  I
have personally suffered from this harassment one year when I was
solicited by a local PA.  I indicated no interest, said good bye and
hung up.  The phone rang again in a few moments, same guy.  He made
some vaguely threatening remarks.  I hung up.  Then I received dozens
of "hangup" calls over the next several days.  Eventually he got bored
and went away.  But this sort of thing does happen.


Regards,

Mark

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

From: [e-mail] (Robert S. Helfman)
Subject: Re: The Depths of Sliminess
Organization: The Aerospace Corporation, El Segundo, CA
Date: Wed, 1 Jul 1992 16:21:35 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (John De
Armond) writes:

> Consider that not all teleslime works in boiler rooms and against
> quotas.  Consider the increasing problem we have here in Atlanta with
> casual teleslime who work out of their homes (judging by the screaming
> kids and blaring TV in the background) to make a little extra money.
> They have neither the quota to drive them nor the thick skin to let
> 'em weather insults.  These people get mad at being cussed at or even
> hung up on.  They do waste their time getting even by calling back.

PAT, they sure as hell DO call back and harass people. It's happened
to me. Some creep called and tried to give me the hard sell. I said
(brusquely, but not rudely), "I'm not interested" and just hung up
(loudly -- bringing the handset down at Warp 9). He called back and
said "you're rude". I said "it's MY telephone and you're the one who's
rude" and then hung up again. He called back immediately and I just
let the answering machine get it. He gave up after that.

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

Date: Saturday, 4 July 1992 6:05pm CT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: The Depths of Sliminess


>[Moderator's Note: Very dramatic story, but is it really the truth?
>What telemarketer do you know with enough spare time on his hands to
>waste call after call on someone who obviously is not buying anything?
>To those boys, time *is* money, and people (who they call) wasting
>their time 'looking for a pen', etc are anathema.
> ... I don't believe their story.  PAT]

I believe this story.  It is my policy also to give telemarketers a
little hell.  "What do you tell your family you do for a living?  Do
you admit to them you are a profeessional nuisance? ..."  I read,
perhaps in this forum, about someone who tries to sell them
telemarketing supplies.  That sounds amusing but I dont know enough to
fake that one.  About one in 20 calls back and hangs up several times.
Unfortunately caller ID is an invasion of the caller's privacy in
Texas.  I can not even discover who will accept complaints about
megadialers (which are not legal) and take action.  Grrrrr!  I hate
cold call telemarketers.

On a more conciliatory note: would someone please give more
information about CPC and how I can tell if I have it?  Does it
eliminate those please hang up and dial again messages on your
answering machine?


[e-mail]

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

Date: Sat, 04 Jul 1992 11:32:25 CDT
From: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: The Telco Owns the Numbers


[e-mail] (Joel M Snyder) writes:

> ZIP + 4 normally selects at the block level (there's a ZIP + 4 book in
> your post office for your town); for some places, obviously, the + 4
> gets it a lot closer, such as a PO Box (mentioned previously), a
> single office building, etc.

I couldn't let this go by ... a few years back, I lived in Apartment
401, 800 Hinman Avenue, Evanston, IL. This is an eight-story building
with approximately 16 apartments per floor. The ZIP+4 for my address
was something like 60202-2322, which I obtained from the Post Office
manuals.  Curiously, my neighbor in Apartment 402 had a completely
different ZIP+4 extension; in fact, there were several different
extensions used over and over in the building, depending on what the
apartment number was, and this took a fair amount of space to list in
the ZIP Code manual.  The kicker was: like most apartment buildings,
all the mailboxes were in the lobby anyway.


Andrew C. Green
Datalogics, Inc.      Internet: [e-mail]
441 W. Huron          UUCP: ..!uunet!dlogics!acg
Chicago, IL  60610    FAX: [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Justin Leavens)
Subject: Re: The Telco Owns the Numbers
Date: 4 Jul 1992 12:28:20 -0700
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Lauren
Weinstein) writes:

> Greetings.  Someone asked if the subscribers had any choice in the
> selection of new numbers, in the situation of being forced to change
> numbers by telco.  In the case of the Woodland Hills event I
> originally mentioned, I believe the subscribers were allowed to pick
> their new four digit numbers in the new prefix, but could only choose
> numbers within fairly limited ranges, i.e. they did not have the
> entire 10,000 possibilities from which to choose.

Pacific Bell offers you six numbers to choose from when establishing
your service. If at that time, or any time before your service is
established, you want a specific number, you can have it for a
one-time $10 charge (provided it hasn't been in use for six months to
a year, depending on whether it was a business or residence in a
previous life). After your service is established, it will cost you
$20 for a number change, and $10 for the personalized number. GTECA
gives you one number, but if you ask and there are more available,
they will give you four more choices for free. If you want a
personalized number, it requires a 24 hour callback to verify that it
is available, a one time $35 charge, and $1.50/month charge.

In addition, Pacific Bell is very helpful in checking numbers for you
to see if they are available. They'll take several of your number
combinations at once and call their center to see if they are
available, as well as handling "can I get these four numbers in any
available prefix?" or "how about something with repeated digits?" type
requests. They'll also tell you when the number you want will become
available if it's not in use, and try to find good, memorable numbers
if you just simply ask for one of those.


Justin Leavens     University of Southern California    [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Allen Robel)
Subject: Re: Batman Well Connected?
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Sat, 4 Jul 92 13:15:42 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail].
arizona.edu (Dr. Ross Alan Stapleton) writes:

> I just saw "Batman Returns" over the weekend, and am almost positive I
> saw the following: there are several scenes in the Batcave, with
> various high-techy devices arrayed around ... in one, Batman is standing
> in front of some telecom-looking equipment, and one of the many
> lighted red buttons on the panel reads "AUTOVON" ...

There is another scene that impressed me more as far as being
"well connected."  How about that full motion interactive video
in the Batmobile!


Allen Robel                      [e-mail]
University Computing Services    [e-mail]
Network Research & Planning      voice: [phone]
Indiana University               FAX:   [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Allen Robel)
Subject: Re: Ameritech/IBT
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Sat, 4 Jul 92 13:19:05 GMT


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

> BTW, the IBT tariffs for ISDN seem to be among the best in the country
> and decidely better than Pacific Bell.

So what are the tariffs?  I've yet to see real pricing information for
our area.


Allen Robel                      [e-mail]
University Computing Services    [e-mail]
Network Research & Planning      voice: [phone]
Indiana University               FAX:   [phone]

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

Date: Sat,  4 Jul 92 09:22:38 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Gordon D Woods)
Subject: Re: "Choke" Prefixes
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories


 From article <[e-mail]>, by rlm@ms_aspen.hac.com
(Robert L. McMillin):

> On a related matter:
> during the recent riots, I was able to get dial tone out of a pay
> phone in the part of West Torrance that is served by GTE, even though
> my own phone wouldn't give me dial tone after ten minutes off hook.
> Do pay phones have a higher priority within the switch in terms of
> getting dial tone?

I do know that on loop carrier systems with traffic concentration (per
call sharing of channels) that conventional (non-COCOT) coin units get
permanently assigned channels and therefore, have priority within the
carrier system.  I would guess they also have their own traffic group
within the CO switch because they use special interface circuits.

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

From: [e-mail] (John C. Fowler)
Subject: Re: What is Iridium Project?
Date: 4 Jul 92 13:28:14 GMT
Organization: Los Alamos National Laboratory


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Charles Neveu) writes:

> Telecommunications Magazine has a article that makes passing mention
> of Motorola's Iridium Project and its 77 satellites that are going to
> be launched. What is the Iridium Project?

Think of Iridium as "Worldwide Cellular."  Once launched, you will be
able to make a phone call from just about anywhere in the world --
even where telephone systems are controlled by the government or are
just too archaic to be trusted.  I imagine that once it's launched,
there will be a scramble to be the first to make a phone call from the
top of Mt. Everest.  :-)


John C. Fowler, [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Charles Neveu)
Subject: What is Iridium Project?
Date: 4 Jul 92 02:50:28 GMT
Organization: Capital Market Technology


{Telecommunications Magazine} has a article that makes passing mention
of Motorola's Iridium Project and its 77 satellites that are going to
be launched. What is the Iridium Project


Charles Neveu    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Justin Leavens)
Subject: Re: Pac*Bell Posturing
Date: 4 Jul 1992 16:18:26 -0700
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA


Pacific Bell is saying that the features Last Number Callback,
Selective Ringing, and Selective Call Forwarding will be available
right around July 20.  From what I was told by a couple of Pac Bell
people, the reason that Caller-ID implementation was going to take
longer than the other features was that they need "sufficient time to
inform the public regarding the privacy issues involved in making
their telephone numbers available".  I think this issue hinges on the
importance that people place on "features" like Caller-ID.

For most readers of c.d.t., Caller-ID is an added function to our
telephone service. To a lot of people, Caller-ID represents a major
change in how telephones work. Just like the implications of being
able to purchase items/services via phone and have them charged to
your phone bill weren't researched well enough before implementation
(IMHO), I think it would be dangerous and not in anyone's best
interest to suddenly offer a service like this when not everyone may
understand what it is and how it works. Especially since the default
setting will be to give out your number. If it defaulted the other
way, I don't think it would be an issue (and there'd be no real use
for Caller-ID either.

I'd like to pose another related question: How can it be an invasion
of privacy for people to get your phone number (via Caller-ID or
whatever) if the phone company "owns" the number? What real rights
does the phone user have regarding their home phone number?


Justin Leavens   Microcomputer Specialist   University of Southern California

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

From: [e-mail] (Justin Leavens)
Subject: Re: AT&T Knows I am Moving. How?
Date: 4 Jul 1992 16:46:55 -0700
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA


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

> I was amazed to get something similar -- an offer of a free hour of
> long distance if I keep Reach Out America service -- if I keep AT&T
> when I move.  However, the only people I've told (other than friends
> and relatives) is the apartment complex I'm moving into and the one
> I'm moving out of.  I haven't called and hooked up phone/electric
> service yet.  I suppose this is more of a privacy issue then telcom

I'm always amazed whenever I move that I get a note from TRW (I belong
to their Credentials service) confirming the fact that I've moved and
to make sure that they've got my correct address. Of course, it's
always correct. Two out of three times this letter has arrived on the
day I moved in. It's a little unnerving.


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

Date: Sat, 4 Jul 92 22:39:16 GMT
From: [e-mail] (H. Shrikumar)
Subject: Re: RFC For Fax Specs?


>> I need the RFC (or some other type of "oficial document" ) that
>> gives the specs for fax transmissions. A description of the protocol,

>> Preferably in on-line Internet accessible format ...

> See rfc1314, "A File Format for the Exchange of Images in the

Sure, this RFC might help, but perhaps you mean fax as in "please fax
it to the number on my card".

In that case, you are better of getting it from the horse's mouth, the
horse in question being CCITT. You'd need T.3 and T.4. and perhaps
V.21, V.27 and V.29, depending on how deep into the analog part you
wish to get in case of Group III fax.

Of course, its not on-line (some would even question if any CCITT
document is even readable :-)


shrikumar ( [e-mail] )

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #528
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa23937;
          5 Jul 92 0:23 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA23914
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 4 Jul 1992 22:41:13 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA06619
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 4 Jul 1992 22:41:05 -0500
Date: Sat, 4 Jul 1992 22:41:05 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #529

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 4 Jul 92 22:41:00 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 529

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: A Positive COCOT Experience (Steve Howard)
    Re: Longest Phonecall (H. Shrikumar)
    Re: 911 in Australia (Ash Nallawalla)
    Re: National Security and 710 (Ken Abrams)
    Re: National Security and 710 (Aubrey Philipsz)
    Re: Trying to Locate Bellcore (Alan L. Varney)
    Re: Can't Reach ANAC or 700-555-4141 From My Dorm (Gordon Hlavenka)
    Re: Strange Message on Answering Machine (H. Shrikumar)
    Re: Strange Message on Answering Machine (Jack Decker)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 4 Jul 92 00:37:55 MDT (Sat)
From: [e-mail] (Steve Howard)
Subject: Re: A Positive COCOT Experience


In <[e-mail]> I said:

> At the end of the ski season I will calculate the percentage of calls
> dialed using 10XXX, 950, etc. -- if there is any interest, I'll post
> it.

> [Moderator's Note: Yes, please! An actual breakdown of AT&T, Sprint,
> MCI and other OCC calls would be quite interesting.    PAT]

The breakdown is listed below.  This is for 11 payphones connected to
our PBX (that charge AT&T rates :-) ).  They were installed in early
March so the information below only reflects about seven weeks of
traffic.

Unfortunately the breakdown of 10XXX vs 950 is not accurate.  When
possible the phones translate 10XXX into their 950-xxxx or 1-800
counterparts (presumably this is so that they can remain consistent
with the phones that are in nearby areas that don't have equal
access).  This will be changed -- we have equal access so it isn't
necessary here.  Also, these numbers are based on call *attempts* --
whether supervision was received or not.

                 Percentage
Number Dialed     Of Total

950-0244           .98%
950-0488           .35%
950-0638           .35%
950-0675           .14%
950-1022         12.43%  MCI        (This includes 10222-0-xxx)
950-1477           .07%

800-877-8000     19.59%  US Sprint  (This includes 10333-0-xxx)
800-950-1022      6.67%

AT&T             29.28%  (These people inserted an AT&T card into the
                         reader, or dialed 0+ and entered an AT&T card
                         number, or for some other reason got handed
                         off to AT&T).

10288-0-xxxx     30.13%  (These people entered 10288 even though the phone
                         would have passed them to AT&T when they entered
                         an AT&T Card number).

I find the last number interesting.  Half of all AT&T callers dialed
the 10288.  (I always do :-) ).  I wonder how many of these people
learned to dial 10288 the hard way?  :-(


Steve Howard   [e-mail]   Breckenridge Ski Corporation
Disclaimer=The opinions above do not necessarily represent those
of my employer.

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

Date: Sat, 4 Jul 92 22:32:43 GMT
From: [e-mail] (H. Shrikumar)
Subject: Re: Longest Phonecall


Hi,

> One evening I called a friend in Illinois from Virginia.  We talked
> for maybe 20 minutes, said goodbye, .... [and did not hang up properly]
 ..
> In about a month, our phone bill arrived.  There was a nearly 24 hour
> long distance phone call to Illinois billed on it.  When my housemate,
 ..
> hours.  We could prove that all of us were at work all day, and that
 ..
> removed it from the bill.

Were this in India, even if one indeed was a mere victim of wrong
billing, you'd have been billed anyway, and would have been required
to *first* pay up, "under protest" if you wish, and then complain, and
wait ... and wait ... and wait.... hoping that your file would move
thru the monopoly's redtape. (the law as it stands is clear on that,
time for a change here I guess.)

(Things might get changing now, with some talk of liberalisation, but
I would not hold my breath! :-)

But that reminds me ...

Two brothers, partners in business, stationed in Lucknow and Delhi,
had "learnt" that the long-distance (STD) call meter would wrap around
after a certain (close to an hour) time interval. So they'd always
make sure that their calls were that period plus three minutes, and
they'd get billed for just three minutes. Of course, this amounts to a
fraud, but they apparently got away with it for far too long.

And of course, the wonders of pulse dial pay phones. Instead of
replacing the phone on-hook to disconnect, if you dial 1 very
s-l-o-w-l-y, the extended pulse would trigger a disconnect and a new
dial tone without releasing the coin from the slot where it gives
battery current to the carbon mike.

Not to forget the fact that on these pay phones, the coin enables
battery current to the carbon mike to let you talk. but if you don't
mind bellowing in half-duplex, you can shout into the moving iron
earpiece and be heard the other side. (Won't cost you anything for a
call. I've had to resort to this once, when one coin box was so full
right up to the slot, so you just could not drop a coins.)

(In most metro's now we have pay phones with a man in attendance, and
a device that meters and bills the call. That's made making public
calls so much better, it is quite easy to make long distance calls to
from these.)


shrikumar ( [e-mail] )

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

From: [e-mail] (Ash Nallawalla)
Subject: Re: 911 in Australia
Organization: Australian Centre for Unisys Software, Melbourne
Date: Sat, 4 Jul 1992 02:34:59 GMT


[e-mail] (David B. Whiteman) writes:

> The radio had a news story about a fellow in Australia who loved to
> watch the TV show Rescue 911.  When his house was on fire he kept
> frantically trying to dial 911 without sucess.  He forgot that where
> he lived one dials "0 0 0" (three zeros) for emergency services.

Sounds like an urban legend in the making. In Australia they have
William Shatner (sp?) telling viewers that 000 is the number to use in
Oz -- I believe this is repeated more than once during the hour-long
programme.


Ash Nallawalla      Tel: [phone] BH; Fax [phone]
ZL4LM/VK3CIT      Postal: P.O. Box 539, Werribee VIC 3030, Australia
[e-mail]  Contact me if you belong to a PC User Group!

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

Subject: Re: National Security and 710
Date: Sat, 4 Jul 92 9:19:30 CDT
From: Ken Abrams <[e-mail]>


[John Draper asked why Ken Abrams was talking about 710.   PAT]

"I" didn't start the discussion.  I don't moderate this group and
decide what gets published and what does not.  My message was an
attempt to quash the discussion.  Why did you see fit to direct
your comments to ME?  I absolutely agree with you.  Please direct
additional comments and complaints to Pat Townson, the conference
Moderator or to those folks who seem bent on continuing the discussion.
Apparently my advice fell on deaf ears.


Ken Abrams         nstar!pallas!kabra437
Springfield, IL    [e-mail]    (voice) 217-753-7965


[Moderator's Note: Actually, my experience has been that telling
people on Usenet that a certain topic is forbidden discussion only
causes the discussion to go on that much longer and more heated than
before.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Aubrey Philipsz)
Subject: Re: National Security and 710
Organization: Express Access Public Access UNIX, Greenbelt, Maryland USA
Date: Sat, 04 Jul 1992 22:01:42 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (John
Draper) writes:

>> 710 is indeed assigned for "Government Special" use.  It's actual
>> function is highly classified.  Doesn't surprise me that you couldn't
>> get any information without a need to know.  I respectfully suggest
>> that you not pursue the matter any further, least someone from the
>> Government might start asking YOU a lot of questions!!

> If you are SO concerned about national security, then why are you
> broadcasting to the world that 710 has anything special in it at all?

Hi John!  Long time no see.

Without saying anything technical, the 710 situation concerning
*publicity* is a lot like that of Inward.  A lot of people are aware
that something called Inward exists, there are a fair number of
people who have to deal with it on a daily basis, but in general there
is little technical knowledge floating around in public about it.
This is because you can't get ahold of Inward from most "normal"
phones.

The 710 situation is sort of the same.  There are a fair number of
people who know something about it, because it is hard to hide
something that big.  There is some general knowledge floating around
that it exists, but no real technical knowledge about it ...

> Now every phone hacker on the net will be encouraged to start
> "scanning" the 710 area code for their "special classified" numbers.

I dare say that there have been people calling those numbers for
years.  This is nothing new.


Aub Philipsz           [e-mail]

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

Date: Sat,  4 Jul 92 17:31:42 CDT
From: [e-mail] (Alan L Varney)
Subject: Re: Trying to Locate Bellcore
Organization: AT&T Network Systems, Inc


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

> Can anyone out there tell me how to get in touch with Bellcore?
> Specifically their publications division.

TAs, TRs and other "standard" documents can be ordered from:

     Bellcore
     Document Registrar
     445 South Street - Room 2J-125
     P. O. Box 1910
     Morristown, NJ 07962-1910

or by calling the menu-monster at 1-800-521-CORE (1-800-521-2673);
they take plastic.  If you don't have a document number handy, they
can send you a catalog of technical documents.

  If you want to talk to the "pub" folks, or a technical person, the
numbers/addresses are in the front of any TR (and the "Catalog").


Al Varney - the above represents my opinion, and not AT&T's....

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

From: [e-mail] (gordon hlavenka)
Subject: Re: Can't Reach ANAC or 700-555-4141 From My Dorm
Organization: Vpnet Public Access
Date: Sat, 04 Jul 1992 16:18:11 GMT


> 711-XXXX (whereas elsewhere 711-anything other than 6633 doesn't
> work, it gives strange tones or silence) ... (and 711 is not a "real"
> exchange).

Well, in my area (708-573) "enhanced" 911 was turned on on 9-11-91.
Sometime in August of '91 (for the math-impaired, this would have been
_before_ September 11) I was playing around at the office in response
to another post on this group, dialed '711', and was connected to 911!
Stupid me, I hung up immediately.  The operator called back and
interrogated our receptionist.  The operator wouldn't hang up until
someone had gone to each office and made sure everyone was OK.  This
was chalked up as a glitch in the new 911 equipment and/or our cheap
office key-phones.

A bit off the subject, last week I actually had need to call 911 from
my house (708-832).  We have been paying a $.50 surcharge for quite
some time to cover the "enhanced" 911 that is (supposedly) in service
now.  When I called, the operator had to ask me for my address and
phone number!  I'm _really_ impressed (not).


Gordon S. Hlavenka   [e-mail]

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

Date: Sat, 4 Jul 92 21:56:52 GMT
From: [e-mail] (H. Shrikumar)
Subject: Re: Strange Message on Answering Machine


> [Moderator's Note: There are answering machines available with CPC
> (called party control) which abort on detecting a hangup.    PAT]

How does the CPC work ?

> [Moderator's Note: Someone calls and the phone rings. Just before your
> answering machine picks up, they disconnect, but too late to stop your
> machine from answering. Telco sees you have gone off hook, and sends
> dial tone, which plays through your outgoing message. After 15-25
> seconds or so, you have not dialed a number -- your machine is still
> talking to no one with an outgoing message. Telco decides you are not
> going to place a call and must have left your phone off hook, or if
> you are going to call it is too late this time around, 'so please
> hang up and try your call again ... '

Too sad you in US don't have polarity reversal on your calls !!

The phone lines all over India seem to have that. You get one polarity
when you talk to the exchange, or when their equipment talks to you,
and the opposite polarity when you talk to your party.

(After a few posts of India bashing, I could not help get a little
patirotic !)


shrikumar ( [e-mail] )

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

Date: Sat, 4 Jul 92 16:53:41 CST
From: Jack Decker <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Strange Message on Answering Machine


Speaking of stupid pranks, here's one that perhaps wasn't as stupid as
it first seemed.  Maybe 20 years ago a guy was being plagued by prank
calls from junior high kids.  But he recognized one of the voices as a
neighbor kid, so he hooked up a tape recorder to the line and every
time one of the calls came in, he taped it.  It wasn't long until he
got what he wanted -- a perfect recording of the kid saying "You're a
real....." followed by a string of profanity that would make a sailor,
or the kid's parents, turn beet red.

What do you suppose he did with that tape?  No, he didn't take it to
the cops ... he had a more perverse idea in mind.  It just so happened
that this guy had worked at a radio station and had enough electrical
expertise to figure out how to play the tape back into the phone line
in such a way that it sounded fairly live to the person on the other
end of the connection.  So he waited until one night when he was sure
that the kid wasn't home and the kid's mother WAS, dialed up the
family home and let the tape rip.  Imagine mama's surprise to hear her
little darling calling her some very nasty things and making some
obscene suggestions, in what was obviously his own voice, and then
hanging up on her!

You can imagine what must have transpired when the kid got home ...
even if mama related enough of the message for the kid to figure out
what happened, he couldn't very well admit to making obscene calls to
the neighbors.  The way I hear the story, the kid wasn't seen outside
much (except when mowing the lawn or doing other chores) for a while.
The prank calls also came to a screeching halt!

Now, with answering machines and Caller-ID, you wouldn't even need to
know the caller to return similar prank messages to the parent.  Of
course, if the parents also had Caller-ID (and you didn't block
transmission of your number for the call), they could figure out that
you had sent the message, not their kid, but you'd still be in a
position to ask why their little darling was leaving such messages on
your answering machine.

But I have to admit, I'd love to see the expressions on the faces of
some of the parents when they hear what was really coming out of the
mouths of their kids ... especially if they thought (even for a few
seconds) that the kid was saying it directly to THEM!


Jack Decker   [e-mail]   FidoNet 1:154/8


[Moderator's Note: This same technique was useful in clearing the
airwaves of an obnoxious CB'er here many years ago. He was one of
those types who liked to send his modulations through a reverb unit or
echo box then into a 100 watt linear amplifier. His modulations
sounded this way: 'Break ake ake ake ake ake for a radio check eck eck
eck ...'  One of those idiots. I mean, my radio was loud, but that guy
was incredible. You could hear him over in Michigan across the lake.
If he barely heard two kids with 100 milliwatt walkie-talkies a mile
away through the hash, he'd have the nerve to key up his radio with
all that modulation and power and tell *them* 'hey! back it down out
there! ... '. This guy walked all over the locals in Joliet, some 40
miles away. One day when he had a mean streak and was cussing up a
storm someone tape recorded it on a two minute endless loop tape, and
played it back to him over the air -- anonymously of course, like most
CB transmissions -- and over, and over, and over, and over. That tape
was played on all forty channels (and then some! heh heh! Early forty
channel radios with the Motorola 02-A chip were easily -- and quite
illegally -- programmable over the entire 10/11 meter band. The FCC
finally put the heat on Motorola to quit making that chip.) That must
have spooked him good; little was heard out of him after that.   PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #529
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa24931;
          5 Jul 92 0:52 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA07872
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 4 Jul 1992 23:12:38 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA31452
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 4 Jul 1992 23:12:30 -0500
Date: Sat, 4 Jul 1992 23:12:30 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #530

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 4 Jul 92 23:12:30 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 530

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Concert-Goers Blast 911 Service (John Rice)
    Re: Roommates and Long Distance Doesn't Mix (Larry Autry)
    Re: Satellite Usenet Newsfeeds Avaialable Now (Larry Autry)
    Re: Funny Advertising Goof-ups (Wrong Numbers) (John Higdon)
    Re: Can't Reach ANAC or 700-555-4141 From My Dorm (Gordon Hlavenka)
    Re: Telecomics (Alan Gilbertson)
    Involuntary Phone Number Changes (Scott Fybush)
    ISDN Availability to Residence Customers in Chicago Area (Bill Nickless)
    NER-VOUS Gives Time of Day (was Jane Barbie) (David W. Barts)
    Factoid From Playboy (Stephen J. Friedl)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Concert-Goers Blast 911 Service
Organization: Teradyne Inc., Telecommunications Division
Date: Sat, 04 Jul 92 04:47:25 GMT


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

> Excepting a very poorly engineered CO, this also should not be a
> problem unless you have a very significant percentage of your
> subscribers going offhook all at the same time.  This is not the case
> in a concert ticket hotline, or a radio station giveaway, but might
> occur during some sort of emergency (power failure, weather disaster,
> large nearby explosion, etc.)  In such a case, certain lines within
> the neighborhood can be designated to be 'hot' lines, or 'A' lines,
> which get preferential treatment.  The idea being, if we can't serve
> 100%, and if we tried we'd serve 0%, then let's pick 10%-20% and give
> them service.  The rationale being, it's not necessary for every one
> of 500 residents in a neighborhood to call 911 to report a fire.

Well, I'd sure hate to be one of the 80%-90% trying to call for an
ambulance for my parent with a heart attack. Who decides who get's
'preferental' service?  In my opinion, the 'Concert Ticket' phoenomena
is 'misuse' of the phone system (right up there with telemarketing and
charity solicitation).

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Kevin W. Williams) writes:

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

>>> [Moderator's Note: Come now, do you *really* think US West or any
>>> telco relishes these situations and ignores them 'because they are the
>>> phone company'?  And had telco known in advance (did any of the
>>> concert promoters advise telco of the times, etc?), what in your
>>> estimation might telco have done about it, other than possibly block
>>> off access from certain exchanges when traffic was heavy?    PAT]

>> I'd have to disagree. Proper design of a "Life and Death" emergency
>> system should preclude ANY intruption of that service based on trunk
>> loading. 911 trunks should be Independent of any other traffic.

> Let's be a little realistic here. I could, indeed, design a 911 system
> which was indpendent of any other request for service. Unfortunately,
> I would have to run a separate phone to each house which only served
> the emergency service bureau.

(Technical paragraph deleted)

> If you want a feature that would work, it would be possible to cut off
> any subscriber that called for a ticket, and not allow him to
> reoriginate for five minutes or so. This would free up a lot of
> resources. Unfortunately, it would also open up the telco for lawsuits
> ("Aunt Tilly keeled over right after I called for a ticket, and I
> couldn't get through.").

Is this any different than a lawsuit "Aunt Tilly keeled over while
that "Damned Radio Station" was running it's contest and I couldn't
get through."

> Choke prefixes, call gapping, and similar network management
> treatments are a compromise for an insoluble problem. No switch
> manufacturer can sell totally non-blocking line equipment, because the
> telcos won't pay the costs. We cannot predict who is going to call 911
> and who is going to call Larry King. The best we can do is make the
> machine survive the peaking, give fairly distributed service to all
> originators, and try to deal with the problem during routing and
> termination.

My original comment related to 'Trunk Blockage' not whether the
subscriber could receive dial tone. In the 'Concert Ticket' scenario,
it's more likely that all outgoing trunks are blocked. It's the
'natural disaster' scenario in which dial tone becomes hard to get. I
stand by my original statement.

"I'd have to disagree. Proper design of a "Life and Death" emergency
system should preclude ANY intruption of that service based on TRUNK
LOADING. 911 trunks should be Independent of any other traffic. "


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Larry Autry)
Subject: Re: Roommates and Long Distance Doesn't Mix
Organization: Silicon Graphics, St. Louis, MO
Date: Sat, 4 Jul 1992 00:21:51 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Chris
Sherman) writes:

> I would like to shut off the dial-1 long distance access from my
> phone, yet still have the ability to use LD charge cards for making LD
> calls.

> But, Southern Bell says that they can't do this.  They can block LD
> calls completely, for $22 setup, and $2 a month, but this means no
> long distance calls PERIOD.

Ask if the option allows you to block long distance but allow 800
numbers.  If so, what about using Sprint's FON card.  They require you
to call this 800 number then your LD number + authorization number.


Larry Autry     Silicon Graphics, St. Louis    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Larry Autry)
Subject: Re: Satellite Usenet Newsfeeds Avaialable Now
Organization: Silicon Graphics, St. Louis, MO
Date: Sat, 4 Jul 1992 00:25:50 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Manfred
Frey) writes:

> A small Ku-Band satellite antenna and indoor satellite receiver/
> modem that delivers approximately 40 megabytes of data to your machine
> in a 24 hour period.

What if one already owns a Ku-band satellite dish?  I suppose a modem
would be in order though.  Is that priced separately?


Larry Autry      Silicon Graphics, St. Louis    [e-mail]

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

Date: Sat, 4 Jul 92 20:30 PDT
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: Funny Advertising Goof-ups (Wrong Numbers)


[e-mail] (Mark Walsh) writes:

> Before I decided what to do, somebody from the church called me up,
> profusely appologized for the error (5000 flyers had already been
> distributed), and invited me over for a free night of Bingo!

Wouldn't it be nice if it always turned out that way? Some time ago, I
had a number that was very close to 800 HILTONS. At one point I became
innundated with calls from people trying to book reservations. When I
called the hotel chain to see if there had perhaps been an ad with a
mistake or some other contributing factor for the wrong numbers, I got
the royal brush-off. Since the Great Big Corporation was not
interested in little old me or my problems, I used a retaliatory
method that if nothing else made me feel better. I am sure you can
imagine what it was.

Later, I changed the number. That ended the wrong numbers until
relatively recently. Suddenly, people started calling at ungawdly
hours wanting information about glass treatment. Turns out that a
company in Chicago had an ad in a national magazine with my number in
it! But this time, the firm came hat in hand profusely apolgizing and
made a deal with me. I agreed to allow the use of MY number outside of
the state of California (my 800 number is CA only) for a limited
period. Also, when I get that occasional wrong number from within
California, I refer the caller to the correct number.

It is amazing how one's attitude can be affected by willingness for
cooperation. I still have a bad taste in my mouth over the Hilton
inconvenience, but I gladly give out the glass treatment company's
correct number to callers (calling on my nickel, no less) several
times a week.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (gordon hlavenka)
Subject: Re: Can't Reach ANAC or 700-555-4141 From My Dorm
Organization: Vpnet Public Access
Date: Sat, 04 Jul 1992 16:18:11 GMT


> 711-XXXX (whereas elsewhere 711-anything other than 6633 doesn't work,
> it gives strange tones or silence) ... (and 711 is not a "real" exchange).

Well, in my area (708-573) "enhanced" 911 was turned on on 9-11-91.
Sometime in August of '91 (for the math-impaired, this would have been
_before_ September 11) I was playing around at the office in response
to another post on this group, dialed '711', and was connected to 911!
Stupid me, I hung up immediately.  The operator called back and
interrogated our receptionist.  The operator wouldn't hang up until
someone had gone to each office and made sure everyone was OK.  This
was chalked up as a glitch in the new 911 equipment and/or our cheap
office key-phones.

A bit off the subject, last week I actually had need to call 911 from
my house (708-832).  We have been paying a $.50 surcharge for quite
some time to cover the "enhanced" 911 that is (supposedly) in service
now.  When I called, the operator had to ask me for my address and
phone number!  I'm _really_ impressed (not).


Gordon S. Hlavenka   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Alan Gilbertson)
Subject: Re: Telecomics
Date: Sat, 04 Jul 92 22:58:08 EDT
Organization: FidoNet node 1:3603/230 - CSFSO Telecomm, Clearwater FL


Monday June 29 1992, David Leibold writes:

> Any other examples of telecom references in the funnies?

My all-time favorite is a Gary Larson (The Far Side) cartoon showing
two cows in their living room.  In the foreground, and telephone is
ringing.  One of the cows looks at the phone and says, with a brittle
smile that suggests forced cheerfulness in the face of utter defeat:
"Well, there it goes again, and here we sit without opposable thumbs."


Alan

Internet: [e-mail]
UUCP: ...!uunet!myrddin!tct!psycho!230!Alan.Gilbertson

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

From: [e-mail] (Scott Fybush)
Subject: Involuntary Phone Number Changes
Date: Sat, 4 Jul 92 15:56:47 EDT


The recent thread on involuntary phone number changes has set me
thinking about three which I recall involving Rochester Telephone.

The first took place circa 1975.  It was part of a general realignment
of service areas with RochTel, which also moved Canandaigua NY from
315 to 716.  ThisCanandaigua customers at least kept their old
numbers.  Customers in Avon were not as lucky.  They were moved, en
masse, from 716-926 to 716-226.  I don't know why this was done.
[Around the same time, the service number was changed from 113 to 611
for these customers as well.]

The second took place around 1982.  The University of Rochester had
heretofore used part of 716-275, I believe 275-2000 through 275-8999.
U of R internal users dialed four digits for on-campus calls.  Around
this time, the system at the University was expanded.  To give the U
of R the rest of 275, residential and business customers off-campus
had to be moved from 275-0XXX, 275-1XXX, and 275-9XXX.  I knew a few
people with 275-9XXX numbers.  They were all moved to 461-9XXX, with
the same XXX.  Thus, WWWG radio at 275-9212 moved to 461-9212.  As 461
had been in service for a few years already, I don't know why the 9XXX
block was still available.  The U of R dialing system, now on a ROLM
PBX, requires five digits for on campus calls, 5-XXXX for 275 numbers,
4-XXXX for 274 numbers (the U of R has only part of the 274 exchange),
and 7-XXXX for some on-campus numbers which can't be dialed from
outside using DID.

[A similar change happened at Brandeiss University around 1986.  The
campus [PBX/Centrex?] on 617-647 was replaced with a new Northern
Telecom SlSL-1 PBX.  To clear enough numbers for the new PBX, which
would for the first time put a phone in every dorm room, the whole
campus was moved to 617-736.]

The third move affected the greatest number of customers.  It took
place around 1983.  The "Rochester" dialing area is actually served by
several different COs.  Each has the same local dialing area (quite
large at that), but a customer in the town of Brighton, served by the
244-256-271-274-275-442- 461-473 CO, would have to get FX service to
have a number on any other "Rochester" CO, and vice-versa.  That
Brighton CO originally also served an area along NY route 252 in the
northern part of the town of Henrietta.  (The southern part of
Henrietta is served by the distinct "Henrietta" exchange, 716
321-334-359, with a different local calling area.)

In 1983, with the opening of the Marketplace Mall, the northern
Henrietta area exploded with growth.  Roch Tel was forced to put in a
new CO for the area, originally 716 424-427- 475 (with 475 also
serving the Rochester Institute of Technology PBX), later adding 272
and 292.  All the customers in the area were forced to change their
numbers.  Most of the new 424-427 numbers did not even have the same
last four digits as the old "Brighton" numbers!  I've never seen
anything like *that* happen in RochTel land.

For the most part, RochTel is pretty stable with numbers.  My
grandmother has had the same number, originally GR3-XXXX, now
473-XXXX, since 1955, at two locations.  My parents have had the same
442-XXXX number since 1969.


Scott Fybush -- [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Bill Nickless)
Date: Sat, 4 Jul 92 12:22:51 -0500
Subject: ISDN Availability to Residence Customers in Chicago Area


I just got off the phone with a "data specialist" who got my name from
Illinois Bell.  She was most helpful and informative.  It seems that
there really are two tariffs in place for ISDN service from Illinois
Bell; one for Centrex customers and one that's not.  It further seems
that if you get the "Direct ISDN" tariffed offering, it's only about
$100 installation charge for Basic Rate Interface (2B+D).  It's
sensitive to usage, to the tune of $6/hour.  Of course, if you use the
"Centrex" offering, and set up "extensions" out in the various places
you want to connect, then it's not sensitive to usage.

Evidently Ameritech has committed to 80% of subscribers having ISDN
available by 1995.  This is supposedly better than the other RBOC's,
but nothing like Germany or Japan.

So I guess I'm retracting my grumbling.  I can still gripe that the CO
that serves my house isn't ISDN capable, but it might/should happen
eventually.

Thanks to Neil R. Ormos for giving me the incentive to really track
down the information.  He had different information than I did, so I
was forced to track it down.


Bill Nickless  System Support Group  <[e-mail]>  [phone]

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

Date: Sat, 04 Jul 92 21:02:09 -0700
From: David W. Barts <[e-mail]>
Subject: NER-VOUS Gives Time of Day (Was Jane Barbie)


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Dave
Niebuhr) writes:

> I just tried 9-637-1212 (Area Code 516) from my office phone and got a
> recording stating that I had dialed my own number in Area Code 718
> (Brooklyn (Kings County), Queens, or the start of 718 in the Bronx).

NER-VOUS may not be the time-of-day number in NYC, but it will give
the time of day in Boston (at least it did last winter when I tried
dialing 1-617-NER-VOUS).

And the 13 cents that call to Boston cost me was less than the
1-206-976-1616 time-of-day ripoff listed in the Seattle phone book
would have been.  (As as aside, I almost never dial time-of-day
services anyhow -- I just tune in WWV, WWVH, or CHU on one of my four
shortwave sets.)


David Barts  N5JRN        UW Civil Engineering, FX-10
[e-mail]      Seattle, WA  98195

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

Subject: Factoid from _Playboy_
Date: 04 Jul 92 17:46:14 PDT (Sat)
From: [e-mail]"Raw Data"column (Stephen Friedl)


        _Playboy_, August, 1992


    "Reach out and put the touch on someone:
    18,000,000 unsolicited sales calls are
    made to private homes in the US each day"


Stephen J Friedl | Software Consultant | Tustin, CA |     [phone]
3b2-kind-of-guy  | I speak for me ONLY |   KA8CMY   | uunet!mtndew!friedl

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #530
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa16281;
          5 Jul 92 11:52 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA19839
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 5 Jul 1992 10:07:25 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA30249
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 5 Jul 1992 10:07:17 -0500
Date: Sun, 5 Jul 1992 10:07:17 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #531

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 5 Jul 92 10:07:10 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 531

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    700 Easyreach Service Should be Called Hard to Reach (Carl Neihart)
    Whose DDS DSU/CSU Does 57.6 Async? (Barton F. Bruce)
    AT&T Educational Presentations by Satellite (Bill Mayhew)
    Arranging For "Local" Calls Between Adjacent Exchanges (Daniel Schneider)
    Calling US From Mexico ([e-mail])
    Sky Pager (Adam Mottershead)
    More on ISDN Availability to Residence Customers in Chicago Area (N. Ormos)
    +__ 5551212 (was 1-xxx-555-1212 From Overseas?) (Carl Moore)
    Surplus Phone Stuff Sources? (Tom Adams)
    Payphones With Bogus DTMF Tones? (Peter Clitherow)
    Vendor Products for 56K Circuits (Kathy Rinehart)
    Candidates E-Mail Addresses (Robert Virzi)
    Any Experience With New Amex Gold Card/MCI Service? (Henry Mensch)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Carl Neihart)
Subject: 700 Easyreach Service Should be Called Hard to Reach
Organization: gerber alley
Date: Sun, 05 Jul 1992 09:20:04 GMT

I just got my info from AT&T on my personal 700 number recently.

Unfortunately, after getting the info on the 700 number, the whole
reason I got the number in the first place was negated -

I got the number because an easy-to-remember seven-digit 700 number
was mine for the taking.  I thought it was worth $7 per month to have
folks be able to remember my number easily.

However, when AT&T mailed me the info, along with it came que cards to
send to my freinds & relatives, so they would know how to dial me.

It turns out AT&T has implemented the 700 service such that only those
phones connected to AT&T as their default equal access carrier can
call a 700 number; all other customers must dial 102880 before dialing
700-xxxxxxx.  This means I must give different dialing instructions to
folks depending on who provides their long distance service, and even
if someone has AT&T as their carrier at home, they still must know how
to dial me using the long equal access method should they be
unfortunate enough to get a payphone not connected to AT&T.

This is a radical departure from 800 and 900 service, where the caller
does not need to keep track of the carrier that provides the service
for the person/company they are calling, they simply dial the number.

When I asked the person at AT&T why they did it this way, they said it
was the only way it could be done, because of the complex network
required to setup 700 service.  Something like "800 numbers only go to
one place, whereas 700 numbers can go anywhere, depending on where the
phone is forwarded to."  Right.  Like I really believe that answer!

I think the real reason AT&T set it up this way is a marketing gimic;
gee what better way to get people talking about your company, than to
make them say they are using you when giving out a phone number!  Like
it is no longer OK to say "Yeah, call be at xxx-xxxxxxx"; now you must
say "yeah, call me at xxx-xxxxxxx if you're smart enough to be on
AT&T, and if you aren't on AT&T, select AT&T for the call using 102880
then dial xxx-xxxxxxx.  And, oh, by the way, to simplify your dialing
procedure, switch to AT&T."

I find this to be a troubling decision on AT&T's part.  Sure they're
upset at the divestiture; sure they're upset they have to go drum up
business like everyone else instead of having it dropped in their lap,
but making users say what service provider they're using, and telling
others how to get the same service provider before calling them, this
is taking it too far.  We want to have one phone system in the U.S.,
not dozens.

I simply do not understand why the 700 service cannot be implemented
like the 800 or 900 service, where the number is dialed simply using
1+x00+xxxxxxx without worrying about who is the supplier of the
service ...

Gee what a nightmere for all our Rolodeck programs, now, besides
specifying area code, we must also specify carrier!

Just my two cents worth ...


Regards,

Carl Neihart       Gerber Alley Technologies
6575 The Corner's Parkway   Norcross, GA  30091
404-441-7793 x2916 (voice)  404-662-5674  (fax)
[e-mail] or [e-mail] (email)


[Moderator's Note: Well seriously, you should believe her, because
that is the way 700 is set up and it was Bellcore, not AT&T which made
it that way. Every carrier is entitled to use *all* of the 700 space.
Of necessity, one must specify which carrier's 700 space you wish to
use. The default is always for the carrier you are subscribed to. The
difference with 800/900 service is that the prefix (three digits which
follow the area code) designate the carrier; thus a 10xxx code on the
front end would be redundant or contradictory. Regardless of the 10xxx
chosen (if your local telco even allows it), on 800/900 calls the
prefix detirmines the carrier. 800 is getting filled up, and 900 is
historically NOT where you would want to be located. Thus, 700 had to
be used.  Anyway, EasyReach is intended as a specialty service for
AT&T customers, not the world at large.  PAT]

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

From: Barton F. Bruce <[e-mail]>
Subject: Whose DDS DSU/CSU Does 57.6 Async?
Organization: Cambridge Computer Associates, Inc.
Date: 05 Jul 92 03:26:54 EDT
Organization: Cambridge Computer Associates, Inc.


When I didn't need one a few months ago, I kept seeing ads for
someone's DDS DSU/CSU that goes 57.6kb async (with the start and stop
bits stripped, the remainder easily fits on 56kb). Many go to 19.2 in
ASYNC mode, some go to 38.4kb, one I know of will have 57.6 in a few
months.

Now that I need it I can't find who makes the one that goes to 57.6.

Any pointers would be appreciated.

Email is best. If enough others ask, I will post.


Thanks,

Barton F. Bruce - [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Bill Mayhew)
Subject: AT&T Educational Presentations by Satellite
Organization: Northeastern Ohio Universities College of Medicine
Date: Sun, 05 Jul 1992 05:02:55 GMT


I had the day off today, so I was flipping around looking for
interesting stuff on my TVRO.  I happened upon an AT&T presentation on
Telstar 302, transponder 3H.  It was a basic marketing-like
presentation on the DMS-2000 SONET fiber terminal equipment.  For
telco outsider such as myself it was fairly interesting becuase it did
not go into minute technical detials.  AT&T acknowledged home and
business viewership outside of internal channels at the open of the
program; interesting.  The program aired 0930-1115 on 6/30/92.

At the end, they mentioned that AT&T eduational materials are
available by calling 800-TRAINER and selecting 2 on the voice mailbox.

The program was uplinked by a TOC in Dublin, OH.  If I get a chance,
I'll give them a call to see if a schedule is available; I'll send any
info I receive along to the telecom readership here.

The program was live, and thus much more enjoyable than watching a
pre-taped sanitized sales pitch.


Bill Mayhew      NEOUCOM Computer Services Department
Rootstown, OH  44272-9995  USA    phone: [phone]
[e-mail]   (140.220.1.1)

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

From: [e-mail] (Daniel L. Schneider)
Subject: Arranging For "Local" Calls Between Adjacent Exchanges
Date: 5 Jul 92 07:40:00 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Daniel L. Schneider)
Organization: The University of Texas at Austin, Austin TX


Is it possible to arrange "tollfree" calling to an area just outside
the local tollfree calling area?

I'll be taking a job in Killeen, TX (as a high school math teacher)
and I am working on figuring out how to maintain access to the
internet without paying long-distance tolls.  PC Pursuit seemed to be
the best solution, as they have a dial-up in Temple, TX which is in
the same county as Killeen.  Unfortunately, I just discovered that
telephone calls between Temple and Killeen are long-distance.

Killeen and Temple are in different, but adjacent exchanges.  They're
like 15 miles apart.  Normally, calls between the two are
long-distance.  Is there any way I can get around this?  My net access
depends on it.


Thanks,

Dan     [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (jason H)
Subject: Calling US From Mexico
Date: 05 Jul 92 02:35:20 GMT


I'm going to be travelling in Mexico for six weeks.  I will be mostly
in rural areas.  On previous trips, I have called the US from long
distance telephone offices that are normally in small towns.

What are some other ways to make calls from Mexico to the US?  Any advice
or slick tricks appreciated.


Jason  [e-mail]

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

Date: Sun, 05 Jul 1992 05:26:00 -0400
From: [e-mail] (Adam Mottershead)
Subject: Sky Pager
Organization: R-node Public Access UNIX System (416-636-2026) 24hrs.


Well, not being to versed in Paging Systems, I decided that I should
throw this question to the net.

Now, aside from traditional paging systems which use standard brodcast
techniques, can anyone give me information about Sky Pager?  From what
I understand it is some kind of Country Wide or Continent Wide paging
system.

Is this done through cell sites or is there satellites involved here?
Can it be received here in Canada?

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

Date: Sun, 5 Jul 92 07:12:17 -0600
From: "Neil R. Ormos" <[e-mail]>
Subject: More on ISDN Availability to Residence Customers in Chicago Area


In the above-referenced post, I recited pricing information I had
received from Illinois Bell for ISDN service to my residence.  Further
inquiries from other readers indicate that the information I posted
was ambiguous.  To set the record straight, the approximate costs were
(excluding tax):

  Installation--           $ 95 (one time).

  Monthly service charge-- $ 37 (per month). *

  Usage:

    for calls you receive, whether voice or data-- no charge;

    for "local" (apparently intra-LATA) data calls you
    originate-- $ 0.12 for the first minute and $ 0.10 for each
    additional minute;

    for "long-distance" data calls you originate-- as tariffed by
    the "long-distance" carrier;

    for voice calls you originate-- the "normal" charge for that
    call; i.e. the cost is the same as it would be if you originate
    the call on a regular analog line.


* The monthly charge varies depending on whether you want zero,
  one, or two of the B channels to be voice-capable; the
  above-cited price assumes one.

As always, your mileage may vary.  I am a residential telephone
subscriber of Illinois Bell, but I have no other business relationship
with them and am not authorized to speak for them.

Don't ya love the inconsistency between Illinois Bell's advertising
jingle ("Relax.  We're all connected.") and that legal disclaimer at
the bottom of their long-distance bills ("There is no connection
between Illinois Bell and AT&T")?

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

Date: Sun, 5 Jul 92 00:11:40 EDT
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject:  +__ 5551212 (was 1-xxx-555-1212 From Overseas?)


A Moderator's Note has mentioned [phone] .  Here is what I
have for +61 55:

61  Australia
    55    Warrnambool (Victoria)

I recall it also mentioned [phone] , but +670 is not Guam
(that's +671 and does not require city codes).  Under +670, I have
only one entry starting with 5, and it does not start with 55:

670 North Mariana Islands (Saipan)

    532 Rota Island

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

From: [e-mail] (Tom. Adams 529-7860)
Subject: Surplus Phone Stuff Sources?
Organization: Southwestern Bell Technology Resources, St.Louis, MO
Date: Sun, 5 Jul 92 05:42:26 GMT


Could anyone share sources of surplus or otherwise cheap telephone
supplies?  I could use a 66 block punch down tool, but don't want to
pay the $40 prices I see in catalogs.  There's a raft of other stuff
I'd like to keep an eye out for too.

I'd appreciate it if you could reply via mail.  I'm about to go on
vacation and this group expires too quickly here.  I'll summarize if
the subject is of general interest.


Tom Adams  [e-mail] [e-mail]   314-529-7860

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

From: [e-mail] (Peter Clitherow)
Subject: Payphones With Bogus DTMF Tones?
Reply-To: <bellcore![e-mail]>
Organization: Bellcore - IMS, Morristown, NJ
Date: Sun, 5 Jul 92 05:26:59 GMT


I was in Whitefish, Montana at a payphone a couple of days ago, (in a
casino, perhaps indicitively) trying to make a long distance call to
Missoula.  Being wise to the usual scams, I prefixed things with 10288+
but wasn't surprised to note that it was intercepted with "your call
cannot be completed as dialed".  What was strange though, was that the
DTMF tones appears to have been hacked: (after dialing numbers often
enough, you get to recognise the tones.)

Is this yet another way to finess upcoming FCC requirements for equal
access to all long distance carriers by allowing a "connection" but
forwarding incorrect information?


peter clitherow <[e-mail]> [phone], DQID: H07692
bellcore, 445 south street, room 2f-085, morristown, nj 07962

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Vendor Products For 56K Circuits
Date: 5 Jul 92 06:56:00 GMT
Organization: Arnold Engineering Development Center


I have an interest in DSUs for a possible upcoming application.  I
have access to the September, 1991 issue of "Data Communications", but
I am interested in any "real-life user" stories that anyone would like
to share with me.  Particularly, I am interested in any problems/bugs/
incompatabilites that were encountered, especially in the mixing of
vendors.  Should this application become a reality, an upgrade to T1
is a possibility, so I would like feedback regarding vendors with
flexible products.

My thanks in advance to anyone who would like to provide info.


Kathy Rinehart     [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Robert Virzi)
Subject: Candidates E-Mail Addresses
Date: 5 Jul 92 07:54:58 GMT
Organization: GTE Laboratories Incorporated, Waltham MA


Someone posted the following e-mail addresses for the presidential
candidates to the net.  Unfortunately, I lost the header to the
message and cannot give proper attribution.  The addresses, as posted,
are:

Jerry Brown:
[e-mail]
[e-mail]   [e-mail]

Pat Buchanan:
[e-mail]

George Bush:
[no public e-address known at this time]

Bill Clinton:
[e-mail]

Andre Marrou (Libertarian):
[e-mail]

Ross Perot:
[e-mail]

I tried to mail to Perot from a unix machine on the internet, and it
bounced.  The message indicated 'postage due', as shown below.

+ From: Electronic Postmaster <[e-mail]>
+ To: <[e-mail]>
+ Subject: Undeliverable message
+ Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
+ Status: RO
+
+ Re: ? EMDRPD - Mail Delivery Failure. Refused -- Postage Due. >EPX [71511,460]

I thought some readers of this Digest might want to know the
addresses.  I hope you have better luck than me getting to the
Compuserve accounts.  If there is a way to get from the Internet to
Compuserve, I'd like to hear about it.


Bob Virzi     [e-mail]    ...!harvard!bunny!rv01


[Moderator's Note: You *can* get from Internet to Compuserve using the
addresses you specified. It is always <[e-mail]>.
The catch is, CIS insists on being paid for all mail by someone.
Unlike many other services which handle each other's email at no
charge to the end user for incoming mail, CIS requires their users to
agree in advance to accept 'collect charges' on incoming mail from the
Internet. Obviously, Mr. Perot failed to give that permission on his
account. Since he has been known to read this Digest in the past,
perhaps he or an associate will see this and fix the CIS account so we
can write to him.

In a recent development in the Perot campaign, secret photos published
by the {World Weekly News} last week show Perot meeting with space
aliens. These are the same space aliens who met with Bush recently.
Thus far the aliens have expressed no interest in meeting with
Governor Clinton.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Henry Mensch)
Date: Sun, 5 Jul 92 06:20:25 -0700
Subject: Any Experience With New Amex Gold Card/MCI Service?
Reply-To: [e-mail]


This is a service which lets you use your Amex Gold Card, along with a
user-set pin, to make MCI LD calls which appear on your Amex bill.  I
just signed up today and should get my materials soon, but am
interested in impressions and anecdotes about this service.


Thanks,

# henry mensch / booz, allen & hamilton, inc.  / <[e-mail]>

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #531
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa18007;
          5 Jul 92 12:37 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA28991
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 5 Jul 1992 10:54:16 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA00422
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 5 Jul 1992 10:54:07 -0500
Date: Sun, 5 Jul 1992 10:54:07 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #532

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 5 Jul 92 10:54:08 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 532

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    1-800 DISA Hacking - A Waste of Time and Money (Bill Garfield)
    Alarm Bells (David Lesher)
    Company Uses Caller-ID to Identify Customers (Sam Israelit)
    Switch Question (Todd Langel)
    Suit Alleges Cellular Caused Brain Tumor (Robert Horvitz)
    International FAXes (Andy Rabagliati)
    Answering Machine Problem (Kelly Schwarzhoff)
    Way Cool MCI Mail Binary File Handling (John R. Levine)
    Trying to Locate Telenet Company (Drew Letcher)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: 1-800 DISA Hacking - A Waste of Time and Money
From: [e-mail] (Bill Garfield)
Date: Sun, 5 Jul 92 01:35:00 -0600
Organization: Ye Olde Bailey BBS - Houston, TX - 713-520-1569
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Bill Garfield)


I speculate that there is more than a slight possibility that the
hacker/phreaker sub-culture follows c.d.t. in hopes of one day
gleaning an occasional tidbit. Therefore, I will ask our Esteemed
Moderator to consider posting this, on the good chance it will
possibly reach the person to whom it directly applies.

As I write this, 5-05-92, one of my tandem machines has been playing
host for the past few weeks to a hackling from (212) 234-849x who has
been pounding randomly on one of my DISA ports which terminates on
1-800-755-xxxx using the PIN codes 3321, 6654, 7892, 8090, 9080 and
numerous others.

However, what the hackling has yet to figure out, is that there is
_no_ outbound path. There is _no_ back door.  The effort is futile. He
is wasting his time, my inwats dollars, and I assure you he is calling
a tremendous amount of attention to himself with his activities.

In hopes that the hackling might read this and then go away, I freely
offer the following points of information about the system upon which
the assualt is currently taking place.

The hackling is entering the machine on Trunk Group #27 which
terminates a full 1.544 span from Sprint.  Here are some notes about
Trunk Group 27 (1-800-755-xxxx):

All area code 809 is blocked - always has been, always will be.
All "011" international access is blocked.
All 10xxx access is blocked.
All 950-xxxx access is blocked.
All 1+555 and 1+NPA+555 d/a access is blocked. (a recent change)
  (there'll be no D/A call-completion at my expense ...)
All 1-700 access is blocked.  (also a recent change)
All 1-800 access is blocked.
All 1-900 access is blocked.
All 976-xxxx access is blocked.
All 1+ (toll) access is blocked.
All local (9+) access is blocked.
All zero-plus access is blocked.
Star (*) and pound (#) codes will take you *absolutely# nowhere.
The DTMF receivers do not understand AUTOVON and MF tones.
In-band ANI is being delivered in real time.
The four-digit PIN codes are for _accounting_ purposes, not security.

 From the above, an intelligent individual might reasonably conclude
that the DISA port the hackling is banging on is _inbound only_ for
intra-company trunks and extensions. That conclusion is 100% correct.
There is no way out.  The entire trunk group he is entering from is
_interconnect restricted_ from the outbound routes. Yes, of course
there _are_ outbound routes, but access to those require the caller to
enter the machine from an entirely different trunk group (different
1-800 number) than the hackling is now on. And that one, my friends,
is *well protected* from the likes of hacklings by multiple ring
answer delay, silent answer and 12-digit PIN numbers which are _very_
closely monitored. Right now the hackling is banging on a door which
exists only in his mind. There is no "doorway" available to Trunk
Group 27.  Certainly the amount of reorder tone he's received and the
number of intercept recordings he's been dumped will some day begin to
convey that message, won't it?

Persistent devil, I'll say that!

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

From: David Lesher <[e-mail]>
Subject: Alarm Bells
Date: Sun, 5 Jul 92 08:22:11 EDT
Reply-To: [e-mail]  (David Lesher)
Organization: NRK Clinic for habitual NetNews abusers - Beltway Annex


It looks as if is not just the newspapers that are worried about Ma's
deregulated subsidiaries. (Not that those of us reading c.d.t. ever
thought so.)

The 7-1-92 {Wall Street Journal} has a story about how the security
industry is worried.  Their concerns are familiar to readers here:

1) They are mostly small businesses - 98% of the 12,000 companies in
the US have less than ten employees. This compared to Bells with $10
billion revenues, and 50,000 employees.

2) The burglar and fire alarm service companies are captives of the
Bell's; They, at least at present, cannot lease service from an
alternative supplier. But just as John [keep PacBell shaking ;-]
Higdon has observed in the PBX and voicemail markets, the Bells are
free to offer services that guarantee them exclusive advantages.

3) Past history shows how the Bells' "arms-length" unregulated
subsidiaries are really mostly close-dancing, if not sleeping with,
the regulated LEC's.

4) An obvious Bell-advantage: they can use billing information to find
everyone who called a private alarm company's numbers, and solicit
them to change to "Illinois Bell & Security Company" or similar. While
we may say, "Can't ever happen!", Cincinnati Bell did such a search
for its largest customer, a soap and diaper company, not so long ago.

The story goes on to discuss how Nynex is presently in cahoots with
the Irish PTT, Telecom Eirann, to the extent that they are attempting
to get the government to change the EC's existing standards, so their
equipment will be approved.

In a paragraph anyone of us with the experience can relate to, Carl
Spiegel of Alarm Security Protection in Waterford, CT talks about
problem of trying to get a leased circuit fixed by Bell. Sure no
surprises there, folks ...


[e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: In fairness to CinBell however, they conducted the
search only because they were ordered to do so by a judge.   PAT]

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

Date: Sun, 5 Jul 1992 03:22:25 -0800
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Company Uses Caller-ID to Identify Customers


I recently had an interesting set of conversations. I called
MacConnection in New Hampshire to order a RAM upgrade. I told the
operator that I had an account with them and she said,"Mr. Israelit is
your address in Portland, OR still valid for the shipment?" I was a
bit surprised that she new all of this since I hadn't given her any
information. After talking with her for a little while I learned that:

1). They were using Caller-ID to present account information to the
operators as they answered the phone. Multiple phone numbers are
mapped into a given account [Note: This could cause some problems if a
number of people share a line in a small company, but that is probably
a small percentage of the businesses.]

2). They have the ability to ignore Caller-ID for a given customer if
that customer tells them to disable it. She said that very few people
have asked for this option. The company announced the use of Caller-ID
on the order desk in its catalog. [Shows how well I read the fine
print!]

3).  The system has really improved their customer service
capabilities significantly when it comes to tracing orders, tracking
addresses, etc.

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

From: [e-mail] (Todd Langel)
Subject: Switch Question
Date: Sun, 05 Jul 92 00:00:04 EDT
Organization: FidoNet node 1:3603/230 - CSFSO Telecomm, Clearwater FL


> Crews from AT&T and Southern Bell have been installing what I assume
> is a switch outside the building where I work.  A large (maybe
> 25'x10'x8') metal-and-concrete unit has been placed in a hole that was
> dug to accomodate it.  The outer part of the unit is a concrete shell
> that is split into a lower and upper half.  The lower half of the
> shell consists of a series of equipment racks framed together .  The
> metal frames are blue, and the equipment in them looks -- well-- like
> the equipment one sees in a phone closet, except more of it.  The top
> half of the concrete shell has what looks like a large air conditioner
> unit on the top that will be above ground when the hole is filled in.

> I have a couple of questions I hope someone might be kind enough to
> address.  The switch was an AT&T product (based on the number of
> things that came in AT&T boxes and the AT&T techs who were running
> around).  What kind of switch might this be?

A: If the bays you saw were blue at the top, with white doors, and
were about 2 1/2 feet wide and 2 feet deep, it is probably a 5ESS
Remote Switch.

B: If they were blue metal frames with equipment racks mounted in
them, and had white circuit packs showing, it is probably a Slick-5
Multiplexer / Or a Fiber Regen Bay.

(If you can, give a little more detail about the bays (ex. how many -
size - color)

The building you described sounds like a CEV Hut. I don't know the
exact meaning for CEV but I think it stands for Concrete Equipment
Vault.

As for the exchanges you asked about -- I don't know. That is usually
up to the local telco.


Todd   ... OFFLINE 1.38 * <T. Langel> <AT&T Network Systems - Tampa, Fl>
Internet: [e-mail]
UUCP: ...!uunet!myrddin!tct!psycho!230!Todd.Langel

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

Date: Sun, 05 Jul 92 00:26:04 MDT
From: Robert Horvitz <[e-mail]>
Subject: Suit Alleges Cellular Caused Brain Tumor


The lead article in the May/June issue of {Microwave News} says that
NEC America and GTE Mobilnet of Tampa have been sued for damages
arising from a brain tumor allegedly induced in Susan Reynard, who was
described as a frequent user of cellular phones.  The suit argues that
"The tumor was the result of radiation emitted by a cellular telephone
[or] the course of the tumor was accelerated and aggravated by the
emissions from the telephone ..."

This is believed to be the first lawsuit against a cellular phone
company concerning electromagnetic hazards.  Lawyer John Lloyd Jr.
said it was prompted by the deaths from brain cancer of three Tampa-area
doctors who were also described as heavy users of cellular phones.

According to David Reynard, Susan's husband, (quoting from {Microwave
NEWS}), "If an outline of the phone were superimposed on the [magnetic
resonance image of her head which] showed his wife's tumor, the
malignancy would be at the middle of the antenna ..."

The radio wavelengths used in cellular phones are similar to the
dimensions of the human skull, so that resonance could provide an
efficient transfer of energy.

{Microwave News} is the leading newsletter concerned with reports of
biological effects of non-ionizing radiation.  Subscriptions are $285
per year (6 issues; $315 per year outside the US).  Order from P.O.
Box 1799, Grand Central Station, New York, NY 10163 USA.  My only
connection to MN is as a reader for the past eight years.


Robert Horvitz   Prague, Czechoslovakia
Radio Consultant, The Soros Foundations

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

Date: Sun, 51 Jul 92 01:11:56 -0400
From: wizzy![e-mail] (Andy Rabagliati)
Subject: International FAXes


I was on vacation in West Africa earlier this year and had trouble
with my return tickets.

The easiest way to sort it out was to fax my sister in the US, and
accordingly went to the telephone office in Dakar, Senegal, with a
fax.

Too late I remembered that her fax machine is a Panasonic combined
answering machine and fax -- being a French-speaking country they
didn't understand the message and told me that it would not work. My
explanation (in quite reasonable French) was not good enough for them
 -- the girl behind the desk told me not to waste her time as she was
busy, and other customers patiently explained to me that it was an
answering machine. The French!!

So, I went to the other main office, and told them the fax machine was
a little different than most, and that they should press the send
button when they heard the ring ... ring ... ring. I thought that
might save a lot of explanation.

Of course she didn't, and held the handset up so I could hear it was
not a fax machine. I stabbed the # button, and they were back on
familiar territory, with a fax warble in the handset.

They charged 4,000 CFA ($16) per page to send, 300CFA ($1) per page to
receive. In comparison, a one minute phone call was about 1,500 CFA
($6).

So, when sending / receiving faxes to third world countries,

1) Use fax machines this end that sound like fax machines
2) No header pages, just cram it on as few pages as possible.

Oh, and another anomaly I found -- a letter from Nigeria to U.S.A was
1 Niara (6 cents) - how do they do that?


Cheers,

Andy Rabagliati | W.Z.I. RR1 Box 33, Wyalusing PA 18853 | [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Kelly Schwarzhoff)
Subject: Answering Machine Problem
Organization: HoloNet (BBS: 510-704-1058)
Date: Sun, 5 Jul 1992 03:28:07 GMT

I'm trying to install an answering machine on a phone system that runs
a key service unit -- the Panasonic KX-T61610 in particular.  The
problem is that I'm trying to set the answering machine to pick up the
SECOND line. Unfortunately, from what I can tell, it will only pick-up
the first line I believe. Any suggestions?


Kelly Schwarzhoff
Internet: [e-mail]   Fidonet: 1:161/445.0


[Moderator's Note: Most devices built to serve only one line usually
default to serving 'line one'. What you need to do is get in the
little box on the wall where the answering machine plugs into the
phone line and swap the red/green wires with the yellow/black wires so
that yellow/black feed out to the modular plug on 'line 1'. If you
have a phone on that line as well (through something like a 'Y-connector'
plugged in down there, then you will need to open the phone and make
an offsetting swap the other way to keep 'line 1' and 'line 2' in their
proper alignment on the phone itself (unless you don't mind having
them reversed on that instrument only.)

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

Subject: Way Cool MCI Mail Binary File Handling
Date: Sun, 5 Jul 92 00:34:44 EDT
From: John R. Levine <[e-mail]>


MCI Mail has recently upgraded their support for binary files in
messages.  They have long allowed you to send and receive binary
message segments, but only through the batch X.PC interface used by
programs like Lotus Express and Norton Desktop.

Now they've extended binary file support to the standard interactive
interface and the Internet gateway.  You can transfer binary or text
files interactively using zmodem or Kermit with the UPLOAD and
DOWNLOAD commands.  When a file with a binary piece is in your
mailbox, attempts to read it with the regular READ command warn you
that there's a binary part, so you use DOWNLOAD to retrieve it.  You
can download non-binary parts of messages as well, which is often a
more reliable way than screen capture to get MCI messages into your
local computer.

What's really cool is that binary attachments even work for files
passed to and from Internet mail!  Binary segments appear as uuencoded
data, e.g.

//BEGIN BINARY MAIL SEGMENT:
begin 600 filename
M'YV04][(D9,'1!(09-*0<7."#H@S91R*"3-F#8@Y;]ZX*2.'!8@V!<LDI",0
 ...
end
//END BINARY MAIL SEGMENT

(If you're not familiar with it, uuencode is a de-facto standard way
to disguise binary data as text by encoding three 8-bit characters as
the low six bits of four ASCII characters.)  If you send a message in
this format to <user>@mcimail.com, the gateway decodes the binary part
and turns it into a binary message segment.

They've also changed their rates to make large messages cheaper:

     1-500 characters                  $.50
     501-1,000 characters          add  .10
     1,001-10,000 characters       add  .10/1,000 characters
     10,000 characters or greater  add  .05/1,000 characters

Finally, they've added 9600 bps V.32 MNP, access, which is handy since
binary files can be fairly large.  The number is 800-967-9600 and
there appears to be no connect time charge, the same as with their
other 800 numbers.

Kudos to MCI for doing such a thorough job on this useful new feature.


Regards,

John

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

From: [e-mail] (Drew Letcher)
Subject: Trying to Locate the Telenet Company
Organization: University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, USA
Date: Sun, 5 Jul 1992 00:02:00 GMT


Does anyone know of how to contact the company that runs the Telenet
public data network or other similar systems?  We would like to hook
up a host to the system so people can dial-in to our system just like
people can dial-in to CompuServe.


Drew Letcher            | Specializing in PC network application programming.
Systems Programmer      | DOS, Netware, NetBIOS, IPX/SPX, etc.
[e-mail]  |


[Moderator's Note: Telenet has been part of Sprint for a few years
now. They are also the folks who operate PC Pursuit. Their corporate
office is in Reston, VA. Phone [phone].  But I'll tell you their
connections are not cheap ... you need *big* traffic to justify the
connection. PC Pursuit on the other hand is a real bargain.   PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #532
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa19293;
          5 Jul 92 13:11 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA32082
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 5 Jul 1992 11:31:04 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA31768
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 5 Jul 1992 11:30:55 -0500
Date: Sun, 5 Jul 1992 11:30:55 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #533

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 5 Jul 92 11:31:00 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 533

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    More Details on Canadian Long Distance Competition (David Leibold)
    Phone Keypad Interfaces to Enhanced Telephone Services (H. Shrikumar)
    Data Out Port on Caller ID Box (Rick S. Tuzinowski)
    Caller ID via Switch Emulation? (Russ Latham)
    Bell South, NT Test New Services and Screen-Based Phone (FIDO via J Decker)
    Digital Cellular (FIDO via Jack Decker)
    Matching Vanity Phone Number and Zip Code (Nigel Allen)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sun, 05 Jul 92 08:26:57 EDT
From: David Leibold <[e-mail]>
Subject: More Details on Canadian Long Distance Competition


I reviewed much of the document known as Telecom Decision CRTC 92-12,
otherwise known as the decision to allow competitive long distance
carriers in Canada. Some interesting details come out of this
decision:

* Unitel, BCRL and Bell Canada/Stentor would need carrier
identification codes (CICs) to allow for 10xxx and 950.xxxx dialing.
Unitel wants three CICs, specifically. Bell Canada mentioned the
concern that CICs will soon exhaust and that Bellcore is trying to
reclaim old CICs and restrict carriers to only one CIC.

* Unitel and BCRL also want prefix codes for 800 and 900 service, with
at least one NXX code request per carrier per service code (ie. 800,
900).  As for the 700 service code (currently in the U.S. each carrier
can assign NXXs in 700 freely), Bell Canada wants to have the 700 NXXs
in Canada co-ordinated by a proposed industry numbering plan group. It
appears that Stentor (formerly Telecom Canada consortium) "will assign
discrete NXXs within the 800 and 900 SACs in accordance with industry
practice." Stentor is Bellcore's agent in Canada with respect to
numbering plan matters.

* Operator services are to be provided by the pre-subscribed (ie.
default) carrier. Bell Canada did propose to have all 0+ traffic sent
through its own TOPS switches where carrier preference will be handled
from there, under a scheme known as Billed Party Preference (BPP). The
CRTC decided that the BPP method would not be introduced at the
outset, while prohibiting any interexchange carriers from connecting
payphones unless tariffs are submitted that incorporate "adequate
consumer protection in respect of rates, access and confidentiality of
consumer information."

* The CRTC requires all payphones to be able to access all carriers.
For any payphones to be operated by Unitel, such phones are to provide
access to local emergency (ie. 911) services.

* Directory Assistance handling was a point of much agreement between
the competitors and the incumbent telcos. Unitel and BCRL proposed to
deliver 1+NPA+555.1212 calls over their networks to the terminating
area code where the telco's Directory Assistance service would accept
such calls. 800 Directory Assistance would be handled by Stentor as it
is today, with Bell Canada supporting the addition of any Unitel 800
numbers to Stentor's 800 number database.

* Unitel would bill calls from its default customers (ie.
pre-subscribed phones to Unitel's service). Unitel wanted Bell
Canada/BC Tel/existing telcos to handle the billing for "casual" calls
(ie. from phones defaulting to a carrier other than Unitel) or calls
billed to cards of the existing telcos. The telcos, needless to say,
weren't thrilled at the prospect of having to handle some of the
billing for Unitel. Unitel, in response, gave Southern New England
Telephone as an example of a company that provides billing services to
carriers under equal access arrangements.  Furthermore, Unitel stated
that Bell Canada, BC Tel, etc. already performed such billing
functions for U.S. carriers, by reason of their interconnection.

The CRTC weighed a few approached to the billing problem and decided
that the respondent telcos (Bell, BC Tel, etc) should bill and collect
charges for casual or non-default calls to competing carriers. Refusal
to allow such a billing arrangement would imply an undue advantage for
the telcos mainly due to the highly integrated nature of their billing
systems.  There were also privacy and security concerns over passing
billing information from telco databases to competing carriers.

* Unitel was denied its request to gain access to telco calling card
databases to verify card numbers and to allow for Unitel calls to be
placed on the telco calling card tab. The CRTC noted that calling
cards are used mainly for long distance and could be considered a
competitive tool, though calling card validation to U.S. services was
seen as a convenience to Canadian travellers, rather than a reason to
grant Unitel such validation access.

* However, the CRTC did approve of allowing carriers to have access to
line information database (LIDB) information, since collect and
third-party calls have need of such verification to avoid fraud (eg.
attempts to call payphones collect need to be blocked). The exact
method of providing such verification was to be determined, as long as
such information could be obtained by carriers without undue
difficulty, while keeping confidentiality and security concerns in
check.

* CRTC has mandated joint technical committees (JTCs) among
competitors and telcos to ensure proper relations and to ensure
orderly introduction of new services.

And those are some of the more technical details on how Canadian long
distance competition will develop, notwithstanding appeals to the
decision as announced by Bell Canada and BC Tel.


[e-mail]

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

Date: Sun, 5 Jul 92 03:15:27 GMT
From: [e-mail] (H. Shrikumar)
Subject: Phone Keypad Interfaces to Enhanced Telephone Services


> That is, *70 seems to pretty universally suppress call waiting, but I
> don't know if the code to retrive messages from your answering service
> is the same everywhere, North-America-wide, or just across a single
> company's jurisdiction.  Are there FCC standards for this, or CCITT
> standards?

Not the kind of thing that CCITT cares to standardize. Even the
numbering plan is left to each administration. Only country codes are
specified, but even then, as we all know, international access codes
are left to local administration.

CCITT does not believe in the dilution of national boundaries.

BTW, it was interesting to hear abot PCS being tried in Ameritech
areas. Wish they had selected this for India ... rather than the so
very expensive GSM.

(not that the GSM plan has taken off yet !! :-)


shrikumar ( [e-mail] )

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Data Out Port on Caller ID Box
Date: 5 Jul 92 01:56:02 EST
Organization: LANcc, Louisville KY


I'm using a Bell South Products Caller-ID box (MHE20).  It has a four
pin modular jack on the back labeled "data out" but the manual gives
no pinouts.  Anybody know how it might be interfaced with a serial
port?  After calling Bell South and talking to another place about it
I have been unsuccessful in finding the pinouts.  It says in the
manual "Incorrect serial connection will damage the unit" or else I'd
just start trying combinations.

Any help would be appreciated.


[e-mail] (coplex!lancc!rick)   [e-mail]
[e-mail]
Rick S. Tuzinowski * PO Box 5296 * Louisville KY 40255

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

From: [e-mail] (Russ Latham)
Subject: Caller ID via Switch Emulation?
Date: Sun, 5 Jul 92 00:40:27 CDT


Someone was recently telling me that Radio Shack had a device on the
market not too long ago (before it was pulled for legal reasons) that
you could connect to your home telephone line, and when someone would
call you, the device would send a message request to the terminating
central office switch requesting the calling number identification.
This was done in the same way that the terminating CO would request
that info from the originating CO.  The switch would then send the
identification data on your home phone line, for decoding by the
device.  The device was then able to display the phone number of the
person calling you (basically the same thing that Caller-ID does).

Is it possible to send such requests through the standard home phone
line, to the CO telephone switch?  I personally don't believe it can
be done.  Any information appreciated ...


Thanks,
Russ Latham   Motorola, Inc.
[e-mail]   -or- [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: Believe me, if there were such a device on the
market, and if it were possible to get the calling party's number by
merely asking the CO to give it to you, such a device would be the
best seller in Radio Shack's history. I have never seen anything like
this in the RS catalog. Anyone want to comment on whether or not it is
possible to trick a CO into handing you that information?   PAT]

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

Date: Sun, 5 Jul 92 00:52:08 CST
From: Jack Decker <[e-mail]>
Subject: Bell South, NT Test New Services and Screen-Based Phones


This message was seen in the Fidonet MDF echo:

* From : Dan J. Rudiak, 1:134/68 (22 Jun 92 06:22)
* To   : All
* Subj : Bell South, NT Test New

920616 BellSouth, NT Test New Services and Screen-based Phones

Chicago, June 16 -- BellSouth and Northern Telecom today announced a
market test in which consumers will use display-based residential
telephone services designed to make calling features easy and
convenient to use.

The market test involves advanced services provided on a DMS-SuperNode
central office switch and prototype screen-based phones, all from
Northern Telecom.  The screen on the phones will display call options
generated by the switch in BellSouth's central office.  During the
test, BellSouth will gather market research data on combinations of
services, including Call Waiting, Caller ID, Caller ID-Deluxe (calling
name identification) and the company's MemoryCall service (voice
mail), as well as data on some new services.  Approximately 500
customers will participate in the test.

This is the first network-based market test of interactive services
consistent with the proposed framework of Bellcore's Analog Display
Services Interface (ADSI) Technical Advisory.  ADSI calls for service
information to be delivered to a user's phone using existing Custom
Local Area Signaling Service (CLASS) technology and from the phone
using touch-tone dialing.  Because ADSI uses existing technology,
phone companies and other information service providers can deploy
services without investing in new computer platforms.

"In developing the phone of the future, it is important for us to
produce equipment that is easy to use, works well with current and
future services and meets cost expectations," said David Thomson,
general manager, Residential and Business Terminals and Services,
Northern Telecom Inc.

Customers will use a new enhanced service combining Call Waiting with
Caller ID that lets them see who is calling without interrupting their
current call.  In some of these homes, the customer will be able to
push one of the network-defined buttons to deliver a short message to
the second caller or direct the caller to leave a message.  Customers
will be able to see both the incoming calling number and the name
associated with that number on their telephone sets.

Additional features to be tested include Call Log and Visual Call
Block.  Call Log allows customers to review the names and numbers
associated with unanswered calls.  Unlike call logging on today's
Caller ID telephones and adjuncts, the network-based Call Log feature
also records calls that were forwarded to another number or which
received a busy signal.  Visual Call Block lets customers view and
edit a list of numbers associated with callers from whom they do not
wish to receive calls.  Today's Call Block service requires users to
edit this list by listening to audio commands and pushing the
appropriate keys.

Jack Huber, assistant vice president, Market Research for BellSouth
Telecommunications, Inc., said that listening to customers is crucial
in the development of new services in the 1990s.  "We have a modern
network that can deliver a number of services to the home," he said.
"If we are to be successful, however, we must know what services
people want and -- just as important -- what they are willing to pay
for them.  We hope that this test will result in new service offerings
for our customers."

"This market test will demonstrate the power of creating a link
between public network-based services and telephones in the home,"
said Paul Brant, assistant vice president, Northern Telecom Public
Networks.

The prototype phones used in the test feature a three-line screen that
displays prompts and context-sensitive soft-keys to make activating
and using services easy.  Soft keys, similar to buttons found on bank
automatic teller machines, change their function as the user
progresses through a service.  The user can also move around the
screen using vertical and horizontal scroll buttons.  A speaker lets
the user monitor the progress of a call and respond to both visually
displayed and audible prompts.

BellSouth Telecommunications, Inc., with headquarters in Atlanta and
Birmingham, provides unified direction and support for the local
telecommunications operations of BellSouth in the southeastern United
States.

BellSouth Telecommunications, Inc. does business as Southern Bell in
North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia and Florida and as South
Central Bell in Kentucky, Tennessee, Alabama, Mississippi and
Louisiana.  These companies serve over 18 million local telephone
lines and provide local exchange and intraLATA (Local Access and
Transport Area) long distance service over one of the most modern
telecommunications networks in the world.

Northern Telecom is a leading supplier of telecommunications switching
equipment to telephone companies and offers a full range of CLASS,
Custom Calling Features and other advanced services.  Northern Telecom
has been manufacturing and marketing telephones since 1882.  This
market test supports the company's goal of simplifying access to
telephone network features and services.


 * BWave/QWK v0.96 * Huc Accedit Zambonis.
--- Maximus/2 2.00
 * Origin: The Computer Connection BBS (1:134/68)

                        --------

Jack Decker   [e-mail]    FidoNet 1:154/8

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

Date: Sun, 5 Jul 92 00:50:35 CST
From: Jack Decker <[e-mail]>
Subject: Digital Cellular


The following message was seen in the Fidonet MDF echomail conference.
AGT = Alberta Government Telephone, the provincial telephone company
in Alberta.

* From : Bill Boogaart, 1:134/14 (26 Jun 92 21:38)
* To   : All
* Subj : Digital Cellular

AGT Cellular yesterday announced the first North American digital
cellular service, and the world's first cellular service meeting the
industry endorsed TDMA standards. Digital cellular customers benefit
from a higher level of call security, improved network access,
improved hand-off between adjacent cells, and noise free digital
transmission. The first to benefit are the AGT cellular subscribers in
Calgary, with the service becoming available to the rest of Alberta
before the end of August. The new digital cellular phones will operate
in both digital and analog modes. Present analog phones will be
compatible with the digital technology until the year 2000 when analog
service will be phased out.

Bill      msged 2.07
Origin: Gorre & Daphetid BBS - Calgary AB Canada HST DS (1:134/14)

                        -----------

Jack Decker   [e-mail]   FidoNet 1:154/8

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

Date: Sun, 5 Jul 1992 03:29:44 -0400
From: [e-mail] (Nigel Allen)
Subject: Matching Vanity Phone Number and Zip Code
Organization: Echo Beach, Toronto


The American College of Emergency Physicians has a telephone number
ending in 911. (The full number is [phone].) I thought at first
that this might be an amusing coincidence, but then I saw that the
group's mailing address was P.O. Box 619911, Dallas TX 75261-9911:
both the P.O. Box number and the nine-digit zip code also end in 911.

(Somehow, I had thought that nine-digit zip codes ending in 99xx were
reserved for internal U.S. Postal Service use, but I guess not. The
last three or four digits of the nine-digit zip code for a P.O. Box
normally match the last three or four digits of the P.O. Box itself.)


Nigel Allen  [e-mail]  via FidoNet node 1:250/98

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #533
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa22151;
          5 Jul 92 14:17 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA17605
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 5 Jul 1992 12:38:23 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA30689
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 5 Jul 1992 12:38:15 -0500
Date: Sun, 5 Jul 1992 12:38:15 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #534

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 5 Jul 92 12:38:17 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 534

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Beware: The AT&T "Call Me" Card Works to *ANY* Number! (Phydeaux)
    Sprint (Actually MCI) Bill Case (Charlie Mingo)
    Check Digits (Rich Goldschmidt)
    Looking For SS-7 Books (James R. Saker Jr.)
    Re: ISDN Mailing Lists (Mike Bray)
    Re: With NETel, is it an UPgrade or a DOWNgrade? (Jonathan A. Solomon)
    Re: Funny Advertising Goof-ups (Wrong Numbers) (Charles Stephens)
    Re: Pac*Bell Posturing (John Higdon)
    Re: Cellular / Video Help! (John Rice)
    Re: NER-VOUS Actually NER-xxxx (Patrick Tufts)
    Re: ISDN Availability to Residence Customers in Chicago Area (John Higdon)
    Re: Strange Message on Answering Machine (Jim Rees)
    Re: Payphones With Bogus DTMF Tones? (David Sternlight)
    Re: Telecomics (Charles Stephens)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sun, 5 Jul 1992 00:11:09 -0700
Subject: Beware: The AT&T "Call Me" Card Works to *ANY* Number!
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: E 4th St Home For The Overeducated Underemployed - Chicago Div.
From: [e-mail] (Phydeaux)


Some of you may remember about a month ago when I posted that a friend
had called me from a GTE Airphone on an AT&T 'call me' card I had
given him.  Well, today our phone bill arrived and the plot thickened.
Over $50 in AT&T calls from GTE Airphone appeared on the June phone
bill.  Only one of these calls was made to the "one number" authorized
for the card.  The rest were made to numbers across the USA.

First AT&T told me that it was impossible for the all of calls to have
been made with the "call me" card because it was only authorized to my
number.  (Why did they think I was calling?)  The AT&T representative
told me, "The calls must have been made using your Illinois Bell
card."  Sure, when all else fails pass the buck.  After some
insistance on my part she checked into it a little further and told me
that "There is a small possibility that GTE Airphone let the calls go
through.  So we will credit you for $43.26..."  all but the one call
made to my house.  Fine.  20 minutes on the phone for them to admit to
a *possible* mistake and to credit me.  What *really* got my goat was
what she told me next.

It seems that even though the card is a new-fangled AT&T card with
*no* trace of what my home number on it, and contrary to *ALL* the
marketing hype about how the card can *ONLY* be used to call *one*
number, it can "... Still be used by some carriers to numbers other
than the one specified." Obviously this includes GTE Airphone.  I
thought the whole idea of these new cards was so that the billing
verification *HAD* to go through AT&T, who would catch fraudulent use.
I mean what's the point in issuing millions of new cards and touting a
wonderful new system of verification if you're not going to check the
verification completely?

To top this all off, I was told that they "COULD NOT GUARANTEE" that
additional calls to numbers other than the one "call me" number would
be blocked and that A) If I did not like this I could cancel my card
and B) If any such charges *did* appear on the bill that they would
*NOT* give me credit for them.

I could go into my recent experiences with AT&T's Universal Card
customer "service" but I won't ...


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Charlie Mingo)
Date: Sun, 05 Jul 1992 02:10:19 -0500
Subject: Sprint (Actually MCI) Bill Case


[e-mail] (David Lesher) writes:

> This is a bit out of date, but some time back there was a thread about
> a "Fatal Attraction" type case in which a Sprint bill was a vital
> piece of evidence. The defense introduced one bill, and the
> prosecutation another. The defense's version came under scrutiny
> because it lacked the proper advertising blurp line for that month.

> Well, I read that the defendant was convicted, and additional charges
> were pending regarding forgery of evidence.

Just to fill in a few details ...

   The woman's name was Carolyn (?) Warmus, a public school teacher
who was having an affair with another (married) teacher.  She was
charged when her lover's wife was murdered.  This all took place back
in 1986 (or thereabouts).

   The first trial was two years ago.  The defense introduced an MCI
(not Sprint) bill to establish that she was in Connecticut when the
prosecution witness had testified she was purchasing ammo in New
Jersey (using the identification of Warmus's co-worker who had had it
stolen the day before).

   The prosecution tried to discredit the MCI bill, but the jury was
still hung, so they had to have a retrial.  At the second trial a few
months ago, she was convicted of murder (with no phone bill in
evidence) and she was sentenced just last week to (I believe) 25 to
life.  I don't think they bother going after lifers for perjury.

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

From: [e-mail] (Rich Goldschmidt)
Subject: Check Digits
Date: 5 Jul 92 16:53:11 GMT
Organization: Federal Judicial Center, Washington, D.C.


I am looking for source code for a relatively well know and understood
problem.  I want to use check digits to make sure that data entry of a
relatively short string of numbers (ten digits or less) using either
OCR or typing does not create an error in the data.  It must be
sensitive to transposed adjacent digits, the most common typing error.
I need code to add the check digits to the outgoing string, and code
to verify the accuracy of the incoming data entered.  Any pointers are
welcomed.

Please respond via email since I do not usually read all the groups
posted to.  Thanks.


Rich Goldschmidt: uunet!fjcp60!golds or [e-mail]
Disclaimer: I don't speak for the government, and it doesn't speak for me...

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

From: [e-mail] (James R. Saker Jr.)
Subject: Looking For SS-7 Books
Organization: University of Nebraska at Omaha
Date: Sun, 5 Jul 1992 00:16:59 GMT


I'm looking for some good reading material on Signaling System 7 (SS7)
and also on packet switching. Could anyone recommend recent books
they've read on these subjects?


Thanks.

Jamie Saker    [e-mail]

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

Date: Sun, 05 Jul 92 00:14:08 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Mike Bray)
Subject: Re: ISDN Mailing Lists


A few Digests ago, someone asked about a mailing list for ISDN topics.
There are two independent ones.  Contact:

[e-mail]

  and / or

[e-mail]

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

Date: Sun, 5 Jul 92 00:56:43 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Jonathan A. Solomon)
Subject: With NETel, is it an UPgrade or a DOWNgrade?


The problem you have is that NET service to Boston is less expensive
than the service to your local calling area across the area code
boundary.  So, if you get Metropolitan service you will get hundreds
and hundreds of exchanges local, many in 508. I think Waltham has the
biggest LCA of the whole mess. If you don't call Boston you can save
about $10/month by ordering suburban service. Calls to Cambridge are
free but Boston is about a two message unit call. Unlimited local
service would be just Waltham and the immediate vicinity, but watch
out. You can still call Boston or Cambridge without a 1+ and it costs!

Measured service is the only service which is required to be
completely uniform, given that if you order measured and metropolitan
you can receive all your calls on the measured line for next to
nothing and use your metro line for data. Unlimited local is a decent
compromise but make sure you know what you want.

Metro: $25
Suburban: $17
Unlimited local: $12
Measured $3

If you want more you can get "Bay State East" (formerly Bay State
Service). This service will let you call into the 508 lata for less.
This is great for data users if you call, say, mMrlborough. It
INCLUDES metro service; you really get a bargain on it.

Bay State costs about $29-30 plus gouges.


jsol


[Moderator's Note: Jon Solomon was the founder of TELECOM Digest, and
the Moderator here from 1981-1988.   PAT]

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

Subject: Funny Advertising Goof-ups (Wrong Numbers)
From: [e-mail] (Charles Stephens)
Date: Sun, 05 Jul 92 00:54:58 EDT
Organization: COW Pastures


> [Moderator's Note: The passing of William Gaines was a loss for
> everyone who enjoyed his humor. Does anyone know who is/will be taking
> over the reigns at {Mad}?   PAT]

        Oh no!  How horrible!  I know who ever it is, {Mad} will
probably make him the butt of Max Korn jokes.  Oh well, I guess he
would want it that way.  Question: how did he die?


Charles Stephens, SysOp    COW Pastures BBS,
Kennesaw, GA  [phone]   [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: I guess it was just from old age. I don't know what
the owners will do now with {Mad}. I think Time-Warner is the parent
company, and they always let Gaines do his thing independent of the
rest of the Corporation, ie no advertising, etc.  PAT]

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

Date: Sun, 5 Jul 92 22:34 PDT
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: Pac*Bell Posturing


[e-mail] (Justin Leavens) writes:

> I'd like to pose another related question: How can it be an invasion
> of privacy for people to get your phone number (via Caller-ID or
> whatever) if the phone company "owns" the number? What real rights
> does the phone user have regarding their home phone number?

The only "invasion of privacy" involved is to the called party. It is
HIS privacy that is disturbed with the telephone rings, his activities
disrupted, sleep terminated, or whatever. THIS is invasion of privacy.
When the caller's number is displayed to the called party, the caller
relinquishes his ANONYMITY, not his privacy. The caller is always in
control. He is the one who makes the decision to call. He determines
the time of the call. He determines the destination of the call. He
knows the number of the called party.

Please, once again: Caller-ID is NOT a privacy issue; it is an
anonymity issue. Further discussions may or may not be in order
concerning a person's right to remain anonymous.


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


[Moderator's Note: Follow-ups should be directed to comp.privacy if
you please.  And if you aren't pleased, see Figure 1. More on that
later today.    PAT]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Cellular / Video Help!
Organization: Teradyne Inc., Telecommunications Division
Date: Sun, 05 Jul 92 03:46:29 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, Todd.Langel@f230.n3603.
z1.FIDONET.ORG (Todd Langel) writes:

> (Also - I am Guessing that NTSC stands for National Television
> Standard C????????) Anyone???

In Europe, they define "NTSC" as "Never The Same Color"


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Patrick Tufts)
Subject: Re: NER-VOUS Actually NER-xxxx
Organization: Brandeis University
Date: Sun, 5 Jul 1992 06:57:05 GMT


In Boston, NER-xxxx gets you the time of day (where xxxx is any four
digits).


Pat

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

Date: Sun, 5 Jul 92 01:29 PDT
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: ISDN Availability to Residence Customers in Chicago Area


[e-mail] (Bill Nickless) writes:

> It's sensitive to usage, to the tune of $6/hour.  Of course, if you
> use the "Centrex" offering, and set up "extensions" out in the various
> places you want to connect, then it's not sensitive to usage.

The same is true for Pac*Bell's offering, but if you call outside of
your Centrex group, you do not pay anything other than normal usage.
If that means local then it is $0.60/hr. Toll is the going rate. I
would not be real excited about $6/hour for a local call!

> Evidently Ameritech has committed to 80% of subscribers having ISDN
> available by 1995.  This is supposedly better than the other RBOC's,
> but nothing like Germany or Japan.

Oh, and how IS it in Germany and Japan? I suspect that ISDN availability
in Japan is not what you might think. And I know for a certainty that
ordinary old POTS is far superior here.

> So I guess I'm retracting my grumbling.  I can still gripe that the CO
> that serves my house isn't ISDN capable, but it might/should happen
> eventually.

And I guess that I will partially retract my grumbling. My Pac*Bell CO
IS ISDN equipped; I live within the requisite distance; and I could
have it installed next week if I became willing to pay business rates
on the two lines.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Jim Rees)
Subject: Re: Strange Message on Answering Machine
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: University of Michigan IFS Project
Date: Sun, 5 Jul 92 14:31:29 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (H.
Shrikumar) writes:

> How does the CPC work ?

It's a brief interruption in loop current signalling that the far end
has disconnected.

> Too sad you in US don't have polarity reversal on your calls !!

But we used to, right?  I can remember seeing polarity reversal as
answer supervision back before our CO cut over to a 1A ESS.  I don't
know what the switch was back then, and I don't remember whether we
got this on all calls, just local calls, or just calls within the
switch.  I'm also pretty sure we used to get it on our 1 ESS, which is
still in service but no longer does this.  The 1 used to reverse the
polarity briefly then switch it back to normal, but the
electromechanical switch just left it reversed.  I remember this
because we had a 2500 set with no polarity guard.  Am I right or am I
imagining this?

> (After a few posts of India bashing, I could not help getting a little
> patriotic!)

The Indian phone system is not all bad.  Although it can be very
difficult to make a local phone call in the big cities (the standard
greeting is "Hello?" : "Hello, is it 2345678?" to make sure you got
the number you dialled), international calls from smaller towns are a
snap.  And you can pay cash for a phone call, something you can't do
here in the oh-so-high-tech US of A.  Speaking of which, exactly how
does a visitor to the US make a phone call back home?


[Moderator's Note: Well all I know is when I try to call India late on
Sunday evening for business at my firm (Monday morning over there) I
ask the AT&T operator for New Delhi directory assistance and always
get a stunned silence as if she is thinking to herself, "Why me, Lord?
 ...". Speaking of *long* waits for DA, I love that new gimmick being
used in France: Where before DA rang endlessly with a five minute wait
not uncommon, now we get connected immediatly to a holding queue, with
a recorded message of about six bars of music and a man speaking
English with a British accent saying "Telecom Services! Please hold ...
We're trying to extend your call! ..." and this eight or ten second blurb
repeats not once ... not twice ... but endlessly, with only a five
second or so pause between cycles. It repeated 67 times (yes, I counted
them out of boredom) the other day before I was extended to DA.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (David Sternlight)
Subject: Re: Payphones With Bogus DTMF Tones?
Date: Sun, 05 Jul 92 16:17:24 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)


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

> I was in Whitefish, Montana at a payphone a couple of days ago, (in a
> casino, perhaps indicitively) trying to make a long distance call to
> Missoula.  Being wise to the usual scams, I prefixed things with 10288+
> but wasn't surprised to note that it was intercepted with "your call
> cannot be completed as dialed".  What was strange though, was that the
> DTMF tones appears to have been hacked: (after dialing numbers often
> enough, you get to recognise the tones.)

There's an AT&T 800 number for reporting such things. Dunno what it is
but you could start with 800-CALL-ATT and see if they do. AT&T's
attornies are death on this sort of thing, and will go after them.


David Sternlight [e-mail]
Netcom - Online Communication Services San Jose, CA

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

Subject: Re: Telecomics
From: [e-mail] (Charles Stephens)
Date: Sun, 05 Jul 92 09:20:33 EDT
Organization: COW Pastures


Monday June 29 1992, David Leibold writes:

> Any other examples of telecom references in the funnies?

        In another Far Side you see a split view of an operator who is
says, "Will you except a collect call from Mr. Aaaaeeeeeeeeeee?"  and
on the other side you see an office with the phone cord going out the
window.  Hilarious.


Charles Stephens, SysOp   COW Pastures BBS,
Kennesaw, GA  [phone]    [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #534
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa24582;
          5 Jul 92 15:16 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA22077
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 5 Jul 1992 13:34:45 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA08891
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 5 Jul 1992 13:34:37 -0500
Date: Sun, 5 Jul 1992 13:34:37 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #535

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 5 Jul 92 13:34:40 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 535

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Administrivia: Things Seem Back to Normal (TELECOM Moderator)
    New 900 Gimmick: Psychoanalysis by Phone (TELECOM Moderator)
    "Telephone Scrambler" Plans Available (Stephen Friedl)
    Re: Sky Pager ([e-mail])
    Summary Re: Interesting Phone Circuit (Augustine Cano)
    Centel Problem in NC (Bill Huttig)
    x00 Numbers and EasyReach (Bill Huttig)
    Re: EasyReach 700 Service Should be Called Hard to Reach (John Higdon)
    See Figure 1 (Mike Bray)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sun, 5 Jul 1992 12:46:07 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Subject: Administrivia: Things Seem Back to Normal


This is just a note to say the various production problems here of the
past week seem to be corrected, and Digest output has run smoothly all
day yesterday and today. There was quite a bit of backlogged stuff I
was unable to use, but the queue has been zeroed out once again. Maybe
it will stay that way, at least until sometime tonight!  :)


PAT

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

Date: Sun, 5 Jul 1992 13:03:37 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Subject: New 900 Gimmick: Psychoanalysis by Phone


If you feel down in the dumps, and find that Dial-A-Prayer, phone sex
or the suicide hotline isn't enough, we now have a service based in
Chicago called Dial-A-Shrink. Psychiatrists on duty around the clock
will gladly listen to your troubles for $3 per minute.

The service, which was launched in June, invites callers to pour out
their troubles to licensed counselors who will provide analysis and
advice over the phone. There is no time limit of course; you are free
to stay on line for a full hour -- not the fifty minutes normally given
in 'an hour' reclining on the couch in your analyst's office.

The service, known as CounseLink, is intended for people too shy or
busy to go to an office, lie down and talk about themselves. To assure
confidentiality, fees will appear on your telephone bill under the
name Telelink Companies, Inc. of Des Plaines, IL.

The service is different from the many telephone hot lines that offer
counseling for people in crisis. Hot line counselors, whose services
are usually free to the caller, talk to people about suicide,
abortion, drugs or other serious problems.

According to Gerri Jakobs, CounseLink's administrative director, while
counselors will talk to people in crises, it is expected that most
callers will have less pressing problems, such as problems in your
marriage. They'll help you try to find solutions. CounseLink expects
many or most of its calls to be the sort of thing Ann Landers would
discuss with readers.

Callers to 1-900-454-HELP (454-4357) will hear a recording describing
the $3 per minute charge and then be switched to the first available
counselor. If all counselors are busy, the caller will be advised to
call later and won't be charged for the call.

In defense of the $3 fee per minute, CounseLink points out that their
rate per hour is $180, comparable to the charge for psychoanalysis in
the psychiatrist's office ... but you do get a full hour, not just
50 minutes.

Some people have to be in therapy for years ... I know a couple like
that myself.


PAT

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

Subject: "Telephone Scrambler" Plans Available
Date: 5 Jul 92 02:45:25 PDT (Sun)
From: [e-mail] (Stephen Friedl)


Hi folks,

     The August, 1992 issue of {Radio-Electronics} (soon to be called
{Electronics Now}) has plans for a telephone scrambler.  It uses the
Standard Microsystems COM9046 scrambler/descrambler IC, and the
article has the following description of it:

    "To render the speech channels unintelligible, the incoming
    audio signal is passed through a GTE phone switch..."

No, wait!  That's not it!  Let's try to get it right this time:

    "The IC contains two identical speech channels that
    perform full-duplex operation when connected between
    two telephones.  Each channel is capable of scrambling
    and descrambling voice communications.

    "To render the speech channels unintelligble, the
    incoming audio signal is inverted by the ICs internal
    double-sideband modulator.  While one channel accepts
    the normal frequency spectrum from the handset
    microphone, inverts and transmits it, the other channel
    accepts the incoming inverted signal, normalizes and
    sends it to the handset speaker."

That's more like it :-) The plans have all the stuff you need to make
it -- schematic, circuit board diagrams, and they sell a kit for about
$60, an assembled and tested unit for $80, and the COM9046 chip by
itself for $18.

     Just thought there might be interest ...


Stephen J Friedl | Software Consultant | Tustin, CA |     [phone]
3b2-kind-of-guy  | I speak for me ONLY |   KA8CMY   | uunet!mtndew!friedl

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

Organization: The American University - University Computing Center
Date: Sunday, 5 Jul 1992 12:21:44 EDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Sky Pager


Here goes a simple explaination, if there is such a thing, of a paging
system.  A paging system has a "paging terminal" (BBL Industries is
the standard) and a few "towers" that transmitt the digitally (voice
is analog) coded information to radio receivers (pagers).

SkyTel has established a national data network via leased lines and
satellite (redundant) from their paging terminal and towers.  As a
single tower can cost *alot* to put up (could be put on an established
tower) and the frequencies SkyTel has been alotted by the FCC
(National Radio Paging Freq's) are in the 90 0 MHz range the "economic
economy of Scale" is *very high*; SkyTel initally put all their towers
(antenna) around large metropolitan airports.  Thus, their claim that
"you can get a page inside your plane" is true.

As time and money has increased (Bell South bought a *bunch of them*)
SkyTel has increased the total number of their towers and cities of
coverage. In most major metropolitan cities they have begun to
"saturate" the area for better coverage (less "holes").  As of this
date SkyTel offers only Digital Paging, howe rever I *know* they have
both voice and Alphanumeric paging capabilities.  Will they release
them for the common user?  I dunno, probably as a premium.

National Paging vendors are; SkyTel (MTel), PageNet (regional),
Metromedia (re gional & SWBT), MetroCall (regional), and another
national using a flaky FM network called QUE.  About two years ago a
*great* network went belly up calle d Metrocast (all alpha and
international).

Oh!  International paging: SkyTel offers primarily US and Canada
(eastern) only but they have established relations with a few UK,
German, and African companies to potentially start up there too.
International paging is gonna cost you through the *ear*.

Good Luck, email me if you like.

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

Subject: Summary: Re: Interesting Phone Circuit
Date: Sun, 5 Jul 92 10:53:10 CDT
From: [e-mail] (Augustine Cano)


First of all, thanks to those who replied to my posting.  It turns out
that what I thought was a non-standard circuit (possibly the famous
Harmonica bug) was in fact a polarity guard used in old WE phones to
insure that the touch tone pad worked when the phone was hooked up
either way.

My visual inspection also got a couple of the components wrong.  The
correct schematic (thanks to Michael Sullivan) follows:


                 inductor  75 ohms     bridge rectifier
 brown wire --0-\\\\\\\\-+-R3---+-----------+--------+
                |           |          |
                    |          ---      ---
                               |          / \      \ /
                                |          ---        ---
                                        ---          |        |
                    capacitor  ---     -----+        +-----
                    |    white  |        |    green
                    |    wire  ---      ---      wire
                    |             \ /      / \
                    |       ---      ---
                    |              |           |
 white wire --0--R1--+---R2-----+-----------+--------+
        3.9    3.9
        ohms    ohms

Now, this circuit makes more sense!


Augustine Cano    INTERNET: [e-mail]
        UUCP:     ...!{ernest,egsner}!shibaya!afc

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

From: [e-mail] ( Bill Huttig)
Subject: Centel Problem in NC
Date: 5 Jul 92 18:07:42 GMT
Organization: Florida Institute of Technology, Melbourne USA


I have a friend in Walkertown, NC who has Centel phone service. She
received a new phone book today and her unlisted/unpublished number
was listed with her full address. Does she have any legal recoarse
against Centel?  (She has been paying a monthly fee not to be listed.)


[Moderator's Note: She is entitled to (a) keep her existing number and
discontinue paying the monthly fee for non-pub service or (b) to have
her number changed at no expense to herself and some method of
referring calls to her new number if desired. She probably would not
want the referral, since anyone looking in the book and calling her
old number would get the new one ... but that is her choice.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Bill Huttig)
Subject: x00 Numbers and EasyReach
Date: 5 Jul 92 18:15:27 GMT
Organization: Florida Institute of Technology, Melbourne USA


I was wondering what the plan was when the 800 numbers run out?  Why
was a new x00 area code not opened for universal numbers? I would like
to see 500/300 open for EasyReach type services and 400/600/200 for
toll-free type services ... maybe set one for voice only calls and one
for data only calls (fax, modem, digital video etc) in each catagory.

That would leave 700 for each carrier's internal use and solve the
EasyReach Problem.

Maybe dial as a 500 -EEE-NNNN the caller paid and 600-EEE-NNNN the
called party pay. (Optional PIN required or a pre-selected list of
numbers that can call).


Bill

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

Date: Sun, 5 Jul 92 11:11 PDT
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: 700 Easyreach Service Should be Called Hard to Reach


[e-mail] (Carl Neihart) writes:

> Unfortunately, after getting the info on the 700 number, the whole
> reason I got the number in the first place was negated -

[Long diatribe about how AT&T is bad and wrong for creatively using
the 700 service the way God and Bellcore intended, deleted.]

I thought Carl would be discussing the REAL reason for the subject
title. The two deficiencies with the service are related: the calling
telephone must be FGD compliant; and there are some (even FGD
compliant) offices that seem to have a problem with 700 implementation.

Naturally, certain of my associates had to be first on the block with
this service. But I find that my desert hideaway (Contel) cannot call
out to these numbers. Oddly enough 700 555-4141 works just fine but
nothing else does in the 700 block.

The GTE influence is beginning to make itself known in Contel Land.
Calls to repair service result in nonsense explanations as to why it
does not work (and why it is not telco's fault). Example: there is
something wrong with the telephone instrument at the 700 subscriber's
end.

It might be interesting to see if there are other areas that cannot
"reach out" to an EasyReach number that should in fact be able to.
Remember, if you cannot dial 10XXX codes, you probably cannot call one
of these numbers. Otherwise, it should work just fine.

Personally, I think EasyReach is a lot of bang for the buck.


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

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

Date: Sun, 05 Jul 92 02:22:30 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Mike Bray)
Subject: See Figure 1


I wish I could remember who sent this to me, and when they did, but I
don't. :(  So see figure 1. :)


                AT&T Customer Service Memorandum

     Please stop submitting compliants.  This is our system.  We
designed it, we built it, and we use it more than you do.  If there
are some features you think might be missing, if the system isn't as
effective as you think it could be, TOUGH!  Give it back, we don't
need you.  See figure 1.

                *-------------------------------*
                |               _               |
                |              { }              |
                |              | |              |
                |              | |              |
                |           .-.| |.-.           |
                |         .-|  | |  |.-.        |
                |         | |       |  ;        |
                |         \           ;         |
                |          \         ;          |
                |           |       :           |
                |           |       |           |
                |           |       |           |
                |                               |
                *-------------------------------*
                            Figure 1.

     Forget about your silly problem, let's take a look at some of the
features of your AT&T computer system.

* Options

We've got lots of them.  So many in fact, that you would need two
strong people to carry around the documentation if we had bothered to
write it.  So many that even we don't know what most of them do.
Don't ask us for any of these options, because we probably can't find
the PEC for it anyway.  Even if we find the PEC, we probably can't
order it either (just TRY asking for nroff on a 3B2).  If you don't
like it, call Technologies.  They'll tell you to see Figure 1.

* Hot Lines

If you need technical help, call our hotline.  You say that the guy at
the other end doesn't know any more than you do?  Too bad.  If we
could afford to pay qualified people to answer the phones, we'd be
paying them to make our computers work in the first place.  Besides,
you don't ever need to do anything sophisticated anyway.  If you do,
see Figure 1.

* Integrated Voice and Data

What the hell is integrated voice and data?  All it means is that you
can talk on the phone while you are typing on your terminal.  So what
if the terminal and the phone aren't integrated; that's not what we
advertise.  Besides, you probably can't even walk and chew gum at the
same time, much less talk and type.  If you can, see Figure 1.

* Unix

We invented it; it's perfect, and we're the only ones who do it right.
We're so happy with it, we put it on every kind of computer we make.
We even try to keep it the same from release to release, but usually
we blow it.  If you want a computer with stable filesystems, get a
VAX.  Another thing: those nerds from Berkeley are just troublemaking
hackers who have a productivity complex.  They took our operating
system and made it useful, so we told them to see Figure 1.

* Applications Software

We give you MS-word; what else do you want?  So what if it is a clumsy
port from another operating system, it works doesn't it?  Well, OK, it
sort of works.  If you want applications software, get an IBM PC.  You
can get lots of it and they even support it sometimes.  If you already
bought one of our computers and are unsatisfied, you're stuck with it.
We spoke with our applications software people about this, and they
think a lot like we do; they said "see Figure 1."

* Shells

We have two shells; one we sell and one we use.  The Bourne shell is
plenty good for trivial little hacks, which is all you do anyway.
Don't ask for the Korn shell either.  It's great, everybody at AT&T
has a copy, but we won't give it to you.  Besides, if you want to do
anything important, write it in C.  We told our shell programmers to
see Figure 1 a long time ago.

* The C Programming Language

We like it so much we named a book after it.  You can do anything our
machines can do, which is not very much.  Where else can you put so
much unreadable code in such a small space?  Besides, you probably
should be programming in the shell anyway; C is too hard for you.  We
told our C programmers to see Figure 1 a long time ago anyway.

* Floating Point Hardware

We have the WE32106 Math Accelerator Unit, one of the fastest chips
around.  It's so special that you need a special compiler to use it.
Nobody knows how to get you a copy of the compiler?  That's right.  We
don't release it because we are writing another one.  When it's ready,
we might give it to you, but probably not.  In the meantime, you have
to stick with the interpreter, live with the slowness, and see Figure
1.

* Support

We have thousands of service people out there, but most of them are
busy.  If your computer breaks, you will just have to wait.  Our techs
are rehashed phone installers, so don't expect them to be very helpful
unless it involves tip and ring.  Oh, if something breaks between 5:00
PM and 9:00 the next morning, don't waste your time calling us, we're
out.  We also take lots of lunch breaks.  If you need real support,
see Figure 1.

     In conclusion, stuff your complaint.  Love your AT&T computer or
leave it, but don't bitch to us.  We don't give a shit.  We don't have
to.  We're the phone company.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #535
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa26422;
          5 Jul 92 16:08 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA25852
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 5 Jul 1992 14:28:43 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA09306
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 5 Jul 1992 14:28:36 -0500
Date: Sun, 5 Jul 1992 14:28:36 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #536

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 5 Jul 92 14:28:31 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 536

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Ringer Equivalency Numbers (Henning Schulzrinne)
    Workshop: Designing Telecommunications Art Events (Adele Julia Ponty)
    Re: 911 Circuitry Can Detect 91 (Pushpendra Mohta)
    Multi-Line Phones in a Home Environment (Bill Seward)
    Per Call Charge on Caller-ID Dropped in Michigan (Jack Decker)
    Re: "Legal" Phreaking? (Paul Houle)
    Seeking Cell Relay Standards (Ruben M. Marquez-Villegas)
    Wiring Standards Information Wanted (Gerard White)
    Really GOOD Speakerphones Wanted (Franklin Antonio)
    Crimestoppers Textbook (Edward Floden)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Henning Schulzrinne)
Subject: Re: Ringer Equivalency Numbers
Date: Sun, 5 Jul 92 12:18:46 EDT


Even though the central office may still supply ringing current even
with a large total REN, some not-so-well-designed modems may not pick
up with the reduced ringing voltage. I learned this the hard way: I
had just purchased and installed a fax modem (Dallas Fax). The next
night at 2 and 3 AM I got weird phone calls, with nobody answering,
sometimes with tones. I figured that it might be a fax machine, turned
on the computer, but could not get the fax modem to pick up the
connection. A call to the Dallas Fax tech assistance didn't get me
anywhere except advice to return the unit. For some reason, I got the
idea to to disconnect one of our three phones (all REN 1.0, btw) and
things started to work. Afterwards, I just disconnected the ringer in
one of the old 500-style phones -- no need to have the whole house
ringing.  The ironic part of the story: the calls in the middle of the
night were from my father, whose office fax machine was dutifully
trying again and again and again to reach me. I told him to use my
office fax number instead from now on ...


Henning Schulzrinne  ([e-mail])  [MIME mail welcome]
Dept. of CS and Dept. of ECE; Univ. of Massachusetts at Amherst
Amherst, MA 01003 - USA === phone: [phone] (EST); FAX: [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Adele Julia Ponty)
Subject: Workshop: Designing Telecommunications Art Events
Date: Sun, 5 Jul 1992 12:35:26 -0400


Designing TELECOMMUNICATIONS ART Events
An advanced workshop with Brazilian artist Artur Matuck
Workshop fee $75.00

Location:  InterAccess  1179A King St. W., Toronto  phone [phone]

Inter/Access is pleased to present a workshop for artists who are
interested in producing telecommunications projects.  The workshop
will be conducted by Brazilian artist Artur Matuck, assistant
professor in the Department of Fine Arts at the School of
Communications and Arts, University of San Paolo, Brazil.  Artur is a
respected artist and teacher who has produced numerous
telecommunications projects.  Most notably, the REFLUX PROJECT for the
21st San Paolo Biennial.  In this intensive seven-day workshop, Artur
will discuss the historical, theoretical technical and aesthetic
aspects of telecommunications art.  He will also assist participants
in the development of a telecommunications event.

The workshop will be conducted in two parts.  Part One will take place
July 6th through 10th. Originally planned for 7-10 pm, the hours can
be altered to suit the participants. A number of discussions,
demonstrations and hands-on activities will be offered.  Additionally,
critiques and evaluations of former telecommunications events will
lead to the design of participants projects.  The second part of the
workshop will take place on July 23rd and 24th, hours again flexible
but planned for 7-10 pm.  This segment will focus on the actual
production and final analysis of the events, designed and planned in
the first part.

To register for this workshop, call 416-535-8601 or contact Dale
Barrett for further information.

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

From: [e-mail] (Pushpendra Mohta)
Subject: Re: 911 Circuitry Can Detect 91
Date: 5 Jul 92 10:22:45 GMT
Organization: CERFnet


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Bruce Schlobohm) writes:

> At work, our PBX requires that we dial 9 + 1 + areacode+ phone-number
> for calls outside of the 408 areacode.  A colleague here has become
> very adept at starting most phone calls with 9 + 1. A couple of days
> ago, he was at home, and started dialing 9 + 1, and then remembered he
> was not at work so he hung up.  A few minutes later he received a call
> from a dispatcher asking if he was in any trouble, and that there was
> a police car on its way to help him out!

Speaking of 911 stories, this happened a couple of years ago:

I was calling my folks in New Delhi, India and not having much success
connecting, I gave up on manual dialing and started to hit the redial
button. Now, I would hear ringing halfway through the dialing process
and I would hang up thinking something was amiss.

This happened a few times, so I gave up and dialed manually and was
connected. I was on the phone for about 15 minutes. As soon as I hung
up, my phone started ringing. It seemed that the 911 operators had
received a couple of hangup calls from my address, and when they
called back the phone was busy. A cop car was on its way.

Well, the country code for India is 91 and the area code for New
Delhi is 11 and I had  (cancel) call waiting.

The string being redialed was *70 011 91 11 xxxyyyy

Those of you who have cancel call waiting will recall that there is
brief pause after you enter the cancel code and before the dial tone
returns. During the redial process, that pause ate the 011 tones ...

The rest is left as an exercise to the reader.

Oh, and the cops did show up and the doughnut stories are all true :-)


Pushpendra Mohta  [e-mail]  [phone] (NEW)
CERFNet                  [phone]


[Moderator's Note: My experience here has been that with either *67,
*70, *71 or *72 (all return stutter dial tone) you can 'dial through'
 ... that is, no pause is required in the modem string, etc.  Other
places are different on this?  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Bill Seward)
Subject: Multi-Line Phones in a Home Environment
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Date: Sun, 5 Jul 1992 19:07:13 GMT


I'll be building a new house soon, and will have three (maybe more)
phone lines installed.  Is there a multiline phone setup available, at
some reasonable (<$150 per station) cost, that would also support
station-station intercom?

I specifically don't want anything along the lines of a small PBX, or
any type of system that is primarily marketed to a small business.

If you'd email me directly, I'll summarize and post if there seems to
be sufficient interest.


Bill Seward   [e-mail]   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: Sun, 5 Jul 92 13:49:15 CST
Subject: Per-Call Charge on Caller-ID Dropped in Michigan


Just the "what", I have no idea "why":

 From the June, 1992 "News & Views" billing insert that comes with our
Michigan Bell phone bills:

"Caller ID, the phone option that lets you know the number of the
person calling -- before you answer the phone -- just got more
attractive.

"Effective June 1, the service allows unlimited calls to be displayed
each month -- for no additional charge beyond the monthly fee of
$6.50.

"A one-time start-up fee of $7.50 also applies, but that fee will be
waived for the first 30 days the service is available in a given area.

"When Caller ID service was announced in March, the monthly fee
covered only the first 300 calls displayed.  Numbers beyond 300 a
month then cost two cents each.

"Because the service now offers display of unlimited calls, customers
will no longer have to de-activate their Caller ID service to control
call volume.

"Caller ID allows subscribers to see the number of an incoming call on
a display device that's attached to, or built into, their telephone.

"Currently available in parts of the greater metropolitan Detroit
area, the service should be available to about a third of Michigan
Bell's customers next year.

"If you live in an area where your phone number can be displayed over
Caller ID, you can block your number from appearing, free of charge.

"If you have a touch-tone phone, dial *67 before placing a call in
order to block your number.  If you have a rotary phone, dial 1167.

"For more information, or to order Caller ID, call 1 800 482-8055,
extension 743."

[End of quote from insert.]

As I say, I have no idea why they did it but I'm glad they did ...
Caller ID is not available in my area yet but I would have never
ordered it will a per-call charge attached, whereas now I would
strongly consider it.  I still think $6.50 per month is a bit steep,
but I'd much rather pay that and know for sure what the monthly cost
will be than to pay a smaller monthly charge and just hope I don't get
on someone's auto-redial list when I'm not home to deactivate the
service.

Once in a great while, Michigan Bell actually does something right!
Now if they'd just drop the extra monthly charge for Touch-Tone, and
expand some of the ridiculously small local calling areas in some of
the less-populated areas of the state, I'd be a lot happier with
them ...

Wonder if Pat will call Illinois Bell and ask when they intend to drop
the per-call charge there (since that's also an Ameritech company)?


Jack Decker   [e-mail]    FidoNet 1:154/8


[Moderator's Note: I'll watch eagerly for each issue of "Telebriefs"
in my mail to see what it has to say. Lord knows I could use a
reduction in my phone bill.  :)    PAT]

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

Date: Sun, 5 Jul 92 04:15:38 MDT
From: [e-mail] (Paul Houle)
Subject: Re: "Legal" Phreaking?
Organization: New Mexico Institute of Mining & Technology


In article <[e-mail]> TELECOM Moderator notes:

> [Moderator's Note: Let me ask those of you who persist in the belief
> that it is the system operator's fault if there is a break-in to a
> system with weak security, do you feel the same way about physical
> assaults on other people? That is, if you are attacked by a person
> much larger and stronger than yourself, can't we conclude that if he
> robs you it is really your fault? After all, you could have taken a
> course in judo, karate or some other self-defense procedure if you
> were that interested in your safety and your possessions, etc. Should
> the court find you guilty, or the person who attacked you? The answer
> is rather obvious ... why then is a computer different? Why should a
> new or inexperienced sysadmin take the rap for a hacker intrusion
> merely because the hacker is more sophisticated at it?  It seems to me
> the law is intended to protect the *weakest* members of society.  PAT]

    Although I'd agree that cracking and phreaking are wrong, and
should be prosecuted, I think that the owner of a computer must accept
some legal blame if he does maintain some basic level of security.

    Suppose that I get insurance against theft for the posessions
in my house, and then leave for a week, leaving the front door open.
Somebody comes and takes my TV set, but the insurance company will not
pay my claim for it, because I didn't take reasonable precautions
against thief.  Granted, the thief did something that was immoral and
illegal as well, but to some extent I could take the blame for not
taking reasonable precautions.

    I did a little hacking when I was a teenager, and I broke into
my first computer with the first username/password that I tried.  It
was uucp/<no password>.  I also discovered that a large number of
computers still had default passwords and other easy methods of entry
 -- methods that a 14-year old kid with a C-64 can use.  As such, I'd
say that many computer systems maintain a level of security that is
comparable to leaving the door of a house closed but unlocked.

    This, to me, is simply unacceptable for a company that holds
records that are supposed to be private.  I personally don't mind my
credit information being on file at TRW -- I feel that, for myself,
the loss of privacy is worth the convenience of being able to do
business on credit with total strangers with a good deal of confi-
dence.  I know that the phone company has to keep a log of my long
distance calls, and that many other companies may have a legitimate
reason to keep confidential information about me on computers.  Some
people may feel differently because they put different values on
certain kinds of privacy.  Yet, just about everyone would be outraged
if just anybody could break into a computer and read or alter my
credit information at TRW, or if a gang of hackers could break into a
telephone company computer and find out who I call.

    I think that in cases such as this, the customers of a company
would be justified in bringing a class-action suit against it when it
is discovered that a company fails to take reasonable precautions to
protect confidential information.  This doesn't mean that we can or
should sue a company just for getting hacked, because someone who is
skilled enough and motivated enough and who has the resources can
probably breach any kind of security, but yet, if a company fails to
take the most basic precautions, as many do, I believe that is
potentially criminal negligence.  Any company that holds confidential
information about it's customers should be legally bound to protect
it.

    In other environments, such as acadamia, this might not be the
case.  If hackers broke into the workstation that I use at work, the
only things they could steal would be useless to them -- a least
squares solver code that I'm writing, software to interpret data tapes
from a one-of-a-kind instrument, atmospheric data from satellites and
text files containing directions for mountain bike rides.  We would
probably give this stuff to anyone who asks for it.  Here the issue
would be damage done by hackers, which opens up an entirely different
can of worms.

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Seeking Cell Relay Standards
Date: 5 Jul 92 17:59:23 GMT
Reply-To: RM Marquez-villegas <[e-mail]>
Organization: Loughborough University, UK.


Does anybody knows if there is any agreed standard in cell relay
services like ATM, the protocols, header structure, services provided
or expected to be provided, technologies and techniques of
implementation? Where and how can I get a copy of this papers?

I also need to know how long is the maximum acceptable delay in a
packet/frame/cell switching network for voice and video communica-
tions. What I mean is, how much is an acceptable transmission delay
for a cell across the network? How much is an acceptable delay between
arrivals of a pair of cells/frames/packets in one of these networks?
If your answers are related to the expected ATM standards it will be
perfect.

My e-mail address is :  [e-mail]

Thank you to all for your help.


Ruben

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Wiring Standards Information Wanted
Organization: Memorial University of Newfoundland
Date: Sun, 5 Jul 1992 09:25:40 GMT


For a standard six-pin phone jack, does anyone out there know what
pins 1 and 2, 5 and 6 are used for?  Is there a standard? (i.e. when
used with a PBX).  Tip and Ring are usually found on pins 3 and 4.


G. White


[Moderator's Note: I think 3/4 are for line 1; 2/5 are for line 2, and
1/6 are for line 3 or some other feature such as an intercom buzzer or
a transformer to light the dial, the buttons, etc. I think the color
scheme would be 3/4 = red/green; 2/5 = yellow/black; and 1/6 = white/
blue.  That's how I have mine wired.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Franklin Antonio)
Subject: Really GOOD Speakerphones Wanted
Organization: Qualcomm, Inc., San Diego, CA
Date: Sun, 5 Jul 1992 00:03:07 GMT


I'd like to find a really GOOD speakerphone.  Last year, I bought a
couple of the Shure speakerphones that look like flying saucers.
(Sorry, I don't have the model number handy.) These are the best
speakerphones I've found to date.  They work reasonably well in small
meetings (fewer than ten people).  However, if the meeting is large
(meaning some persons are farther than about five feet from the
saucer) then the voice detection circuit often doesn't do the right
thing, and the people far away from the saucer cannot be heard well.
I also have the problem that I often use the speakerphone to connect a
meeting to MORE THAN ONE remote person, meaning that I'm using a
conference call.  This also seems to confuse the voice detection
circuit (ie echo suppresser) in the phone.

What i'd really like to find is a speakerphone that uses real echo
cancellation rather than echo suppression, and is actually designed to
work in large meetings, and doesn't interact badly with conference
bridges, etc.

Been thinking of building my own ... but would rather purchase.  Any
advice welcome.

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

Date: Sun, 5 Jul 92 09:23:42 CDT
From: [e-mail] (Edward Floden)
Subject: Crimestoppers Textbook
Organization: Technological Renaissance User Group


 From today's (Sunday, 5 July) edition of _Dick Tracy_:

"Crimestoppers Textbook

"Get Their Number -

Some 900-number phone scams have switched to using 800 numbers;
watch carefully for any charges when dialing an 800 number."

I feel much safer now. :)

Internet: pro-ren.cts.com!edward | UUCP: ...crash!pro-ren!edward

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #536
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa19834;
          6 Jul 92 2:26 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA20043
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 6 Jul 1992 00:30:16 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA08373
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 6 Jul 1992 00:30:07 -0500
Date: Mon, 6 Jul 1992 00:30:07 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #537

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 6 Jul 92 00:30:04 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 537

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Beware: The AT&T "Call Me" Card Works to *ANY* Number! (Steve Forrette)
    Re: Beware: The AT&T "Call Me" Card Works to *ANY* Number! (Phil Howard)
    Re: Beware: The AT&T "Call Me" Card Works to *ANY* Number! (Peter M. Weiss)
    Re: 700 Easyreach Service Should be Called Hard to Reach (Andy Finkenstadt)
    700 EasyReach Service is Not Usable (Phil Howard)
    Alternative to EasyReach 700 (Phil Howard)
    Re: Roommates and Long Distance Doesn't Mix (Rich Greenberg)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: Beware: The AT&T "Call Me" Card Works to *ANY* Number!
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA
Date: Mon, 6 Jul 1992 03:49:04 GMT


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

> Some of you may remember about a month ago when I posted that a friend
> had called me from a GTE Airphone on an AT&T 'call me' card I had
> given him.  Well, today our phone bill arrived and the plot thickened.
> Over $50 in AT&T calls from GTE Airphone appeared on the June phone
> bill.  Only one of these calls was made to the "one number" authorized
> for the card.  The rest were made to numbers across the USA.

I've spent a considerable amount of time trying to get to the bottom
of this one -- here's the scoop:

The new AT&T cards (non-phone-number based) can only be used on the
AT&T network, LEC networks for intra-LATA calls, and perhaps a few
"specialty" networks, such as GTE Airphone.  They can't be used on
other IXC's, however, such as Sprint, MCI, or AOS slime.

When you use the card on a non-AT&T carrier, that carrier's calling
card system sends a query to the AT&T database with the called number
and card number, and possibly the calling number.  For regular calling
cards, the called number is ignored -- the answer depends only on the
validity of the card number.

The new Custom Calling card introduces a new problem.  The Custom
Calling card is much like the old Call Me card, except that any 10
numbers may be allowed, instead of the old rule of "only the billing
number," and none of the numbers has to be the billing number.  (For
my card, I have only my cellular number, which can't be directly
billed by AT&T for normal calls).

The problem is in the handling of sequence calls.  US West does this
incorrectly for intra-LATA calls, and it now sounds like GTE Airphone
does it wrong as well.  What happens is that as long as the initial
call is to a valid number for the card, then sequence calls to any
number the carrier handles will be allowed.  For US West (or any other
LEC), this will only be to other intra-LATA calls, and requires that
the caller be in the same LATA as at least one of the valid numbers to
start with.  But with GTE Airphone, the problem quickly expands to
international scale.

When the first call is attempted, the called number and the card
number are sent to the AT&T database for verification.  Since
everything is okay, the AT&T database responds with "okay."  Now, the
user hits # and enters another number.  The incorrectly-programmed
calling card systems (such as those of US West and GTE Airphone)
falsely assume that since the card number was valid just a moment ago,
it's still going to be valid, so they don't bother to query the AT&T
database again.  They don't take into account that with the new Custom
Calling card, that the validity now depends not just on the card
number, but on the called number as well.  (The old Call Me cards that
were based on the subscriber's phone number had a special bit that was
set in the "okay" reply to indicate that calls to no other numbers
were allowed.  This can no longer be used, as the cards can now have
more that one valid number that can be called).

The correct implementation for non-AT&T carriers that accept AT&T
cards is to query the AT&T database for each call attempt, including
sequence calls.  It is up to each LEC (and GTE Airphone) to insure
that their calling card systems conform to this standard.  IMHO, it
would be nice if AT&T refused to accept the bad calls from the
carriers when they were presented for billing.  This would cause the
carriers to fix their systems in short order, I would say!  What they
do now, just put them on the customer's bill, is a "bad thing."  At
the very least, they should filter these calls from the customer's
bill and turn up the heat to the offending carriers.

The attitude AT&T's customer service department is taking on this
issue is the worst part of the problem.  It sounds like the person
with the GTE Airphone problem got a response similar to mine - that
this is the customer's problem, not AT&T's, that they don't guarantee
the restrictiveness of the card, and why would you give the card to
someone you don't trust to use it properly in the first place.  I
tried to explain to them that if I could trust the person I'm giving
the card to, I'd just give them my regular, unrestricted card.  The
entire purpose of the restricted card is that you can give it to
people you DON'T trust!


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Phil Howard)
Subject: Re: Beware: The AT&T "Call Me" Card Works to *ANY* Number!
Date: Sun, 05 Jul 92 22:19:00 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest)


[e-mail] (Phydeaux) writes:

> It seems that even though the card is a new-fangled AT&T card with
> *no* trace of what my home number on it, and contrary to *ALL* the
> marketing hype about how the card can *ONLY* be used to call *one*
> number, it can "... Still be used by some carriers to numbers other
> than the one specified."

If the other carriers choose to carry the call and bill you
themselves, or via the local phone company bill, then you should
refuse the payment on the grounds that you have no arrangement with
that company for doing any such business.

If the other carriers refer the billing to AT&T (do they do this?)
then it should be AT&T's job of filtering out such calls (based on the
type of card it was made from) and not pay out on the invalid calls
(and not charge you, either).

> To top this all off, I was told that they "COULD NOT GUARANTEE" that
> additional calls to numbers other than the one "call me" number would
> be blocked and that A) If I did not like this I could cancel my card
> and B) If any such charges *did* appear on the bill that they would
> *NOT* give me credit for them.

Are you SURE this wasn't GTE?

Before I start thinking about recommending a class-action lawsuit, can
someone explain the mechanisms under which a card issued by one
company (e.g. AT&T) can be utilized by another company to place the
calls?  How are these calls billed?

A few years ago when I had a series of fraudulent calls on a calling
card, there were several other carriers involved.  All of the calls
from the other carriers were billed as being from those carriers, and
aside from cancelling the card number, AT&T was really not involved
except for the numbers they billed, which they granted credit for.
Many of those other carriers refused to grant credit at all and I had
to threaten legal action (and pointed out some mistakes they made in
this as well) against Illinois Bell.


Phil Howard  ---  KA9WGN  ---  [e-mail]   |   "The problem with |

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

Organization: Penn State University
Date: Sun, 5 Jul 1992 16:08:13 EDT
From: Peter M. Weiss <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Beware: The AT&T "Call Me" Card Works to *ANY* Number!


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

> Some of you may remember about a month ago when I posted that a friend
                                                                  ******
> had called me from a GTE Airphone on an AT&T 'call me' card I had
> given him.  Well, today our phone bill arrived and the plot thickened.
> Over $50 in AT&T calls from GTE Airphone appeared on the June bill ...

> To top this all off, I was told that they "COULD NOT GUARANTEE" that
> additional calls to numbers other than the one "call me" number would
> be blocked and that A) If I did not like this I could cancel my card
> and B) If any such charges *did* appear on the bill that they would
> *NOT* give me credit for them.

or c) you could change friends so that they don't use your card in
ways in which you are defrauded.


Pete


[Moderator's Note: But as is pointed out, he thought he had the card
for the untrustworthy people he must associate with. I guess the
answer is he/you/all of us should avoid those types of transactions
when some other method is possible for making the calls.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Andy Finkenstadt)
Subject: Re: 700 Easyreach Service Should be Called Hard to Reach
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Vista-Chrome Incorporated
Date: Sun, 5 Jul 1992 20:24:53 GMT


[e-mail] (Carl Neihart) writes:

> I just got my info from AT&T on my personal 700 number recently.

> Unfortunately, after getting the info on the 700 number, the whole
> reason I got the number in the first place was negated -

[ Bandwidth conserved about the initiating phone requiring
AT&T as the presubscribed carrier, or dialing 10ATT0 +700 + etc ]

In addition to this, I attempted to get Not-so-Easy Reach service on
my residential line at home.  I am a loyal AT&T customer to the tune
of several hundred dollars per month, but AT&T has this problem: I
don't live in an old AT&T now-RBOC service area.  AT&T has no billing
arrangement with CenTel (merging with US Sprint), and so I was told,
"I'm sorry sir, we can't do that; we have no billing arrangements with
your area."

Imagine, now in addition to being pre-subscribed to AT&T, you also
have to live in an RBOC area like Southern Bell, and not in an
independent telephone company area like CenTel.  "No billing
arrangements" my foot -- they manage to bill me for my credit card (14
random digits) and my long distance service (several hundred calls per
month, the net habit is hard to feed).

Oh well, I guess the days of 700-222-ANDY are not to come anytime
soon.


Andrew Finkenstadt       | Vista-Chrome, Inc.   |                  GEnie:  ANDY
GEnie Unix Sysop/Manager | The Printing House   |             NIC Handle: AF136
[phone] home     | 1600 Capital Cir SW  |            ...!uunet!rde!andy
[phone] work     | Tallahassee FL 32310 | [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: I think the rep was mistaken in any case because
AT&T has had miscellaneous billing accounts in place for many years,
for example with non-subscriber calling cards.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Phil Howard)
Subject: 700 EasyReach Service is Not Usable
Date: Sun, 05 Jul 92 21:46:18 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest)


Some others have complained that one needs to dial 102881700 prior to
any AT&T EasyReach number.  I don't see that as much of a problem.

However where I do see a problem with AT&T's service is that one is
required to have a local phone number in their name, with AT&T as the
default carrier.

I strongly prefer having no default carrier, as this adds slightly to
the security level of my home phone.  I am already used to dialing the
carrier access code when I call out, and in fact almost always call
through AT&T as it has been providing me with the best service.

So I see EasyReach as (in part at least) a "scam/ploy/trick" to get
people to switch their default carrier to AT&T.

However the BIG reason that I was in a hurry to get an EasyReach
number is because I anticipate being without a local phone number for
a while in the near future.  AT&T so far will not offer this service
to me on that basis.

I have tried to get the sales droids to get me in contact with someone
that makes the decisions on this.  I suspect that they are not going
to be too interested in addressing this since the whole service is
probably oriented to acquiring the customer base with AT&T as the
default carrier.

I have an AT&T credit card, and they are not even willing to bill me
on that, so it's obviously more than a problem with billing (as the
sales droid tried to convince me as being the problem).  I already get
all my 10288 dialed numbers billed on my local bill anyway, w/o AT&T
as my long distance carrier.

The engineering people at AT&T do an excellent job, but IMHO the
marketing people are lowering themselves down closer to the scum
level.

I'd like to solicit comments regarding what might happen in these
scenarios:

1.  I get an EasyReach number, then local telephone service is disconnected
    for:

    a.  A short time while moving from one town to another.

    b.  A long time while:

        I.  On a long trip out of the country.

        II. While living with someone else during move transitions.

2.  I get an EasyReach number, then after my local phone line is switched
    to AT&T as the default carrier, I call the local company and have it
    changed to something else ("none" is my preferred carrier).


Phil Howard  ---  KA9WGN  ---  [e-mail]   |   "The problem with |


[Moderator's Note: In the case of disconnected service although the
local telco might attempt to bill you anyway on a miscellaneous
billing statement, they might instead charge it all back to AT&T which
would definitly sound an alarm there. In the case of attempting to
switch the default carrier elsewhere, I suspect AT&T would put a hold
on the account so the local telco could NOT change the default without
notifying AT&T. These holds are what all the LD carriers did to get
around the fraud problem of people who sign up, cash the inducement
check and then switch back again right away. Your account would be
flagged that AT&T had a contract with you and they had to be notified
of any change in status on the account.  Speaking of miscellaneous
billing accounts, AT&T *could* set up 700 service that way; after all
they have had non-subscriber calling cards for many years. Probably
the rep you talked to did not know how to do it.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Phil Howard )
Subject: Alternative to EasyReach 700
Date: Sun, 05 Jul 92 21:55:32 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest)


There is obviously some mechanism in place for a seven digit number
that is prefixed by 800 to be routed to the correct long distance
carrier.  With the concept of portability of these numbers, it will
have to capable of doing this with fully discrete mapping, e.g. the
"exchange" prefix alone cannot be the basis.

Someone somewhere has to be operating the database where the lookup of
the potentially ten million entries resides.

Now why can't this same mechanism be used on a PORTABLE version of the
type of service AT&T is operating now as EasyReach?

Given that portability is an issue with holders of 800 numbers that
want to keep their number and change carriers, wanna bet that this
issue will eventually come up from holders of 700 numbers?

However this is more of a problem since the 700 space is carrier
distinct.

But why not use some other [1-6]00 prefix and establish a portable
number service.  There are of course complications, but portable 800
service will have to address many of these anyway, and I suspect most
of the solutions will be the same (such as the mechanism for assigning
a new vanity number).


Phil Howard  ---  KA9WGN  ---  [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: You are forgetting that EasyReach is a specialized
service for AT&T customers. It is intended as a convenience for their
customers, not the caller.   PAT]

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

Date: Sun, 5 Jul 92 15:25:56 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Rich Greenberg)
Subject: Re: Roommates and Long Distance Doesn't Mix
Organization: Hatch Usenet and E-mail.  Playa del Rey, CA


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Chris
Sherman) writes:

> I would like to shut off the dial-1 long distance access from my
> phone, yet still have the ability to use LD charge cards for making LD
> calls.

> But, Southern Bell says that they can't do this.  They can block LD
> calls completely, for $22 setup, and $2 a month, but this means no
> long distance calls PERIOD.

One possibility is to get a toll restriction device.  Hello direct
800-HI-HELLO (aka 800-444-3556) sells several models of what they call
"Call Controllers" which can block various types of outgoing calls
(976, 900, 011, etc).  The middle model (Call Control Plus @ $99.95)
should do the job for you.  It can be bypassed by you with a password,
and at Bell's $2/mo, a year pays for it.  The cheaper model at $49.95
is less versatile, but may do the job for you.  CAUTION: Whereever you
install it and from there out to the CO must be physically secure or a
knowledgable person could defaet it with little problem.


Rich Greenberg - N6LRT - 310-649-0238 - [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #537
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa21638;
          6 Jul 92 3:08 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA12630
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 6 Jul 1992 01:25:45 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA19202
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 6 Jul 1992 01:25:35 -0500
Date: Mon, 6 Jul 1992 01:25:35 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #538

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 6 Jul 92 01:25:36 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 538

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    CompuServe Candidategrams (David Tamkin)
    Re: Pac*Bell Posturing (Peter da Silva)
    Re: 911 Circuitry Can Detect 91 (Steve Forrette)
    Re: Concert-Goers Blast 911 Service (Alan L. Varney)
    Re: "Choke" Prefixes (was Concert Goers Blast 911) (Phil Howard)
    Re: Suit Alleges Cellular Caused Brain Tumor (John Higdon)
    Re: 1-xxx-555-1212 From Overseas? (Jan Richert)
    Re: Zip Extensions (was The Telco Owns the Numbers) (David Tamkin)
    Re: Factoid from _Playboy_ (Steve Forrette)
    Re: Telecomics (David Lesher)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (David Tamkin)
Subject: CompuServe Candidategrams
Date: Sun, 5 Jul 92 20:27:06 CDT


In recent submissions one reader posted a list of email addresses for
presidential candidates.  Those for Clinton, Marrou, and Perot were on
CompuServe, and their user ID's were numerically very close.

Another reader attempted to write to one of them, but the letter was
bounced on grounds that the box could not receive remote mail.  Pat
Townson commented that when CIS accepts mail from the Internet,
someone has to pay them for it.

That's not *exactly* what is happening.  After the email from the
Internet was refused, I suspected something and a visit to CompuServe
confirmed it.  The candidates do not have real CompuServe accounts.
CompuServe, to the best of my knowledge, does not refuse to let users
in good standing receive email from the Internet.

CompuServe is running a Candidategram (CANDIDATEgram they write it)
program.  You select the candidate's number from a menu and compose
or upload a letter, and for $1.50 charged to your CompuServe account
they'll print it and mail the hardcopy.  The actual user ID's of the
mailboxes that receive each hopeful's Candi____grams got into the user
directory somehow.

The reason those accounts cannot receive remote email is not that
CompuServe has to charge somebody for the costs of receiving email and
holding it for a user; it's that CompuServe has to bill somebody for
the costs of printing the letters out and mailing them to the various
candidates' campaign offices.


David W. Tamkin   Box 59297   Northtown Station, Illinois  60659-0297
[e-mail]    CompuServe: 73720,1570    MCI Mail: 426-1818


[Moderator's Note: You are not quite correct. Clinton and Marrou were
close numerically, and both in the 75300.xxxx series which as we all
know are 'sponsored' accounts -- that is free accounts given by CIS to
desirable users. Perot was 71xxx.xxxx, or some distance away. He pays
for that account I suspect; Clinton and Marrou do not. Likewise, Brown
had a 75300 number but Pat Buchanan was in the 76xxx series, meaning
he pays for his box. If these are only mail drops for CandidateGrams,
where was the one for President Bush?   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Peter da Silva)
Subject: Re: Pac*Bell Posturing
Organization: Taronga Park BBS
Date: Sun, 5 Jul 1992 21:55:28 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Justin Leavens) writes:

> understand what it is and how it works. Especially since the default
> setting will be to give out your number. If it defaulted the other
> way, I don't think it would be an issue (and there'd be no real use
> for Caller-ID either.

If Blocked-ID-Blocking was available, it'd be fine. People with the
"no ID" default would get a message saying "You must first enable
Caller-ID before dialing this number". In fact, this would be even
more useful than just plain Caller-ID, since you could get the
deterrent affect without paying for a display unit.


Peter da Silva, Taronga Park BBS, Houston, TX  [phone]/1032

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: 911 Circuitry Can Detect 91
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA
Date: Mon, 6 Jul 1992 02:26:32 GMT


> [Moderator's Note: My experience here has been that with either *67,
> *70, *71 or *72 (all return stutter dial tone) you can 'dial through'
> ... that is, no pause is required in the modem string, etc.  Other
> places are different on this?  PAT]

It depends on the switch type.  1AESS and 5ESS allow dialing over the
stutter dialtone, but the DMS-100 requires a pause.  (GTD-5, as
operated by GTE, require a pause, and an extra $1.50/month, for cancel
call waiting).


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

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

Date: Sun,  5 Jul 92 22:07:12 CDT
From: [e-mail] (Alan L Varney)
Subject: Re: Concert-Goers Blast 911 Service
Organization: AT&T Network Systems, Inc.


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

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

>> Excepting a very poorly engineered CO, this also should not be a
>> problem unless you have a very significant percentage of your
>> subscribers going offhook all at the same time.  This is not the case
>> in a concert ticket hotline, or a radio station giveaway, but might
>> occur during some sort of emergency (power failure, weather disaster,
>> large nearby explosion, etc.)

   But the problem really IS that a significant percentage go off-hook
at about the same time, over and over.  The TELCo can gap "concert"
calls at the originating switches and, at least for repeating numbers
such as the radio station, use a choke trunking network to prevent
tying up normal inter-office circuits.  But until you get dial tone
and dial your number, there is NO WAY to determine if the next call
you make is somehow more important than the ticket caller.  So dial
tone delays are a fact of life for such high-volume call demands -- no
one would want to engineer a CO for two-second holding time calls and
line occupancy near one Erlang for 20% of the lines.

>> In such a case, certain lines within
>> the neighborhood can be designated to be 'hot' lines, or 'A' lines,
>> which get preferential treatment.

> Well, I'd sure hate to be one of the 80%-90% trying to call for an
> ambulance for my parent with a heart attack. Who decides who get's
> 'preferental' service?  In my opinion, the 'Concert Ticket' phoenomena
> is 'misuse' of the phone system (right up there with telemarketing and
> charity solicitation).

   Preferential service is usually given to hospitals, doctors, police
and other emergency-related services.  Maybe a few high-profile
officials?  But not the average residential line.

> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
> (Kevin W. Williams) writes:

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

  [ regarding overload of circuits ]

>>> I'd have to disagree. Proper design of a "Life and Death" emergency
>>> system should preclude ANY intruption of that service based on trunk
>>> loading. 911 trunks should be Independent of any other traffic.

>> Let's be a little realistic here. I could, indeed, design a 911 system
>> which was indpendent of any other request for service. Unfortunately,
>> I would have to run a separate phone to each house which only served
>> the emergency service bureau.

   Making 911 trunks independent isn't hard, since most of the current
E911 systems require special signaling on the circuits to a central
tandem.  But trunks aren't the problem -- dial tone is.

>> Choke prefixes, call gapping, and similar network management
>> treatments are a compromise for an insoluble problem. No switch
>> manufacturer can sell totally non-blocking line equipment, because the
>> telcos won't pay the costs. We cannot predict who is going to call 911
>> and who is going to call Larry King. The best we can do is make the
>> machine survive the peaking, give fairly distributed service to all
>> originators, and try to deal with the problem during routing and
>> termination.

> My original comment related to 'Trunk Blockage' not whether the
> subscriber could receive dial tone. In the 'Concert Ticket' scenario,
> it's more likely that all outgoing trunks are blocked. It's the
> 'natural disaster' scenario in which dial tone becomes hard to get. I
> stand by my original statement.

   Believe me, dial tone is a problem even for the "concert ticket"
scenarios.  I've seen the traffic numbers for one of the "Garth Brooks
ticket hour" events.  Wow!  And this was with the ticket number call-
gapped at almost every switch.  Unfortunately, with current call gap
methods, the caller knows almost immediately that the call was killed.
So they hang up, wait for dial tone and hit "REDIAL".  The switch that
was the target for all these calls handled about 2X engineered busy
hour incoming attempts, with most receiving busy tone.

   Still not convinced?  Let's say a given switch can handle 360K
calls per hour with 60,000 lines.  That's 100 calls/second.  If half
are originating calls (needing dial tone), we need to provide 50 dial
tone/ digit receivers for each second it takes for the average caller
to dial.  If that's six seconds, we need 300 receivers (this is
back-of-envelope engineering, not Erlang-B).  But it takes less than
1000 ticket callers with a three-second holding time to use up all
those receivers.  That's less than 2% of the lines.  Many ticket
callers ask their friends to call, just to increase their odds of
getting some.  Result?  Severe dial tone delay.

   A friend in telco support agrees the best we can do with today's
switches is route the gapped calls to a very quiet announcement, with
some background clicking, so that callers believe their call is going
to EVENTUALLY complete.  But denying them an equal shot at dial tone
when they re-originate is expensive in real time, and might lead to as
many lawsuits as it solves.


Al Varney -- just MY opinion, and not an official AT&T opinion.

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

From: [e-mail] (Phil Howard)
Subject: Re: "Choke" Prefixes (was Concert Goers Blast 911)
Date: Sun, 05 Jul 92 22:55:55 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest)


[e-mail] (John Nagle) writes:

> Overloads due to massive redialing should be fixable by programming
> originating switches to apportion originating registers using some
> measure of "fairness", such as number of requests for dialtone in the
> last N minutes, tallied for each line.  This would effectively
> guarantee that if you haven't made multiple call attempts in the last
> few minutes, you get dialtone ahead of everyone who has.

What about having callers to choke prefixes not get dial tone back for
X seconds?  More sophsiticated systems could increment X on a per
caller line basis if the next call is made to a choke prefix within
2*X seconds.  Expiration of 2*X would reset X.  A starting value of
five to ten seconds seems to me like it might work.


Phil Howard  ---  KA9WGN  ---  [e-mail]

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

Date: Sun, 5 Jul 92 11:30 PDT
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: Suit Alleges Cellular Caused Brain Tumor


Robert Horvitz <[e-mail]> writes:

> According to David Reynard, Susan's husband, (quoting from {Microwave
> NEWS}), "If an outline of the phone were superimposed on the [magnetic
> resonance image of her head which] showed his wife's tumor, the
> malignancy would be at the middle of the antenna ..."

If people are going to start trading in this psuedo-scientific clap-
trap, at least they might check out a few laws of physics before
putting foot in mouth. The center of radiation is NOT at the center of
a cellular antenna.

> The radio wavelengths used in cellular phones are similar to the
> dimensions of the human skull, so that resonance could provide an
> efficient transfer of energy.

Except that the skull makes a much more effective shield than a
waveguide. I see it all happening again: many good, useful products
have been taken away because of this sort of voodoo. No acceptable
studies have been able to prove or disprove any of these beliefs or
theories concerning non-ionizing radiation. Here we go again with
emotionalism and scare tactics for the ignorant.

I have worked around high power RF for over a quarter-century. I
install and maintain 950 MHz equipment that is many, many times more
powerful than even a car-mount cellular phone. I have been using
cellular phones, including handhelds, since day one. So where is MY
brain cancer? (My mental defectiveness is a separate issue and long
predates any exposure to RF :-)

> {Microwave News} is the leading newsletter concerned with reports of
> biological effects of non-ionizing radiation.  Subscriptions are $285
> per year (6 issues; $315 per year outside the US).  Order from P.O.
> Box 1799, Grand Central Station, New York, NY 10163 USA.  My only
> connection to MN is as a reader for the past eight years.

There is a lot of money to be made peddling this horse manure. It is
occasional fun reading because of the technical and scientific mistakes
that are frequently made and are so obvious to those in the industry.
But whatever turns people on ...


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


[Moderator's Note: You may be safe because of a very thick skull. :)  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Jan Richert)
Subject: Re: 1-xxx-555-1212 From Overseas?
Date: 5 Jul 92 13:41:49 GMT
Organization: Krefcom UUCP Server, Krefeld, FRG


The cheapest way to call the U.S. directory assistance from Germany is
to call the AT&T operator toll free at 0130/0010 and ask him to
connect you to XXX-555-1212. I'm always connected without any
questions on how I'd like to bill for it ...


Greets,

Jan Richert (NIC-ID: JR482)   | Internet:   [e-mail]
Krefeld, FRG                  | BTX:        02151399843-0001
Voice & FAX: [phone]  | IRC-Nick:   jrichert

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

From: [e-mail] (David Tamkin)
Subject: Re: Zip Extensions (was The Telco Owns the Numbers)
Date: Sun, 5 Jul 92 13:10:10 CDT


[e-mail] (Andrew C. Green) shared in volume 12, issue
528:

> I lived in an eight-story building with approximately 16 apartments
> per floor.  Curiously, my neighbor had a completely different ZIP+4
> extension; in fact, there were several different extensions used
> over and over in the building, depending on what the apartment
> number was, and this took a fair amount of space to list in the ZIP
> Code manual.  The kicker was: like most apartment buildings, all the
> mailboxes were in the lobby anyway.

And in that lobby the mailboxes no doubt are in banks, each bank
opened for delivery access with a single postal service lock.  Usually
when the zip extension pattern for the units in an apartment or condo
buidling repeats and repeats illogically in a straight numerical
listing of unit numbers, you'll find a lot of logic if you look at
which units' mailboxes are in the same bank: one zip extension, one
bank, one lock, one key, one group of boxes whose mail is thrown
separately from those with other zip extensions.

It is set up for the convenience of mail carriers rather than that of
zip directory perusers.  After all, the USPS, not the postal patrons,
owns the zip extensions.  In fact, one building in a complex where I
used to live had all its zip extensions suddenly changed from a numer-
ically simple arrangement to one that followed the banks in the lobby.
I doubt that they were given any notification, just as residential
addresses were sent nothing to say what their zip extensions would be
when zip + 4 was introduced.


David W. Tamkin   Box 59297   Northtown Station, Illinois  60659-0297
[e-mail]    CompuServe: 73720,1570    MCI Mail: 426-1818

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: Factoid from _Playboy_
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA
Date: Mon, 6 Jul 1992 03:04:00 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail].
US (Stephen Friedl) writes:

>        _Playboy_, August, 1992

>    "Reach out and put the touch on someone:
>    18,000,000 unsolicited sales calls are
>    made to private homes in the US each day"

Gee, I wonder how this compares with the number of battered-wife-
calls-home-from-shelter-and-is-worried-that-husband-will-beat-her-
if-he-knows-what-number-she's-calling-from calls that happen each day?


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

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

From: David Lesher <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Telecomics
Date: Sun, 5 Jul 92 19:10:16 EDT
Reply-To: [e-mail]  (David Lesher)
Organization: NRK Clinic for habitual NetNews abusers - Beltway Annex


About 12 years ago, there was a series that ran with good, make that
GREAT, telco humor. I can't recall the name of the strip, but the
episode plot went like this:

    Man holed up in his apt - refuses to pay his Ma bill.
    SWAT team (all in familiar colored trucks) shows up.
    Several exchanges by bullhorn...

    Ma-SWAT:Come out now! We'll write off the local message
        units. All you have to pay is the LD calls...

    Subscrib:You'll never take me alive!
(and he sacrifices a hostage:)

    Ma-Swat:Oh God, the inhumanity - He's torn his Yellow
        Pages in half, and THROWN them out the window!
        Has he no heart at all?

Finally they shoot in tear gas, and rescue the poor 2500 set.
They take away the sub in handcuffs to court:
    Judge:    I hereby sentence you to imprisonment in the
        county jail. You shall remain there, on the
        phone, until Repair Service answers.
    sub:    But your Honor, that will be YEARS! What about
        my family?
    Judge:    Take him away....

Dan da dan dah.....


[e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #538
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa22789;
          6 Jul 92 3:42 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA26622
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 6 Jul 1992 01:50:21 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA21534
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 6 Jul 1992 01:50:10 -0500
Date: Mon, 6 Jul 1992 01:50:10 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #539

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 6 Jul 92 01:50:11 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 539

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    CCITT Documents Available (Joshua Hosseinoff)
    Looking For a Device to Log Calls (T. Govindaraj)
    FGB, FGD Trunks (Steven S. Brack)
    AGT Digital Cellular (Dan J. Rudiak, FIDO via Jack Decker)
    Looking For Supplier of Telephone Jack Converters (Eric Engelmann)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 05 Jul 1992 21:24:57 -0400 (EDT)
From: JOSHUA HOSSEINOFF <[e-mail]>
Subject: CCITT Documents Available


Anyone with Telnet access can get CCITT documents through the Gopher
System. Here's what you do:

Telnet to consultant.micro.umn.edu

Login as gopher or anet if you are using an anet system.

No password is required

 From the main menu select 8. Other gopher and info services.
Then option 2. Europe
Then option 4. Chalmers University of Technology, Sweden
Then option 7. Swedish University NETwork (SUNET)
Finally, option 3. CCITT Blue Book

Below is the readme file for the CCITT blue book which describes what
specific files are available and how it is set up.


Joshua Hosseinoff
[e-mail]
                          ------------

Contents of the CCITT Blue Book

The Blue Book is divided by volume and fascicle.  Our naming scheme is
vol_fascicle_part.format.  For example, Volume 3, Fascicle 1, Part 1
in Ascii format would be:

        3_1_1.txt

The volumes are divided as follows:

Volume 1

Fascicle 1.1 - Minutes and reports of the Plenary Assembly
Fascicle 1.2 - Opinions and Resolutions
Fascicle 1.3 - Terms and Definitions
Fascicle 1.4 - Index of Blue Book

Volume 2

Fascicle 2.1 - General tariff principles.  Series D Recommendations.

Fascicle 2.2 - Telephone network and ISDN - Operation, numbering,
               routing and mobile service.  Recommendations E.100-
               E.333.

Fascicle 2.3 - Telephone network and ISDN - Quality of service, network
               management and traffic engineering.  Recommendations
               E.401-E.880.

Fascicle 2.4 - Telegraph and mobile services - Operations and quality
               of service.  Recommendations F.1-F.140.

Fascicle 2.5 - Telematic, data transmission and teleconference services.
               Operations and quality of service.  Recommendations
               F.160-F.353, F.600, F.601, F.710-F.730.

Fascicle 2.6 - Message handling and directory services - Operations and
               definition of service.  Recommendations F.400-F.422, F.500.

Volume 3

Fascicle 3.1 - General characteristics of international telephone connections
               and circuits.  Recommendations G.100-G.181.

Fascicle 3.2 - International analogue carrier systems.  Recommendations G.211-
               G.544.

Fascicle 3.3 - Transmission media - Characteristics.  Recommendations
               G.601-G.654.

Fascicle 3.4 - General aspects of digital transmission systems ; terminal
               equipments.  Recommendations G.700-G.795.

Fascicle 3.5 - Digital networks, digital sections and digital line systems.
               Recommendations G.801-G.961.

Fascicle 3.6 - Line transmission of non-telephone signals.  Transmission
               of sound-programme and television signals.  Series H and
               J Recommendations.

Fascicle 3.7 - ISDN - General structure and service capabilities.
               Recommendations I.110-I.257.

Fascicle 3.8 - ISDN - Overall network aspects and functions.  ISDN
               user-network interfaces.  Recommendations I.310-I.470.

Fascicle 3.9 - ISDN - Internetwork interfaces and maintenance principles.
               Recommendations I.500-I.605.

Volume 4

Fascicle 4.1 - General maintenance principles: maintenance of international
               transmission systems and telephone circuits.  Recommendations
               M.10-M.782.

Fascicle 4.2 - Maintenance of international telegraph, phototelegraph
               and leased circuits.  Maintenance of the international
               public telephone network.  Maintenance of maritime
               satellite and data transmission systems.  Recommendations
               M.800-M.1375.

Fascicle 4.3 - Maintenance of international sound-programme and television
               transmission circuits.  Series N Recommendations.

Fascicle 4.4 - Specifications for measuring equipment.  Series O
               Recommendations.

Volume 5

Fascicle 5.1 - Telephone transmission quality.  Series P Recommendations.

Volume 6

Fascicle 6.1 - General recommendations on telephone switching and
               signalling.  Functions and information flows for services
               in the ISDN.  Recommendations Q.1-Q.118 bis.

Fascicle 6.2 - Specifications of Signalling Systems Nos. 4 and 5.
               Recommendations Q.120-Q.180.

Fascicle 6.3 - Specifications of Signalling System No. 6.  Recommendations
               Q.251-Q.300.

Fascicle 6.4 - Specifications of Signalling Systems R1 and R2.
               Recommendations Q.310-Q.490.

Fascicle 6.5 - Digital local, transit, combined and international
               exchanges in integrated digital networks and mixed analogue-
               digital networks.  Recommendations Q.500-Q.554.

Fascicle 6.6 - Interworking of signalling systems.  Recommendations Q.601-
               Q.699.

Fascicle 6.7 - Specifications of Signalling System No. 7.  Recommendations
               Q.700-Q.716.

Fascicle 6.8 - Specifications of Signalling System No. 7.  Recommendations
               Q.721-Q.766.

Fascicle 6.9 - Specifications of Signalling System No. 7.  Recommendations
               Q.771-Q.795.

Fascicle 6.10- Digital subscriber signalling system No. 1 (DSS 1), data
               link layer.  Recommendations Q.920-Q.921.

Fascicle 6.11- Digital subscriber signalling system No. 1 (DSS 1), network
               layer, user-network management.  Recommendations Q.930-
               Q.940.

Fascicle 6.12- Public land mobile network.  Interworking with ISDN and PSTN.
               Recommendations Q.1000-Q.1032.

Fascicle 6.13- Public land mobile network.  Mobile application part and
               interfaces.  Recommendations Q.1051-Q.1063.

Fascicle 6.14- Interworking with satellite mobile systems.  Recommendations
               Q.1100-Q.1152.

Volume 7

Fascicle 7.1 - Telegraph transmission.  Series R Recommendations.  Telegraph
               services terminal equipment.  Series S Recommendations.

Fascicle 7.2 - Telegraph switching.  Series U Recommendations.

Fascicle 7.3 - Terminal equipment and protocols for telematic services.
               Recommendations T.0-T.63.

Fascicle 7.4 - Conformance testing procedures for Teletex Recommendations.
               Recommendation T.64.

Fascicle 7.5 - Terminal equipment and protocols for telematic services.
               Recommendations T.150-T.390.  Recommendations T.65-T.101.

Fascicle 7.6 - Terminal equipment and protocols for telematic services.
               Recommendations T.400-T.418.

Fascicle 7.7 - Terminal equipment and protocols for telematic services.
               Recommendations T.431-T.564.

Volume 8

Fascicle 8.1 - Data communication over the telephone network.  Series V
               Recommendations.

Fascicle 8.2 - Data communication networks: services, facilities, and
               interfaces.  Recommendations X.1-X.32.

Fascicle 8.3 - Data communication networks: transmission, signalling and
               switching, network aspects, maintenance and administrative
               arrangements.  Recommendations X.40-X.181.

Fascicle 8.4 - Data communication networks: Open Systems Interconnection
               (OSI) - Model and notation, service definition.
               Recommendations X.200-X.219.

Fascicle 8.5 - Data communication networks: OSI - Protocol specifications,
               conformance testing.  Recommendations X.220-X.290.

Fascicle 8.6 - Data communication networks: interworking between networks,
               mobile transmission systems, internetwork management.
               Recommendations X.300-X.370.

Fascicle 8.7 - Data communication networks: message handling systems.
               Recommendations X.400-X.420.

Fascicle 8.8 - Data communication networks: directory.  Recommendations
               X.500-X.521.

Volume 9

Fascicle 9.1 - Protection against interference.  Series K Recommendations.
               Construction, installation and protection of cable and
               other elements of outside plant.  Series L Recommendations.

Volume 10

Fascicle 10.1- Functional Specification and Description Language (SDL).
               Recommendation Z.100 and Annexes A, B, C, and E,
               Recommendation Z.110.

Fascicle 10.2- Annex D to Recommendation Z.100.

Fascicle 10.3- Annex F.1 to Recommendation Z.100.

Fascicle 10.4- Annex F.2 to Recommendation Z.100.

Fascicle 10.5- Annex F.3 to Recommendation Z.100.

Fascicle 10.6- CCITT High Level Language (CHILL).  Recommendation Z.200.

Fascicle 10.7- Man-Machine Language (MML).  Recommendations Z.301-Z.341.

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

From: [e-mail] (T. Govindaraj)
Subject: Looking For a Device to Log Calls
Date: 5 Jul 92 18:53:18 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail] (T. Govindaraj)
Organization: Center for Human-Machine Systems Research - Georgia Tech


Recently we have begun to doubt the call durations shown on the bills
from a certain long distance carrier (who shall remain nameless). This
seems to happen on calls to India. (This may happen in domestic long
distance calls too, but since there are not so expensive we don't keep
track of them.)

Is there a device I can hook up to the phone (or junction box) that
will keep an accurate log? I remember seeing such a device in the
Hello Direct catalog sometime ago, but the current catalog does not
list one.

I would like something that is relatively inexpensive ($100-150). It
can be standalone or work with a NeXT machine. Ideally I would like to
use it to log calls on two lines.

Any information will be greatly appreciated. Thank you very much.


govind
T. Govindaraj    [phone]        [e-mail],NeXTmail welcome.
Member, League for Programming Freedom         (write [e-mail])
School of Industrial and Systems Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology
765 Ferst Drive, ISyE-0205, Atlanta, GA 30332-0205.

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

Date: 05 Jul 1992 17:59:28 -0400 (EDT)
From: [e-mail] (Steven S. Brack)
Subject: FGB, FGD Trunks


After hearing a good deal about trunks described as:

Feature Group B   -->  950-XXXX access
Feature Group D   -->  10XXX    access,  etc.,

I wondered what other Feature Groups there were, and what "Features"
such labelling indicated.


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

Date: Sat, 4 Jul 92 13:48:26 CST
From: [e-mail] (Jack Decker)
Subject: AGT Digital Cellular


This message was seen in the Fidonet MDF echomail conference:

* From : Dan J. Rudiak, 1:134/68 (30 Jun 92 06:30)
* Subj : AGT Digital Cellular

920625 AGT Cellular Offers First Commercial TDMA Service

Schaumburg, Ill., June 25 AGT Cellular of Calgary, Alberta today
announced availability of the world's first commercial TDMA digital
mobile cellular telephone service, using unique, dual-mode cellular
base station radio equipment supplied by MOTOROLA NORTEL
Communications.

MOTOROLA NORTEL has substantially completed a $4.3 million upgrade to
AGT Cellular's existing network of Northern Telecom cellular systems,
adding TDMA (time division multiple access) base station radio
equipment to its "digital ready" cell sites.

"This enhances AGT Cellular's position as Alberta's leader in cellular
technology," said Harry Truderung, president, AGT Cellular. "There's
no doubt digital is going to become a competitive factor in the
marketplace over the next year, and we're proud to be taking the
lead."

Digital cellular service coverage is available to 80 per cent of AGT
Cellular's subscribers today, and virtually all by the end of August.

"Mobile telephone users in the province of Alberta will be among the
first in the world to take advantage of the quality, reliability,
security, and future advanced features of digital cellular," said
William Spencer, chief executive officer, MOTOROLA NORTEL.

"We're very pleased to participate with AGT Cellular in turning the
promise of digital cellular service into a reality," Spencer said.

Digital technology converts analog voice into more compressed and
efficient binary signals, initially offering as much as a three-fold
increase in capacity, as well as noise-free calls, cleaner call
handoff between cells, and enhanced security.

In the future, digital technology will also enable cellular systems to
offer advanced networking features such as caller identification.

The digital radio equipment MOTOROLA NORTEL is supplying to AGT
Cellular is Northern Telecom|s unique dual-mode cellular radio channel
unit, manufactured in Calgary.

It consists of a digital signal processor-based (DSP) transceiver,
capable of loading application-specific software for analog or digital
operation, and for future enhanced cellular services.

It supports either a single analog radio channel, or a TDMA digital
channel capable of handling three, simultaneous conversations today,
and eventually up to six.

And it allows the cellular system operator to allocate analog and
digital radio channels dynamically on a call-by-call basis to meet
changing subscriber demand.

"This is the only radio channel unit available for cellular networks
that can operate in either analog or digital mode, yet it's
competitively priced with analog-only systems," said John Roth,
president, Wireless Systems, Northern Telecom.

"It allows AGT Cellular to offer the benefits of digital while
continuing to offer the highest level of service to its loyal
installed base of analog mobile customers," Roth said.

TDMA is the current industry standard access method for digital
cellular systems in North America.

AGT Cellular is Alberta's leading supplier of cellular and paging
services, and a subsidiary of publicly-traded, Alberta-based TELUS
Corporation, one of Canada's largest telecommunications companies.

MOTOROLA NORTEL Communications, headquartered in Schaumburg, Illinois,
is a joint venture company of Motorola and Northern Telecom which
sells, services, and supports cellular telephone networks in the U.S.,
Canada, Mexico, Central and South America, and the Caribbean.
MOTOROLA NORTEL draws on the research, manufacturing, and marketing
expertise of both parent companies to provide its customers with
world-class cellular network systems supporting current and emerging
standards.

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


One more from the Fidonet MDF echomail conference.  I was sorry to read
this, since I had the hope that the digital cellular systems would offer
some real security:

* From : Dan J. Rudiak, 1:134/68 (30 Jun 92 06:30)
* To   : Dave Leibold
* Subj : Re: Agt cellular now run

 @PTH 1:154/9@fidonet 8
 @MSGID: 1:134/68.0 2a4fff6e

In a fit of brilliance, Dave Leibold blurted out to All:

> AGT Cellular in Alberta, Canada, has apparently scored the first
> digital  cellular system in service in North America, beating out
> Cantel and other companies which have stated their
> intention to go digital cellular (as opposed to the current
> analog voice transmissions which can be intercepted with
> scanners, etc). AGT has placed ads joking that digital is

Calls can still be intercepted ... I sat in a session where the
instructor had a plain-jane cell phone with a "maintenance" package
installed in it. He was able to tune to any of the channels within the
cell, and listen in on both sides of the conversation. You'll be able
to do the same thing with the digital cellular. Digitial cellular was
created for the Celco, not the customer ...


Dan

Origin: The Computer Connection BBS (1:134/68)

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

Jack Decker    [e-mail]     FidoNet 1:154/8

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

Date: Mon, 6 Jul 1992 04:18 -0500
From: Eric Engelmann <[e-mail]>
Subject: Looking For Supplier of Telephone Jack Converters


The World Bank sends a lot of people to remote ends of the Earth with
notebook PCs and built in FaxModems. These countries have a variety of
non RJ11 wall jacks. I once saw a set of universal telephone jack
converters (an idea similar to the AC adapters for small appliances
used overseas which are readily available in many stores). I've lost
the vendor's name. None of the modem or telephone vendors I've spoken
with can direct me to a collection of adapters (RJ11 to XXX). Can
anyone help?

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #539
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa25066;
          7 Jul 92 3:26 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA22272
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 7 Jul 1992 01:36:18 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA10175
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 7 Jul 1992 01:36:09 -0500
Date: Tue, 7 Jul 1992 01:36:09 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #540

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 7 Jul 92 01:36:02 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 540

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: 700 Easyreach Service Should be Called Hard to Reach (John Butz)
    Re: 700 Easyreach Service Should be Called Hard to Reach (Irving_Wolfe)
    Re: 700 Easyreach Service Should be Called Hard to Reach (Alan Toscano)
    EasyReach 700 Glitch (Herr Cerny)
    Re: Answering Machine Problem (Peter da Silva)
    Re: AT&T Educational Presentations by Satellite (Alan L. Varney)
    Re: Suit Alleges Cellular Caused Brain Tumor (Gregory Youngblood)
    Re: 1-800 DISA Hacking - A Waste of Time and Money (Martin McCormick)
    Re: What are "NorTel" and "Centrex"? (Mike Seebeck)
    Re: Crimestoppers Textbook Carl Moore)
    Re: Crimestoppers Textbook (Tony Safina)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Date: Mon, 6 Jul 92 10:06 EDT
Subject: Re: 700 Easyreach Service Should be Called Hard to Reach


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

> It turns out AT&T has implemented the 700 service such that only those
> phones connected to AT&T as their default equal access carrier can
> call a 700 number; all other customers must dial 102880 before dialing
> 700-xxxxxxx.  This means I must give different dialing instructions

First, let's separate:

    1.  The Easy Reach Service 700, from

    2.  The Problems all IECs will experience providing service
with 700 numbers, before this discussion is taken any further.

I'll let AT&T's Easy Reach 700 service speak for itself.  It's a good
service, and has gotten good reviews.

Next, unlike 800 and 900 numbers, 700 numbers are NOT shared between
IECs.  That is, the range of 800 and 900 numbers (ie 800-000-0000 thru
800-999-9999 and likewise for 900) are shared resource, where the
range is divied up among all the Long Distance carriers.  The 800-NXX
(or 900-NXX) tells the LEC switch which IEC "owns" the 800 (or 900)
number.  (Though I understand, this will change for 800 service in the
future ... ie "portable" 800 numbers).

The "intelligence" for 800 and 900 numbers lies in the LEC switch, not
in the subscriber.  This is not true for 700 numbers.  Each IEC "owns"
its own range of 700 numbers (700-000-XXXX thru 700-999-XXXX), so it
is possible that 700-NEI-HART could exist on AT&T's network, MCI's
network, Sprint's Network, etc, etc, all at the same time!  The
subscriber now has to know which IEC owns the number and dial the
appropriate access code OR be "piced" to the particular IEC.

Mind you, that this is not the fault of AT&T, AT&T Easy Reach 700,
MCI, Sprint, etc.  This was (to the best of my knowledge) a Bellcore
decision.  800 and 900 numbers are a limited resource.  Giving each
IEC its own range of 700 numbers (and maybe 600, 500, 400, etc in the
future) allows room for growth, while trading off ease of dialing and
the possibility that one or more unique 700 numbers can exist.

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

> this service. But I find that my desert hideaway (Contel) cannot call
> out to these numbers. Oddly enough 700 555-4141 works just fine but
> nothing else does in the 700 block.

Try the Easy Reach 700 service 800 access number for those times when
the LECs, pay phones, or cellular phones block 700 dialing.
1-800-824-5621.  For Customer service, 1-800-982-8480.

Many thanks [e-mail] for the compliments on the service.


John Butz
Easy Reach 700 System Engineering
AT&T Bell Labs    [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: It is important to point out also that all EasyReach
numbers must be dialed zero plus 700 -- not one plus. They are always
in effect 'operator assisted'.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Irving_Wolfe)
Subject: Re: 700 Easyreach Service Should be Called Hard to Reach
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Happy Man Corp., Vashon Island, WA 98070-7399
Date: Tue, 7 Jul 1992 02:15:58 GMT


In <[e-mail]> the Moderator notes:

> [Moderator's Note: I think the rep was mistaken in any case because
> AT&T has had miscellaneous billing accounts in place for many years,
> for example with non-subscriber calling cards.   PAT]

Unfortunately, I think the problem is real.

We are stuck here on Vashon Island with a horrible phone company, part
of PTI, that also doesn't have general billing arrangements with AT&T,
only a few standard long distance billing plans.  In fact, my business
subscribed to AT&T's "Pro-Watts-Plus" (or some such) and inquired
about getting their 5% discount for signing up for 18 months.  It
couldn't be done because no billing arrangement with PTI exists for
that.  Apparently, AT&T just tells PTI by some code to discount our
bill, and PTI hasn't elected to write the software to apply the
discount.

We have other billing problems with PTI; supposedly, the right total
amount is being charged, but many calls appear twice on the bill
because they aren't real good at programming computers.  Except for
very large customers, AT&T doesn't like to direct-bill.  It's a pity!


[e-mail]      Happy Man Corp. 206/463-9399 x101
4410 SW Pt. Robinson Rd., Vashon Island, WA  98070-7399  fax x108

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: Mon Jul  6 13:34:54 CDT 1992
Subject: Re: 700 Easyreach Service Should be Called Hard to Reach


In a reponse to an article posted by [e-mail] (Carl Neihart),
[e-mail] (John Higdon) writes:

> ... The two deficiencies with the service are related: the calling
> telephone must be FGD compliant; and there are some (even FGD
> compliant) offices that seem to have a problem with 700 implementation.

> ... But I find that my desert hideaway (Contel) cannot call
> out to these numbers. Oddly enough 700 555-4141 works just fine but
> nothing else does in the 700 block.

> ... Remember, if you cannot dial 10XXX codes, you probably cannot
> call one of these numbers. Otherwise, it should work just fine.

Since you're able to reach the "You have reached the AT&T long
distance network" recording, perhaps either you or your end-office
switch are placing the EasyReach 700 calls in a 1+ fashion. EasyReach
calls must generally be dialed as 0+.

In non-equal-access (non-FGD-compliant) towns, 10XXX codes aren't
permitted, but most long distance calls will default to AT&T anyway,
so dialing 0 700 NXX-XXXX will *probably* work. If it doesn't, or if
you're calling from an uncooperative COCOT/PBX, you can use one of
AT&T's 800 access codes to reach OSPS: 1 800 824-5621 option 1.

Note that while non-FGD-compliance may not be an obstacle to
EasyReach, the lack of DTMF may well be: To place an ER700 call from a
rotory phone, the call must be dialed 0+ or 10ATT-0+ (no 800 access),
must be billed to the calling number (you can't enter a PIN or card
number without DTMF), and the calling line must not have a restriction
on sent-paid calls. Changing your ER700 Service routing *always*
requires DTMF.


A Alan Toscano - [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: Mon Jul  6 04:26:23 1992
From: [e-mail] (Herr Cerny)
Subject: EasyReach 700 Glitch
Organization: Crash TimeSharing, El Cajon, CA
Date: Mon, 06 Jul 1992 11:26:21 GMT


I've been hacking around with my new EasyReach 700 service, especially
the selective routing feature for PIN coded callers.  But I've
uncovered a glitch in the call forwarding feature for a specified
number of hours: after the specified time elapses, calls are not
routed to the default ("home") destination.  Instead, both anonymous
and PIN coded callers reach a network announcement, "I'm sorry, the
EasyReach 700 subscriber is not available."

I reported the glitch, and AT&T acknowledged it, advising that they
are going to fix this within a week.  Until then, other EasyReach
folks should be aware of the work-around: program call forward
indefinite back to the "home" number after your call forwarding period
elapses.

Btw, if you're still thinking about getting a 700 number, you better
move fast: 700-EAT-SH*T and other favorites are already gone. ;-)


Bill Cerny  <[e-mail]>    |    10288-0-700-FON-BILL

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

From: [e-mail] (Peter da Silva)
Subject: Re: Answering Machine Problem
Organization: Taronga Park BBS
Date: Mon, 6 Jul 1992 11:03:43 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Kelly Schwarzhoff) writes:

> [Moderator's Note: Most devices built to serve only one line usually
> default to serving 'line one'. What you need to do is [heath-robinson

[slash rube goldberg modification to the phone jack AND phone deleted]

Alternatively, just get a two-line adapter from Radio Shack. It's
designed to let you plug a two-line phone into two one-line jacks, or
two one-line phones into a two-line jack. Cheap, self-documenting, and
you can select which line the answering machine uses on a moment's
notice.

(Query: does anyone make phone cable that puts the separate lines on
twisted pairs? Like twisted-pair ribbon cable, you'd need to have
periodic flat sections, but I see no reason it wouldn't work.)


Peter da Silva, Taronga Park BBS, Houston, TX  [phone]/1032

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

Date: Mon,  6 Jul 92 08:52:14 CDT
From: [e-mail] (Alan L Varney)
Subject: Re: AT&T Educational Presentations by Satellite
Organization: AT&T Network Systems


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Bill
Mayhew) writes:

> I had the day off today, so I was flipping around looking for
> interesting stuff on my TVRO.  I happened upon an AT&T presentation on
> Telstar 302, transponder 3H.  It was a basic marketing-like
> presentation on the DMS-2000 SONET fiber terminal equipment.  For
> telco outsider such as myself it was fairly interesting becuase it did
> not go into minute technical details.  AT&T acknowledged home and
> business viewership outside of internal channels at the open of the
> program; interesting.  The program aired 0930-1115 on 6/30/92.

   Are you sure it was "DMS"-2000; Northern Telecom uses this acronym
for it's switching products, and I've never heard of the DMS-2000 as
an AT&T transmission product.  It could have been a DDM-2000, that's a
single-shelf SONET/OC-3 multiplexer that handles VT-G, DS3, STS-1,
STS-3 and DS1/B8ZS interfaces.  The literature calls DS3 a "low-speed"
signal!

> At the end, they mentioned that AT&T eduational materials are
> available by calling 800-TRAINER and selecting 2 on the voice mailbox.

> The program was uplinked by a TOC in Dublin, OH.  If I get a chance,
> I'll give them a call to see if a schedule is available; I'll send any
> info I receive along to the telecom readership here.

   Dublin, OH is the primary craft/operations training center for AT&T
switching and transmission products.  It, like the 7 other product
training centers in the USA, trains both customers and employees.
Dublin tends to be the "hands-on" training center, and the Hickory
Ridge facility in Lisle, IL (near Bellcore TEC) tends to focus on
classroom training for managers and technical support folks.  There
are also 20 sites offering computer software training.

   Dublin's full-motion satellite broadcasts began in 1992.  It's
called the AT&T Classroom of the Future (it might be a service mark).
These are interactive classes with about 2000 sites around the world.
They also offer basic telecommunications training via VHS tape
combined with PC-based animation.

   The main number is 1-800-TRAINER (1-800-872-4637).  In Canada, it's
1-800-221-1647.  A non-800 contact number is 614-764-5539.

   Glad you enjoyed the presentation.


Al Varney - just MY opinion -- but I must say that I do work with the
            Dublin folks occasionally on switch training.

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

Subject: Re: Suit Alleges Cellular Caused Brain Tumor
From: [e-mail] (Gregory Youngblood)
Date: Mon, 06 Jul 92 07:34:32 EST
Organization: TCS Consulting Services, Peachtree City, GA


[e-mail] (Robert Horvitz) writes:

> The lead article in the May/June issue of {Microwave News} says that
> NEC America and GTE Mobilnet of Tampa have been sued for damages
> arising from a brain tumor allegedly induced in Susan Reynard, who was
> described as a frequent user of cellular phones.  The suit argues that
> "The tumor was the result of radiation emitted by a cellular telephone
> [or] the course of the tumor was accelerated and aggravated by the
> emissions from the telephone ..."

> This is believed to be the first lawsuit against a cellular phone
> company concerning electromagnetic hazards.  Lawyer John Lloyd Jr.
> said it was prompted by the deaths from brain cancer of three Tampa-area
> doctors who were also described as heavy users of cellular phones.

> According to David Reynard, Susan's husband, (quoting from {Microwave
> NEWS}), "If an outline of the phone were superimposed on the [magnetic
> resonance image of her head which] showed his wife's tumor, the
> malignancy would be at the middle of the antenna ..."

Just out of curiousity ...

How much actual on-the-air airtime did she and the others use each
month, and for how many months??

How many technicians for cellular carriers, as well as other staff,
have been diagnosed with brain cancer/tumors thought to be possibly
from the heavy usage of cellular phones?

I'm not downplaying the dangers of the frequency. From what I
understand the 800Mhz has the potential to do some significant damage
to the human brain if exposed long enough.  I'm what I consider to be
a heavy user.  I use my phone (an NEC P300 handheld in and out of a
carkit) several thousand minutes each month, and have done so for
roughly for the last 24 to 30 months.  Before then, I used various
handhelds w/out car kits several hundred minutes a month.  [I'm just
glad I get free airtime. :) The bills would be unmanageable if I
didn't].

Considering my usage, and my idea of heavy users, the posting of the
lawsuit has made me curious.


Thanks,

Gregory S. Youngblood    The opinions expressed above are my own and
Cellular One             does not mean my employer feels the same way.
26-A Bullsboro Drive     Newnan, GA  30263  [e-mail]

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

Subject: Re: 1-800 DISA Hacking - A Waste of Time and Money
Date: Mon, 06 Jul 92 09:07:31 -0500
From: [e-mail]


Partial quote follows:

> host for the past few weeks to a hackling from (212) 234-849x who has
> been pounding randomly on one of my DISA ports which terminates on

It would seem that given the ANI from this guy, one could track him
down and do a little pounding on him.


Martin McCormick WB5AGZ   Stillwater, OK
O.S.U. Computer Center Data Communications Group

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

From: [e-mail] (Mike Seebeck)
Subject: Re: What are "NorTel" and "Centrex"?
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Date: Mon, 6 Jul 1992 15:52:36 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail].
ncsu.edu (Ben Harrell) writes:

> [e-mail] (Shuang Deng) writes:

> Centrex can be described *roughly* as a virtual PBX or key system
> service provided by the local telephone company (also competitive
> access providers in New York state).  In Centrex, every station set
> has a physical or derived voice equivalent channel from the user's
> desk to the serving central office line interface circuit (sometimes
> called line relay).  For customers larger than 50-100 station sets,

hout their own OPE it is not uncommon in my neck off the woods to find the
local RBOC has sold centrex lines to a customer who has their own PBX
or key system.  In this case the Centrex lines look like trunks from
the central office.  Rather like a network on a network.  The customer
may or may-not know the significance of the service and was sold the
lines as a cost savings without reference to the cost of the NARS.


Michael Seebeck   RMH Group, Telecomm Dept.
[phone]     *DISCLAIMER: Its mine, all mine(D.Duck?)

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

Date: Mon, 6 Jul 92 11:10:46 EDT
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Crimestoppers Textbook


OK out there, if you know you dialed an 800 number and you get billed,
check to see what number appears on your phone bill.

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

From: disk![e-mail] (tony)
Subject: Re: Crimestoppers Textbook
Organization: Digital Information Systems of KY
Date: Mon, 06 Jul 1992 13:21:12 GMT


[e-mail] (Edward Floden) writes:

> Some 900-number phone scams have switched to using 800 numbers;
> watch carefully for any charges when dialing an 800 number."

    What if you call these "800" numbers from a pay phone?  <grin>
Can they _still_ bill you?

    -=- Tony Safina -=- disk![e-mail] -=-


[Moderator's Note: Well our experience with the Mystic Marketing
Company of Nevada was they tried to bill the phone, and of course the
telco owners of the phone were the ones to get billed and refuse
payment. Mystic soon wised up; I think they have abandoned billing to
the telephone via 800.   PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #540
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa25980;
          7 Jul 92 3:51 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA22578
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 7 Jul 1992 02:02:13 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA19476
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 7 Jul 1992 02:02:05 -0500
Date: Tue, 7 Jul 1992 02:02:05 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #541

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 7 Jul 92 02:02:00 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 541

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: See Figure 1 (Stephen Friedl)
    Re: See Figure 1 (Tom Perrine)
    Re: See figure 1 (Bryan Lockwood)
    Re: What are "NorTel" and "Centrex"? (Mike Seebeck)
    Re: Funny Advertising Goof-ups (Wrong Numbers) (Bill Gripp)
    Re: Suit Alleges Cellular Caused Brain Tumor (Ang Peng Hwa)
    Re: Looking For SS-7 Books (Dick Rawson)
    Re: Beware: The AT&T "Call Me" Card Works to *ANY* Number! (Phydeaux)
    Re: "Legal" Phreaking? (Tony Safina)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Stephen Friedl)
Subject: Re: See Figure 1
Date: 6 Jul 92 20:39:59 GMT
Organization: Steve's Personal machine / Tustin, CA


Mike Bray writes:

> I wish I could remember who sent this to me, and when they did,
> but I don't. :(  So see figure 1. :)

>                 AT&T Customer Service Memorandum

>      Please stop submitting compliants.  This is our system.

     I am sure that I created this in 1986 or so.  I had seen one for
"VMS Version 3" in the very same format, and decided that AT&T needed
one as well.  I was with an AT&T VAR back then, and most of the things
that this little memorandum mentions are no longer the case: you can
get ksh now, they really do support the math chip very nicely, and the
data techs that have supported my customers and me have been first-rate
(Hi Larry Duffy!).

     Stephen

P.S. - You AT&T management types that got hot the last time this
       was posted can definitely see Figure 1.  Lighten up, OK?


Stephen J Friedl | Software Consultant | Tustin, CA |     [phone]
3b2-kind-of-guy  | I speak for me ONLY |   KA8CMY   | uunet!mtndew!friedl

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

From: [e-mail] (Tom Perrine)
Subject: Re: See Figure 1
Date: 6 Jul 92 23:21:56 GMT
Organization: Logicon, Inc., San Diego, California


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

> I wish I could remember who sent this to me, and when they did, but I
 > don't. :(  So see figure 1. :)

Well, well, well.  Figure 1 returns!  I first encountered this diagram
and text in a Honeywell internal memo, For the Honeywell CP-6 Release
B03 HOST Software Release Bulletin, in 1982.  The diagram is almost
exactly the same, and some of the text is identical:

The first paragraph is identical.  So is most of the one on options.

The rest of the Honeywell memo is just as funny. Naw, its funnier. If
you don't think so, or you want me to type it all in, See Figure 1.

:-) :-) :-) :-) :-)


Tom E. Perrine (tep)     | [e-mail]         | Voice: [phone]
Logicon, Inc.            | sun!suntan!tots!tep     | or : [phone]
4010 Sorrento Valley Blvd| San Diego CA 92121-1498 | FAX: [phone]

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

Subject: Re: See figure 1
From: [e-mail] (Bryan Lockwood)
Date: Sun, 05 Jul 92 15:12:53 PDT
Organization: The Coldbox- [phone]. World's northernmost site?


Ah. I recall seeing this a LONG time ago. In fact I'm pretty sure I
still have a copy floating around on disk (and on around and around
again, if you want to get technical). But the version I saw had to do
with the VAX VMS operating system, rather than with AT&T.

Which is why I nearly fell out of my chair laughing when I read the
part that refers to the VAX. I suppose I could make the VAX version
available if anyone wanted it. Use email, PAT probably wouldn't want
me to post it here.

I wonder if the guy who originally wrote this will be writing to the
fellow who rewrote it, telling him to (see Figure 1)?


Author: Bryan Lockwood (system@coldbox)
Originating system: The Coldbox- [phone]. World's northernmost site?
WWIVnet: @501 | Usenet: uunet!coldbox!system | Direct: [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Mike Seebeck)
Subject: Re: What are "NorTel" and "Centrex"?
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Date: Mon, 6 Jul 1992 15:52:36 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail].
ncsu.edu (Ben Harrell) writes:

> [e-mail] (Shuang Deng) writes:

> Centrex can be described *roughly* as a virtual PBX or key system
> service provided by the local telephone company (also competitive
> access providers in New York state).  In Centrex, every station set
> has a physical or derived voice equivalent channel from the user's
> desk to the serving central office line interface circuit (sometimes
> called line relay).  For customers larger than 50-100 station sets,

hout their own OPE it is not uncommon in my neck off the woods to find the
local RBOC has sold centrex lines to a customer who has their own PBX
or key system.  In this case the Centrex lines look like trunks from
the central office.  Rather like a network on a network.  The customer
may or may-not know the significance of the service and was sold the
lines as a cost savings without reference to the cost of the NARS.


Michael Seebeck       RMH Group, Telecomm Dept.  [phone]
            *DISCLAIMER: Its mine, all mine(D.Duck?)


[Moderator's Note: The above message was mangled when I got it. His
reply starts out just as you see it; I could not figure it out.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Bill Gripp)
Subject: Re: Funny Advertising Goof-ups (Wrong Numbers)
Organization: LA&W RR
Date: Mon, 6 Jul 92 15:25:06 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> John Higdon <john@zygot.
ati.com> writes:

> Wouldn't it be nice if it always turned out that way? Some time ago, I
> had a number that was very close to 800 HILTONS. At one point I became
> innundated with calls from people trying to book reservations. When I
> called the hotel chain to see if there had perhaps been an ad with a
> mistake or some other contributing factor for the wrong numbers, I got
> the royal brush-off. Since the Great Big Corporation was not
> interested in little old me or my problems, I used a retaliatory
> method that if nothing else made me feel better. I am sure you can
> imagine what it was.

So how many bogus reservations did you make???  =B^]


[Moderator's Note: I don't think he made reservations; I think he took
them instead ... I told him it would have been only fitting had at
least a few of the 'guests' then arrived unexpectedly at Higdon House
and demanded a room.  PAT]

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

Date: Tue, 07 Jul 92 00:01:40 SST
From: Ang Peng Hwa <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Suit Alleges Cellular Caused Brain Tumor


John Higdon is an agnostic about non-ionizing radiation who seems to
have been no worse for it bouncing off his skull :)

But here are are my two cents of fears.

The "theory" of non-ionizing radiation was discovered accidentally by
a researcher who was looking for the cause of leukemia. He/she (can't
remember) found nothing until one day, looking around her, saw that
there were lots of power lines. Redrawing her subjects, she found that
virtually all lived within 100 yards of either a substation or a high
voltage line.

True, no study has vindicated those findings. But as a researchers, I
am inclined to take findings that were discovered, more seriously than
those one set out to find.

Then there was the PC Magazine editor Winn Rosch who did a pretty
decent article on the subject of emissions from the computer monitor.
Like John, he concluded that there was no definitive study. But at the
end of the article, Rosch said he now sits five feet away from the
monitor.

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

From: [e-mail] (Dick Rawson)
Subject: Re: Looking For SS-7 Books
Date: 6 Jul 92 16:28:53 GMT
Organization: BT North America (Tymnet)


> I'm looking for some good reading material on Signaling System 7 (SS7)
> and also on packet switching. Could anyone recommend recent books
> they've read on these subjects?

See "Knocking on users' doors: Signalling System 7", by Walter Roehr,
in Data Communications for February 1989.

I saw a more technical article more recently, but I can't remember
where.  It wouldn't hurt to read this for orientation.


Dick

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

Date: Mon, 6 Jul 92 09:32:02 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Phydeaux)
Subject: Re: Beware: The AT&T "Call Me" Card Works to *ANY* Number!


> The problem is in the handling of sequence calls.  US West does this
> incorrectly for intra-LATA calls, and it now sounds like GTE Airphone
> does it wrong as well.  What happens is that as long as the initial
> call is to a valid number for the card, then sequence calls to any
> number the carrier handles will be allowed.  For US West (or any other

Interestingly, the bill I received had about eight calls and the one
to my home number was the *third* call. The only way I can see this
happening is if the calling party uses the card to ring my house and
then sequence to a few more calls (before I answer) and *then* call my
house.  In this case, the phone did *not* ring (and was not busy)
before the call came in to the one authorized number.

> The attitude AT&T's customer  service  department is  taking on   this
> issue is  the worst part of the  problem.  ...   The entire purpose of
> the restricted card is that you can give it to people you DON'T trust!

My thoughts *exactly*.

>> To top this all off, I was told that they "COULD NOT GUARANTEE" that
>> additional calls to numbers other than the one "call me" number would

> Are you SURE this wasn't GTE?

Well, when I got off of the phone she said "Thank you for calling
AT&T" "Your are <expletive> welcome."


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

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

From: disk![e-mail] (tony)
Subject: Re: "Legal" Phreaking?
Organization: Digital Information Systems of KY
Date: Mon, 06 Jul 1992 13:17:31 GMT


[e-mail] (Paul Houle) writes:

>    I did a little hacking when I was a teenager, and I broke into
> my first computer with the first username/password that I tried.  It
> was uucp/<no password>.  I also discovered that a large number of
> computers still had default passwords and other easy methods of entry
> -- methods that a 14-year old kid with a C-64 can use.  As such, I'd
> say that many computer systems maintain a level of security that is
> comparable to leaving the door of a house closed but unlocked.

>    This, to me, is simply unacceptable for a company that holds
> records that are supposed to be private.  I personally don't mind my
> credit information being on file at TRW -- I feel that, for myself,
> the loss of privacy is worth the convenience of being able to do
> business on credit with total strangers with a good deal of confi-
> dence.  I know that the phone company has to keep a log of my long
> distance calls, and that many other companies may have a legitimate
> reason to keep confidential information about me on computers.  Some
> people may feel differently because they put different values on
> certain kinds of privacy.  Yet, just about everyone would be outraged
> if just anybody could break into a computer and read or alter my
> credit information at TRW, or if a gang of hackers could break into a
> telephone company computer and find out who I call.

>    I think that in cases such as this, the customers of a company
> would be justified in bringing a class-action suit against it when it
> is discovered that a company fails to take reasonable precautions to
> protect confidential information.  This doesn't mean that we can or
> should sue a company just for getting hacked, because someone who is
> skilled enough and motivated enough and who has the resources can
> probably breach any kind of security, but yet, if a company fails to
> take the most basic precautions, as many do, I believe that is
> potentially criminal negligence.  Any company that holds confidential
> information about it's customers should be legally bound to protect
> it.

    Granted, you made many good points -- if I borrow my friend's
bicycle and it gets stolen because I negligently leave it on my front
lawn UNLOCKED while I go in the house to eat lunch, I am responsible
for the loss because I failed to take the most minimal of precautions
(say, chaining it to a tree or other secure objject).  If I do that
and someone still steals it, then I am still ethically responsible for
the loss, but my minimal effort to protect against theft would
probably prevent a charge of negligence to boot (although if it were a
_new_ bicycle, the plaintiff might be able to successfully allege that
merely locking it was insufficient protection, that I should have
rolled it into the house for maximal security while I was eating [God
Forbid if I left the front door open _and_ enjoyed my dinner on a
different floor of the house as an intruder rolled the bike out the
front door as I was dining!  Alas!  Negligent again!!]).

    I think the same argument applies, the one which you made, if
someone steals personal data which I have entrusted to a third party
for whatever reason.  They have the bicycle, they are responsible for
its safekeeping.  If they have a code, say something on the order of
the security code for new cordless telephones, one that changes every
time the account is accessed, then I would say they are doing their
job by taking greater than minimal precautions and should not be held
negligent if that data is stolen.  I feel they are still
morally/ethically responsible for the loss (just as I would be if I
lived on the South Side of Los Angeles and left my friend's new bike
chained to a tree in my front yard).

    Regarding the "phreaker's" liability, however, is he/she
blameless if they are caught in the act of theft?  Isn't their act
analogous to the act of the bicycle theif who gets caught trying
different size hacksaw blades on the chain which secures my friend's
bicycle to the tree in my front yard?  Is it a valid analogy?  I am
undecided on this point myself.  The difference is in the fact that
when the bicycle thief make that very first tiny little nick in my
bicycle chain, they have at that point already damaged my property (or
property that had been entrusted to me -- the chain).  When a
"phreaker" tries out his/her first password, is it the same thing?
Nowadays with phone numbers to BBS systems being posted everywhere,
some neophytes may not know if the system they are trying to get
access to is an open board or a closed board.  There may be
non-malicious reasons that a person tries to get access to a
particular board.  A person may even try to get access to a corporate
data base just because they know that company has data which concerns
them and they want to see how well it is protected.  Looking at it
from this point of view, say I have borrowed my friend's bicycle.

    Instead of chaining his bicycle to a tree, I have chained his
bicycle to other bicycles in my front yard (other bikes being
analogous to other people's data).  The lock belongs to me, it is a
very simple three-digit combination lock.  My friend comes back to my
house before I finish my meal and he wants his bicycle (property he
has entrusted to me).  He doesn't want to ring the doorbell and ask me
for the bike because he's afraid he'll wake my mom who works nights.
Instead, he starts fiddling around with the combination lock which
secures his property (as well as property which belongs to other
people [though it is my property while it is in my care]), ... after
an hour of fiddling (I guess I fell asleep on the couch) he gets the
combination, takes his bicycle, resecures the other bicycles, then
leaves a note wedged inside my screen door saying that he took his
bicycle.  Did my friend committ an act of theft?  Would any court of
law hold him responsible for his actions?  These are ques- tions I
don't really know the answers to, I'm not even certain this analogy
applies, but it seemed to make sense as I was writing it.

    I think there are different degreees of culptitude(sp?) and
one "phreaker" may not be as negligent as the next.  There are also
different degrees of moral/ethical responsibility for securement of
another's property.  I would think, however, that a company holding
personal data I have entrusted to them would take better precautions
with it than attempting to secure it with a three-digit bicycle lock.


         -=- Tony Safina -=- disk![e-mail] -=-

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #541
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa19050;
          8 Jul 92 9:01 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA22455
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 8 Jul 1992 07:04:01 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA31464
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 8 Jul 1992 07:03:53 -0500
Date: Wed, 8 Jul 1992 07:03:53 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #542

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 8 Jul 92 07:03:55 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 542

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: 700 Easyreach Service Should be Called Hard to Reach (Mike Coleman)
    Re: 700 Easyreach Service Should be Called Hard to Reach (Phil Howard)
    Re: 700 Easyreach Service Should be Called Hard to Reach (Alan L. Varney)
    Re: Alternative to EasyReach 700 (Phil Howard)
    A Comment From Wales About EasyReach (Richard Cox)
    EasyReach NOT (Cincinnati Bell) (Ralph Hyre)
    Some EasyReach Comments (Ed Greenberg)
    Re: What is Iridium Project? (Gantt Edmiston)
    Re: What is Iridium Project? (Shah Jahan)
    Re: What is Iridium Project? (David W. Barts)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Mike Coleman)
Subject: Re: 700 Easyreach Service Should be Called Hard to Reach
Organization: Twin Sun, Inc
Date: Wed, 8 Jul 1992 01:21:04 GMT

[e-mail] writes:

> Each IEC "owns" its own range of 700 numbers (700-000-XXXX thru
> 700-999-XXXX), so it is possible that 700-NEI-HART could exist on AT&T's
> network, MCI's network, Sprint's Network, etc, etc, all at the same time!

Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaauuuuuggggggghhhhhh!!!!!  (sounds of junior telegeek
shrieking while running around the room and bumping his head against
nearby walls.)

No, no, no, no, no!!  All of this money spent on all of this whizzy
telecom technology, and we're headed back to party lines.  Only *this*
time, someone will be answering your calls and you'll never even hear
the phone ring.

("I'm sorry, sir.  That was 'two clicks and a plop' [phone]?"
"No, ma'am.  It was 'a plop and two clicks' [phone].")

It's so *easy*!  One man, one vote.  One "entity", one phone number.


Mike

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

From: [e-mail] (Phil Howard)
Subject: Re: 700 Easyreach Service Should be Called Hard to Reach
Date: Tue, 07 Jul 92 20:47:05 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest)


> [Moderator's Note: It is important to point out also that all EasyReach
> numbers must be dialed zero plus 700 -- not one plus. They are always
> in effect 'operator assisted'.  PAT]

What causes this?  Is it just a mechanism to allow some sort of
interrupted rerouting, with the EasyReach computer system doing the
role of the operator?

[e-mail] (Irving_Wolfe) writes:

> Except for very large customers, AT&T doesn't like to direct-bill.
> It's a pity!

They direct-bill just fine ... in the form of their Universal-Card.
There is already a mechanism in place on the Universal-Card for
charges for which the grace period does not apply, e.g. the calling
card charges, which are integrated into the bill, but are not a part
of the CREDIT card aspect of the card.

So why can't they offer to do the billing of EasyReach service to
holders of the AT&T Universal Card, through the non-CREDIT side of
that service?

When I've talked to the business people at the EasyReach center, they
tell me they can't.

I understand that to mean they WON'T ... anything can be done if you
want to, and it's even easier if it is all within the same company (or
at least it should be).


Phil Howard  ---  KA9WGN  ---  [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: They also have direct billing for non-subscriber
calling cards, leased products, phone center merchandise paid for in
installments and cellular long distance calls.  PAT]

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

Date: Tue,  7 Jul 92 14:36:11 CDT
From: [e-mail] (Alan L Varney)
Subject: Re: 700 Easyreach Service Should be Called Hard to Reach
Organization: AT&T Network Systems


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

> Next, unlike 800 and 900 numbers, 700 numbers are NOT shared between
> IECs.  That is, the range of 800 and 900 numbers (ie 800-000-0000 thru
> 800-999-9999 and likewise for 900) are shared resource, where the
> range is divied up among all the Long Distance carriers.

    But like all such numbers, the 700 spectrum can only handle around
ten million subscribers.  If it is wildly successful, some other
number space must be found.  Future PCN services will hit this wall as
well (it'll take multiple NPAs to handle all the users, especially for
those that want ten distinctive ring numbers to flaunt). Unfortunately,
today there is no other NPA than 700 that a carrier is free to
allocate.  The alternative is tone dialing of an ID after dialing a
ten-digit call, as some 800-number providers use.

   Another alternative: I once proposed using International numbers
and a new XXX carrier code as a way of getting a private numbering
space (no intra-LATA screening on 01--- calls, and you can get 12
digits).  This was a packet network provider that wanted the dialed
digits to not be screened.  But this means 10XXX dialing to select the
carrier for such calls, since most folks wouldn't want to pre-subscribe
to such a carrier.  And the carrier couldn't handle REAL international
traffic.

   There really aren't any easy answers to providing short dialing
sequences to reach "non-geographic" numbers for large populations.
And people are accumulating numbers like crazy.  FAX numbers, beeper
numbers, multiple cellular numbers, private 800 numbers, etc.  CCITT
is also concerned about the use of parts of numbers to select
features, carriers, services, etc.  Their latest suggestion is that
telephone numbers (as opposed to dialing plans) should only designate
the intended recipient, and prefix digits or other means should be
used to signal the other stuff.  Followed literally, that means the
use of two numbers for "distinctive ring" service violates the CCITT
"rules".  Of course, so do Remote Call Forwarding numbers (for FX).
For the future, CCITT is banking on "supplementary numbers" that can
be delivered to ISDN sets to select services or terminals.

> The 800-NXX (or 900-NXX) tells the LEC switch which IEC "owns" the
> 800 (or 900) number.  (Though I understand, this will change for 800
> service in the future ... ie "portable" 800 numbers).

    800 number "portability" will not change the number of 800
numbers, so in general it only changes from using NXX to identify the
IXC to using NXX-XXXX to identify the IXC.  (There are other
enhancements, such as using ANI, type-of-line, traffic rate and
time-of-day to select the IXC, but that's just frosting.)


Al Varney - just MY opinion, not AT&T's

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

From: [e-mail] (Phil Howard)
Subject: Re: Alternative to EasyReach 700
Date: Mon, 06 Jul 92 19:42:05 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest)


[e-mail] (Phil Howard ) writes:

> But why not use some other [1-6]00 prefix and establish a portable
> number service.  There are of course complications, but portable 800
> service will have to address many of these anyway, and I suspect most
> of the solutions will be the same (such as the mechanism for assigning
> a new vanity number).

> [Moderator's Note: You are forgetting that EasyReach is a specialized
> service for AT&T customers. It is intended as a convenience for their
> customers, not the caller.   PAT]

My suggestion is the creation of a national inter-carrier service in
the same sense that 800 and 900 services now are.  I don't know who's
role it would be to set it up (how was 900 created?) but suspect it
might have to be the FCC itself (I guess they are the ones pushing the
800 service into portable mode).  This idea would not conflict with
the 700 services which any carrier can setup more independently if
they want.  It obviously cannot use 800 numbers (since the caller can
be billed ... at least we would not want that) and probably cannot use
900 either, so I had suggested the [1-6]00 range.

I realize EasyReach is a specialized service.  I'm proposing something
that is different (but might resemble it).


Phil Howard  ---  KA9WGN  ---  [e-mail]

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

Date: Tue, 7 Jul 92 20:22 GMT
From: Richard Cox <[e-mail]>
Subject: A Comment From Wales About EasyReach
Reply-To: [e-mail]


I hope you'll pardon a comment from Wales about your new Easyreach
service.

If I understand it (like, if I've been reading this Digest properly !)
each carrier has their own set of 700-YYY-ZZZZ numbers ... and you all
have to dial the 10XXX prefix if you're not with the carrier serving
the customer that you want.  Two questions: does this preclude
Easyreach numbers being called from outside the NANP (or even outside
the mainland USA ?)  When I dial into the USA from the UK, I canNOT
preselect a carrier.  Should these numbers be called Easy(but only
from inside the US)reach numbers?

And how are they tariffed?  What is the caller charged?  Do your
payphones handle the calls and their charges correctly (I mean
payphones run by telcos, not COCOTS -- that's a separate can of worms).
We have a lot of problems over here right now trying to decide how to
handle portable numbers which could be anywhere on this tiny island
(so the code prefix doesn't tell much about the cost of the call).  A
lot of our payphones rely on the code digits to decide what to charge,
instead of pulses from the telcos.  People won't like having to pay
"national" call charges for what is really a local call, just because
the person we are calling wants to have a portable number.

What thoughts ?


Richard Cox at Mandarin Technology, Llanishen, Cardiff, Wales
(011) 44 399 870101 or [e-mail]

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

From: proty![e-mail]
Date: Tue Jul  7 17:06:24 EDT 1992
Subject: EasyReach NOT (Cincinnati Bell)


Apparently Cincinnati Bell territory is one of those areas where
EasyReach is not available.  I confirmed this by calling the customer
service number.  I wonder if SNET (Southern New England Telephone, the
other semi-BOC that was unaffected by divestiture) is similarly
crippled.

I'd think that the product manager for this service wouldn't have
launched it without having all the relevant agreements in place with
all the Bell-shaped companies.  I don't know if the option of having
cellular service would help here, or not.  I would be interested in
finding out what is 'special' about Cincinnati Bell (ie whether the
delay is political (tariffs), or technical (the billing system can't
handle it.))


Ralph Hyre    unhappy Cincinnati Bell customer

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

From: [e-mail] (Ed Greenberg)
Subject: Some EasyReach Comments
Date: Tue, 07 Jul 92 23:31:18 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest)


Here are some comments on my EasyReach service after having it for a
few weeks.

I got it because I'm taking a 40 day motorcycle trip, and I plan to
program it each night for the motel I'm in.  During the day, I'll
point it at my voicemail. So, if you get my voicemail, I'm not "in for
the night yet."

* I wish you could have different billing and default numbers.  For
instance, I wish my default number could be my voicemail, not my home.
That way, each night I could set eight hour forwarding to the hotel
and just let it expire.  No can do though, I must manually reforward
the number in the morning.

* The menu tree changes depending on the state of things.  It's
different if you are forwarded or not, or if you are calling from a
number that is enabled for sent-paid or not. This makes it impossible
to type ahead.

* The number seems eminently reachable for me.  I was able to access it
from:
    Behind my work PBX (with 9 + 10288 + 0 + 700...)
    Etna, CA, on Siskayou Telephone Company (0 + 700...)
    McCloud, CA on Citizens Utilities Co. (0 + 700...)
    Harrah's Hotel, Reno, NV (9 + 0 + 700..., $1 charge)
    Pacific Telephone coin phone, Shasta, CA (couldn't reliably
      hang up ... got AT&T operator who confirmed that my call
      had been disconnected. Perhaps I wasn't hanging up long
      enough, but I _was_ and was waiting to hear the phone
      reset.)
    10xxx compilant COCOT (10288 + 0 + 700...)

* Could not access from:

    COCOT that wouldn't give AT&T
    COCOT that cut off tone and cut to AT&T operator immediately
      after dialing 102880.  I asked the operator to dial the
      call and got "can't complete your call."  Was going to
      ask her to dial it again with 0+ but realized that with
      no tone it was futile anyway.

* It would be nice if AT&T would sell it with integrated voicemail as
the default when not programmed.  I'd pay .15 or .25 (nite or day) to
play back my messages, and, of course, my callers would have to pay it
to leave messages.

* It would be nice if I could add, change and delete PINS automagically
using the DTMF interface.

* It would be nice if I could set my own variable length master pin.

* It would be nice if 1 + 700 (or 10288 + 1 + 700) would complete the
call sent-paid, and 0 + 700 (or 10288 + 0 + 700) would complete the
call with a calling card or pin without any prompts. (Entering the
master pin would log you into "command mode") Everybody knows how to
enter a calling card or pin at the AT&T-Beep-Bong prompt and most
everybody knows how to dial 10288 these days. (See the article
published a few days ago about the breakdown of calls at the
telecom-friendly COCOT at the ski resort.  People are dialing 10288
without even checking first to see if the call goes AT&T.)  The
benefit of this would be that you could give simpler instructions.
"The number is 700-xxx-xxxx and you must select AT&T."  Or, "Do it
just like a calling card call on AT&T, but enter this PIN instead."

* How about being able to get back to command mode with a long # tone
after calling home.

* This could be the start of an integrated remote long distance
system.  For instance, how about the ability to complete outgoing
calls from the command mode?  This could include a repitoire of speed
calling numbers.  AT&T could charge you in the EasyReach portion of
your bill, with a calling card surcharge.  If they REALLY wanted to be
snazzy, they could let you complete such calls WITHOUT a calling card
surcharge.  Coupled with voicemail mentioned above, this becomes a
really powerful mobile office.

* Some people have suggested that the reason that EasyReach is limited
to AT&T subscribers is to build a base of presubscribed users.  Maybe
so.  The shortsightedness of this approach is apparent though, since
EasyReach is a really useful thing for people with no local phone
service.

I hope that you AT&T Marketing and Technical Gurus out there will pick
up on some of these ideas.


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] (Gantt Edmiston)
Subject: Re: What is Iridium Project?
Date: Tue, 7 Jul 1992 01:47:01 GMT
Organization: SAS Institute Inc.


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Charles Neveu) writes:

> Telecommunications Magazine has a article that makes passing mention
> of Motorola's Iridium Project and its 77 satellites that are going to
> be launched. What is the Iridium Project?

Iridium is one of the elements.  It has 77 electrons in the outer
shell circling the nucleus.  The plan, as I read about it a while
back, was to launch 77 satellites in geosyncronous orbit around the
world.  This would allow cellular contact from *any* point on the
globe.  The concept of "cells' remains the same, just more coverage
per cell.

The article also said that the FCC had blessed the project and that it
would be implemented by 1996.  I'm not holding my breath or my
cellular calls .... =-)


Gantt Edmiston   QA Host Systems, V416 x6091  SASnet: <[e-mail]>
------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Shah Jahan)
Subject: Re: What is Iridium Project?
Organization: Motorola Inc. - Satellite Communications
Date: Tue, 7 Jul 1992 14:58:55 GMT


[e-mail] (Charles Neveu) writes:

> What is the Iridium Project?

The Iridium project will provide worldwide personal communications
using a constellation of 77 Low Earth Orbit Satellites. It will have a
number of Gateways at strategic locations on the planet for providing
interconnection to PSTN networks.


Shah Jahan    Iridium Systems Engineeering
Motorola Satellite Communications  Chandler, AZ 85248  [phone]

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

Date: Mon, 6 Jul 92 16:55:55 -0700
From: David W. Barts <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: What is Iridium Project?


> Think of Iridium as "Worldwide Cellular."  Once launched, you will be
> able to make a phone call from just about anywhere in the world --
> even where telephone systems are controlled by the government or are
> just too archaic to be trusted.  I imagine that once it's launched,
> there will be a scramble to be the first to make a phone call from the
> top of Mt. Everest.  :-)

Too late, that's already been done.  Sir Edmund Hillary's son called
his father from Mt. Everest several years ago.  The call was carried
via two-way radio to a satelite phone (presumably INMARSAT) at base
camp.


David Barts  N5JRN              W Civil Engineering, FX-10
[e-mail]   Seattle, WA  98195

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #542
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa20774;
          8 Jul 92 9:40 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA25435
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 8 Jul 1992 07:33:03 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA19630
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 8 Jul 1992 07:32:54 -0500
Date: Wed, 8 Jul 1992 07:32:54 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #543

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 8 Jul 92 07:32:52 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 543

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Suit Alleges Cellular Caused Brain Tumor (Paul Eggert)
    Re: Suit Alleges Cellular Caused Brain Tumor (Tony Kennedy)
    Re: Suit Alleges Cellular Caused Brain Tumor (Irving Wolfe)
    Re: Suit Alleges Cellular Caused Brain Tumor (Thor Lancelot Simon)
    Re: The Depths of Sliminess (Justin Leavens)
    Re: The Depths of Sliminess (Mark R. Rubin)
    Re: Candidates E-Mail Addresses (Gary Segal)
    Re: Candidates E-Mail Addresses (Eric Thompson)
    Perot Compuserve Account (Robert Virzi)
    Re: See Figure 1 (Eric Woudenberg)
    Re: See Figure 1 (Mike Whitaker)
    Re: See Figure 1 (Jeff Hibbard)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Paul Eggert)
Subject: Re: Suit Alleges Cellular Caused Brain Tumor
Organization: Twin Sun, Inc
Date: Tue, 7 Jul 1992 19:40:38 GMT


[e-mail] (Ang Peng Hwa) writes:

> The "theory" of non-ionizing radiation was discovered accidentally by
> a researcher who was looking for the cause of leukemia. He/she (can't
> remember) found nothing until one day, looking around her, saw that
> there were lots of power lines. Redrawing her subjects, she found that
> virtually all lived within 100 yards of either a substation or a high
> voltage line.

That story has certainly grown in the telling.  The original study
found a relatively small effect (not even close to `virtually all').
The study itself has been attacked on methodological grounds: e.g.
poorer people tend to have more illnesses, and tend to live next to
power lines, but that doesn't mean power lines cause illnesses.  Most
followup studies have not found significant effects, but informed
opinion on the subject is far from unanimous.

It's too bad that important public policy issues like this are so
often decided in the courts, which do not use the scientific method to
arrive at their results.

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

From: [e-mail] (Tony Kennedy)
Subject: Re: Suit Alleges Cellular Caused Brain Tumor
Date: 7 Jul 92 22:12:45 GMT
Organization: SCRI, Florida State University


>> Ang Peng Hwa <[e-mail]> writes:

> The "theory" of non-ionizing radiation was discovered
> accidentally by a researcher who was looking for the cause of
> leukemia. He/she (can't remember) found nothing until one day,
> looking around her, saw that there were lots of power lines.
> Redrawing her subjects, she found that virtually all lived
> within 100 yards of either a substation or a high voltage
> line.

One objection to this is that it indicates a correlation between
leukemia and power lines, not a causal connection. A reasonable
explanation might well be that poverty is correlated with leukemia,
and houses near power lines are cheaper.

Perhaps people who are susceptible to brain tumors are predisposed to
use cellular telephones ... maybe the larger telephone bills cause
stress which induces tumors?

BTW, do you realize that eating butter reduces your chances of dying
of cancer?

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

From: [e-mail] (Irving_Wolfe)
Subject: Re: Suit Alleges Cellular Caused Brain Tumor
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Happy Man Corp., Vashon Island, WA 98070-7399
Date: Tue, 7 Jul 1992 13:45:34 GMT


In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Ang Peng Hwa) writes:

> The "theory" of non-ionizing radiation was discovered accidentally by
> a researcher who was looking for the cause of leukemia. He/she (can't
> remember) found nothing until one day, looking around her, saw that
> there were lots of power lines. Redrawing her subjects, she found that
> virtually all lived within 100 yards of either a substation or a high
> voltage line.

There is an extremely well-written (truly delightful to read despite
the subject matter) book on this subject by Paul Brodeur.  He's not a
scientist, but a writer; however, he's very bright and thorough and
took the trouble to read everything available and interview actual
workers in the field.  I wish I remembered the book's title, but you
should be able to find it under the author's name.


[e-mail]      Happy Man Corp. 206/463-9399 x101
4410 SW Pt. Robinson Rd., Vashon Island, WA  98070-7399  fax x108

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

From: [e-mail] (Thor Lancelot Simon)
Subject: Re: Suit Alleges Cellular Caused Brain Tumor
Date: Tue, 7 Jul 1992 07:12:41 GMT
Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix & Internet, NYC


In article <[e-mail]> John Higdon <john@zygot.
ati.com> writes:

> Robert Horvitz <[e-mail]> writes:

>> According to David Reynard, Susan's husband, (quoting from {Microwave
>> NEWS}), "If an outline of the phone were superimposed on the [magnetic
>> resonance image of her head which] showed his wife's tumor, the
>> malignancy would be at the middle of the antenna ..."

> If people are going to start trading in this psuedo-scientific clap-
> trap, at least they might check out a few laws of physics before
> putting foot in mouth. The center of radiation is NOT at the center of
> a cellular antenna.

>> The radio wavelengths used in cellular phones are similar to the
>> dimensions of the human skull, so that resonance could provide an
>> efficient transfer of energy.

> Except that the skull makes a much more effective shield than a
> waveguide. I see it all happening again: many good, useful products
> have been taken away because of this sort of voodoo. No acceptable
> studies have been able to prove or disprove any of these beliefs or
> theories concerning non-ionizing radiation. Here we go again with
> emotionalism and scare tactics for the ignorant.

On the other hand, there really may be something to worry about here.
Last time this came up in RISKS, it was pointed out that before the
advent of cellular phone service, the same frequencies were used in
some cities for short-range police radios.  As I recall, in more than
one case handheld transciever units were replaced with belt-mounted +
handset or the like because of large-scale problems with glaucoma.
Tumors didn't factor into this, however, as I recall.  Does anybody
remember more of this discussion?

As I recall another interesting tidbit was mentioned tangetally to all
this -- many of the same products that are accused of "emitting excess
electromagnetic radiation causing health damage" also contain many
plastic components, and get very hot.  (The perfect example of this,
of course, is the electric blanket!) Heat many common plastics enough
and they start to give off their volatile components.  Many of these
are potentially Very Very Bad For You.  I found it to be an intriguing
hypothesis, though probably not any better than the ones about 60Hz,
etc. radiation.  Your mileage may vary.


Thor Lancelot Simon    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Justin Leavens)
Subject: Re: The Depths of Sliminess
Date: 7 Jul 1992 13:03:26 -0700
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA


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

> I believe this story.  It is my policy also to give telemarketers a
> little hell.  "What do you tell your family you do for a living?  Do
> you admit to them you are a profeessional nuisance? ..."

   I know telemarketers are pretty much regarded as slime here in this
forum, but personally, I consider it better that these people are
working than unemployed.

   I worked as a telemarketer for a brief stint back in high school,
trying to sell {USA Today} by phone. Sure, I got the same kind of
lines: "Is this really what you do with your life?", "Don't you have
anything better to do?","Why do you waste my time like this?"... Well,
the answer is that telemarketing is a legal method of marketing a
product, and just like the people who leave the little slips on your
doors that you always throw right in the trash, telemarketers are
generally either students trying to make some extra cash, or people
who can't find other work and are lured by the high wages that are
paid to telemarketers.

And even though telemarketers are generally paid much better than
minimum wage, very few people last more than a couple weeks on the job
because it is grueling to have to deal with that much rejection every
day. Just like in any other sales job there are going to be people who
are very persistent and people who are going to be fraudulent. But the
bottom line is that the call costs you nothing, you don't have to
answer the phone if you don't want to, and if you don't want what is
being sold, then say so right away, cutting them off if you have to
(and you usually will), and end the call.  Most telemarketers would
prefer that you did that anyways, saving them breath for their next
call.

   The bottom line is that unless a telemarkter is _rude_ to you,
there is no reason to be _rude_ to them. They're not doing anything
illegal, they may just be trying to pay their rent this month, and not
everyone has their pick of the job market these days.


Justin Leavens     University of Southern California   Microcomputer Specialist



[Moderator's Note: I agree with you completely, Justin. I've always
felt the reaction here from some people, calling them 'slime', etc.
was a bit much. They are just people earning a living, and it is quite
easy to pick the phone up, say 'no thank you' and disconnect. After
all, when we see a commercial on television we are free to change the
channel and watch something else.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Mark R. Rubin)
Subject: Re: The Depths of Sliminess
Organization: Jet Propulsion Laboratory (NASA)
Date: Mon, 6 Jul 1992 18:15:09 GMT


o One more data point re: "Do telemarketers harass the public?"

o Received a typical telemarketing call.  Handled it as usual
  (listened for a few seconds to make sure it wasn't important, broke
  in with "I don't accept unsolicited calls.", and hung up).

o Phone rings seconds later.  Same guy.  Started saying, "You don't
  realize how great an offer this is ...".  I cut him off, loudly
  told him that he was harassing me, and that if he called again I
  would report it to the phone company and the police, and hung up.

o For the rest of the evening I put up with a string of petty
  harassments.  A home-delivery pizza ordered in my name.  A
  non-existent neighbor calling to curse me out for parking "my" car
  (description of a car other than mine) in front of his house.

o Eventually I called the police, wanting to make a record in case
  the harassment escalated.  They wouldn't take a complaint over the
  phone, and we left it that I'd fill out an in-person report if it
  continued for another night, which it didn't.

o Yeah, I love the "caller ID is an invasion of privacy" argument.


Mark     [e-mail]

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

Date: Tue, 7 Jul 92 14:18:37 CDT
From: [e-mail] (Gary Segal)
Subject: Re: Candidates E-Mail Addresses


[e-mail] (Robert Virzi) writes:

> Someone posted the following e-mail addresses for the presidential
> candidates to the net.  Unfortunately, I lost the header to the
> message and cannot give proper attribution.  The addresses, as posted,
> are:

{ addresses deleted }

I've have seen these e-mail address reported in three different places
now in the space of under one week; here in Telecom, posted on an
internal Motorola net, and in e-mail from a friend at Microsoft.  In
all cases no authentication off the addresses or history of where they
came from was given.  Someone here at Motorola attempted to send mail
to the Perot account and recieved a responce from a former Perot
campaign worker who is being SWAMPED with e-mail because of this post.

I have a feeling that we are dealing with YAUR (Yet Another Usenet
Rumor), as it meets all the classic tests for such things:
(1) Something everyone wants to know, (2) Something everyone will
forward/post to others, (3) No forwarding history given, (4) No
authentication given and (5) it is spreading faster than John Sunnunu
on a "government" trip.

I'm pretty sure that the Perot address is not going to make it to
HRP's desk or even his campaign staff.  I have no information on the
addresses for the others, but given the profile of this post I
wouldn't trust them.

If anyone can verify the authenticty of these address, please do so!
But until then, I'd recomend that if you really want to reach the
candidates, use the U.S. mail.


Gary Segal                 Motorola Inc.
[e-mail]   Cellular Infrastructure Division

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

Date: Tue, 7 Jul 1992 22:57:53 -0700
From: Eric Thompson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Candidates E-Mail Addresses
Organization: U.C. Berkeley Open Computing Facility


TELECOM Moderator noted:

> In a recent development in the Perot campaign, secret photos published
> by the {World Weekly News} last week show Perot meeting with space
> aliens. These are the same space aliens who met with Bush recently.
> Thus far the aliens have expressed no interest in meeting with
> Governor Clinton.   PAT]

Snarfing comedy tidbits from Dennis Miller, eh?  :-)

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

From: [e-mail] (Robert Virzi)
Subject: Perot Compuserve Account
Date: 8 Jul 92 11:38:44 GMT
Organization: GTE Laboratories Incorporated, Waltham MA


I attempted to send mail to the account I submitted for Ross Perot.
It finally got through, and I received a response from David Bush.
Although the account used to be a quasi-official Perot account, it is
no longer used for that purpose.  David has asked me to please not use
or publish the account information, as he is being swamped by the
volume of mail.

So, I am sorry I submitted that information.  I would ask readers of
this Digest to please refrain from sending mail to the account, as it
is no longer an official Perot-connected account.  If I do find an
address that can be used, I will post it to this Digest.


Bob Virzi    [e-mail]    ...!harvard!bunny!rv01

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

From: [e-mail] (Eric Woudenberg)
Subject: Re: See Figure 1
Organization: Alliant Computer Systems Corp.
Date: Tue, 7 Jul 1992 07:40:09 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Bryan Lockwood) writes:

> I wonder if the guy who originally wrote this will be writing to the
> fellow who rewrote it, telling him to (see Figure 1)?

The original (for VAX/VMS) was written by Herb Jacobs, who was at DEC
at the time. He showed it to me when we worked together at Alliant.
It really is pretty funny ... someone should post it.


Eric Woudenberg

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

Date: Tue, 07 Jul 92 12:33:47 +0000
From: Mike Whitaker <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: See Figure 1


I first saw a variant of this on the wall backstage at my fiancee's
amateur operatics society -- it was a detailed exposition of the
response you were likely to get from the actors, the techies, the
director.


Mike Whitaker - [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Jeff Hibbard)
Subject: Re: See Figure 1
Organization: Bradley University
Date: Tue, 7 Jul 92 17:49:59 GMT


Various people write:

> Ah. I recall seeing this a LONG time ago.  But the version I saw had
> to do with the VAX VMS operating system, rather than with AT&T.

> Well, well, well.  Figure 1 returns!  I first encountered this diagram
> and text in a Honeywell internal memo, For the Honeywell CP-6 Release
> B03 HOST Software Release Bulletin, in 1982.

I also first saw this in the early-to-mid 80's, but it was on Control
Data Corporation letterhead of the type normally used to distribute
information about software problems.  The diagram and some of the text
is identical, only the version I saw was longer and funnier.

I wonder if we'll ever know who wrote the original.


Jeff Hibbard, Peoria IL


[Moderator's Note: 'Figure 1' is like so many of those stories which
get passed around from one office to the next with copies made on the
copy machine in each office it reaches until finally everyone who sees
it has a copy of a copy of a copy; no one knows for sure who put it
out, and everyone who sees it changes it a little to meet
circumstances in their company, etc.  PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #543
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa28190;
          8 Jul 92 12:18 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA10704
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 8 Jul 1992 08:02:31 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA08973
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 8 Jul 1992 08:02:23 -0500
Date: Wed, 8 Jul 1992 08:02:23 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #544

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 8 Jul 92 08:01:30 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 544

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    AT&T Calls ITEMIZED Charged by LEC? (Douglas Scott Reuben)
    Report From Siskiyou (Ed Greenberg)
    Modem Interface for NOKIA Cellular Sets (Europe) (Alfredo Cotroneo)
    Foreign Directory Assistance (was "Strange Message... ") (Charlie Mingo)
    SWBell Marketing Voice Mail (Peter da Silva)
    Fixed Call Forwarding (Steve Kass)
    Whatever Happened to the Wiretap Bill? (Les Bartel)
    Call-Waiting Killing With *70 (Michael Ho)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 1-JUL-1992 17:14:30.05
From: Douglas Scott Reuben <[e-mail]>
Subject: AT&T Calls ITEMIZED Charged by LEC?


I just got my bill from Southern New England Telephone (SNET), the
(psuedo-) Bell LEC in Connecticut.

I noted, under the SNET portion of the bill (IE, the pages that SNET
has its logo on which AT&T can NOT see) a whole set of calling card
calls, ALL of which were either out-of-state (INTER-LATA) or totally
had nothing to do with CT, as in the case of INTER-LARA calls from
Maine to Boston, etc.

As an example:

"SNET Calling Card Calls:"


June 8  11:10PM     To West Hartford     CT 203-233-xxxx  NC  2  $1.04
            Fr Randolph        MA 617-986-xxxx

June 11  2:04AM        To Waltham        MA 617-633-7626  NC  1  $.92
            Fr York            ME 207-363-9708

(Also, of course, the calls were made over AT&T, I heard "Thank you
for using AT&T" after each call (there were others as well), and they
were all intER-LATA, etc ... ie, I'm SURE that they were handled by
AT&T in manner normal and similar to all other AT&T Calling Card
calls.)

Now I am aware that AT&T has issued its own cards, which they claim
will appear on the AT&T section of the bill, but after calling AT&T
about this, who then put me on a three-way-call to the manager of
billing services at SNET, we couldn't agree on who's surcharge I am to
pay regardless of who's card I use.

CT levies a $.50 surcharge on Calling Card calls, while AT&T says it
is 80 cents. That is, AT&T is claiming that a call placed via 10288
within CT (this is possible to certain area of the state, e.g.,
Greenwich, Byram, etc.) will have an 80 cent surcharge plus toll,
while SNET says that if you use THEIR card it is only 50 cents, plus
toll.

The SNET manager stated that "If you use our card, even for
out-of-state (Inter-LATA) calls, you will pay our surcharge, if you
use AT&T's, you will pay their surcharge."

I told him this doesn't quite ring true in light of the (above)
charges, as they reflect AT&T's rate of approx 12-13 cents per minute
(night) and the 80 cent surcharge, thus $.92 for a one minute call or
$1.04 for a two minute call. The AT&T rep, who was listening in on us,
confirmed that those were AT&T's rates.

It is my impression that you pay the rates of the carrier you are
using.  Thus, if you use an AT&T card in CT, you can only charge the
maximum allowed by the Connecticut Dept. of Public Utility Control, or
$.50 plus toll.

I thus think that AT&T is wrong in stating that there is an 80 cent
surcharge for calls within CT (intRA-lata). My experience with the
Universal Card in other states reflects this -- I am billed at the
standard LEC rates.

It thus stands to reason that SNET will levy the AT&T 80 cent
surcharge on calls outside of CT (yet not handled by another LEC),
assuming I am using AT&T.

If in fact this is true, and the info of both the SNET manager and the
AT&T rep is wrong, then the only "change" is that SNET is itemizing LD
(IXC) calls made on "its" calling card.

So even if you hear "Thank you for using AT&T" or "Thank you for using
US Sprint" or whatever your carrier of choice is, you will be billed
by SNET, itemized along with LEC-handled (local) calling card calls,
and have NO idea who handled your call when you examine your bill.

So if you went to some slimey COCOT, and used Rip-Me-Off AOS and get a
nice fat $17 charge for a three-minute state-to-state call, these
charges will be mixed in with AT&T, Sprint, SNET, Pac*Bell (assuming
you used the card for a local (LEC-handled) call in CA), and other
legitimate phone companies.

As a matter of fact, unless you remember who you called and what
service you used (any many people may not make it a practice to always
hit 10288 first), you will get a mess of a bill with no idea of who is
to be accountable for the call. (Is SNET supposed to take care of
these calls now, as they are, after all, BILLING you for them, and
apparently not acting as agents for the IXC's in this regard?) Thus if
I get a $17 charge for the COCOT call, but in fact when I placed the
call no one answered and thus should not be billed, do I call SNET and
tell them to remove the call, without having to call to COCOT/AOS
firm? (Does SNET know what it is getting into here??? :) )

I realize that this is pretty recent, but has this happened to anyone
else from other LECs?

With all this nonsense going on, one would HOPE that the FCC speeds up
the billing number database scheme where a customer has one calling
card which has a "preference" for a single IXC, and thus calls will
either be handled by the LEC or the designated IXC, ONLY! (Unless the
customer specifically overides this with 10xxx dialing).


Doug     [e-mail]    [e-mail]

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

Date: 06 Jul 92 11:38:49 EDT
From: Ed Greenberg <[e-mail]>
Subject: Report From Siskiyou


Telecom readers will remember my visit to the Pinnicles Telephone
Company a few years ago, when I knocked on the CO door and obtained a
tour.

Well, today's adventure is a little more tame, but it's interesting
nonetheless.

My wife and I are visiting the Mount Shasta area for the fourth of
July weekend, and we took a ride that took us past Etna, CA and the
Etna office of the Siskiyou Telephone Company and an owner of that
telco, Ms. Eleanor Hendricks.  We met Ms. Hendricks as she was walking
home from the post office with the phone company's mail.

Naturally, when visiting a small town, many of us will check out the
local pay phone, and this Telecom reader is no exception.  I found a
Northern Telecom single slotter with touch tone, 10xxx dialing, and
AT&T for the default carrier.  My 0+700 call went through just fine,
quicker than Pacific Bell was putting them up in Mount Shasta City.

Siskiyou Tel has been in Eleanor Hendricks' family since the turn of
the century, and Eleanor earned her first five dollars working for the
company in 1923.

Siskiyou converted to dial in 1961, and was the first California telco
north of Sacramento to abandon manual service.  Up to that point, all
the lines were terminated in Etna, but the central part of the
operation was moved to Fort Jones at that time for easier access to
Pacific Bell's point of presence in Yreka.  Until a few years ago,
Siskiyou had their own operator service, but has recently abandoned it
in favor of operator service from Pacific Bell.  Now there are
electronic offices wherever Siskiyou serves, connected by microwave to
Fort Jones.

By the way, for a look at this area, check your Northern California
map for Redding, and go north on I5 to Yreka.  Now look parallel to
that route and find State Route 3. South of Yreka on 3, You'll see Ft.
Jones, and south of that is Etna.  Etna, by the way, is said to have
the northernmost brewery in California.  We didn't have any Etna Beer,
but our inkeeper, Bill Larson, says that it's well thought of.

A look at the Siskiyou Telephone Book yields lots of interesting
telecom tidbits.  STC operates seven exchanges, at least those served
by this directory.  Eleanor stated that the area covered is roughly
that of the state of Connecticut.  From the looks of the map in the
book, she's not far off.  Of course, the population is lots less,
which means lots of long wire runs out to rural areas.

This brings me to a part of the directory that I've never seen before.
Each exchange is described in terms of the roads served in outline
form from the main road, down to smaller side roads.  This gives a
fascinating view of the extent of STC's rural outside plant.

Another interesting section is the offering of special services.  No
mention is made of any of the new features coming out, but the usual
suspects like call waiting, call forwarding, 3-way (8 & 30), etc, are
offered under the unregistered tradename of "The Magic Touch." ("Your
Phone Has Learned Some New Tricks.) All these services are described,
and work in the standard fashion, including cancel call waiting.

Along with these services are two odd ones.  What we typically call
Ringmate is offered under the name of "Extra Line." It's interesting
how the telco can sell one party both sides of a two party line :-)

A feature I've never seen before is called "Warm Line."  Here's the
description: "This feature means that you can have your phone set up
to automatically dial a predesignated telephone number after a
specified amount of time (30 seconds.)  Simply knock the receiver off
the hook and after 30 seconds it will automatically dial the specific
number that you had the telephone company program."

All in all, the Siskiyou Telephone Company is a breath of fresh air.
They provide modern service, with good Northern Telecom equipment, and
will probably present to the telecom literate subscriber an
understanding ear.  Whether they're up to such tings as multiple
private lines in the boonies is not known, but I wouldn't mind living
in Fort Jones and getting my service from them.


Reply-to: [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: Centel here in the Chicago area offers 'warm line'
as you describe it. Go off-hook and wait 15-20 seconds for automatic
dialing of one pre-selected number.  PAT]

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

Date: Mon, 6 Jul 92 10:42:19 +0200
From: [e-mail] (Alfredo Cotroneo)
Subject: Modem interface for NOKIA cellular sets (Europe)


Hello there from Milano, Italy.

I am looking for information on the modem interface for the NOKIA
Cityman (2+ years old model, not the newest, I think it's model no.
200?) cellular set. This model is one of the most popular portable
sets in Italy, and should also be available elsewhere in Europe.

I would need the modem interface both for data communication and
ESPECIALLY to be able to record interviews (calls) made with the
cellular phone. I expect the interface would provide a standard phone
line interface (the same provided by the phone company in home/office
phone lines with ring voltages and standard connectors) but nobody was
able pass me more detailed info at this regard. I would prefer to
attach conventional modem/fax/answering machine rather than dedicated
cellular ones (even if I know the limits, but the cellular phone will
not be moving while making/answering the call.)

Please answer by email, and if there is interest I will be glad to
summarize to the net.

Thanks.


Alfredo E. Cotroneo, Milano, Italy
email: [e-mail] (private)
or: [e-mail] (office)

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

From: [e-mail] (Charlie Mingo)
Date: Mon, 06 Jul 1992 03:33:44 -0500
Subject: Foreign Directory Assistance (was "Strange Message... ")


Our Esteemed Moderator writes:

> Speaking of *long* waits for DA, I love that new gimmick being
> used in France: Where before DA rang endlessly with a five minute wait
> not uncommon, now we get connected immediatly to a holding queue, with
> a recorded message of about six bars of music and a man speaking
> English with a British accent saying "Telecom Services! Please hold
> ... We're trying to extend your call! ..." and this eight or ten
> second blurb repeats not once ... not twice ... but endlessly, with
> only a five second or so pause between cycles. It repeated 67 times
> (yes, I counted them out of boredom) the other day before I was
> extended to DA.   PAT]

Were you paying for the transatlantic call while those 67 messages
were being repeated?

  If you have a personal computer and a modem handy, you can always
use Minitel to look the number up yourself.  There are freely
distributed Minitel emulators for the Mac and the PC.  It costs about
$.17/minute, it can be billed to your credit card, and there are no
charges other than for time actually used.

  Of course, this mught not make sense for one call to French DA, but
if you do this more than a few times a year, it could save time (and
your sanity). I'm a bit surprised AT&T doesn't have the French
telephone directory available on their screens.  I can get it on mine,
and I assume they are at least as technically advanced ...


[Moderator's Note: No, this was one of the times when I dialed the
AT&T operator and paid their flat rate of $3 for directory assistance.
You'd think the French operators themselves would use Minitel for
faster service.  Maybe they do, who knows.    PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Peter da Silva)
Subject: SWBell Marketing Voice Mail
Organization: Taronga Park BBS
Date: Mon, 6 Jul 1992 11:15:58 GMT


SWBell is starting to market voice mail. It's apparently a test-market
spot, with a free month, but since I already have an answering
machine, alarm clock, and personal computer I declined participation
in their system.

On another topic, we've got these "How does it work" books. I was
going through one with my son and came upon a description of a stepper
switch, and a map of the phone system in the Federal Republic of
Germany. Is there anyone on the Digest with access to historical
information about the German phone system that could be used to date
the book (there's no date anywhere on any of the four volumes).


Peter da Silva, Taronga Park BBS, Houston, TX  [phone]/1032

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

Date: Mon, 6 Jul 1992 10:38 EST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Fixed Call Forwarding


New Jersey Bell is now offering Answer Call (SM).  The brochure they
sent says that if I subscribe now, they will waive the usual
connection fee ($21) for "Fixed Call Forwarding, recommended" [I
suspect required] for Answer Call to work.

Here's what I think Fixed Call Forwarding is: On busy or no answer,
with the number of rings before no answer selectable as 4 or 6, a call
to the subscriber number is forwarded to another number, but that
number can't be changed as with Call Forwarding, nor can (?) the
forwarding be turned on or off.  According to NJB, Fixed Call
Forwarding is _not_ available except in combination with Answer Call,
but the Answer Call brochure seems to indicate that Fixed Call
Forwarding is at least tariffed as a separate service (it's $2/month).
(Presumably, NJB sets it up with Answer Call to go to the Answer
Center, and CLID enables the Answer Center to handle the call
appropriately.

I want Fixed Call Forwarding, but I don't want Answer Call, since I'd
like busy/no answer calls to go to my ASPEN voice box at work, keeping
all my messages in one place.  I don't want regular Call Forwarding,
since I'd have to do a lot of button pushing for it to do the same job
(turn it on before, and off after, every call I make for busy
forwarding, for example).

Can anyone tell me if Fixed Call Forwarding is available either here
(was the service rep wrong?) or anywhere else (just because I'm
curious).  I can understand why NJB doesn't want me to get it.  They
want me to get Answer Call instead.  But is there any chance that
since it's tariffed, that they might have to let me have it the way I
want it?  Or can I pull any other tricks, like subscribe to Answer
Call and FCF, then drop Answer Call, but not FCF (and change the
forwarding number)?


Steve Kass  Math/CS Department  Drew University  Madison NJ 07940
[e-mail]  [phone]


[Moderator's Note: We have it here in Chicago on cellular service and
on wireline service only for connection to voicemail. You tell them
how many rings to program it for when you sign up.   PAT]

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

From: b11![e-mail] (Les Bartel)
Subject: Whatever Happened to the Wiretap Bill?
Reply-To: b11![e-mail]
Organization: Dazix, An Intergraph Company
Date: Mon, 6 Jul 1992 14:38:53 GMT


What is the status on the wiretap bill that would force telco
equipment manufacturers (or was it telcos?) to provide a means of
phone line access by law enforcement?

Where can I read this bill (or any other pending bill for that
matter)?  My local public library was of no help.  That's not to say
they don't have the info, they couldn't find it.


Les Bartel            [e-mail]
Dazix, An Intergraph Company    uunet!ingr!b23b!naomi!lester

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

Date: Sun, 5 Jul 92 21:57 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Michael Ho)
Subject: Call-Waiting Killing With *70


PAT asked in a previous issue if *70 acted differently in other areas
than his own.

My experience: Yes.  In Omaha, US West territory, *70 (and other
features such as *72 for call-forwarding) yields a stutter dialtone
that can be dialed through.  Constructs like *70 1 976 SMUT are legal
without pauses.

But in Lincoln, under the independent local telco, *70 and *72 yield a
double high-pitched tone (sorry, don't know its name or frequency).
This tone eats anything fed to it, and no digits dialed before the new
dial tone (after the high-pitched thing) will be registered.  To top
things off, there is a variable-length pause before the tones!
Aarrrrgh!

Second interesting note: Lincoln Telephone suggests using 70# and 72#
rather than *70 and *72.  Both work.  Both have the same flaky
behavior.

Third interesting note: Lincoln Telephone's rate of return last year
was over 18 percent.


Michael Ho, Eastern S.F. Bay Area, California
Internet:  [e-mail]    UUCP:  ...!seeker!mikeho

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #544
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa05577;
          9 Jul 92 12:24 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA14144
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 9 Jul 1992 01:47:29 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA26531
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 9 Jul 1992 01:47:21 -0500
Date: Thu, 9 Jul 1992 01:47:21 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #545

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 9 Jul 92 01:47:24 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 545

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: The Depths of Sliminess (Roy Smith)
    Re: The Depths of Sliminess (Harry P. Haas)
    Re: The Depths of Sliminess (Fred Wedemeier)
    Re: The Depths of Sliminess (Phil Howard)
    Re: The Depths of Sliminess (Leonard Erickson)
    Hang Up on This Scam (From the Company News Letter) (Ken Sprouse)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wed, 8 Jul 92 11:15:14 EDT
From: Roy Smith <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: The Depths of Sliminess
Organization: Public Health Research Institute (New York)


In article <[e-mail]> is written:

> But the bottom line is that the call costs you nothing, you don't have to
> answer the phone if you don't want to,

    How do I know it's a telemarketer until I answer the phone?
It costs me the annoyance of stopping whatever I am doing and having
to go answer the phone.  It's invasive.


[e-mail] (Roy Smith)
Public Health Research Institute
455 First Avenue, New York, NY 10016, USA


[Moderator's Note: How do you know? Simple. You say to your telco and
your utility commissioners, "I want Caller-ID available in our phone
exchange now. I want control of my phone instead of telemarketers,
phreaks and other people having control of it."  When installed, then
you answer those calls you wish and ignore the others.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Harry P. Haas)
Subject: Re: The Depths of Sliminess
Date: 8 Jul 92 13:52:04 GMT
Organization: Georgia Tech Research Institute


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Justin Leavens) writes:

> I know telemarketers are pretty much regarded as slime here in this
> forum, but personally, I consider it better that these people are
> working than unemployed.

To me, a "telemarketer" is a company that uses telemarketing as their
primary marketing technique.  I do not consider the person on the
phone a "telemarketer", just an employee of one.

> The bottom line is that unless a telemarkter is _rude_ to you,
> there is no reason to be _rude_ to them.

A telemarketer is ALWAYS rude to me by DEFINITION.  I DO NOT EVER want
someone to use my private phone for their business.  I do not EVER
want to leave the dinner table only to hear an ad on my phone.  The
person on the phone IS rude in my opinion, the key is that they are
being PAID to be rude (perhaps under duress), and that the TRUE jerk
is the guy paying the person on the phone.  (BTW, I'm not rude to them
 - unless . . )(

> They're not doing anything illegal

Yet ... of course, SOME forms of telemarketing ARE illegal in some
states.

> [Moderator's Note: I agree with you completely, Justin. I've always
> felt the reaction here from some people, calling them 'slime', etc.
> easy to pick the phone up, say 'no thank you' and disconnect.

There is a tedency on the net to be overly harsh.

> They are just people earning a living, and it is quite
> all, when we see a commercial on television we are free to change the
> channel and watch something else.  PAT]

Yeah, right, PAT.  I guess if everytime you hear a commercial on the
TV you get right up, go into the other room, and look to see if it's
your mother on the TV.  This is NOT the same.  I do not use my TV as a
personal communications device.  I do not pay a month fee for having
television service. I actually USE my phone for my own purposes, and
the telemarketers are FORCING me to screen them.  I can turn off the
TV, I CAN'T turn off the phone without losing my communications device
AND my service charge.

I DO however agree that there is no reason to be rude to a "nice"
person calling you from a telemarking agency.  I personally tell them,
nicely, that I do NOT respond unsolicited advertising and to please
remove me from their list (which they probably don't have -- I'm sure
they call everyone.)  I also report any and all callers which break
Georgia regulations to the GPSC.


Harry Haas  GTRI/RIDL/EB    Georgia Tech Research Institute
Research Engineer II        Georgia Institute of Technology
404-528-7679                Atlanta Georgia, 30332
[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Fred Wedemeier)
Subject: Re: The Depths of Sliminess
Organization: TI Telecom Systems, Dallas
Date: Wed, 8 Jul 1992 17:50:53 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Justin Leavens) writes:

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

>> the answer is that telemarketing is a legal method of marketing a
>> product, and just like the people who leave the little slips on your
>> doors that you always throw right in the trash, telemarketers are

and...

> But the bottom line is that the call costs you nothing, you don't
> have to answer the phone if you don't want to, and if you don't want
> what is being sold, then say so right away, cutting them off if you
> have to

It's not really the same. You would get mighty PO'd if the people
leaving slips on your door would instead ring the doorbell and _hand_
them to you rather than stuffing them in a crack for you to see when
you came home or left. You generally answer the doorbell when it rings
 -- at least in my neighborhood -- and most everyone used to answer
the phone when it rang. In both cases, you could expect some benefit
from doing so. There _ain't no_ benefit in answering a call from a
telemarketer, and it's a distraction and annoyance for me to do so.
Yeah, once a month or once a week, no problem.  But depending on the
demographics, you can get half a dozen or more of these d!!n things in
one evening.

So you start screening calls with an answering machine, which is a
rudeness to family, friends, and associates whose calls you want to
receive. (Is Fred really not there, or is he listening to me talking
while he decides if he'll honor me by picking up the phone??)

An upside to all this? A friend of mine has an insurance agency and he
makes cold calls to drum up business (yeah, two strikes against him
but he's still a friend). He sometimes gets hold of shut-ins who
haven't heard a real human voice in days and _want_ to talk. He'll
spend 5-10 minutes just talking even though he knows he won't sell
insurance.


Fred Wedemeier    pho: 214-997-3213     fax: [phone]
timsg: fcw   inet: [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Phil Howard)
Subject: Re: The Depths of Sliminess
Date: Wed, 08 Jul 92 19:06:04 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest)


[e-mail] (Justin Leavens) writes:

> I know telemarketers are pretty much regarded as slime here in this
> forum, but personally, I consider it better that these people are
> working than unemployed.

This kind of "work" does not contribute to the national resource.

In fact it is my opinion that any advertising that goes beyond giving
useful information to the public is another example of waste of
resource.  While advertising that diverts purchasing dollars from one
brand to another certainly helps the company getting the purchases, on
the whole, it does not contribute, unless of course one is actually
and truly getting more for their money where their purchases are
going.

If the telemarketers are working for what is in fact an actual scam,
then they are going to end up being jobless anyway.

They are also probably being ripped off themselves, as in the "boiler
room" operations and likely no real benefits from their "employer".

> I worked as a telemarketer for a brief stint back in high school,
> trying to sell {USA Today} by phone. Sure, I got the same kind of
> lines: "Is this really what you do with your life?", "Don't you have
> anything better to do?","Why do you waste my time like this?"... Well,
> the answer is that telemarketing is a legal method of marketing a
> product, and just like the people who leave the little slips on your
> doors that you always throw right in the trash, telemarketers are
> generally either students trying to make some extra cash, or people
> who can't find other work and are lured by the high wages that are
> paid to telemarketers.

Lots of people take a variety of jobs for short terms that are not in
their career line (assuming the even have an idea at the time of what
it might be).  There is nothing wrong with it, especially if it is for
a legimate product and their is not scam/slime/sleaze aspect to it.

My mother got a call once from a telemarketer wanting to sell her a
subscription to "Money Magazine".  She told them she already had a
subscription, but it turns out they put it through anyway.  Now she
has TWO and is getting billed for TWO.  The people at the magazine
itself were slow to delete the second one but eventually did.

So just because what is being peddled is itself a legitimate product
does not mean the peddler is.

BUYER BEWARE!!    CALLEE BEWARE!!

> And even though telemarketers are generally paid much better than
> minimum wage, very few people last more than a couple weeks on the job
> because it is grueling to have to deal with that much rejection every
> day. Just like in any other sales job there are going to be people who
> are very persistent and people who are going to be fraudulent. But the
> bottom line is that the call costs you nothing, you don't have to
> answer the phone if you don't want to, and if you don't want what is
> being sold, then say so right away, cutting them off if you have to
> (and you usually will), and end the call.  Most telemarketers would
> prefer that you did that anyways, saving them breath for their next
> call.

I agree.  This is what I do with such calls.  Even if the product
sounds interesting to me (it really has happened a couple times) I now
cut it off politely anyway.  In the two cases, I asked for something
to be mailed to me with the offer, so that I would have it in writing
and know who I was dealing with.  They did not want to take my address
and nothing ever arrived anyway.  They actually missed a possible
sale.

Now all such calls are screened by my answering machine, since I
really do not want to have to interrupt whatever I am doing just to
say "no thanks".  If they are serious enough, they can announce who
they are and I can pick up, or they can leave a message with a toll
free number for me to call.

> The bottom line is that unless a telemarkter is _rude_ to you,
> there is no reason to be _rude_ to them. They're not doing anything
> illegal, they may just be trying to pay their rent this month, and not
> everyone has their pick of the job market these days.

I fully agree.

> [Moderator's Note: I agree with you completely, Justin. I've always
> felt the reaction here from some people, calling them 'slime', etc.
> was a bit much. They are just people earning a living, and it is quite
> easy to pick the phone up, say 'no thank you' and disconnect. After
> all, when we see a commercial on television we are free to change the
> channel and watch something else.  PAT]

In many cases it is the telemarketing operating that is slime and the
telemarketers are just as much a victim.  There are also cases on both
extremes as well, some fully legitimate, and some fully slimy rip-off.
The slimy give the legit a bad reputation.

I have to disagree that it is "easy to pick the phone up, say 'no
thank you' and disconnect".

I've missed the important part of a TV show because of this in the
past.  I've had dinner interrupted, and my guests disturbed.  Once I
even missed an important incoming phone call.

It's NOT like direct mail advertising, where I can deal with the item
when I have the time to (except in the couple of cases where it caused
my mailbox to be filled up and some real mail bounced back).

So far *NO* telemarketers have left a message on my answering machine.
If they really don't want to be a nuisance, but get a possible sale
anyway, they should go ahead and do that.  Their employer should have
a script ready for them to put on an answering machine, perhaps even a
pre-recorded one so they can take a breather or go on to yet another
call.  I have an hour recording capacity on my answering machine
(three minute maximum per call) so it would take an awful lot of these
to be a nuisance to me.

BTW, I can also choose to ignore the commercial on TV.  I have a MUTE
button, too.  And I know the commercials are coming, so no matter what
the subject of the commercial is, it won't be an interruption ... they
don't leave the program running behind the commercial (except for one
TV station I know of, but that's another matter).


Phil Howard  ---  KA9WGN  ---  [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: I make numerous calls each day on behalf of the
attornies who employ me and I am sometimes mistaken for a telemarketer
which is always quite humorous to me. We *never* give out our 800
number on callbacks, and a lady today said to me that unless I had an
800 number, her boss would not return my call. I told her he had best
invest the 15 cents to call me back, because if I had to call him
again I was going to place him with a local attorney in his town for
suit based on an NSF check I was holding. And then there are the ones
who want to know what I am selling ... :) I always respond 'Law suits.
And unless you quit screening my call and put your boss on the phone
right now you can tell him you bought one for him.'.  :)   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: The Depths of Sliminess
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: SCN Research/Qic Laboratories of Tigard, Oregon.
Date: Wed, 8 Jul 1992 20:50:08 GMT


[e-mail] (Justin Leavens) writes:

> You don't have to answer the phone if you don't want to,

This is a *stupid* comment. Until I answer the phone, I don't know who
is calling. It could be someone I want a call from. (Note that a *lot*
of people still just hang up if they get an answering machine, so
"screening" is not workable).

Or what if you are "on call" or expecting important calls?

One type of sales call that I detest is the people calling to try to
sell extra services for the local cable company. They start out by
saying "This is Paragon Cable calling ..." So I have to listen quite a
bit longer before I can be sure that it's a sales call, not a call
about a billing problem or some such.


Leonard Erickson              [e-mail]
CIS: [70465,203]             [e-mail]
FIDO:   1:105/56     [e-mail]
(The CIS address is checked daily. The others infrequently)


[Moderator's Note: Fifty years ago there was a breed of person known
as the 'door-to-door salesman', who literally went house to house
selling things. People then had to get up and answer the door only to
slam it shut again or invite the person in or whatever. And those guys
going door to door sold everything under the sun including pots and
pans, insurance, women's lingerie, shoes, brushes, you name it.
People would look through a peephole in the door and remain quiet,
pretending to not be at home. But the modern day equivilent of the
peephole, Caller-ID, is still banned in some places at the behest of a
a few people who keep squalling about their fantasy of a woman in a
shelter somewhere whose husband will come to get her if he knows where
she is. So for you folks that don't like answering the phone blind and
risking a call from (oh my God!) a 'telemarketing slime', I suggest
you put up or shut up. This is not directed to you, Leonard, because I
don't know where you stand ... but amazingly, many people gripe about
intrusions on the phone and condemn the most effecient way of dealing
with it also. I think it is because they don't want the intrusions
*they* make on the phone to be easily detected or stopped.   PAT]

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

Subject: Hang Up on This Scam (From the Company News Letter)
Date: 8 Jul 92 15:53:49 EDT (Wed)
From: [e-mail] (Ken Sprouse)


We have an internal news letter that comes out once a week and todays
edition has the following article in it.

    ------

    Employes should beware of a telemarketing scam that can
potentially cost the Corporation nearly $10 every time an employee
participates in it.

    Corporate Secruity is aware of one of our locations that
recently received approximately 2,500 calls from an audio response
unit.  The uint's message attempts to entice the called parties to
dial an 800 number to find out what prize they have won.  Once the 800
number is dialed, a call processing system answers and instructs the
caller to press "1" on their keypad.  For a charge of $9.95 billed to
their phone, the caller then may find out their prize.

    At this point, the processing system apparently transfers the
inbound 800 call, along with the Automatic Number Identification, to a
900 number.  In this manner, PBX restrictions on dialing 900 numbers
are circumvented.

    Please be alert to the possibility of such a scheme.  If you
receive this type of call, do not participate.

          ---------

I don't know if its just coincidence but while at lunch today I was
browseing thru {USA Today} and found an article along the same lines
on the front page of the Money section.  Beware the telescum!


Ken Sprouse / N3IGW       [e-mail]      Oakmont, Pa.
GEnie mail KSPROUSE /  Packet radio [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: Thanks Ken, but its an old scheme we have covered
here before, in almost painful detail a few months ago. Still, it is
worth mentioning to new readers.   PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #545
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa08368;
          9 Jul 92 13:26 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA20141
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 9 Jul 1992 02:12:02 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA00746
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 9 Jul 1992 02:11:54 -0500
Date: Thu, 9 Jul 1992 02:11:54 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #546

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 9 Jul 92 02:11:55 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 546

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: FGB, FGD Trunks (Alan L. Varney)
    Re: 911 Circuitry Can Detect 91 (Jeff Hibbard)
    Re: CompuServe Candidategrams (Steve Forrette)
    Re: The Telco Owns the Numbers (Alan Boritz)
    Re: Way Cool MCI Mail Binary File Handling (Alan Boritz)
    Re: Way Cool MCI Mail Binary File Handling (Paul Robinson)
    Re: "Telephone Scrambler" Plans Available (Nick Sayer)
    Re: 900Mhz Cordless Phones: Which One? (Erez Levav)
    Re: Looking For Supplier of Telephone Jack Converters (Julian Macassey)
    Re: Company Uses Caller-ID to Identify Customers (Ken Weaverling)
    Re: Company Uses Caller-ID to Identify Customers (Leonard Erickson)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wed,  8 Jul 92 13:02:05 CDT
From: [e-mail] (Alan L Varney)
Subject: Re: FGB, FGD Trunks
Organization: AT&T Network Systems


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail].
UTOLEDO.edu (Steven S. Brack) writes:

> After hearing a good deal about trunks described as:

> Feature Group B   -->  950-XXXX access
> Feature Group D   -->  10XXX    access,  etc.,

> I wondered what other Feature Groups there were, and what "Features"
> such labelling indicated.

   Most of the following comes from SR-TSV-002275, "BOC Notes on the
LEC Networks - 1990", by Bellcore.  The Feature Groups use a single
letter to label the "group" of interface capabilities that can be
ordered by an IC/INC.  I have no idea who made up the actual letters.

   FG-A provides "line-side" access to an IXC.  Almost any local
number can be used for access -- but you need to tone-dial the actual
called number and other ID, such as an IXC calling card number.  This
was the basic form of access before MCI won their case and Trunk
Access was available.  There is no ANI, no line ID, no answer
supervision.  But it's cheap ...

   FG-B provides "trunk-side" access to an IXC, usually by dialing a
950-0XXX or 950-1XXX number.  If direct trunks are provided to the
originating CO, a form of ANI and rotary-dial service may be possible.
You still get a second dial tone or announcement, and then must dial
the actual called number.  Transmission quality is not as stringent as
FG-D.  Usually cheaper than FG-D.  Was called "interim" access in many
divestiture-related documents, because it was to be replaced with FG-D
 -- but the tariffs didn't have a sunset provision, and many users want
the cheaper access.  Answer supervision provided.

   FG-C provided AT&T Long Lines with a tariff for their old pre-
divestiture circuits.  AT&T "must" convert such circuits to FG-D when
the EO or Tandem is capable of "equal-access" signaling.  Very few
such trunks remain in use.

   FG-D (aka "equal access" trunks) is a high-quality, low-blocking
access method providing the IXC with answer supervision, carrier
pre-subscription, 10XXX access and overlap outpulsing.  ANI and line
ID are optionally provided.  The line ID (II digits) provide
information on the type of line (Hotel, Inmate, Coin, etc.).  A
"transitional" 950-0/1XXX capability is provided to allow FG-B
carriers to move to FG-D without blocking customers using the older
950-dialing access.

   So while 10XXX is always uses FG-D trunks, 950-dialing may go over
either FG-B or FB-D trunks.

  Al Varney -- just MY opinion....

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

From: [e-mail] (Jeff Hibbard)
Subject: Re: 911 Circuitry Can Detect 91
Organization: Bradley University
Date: Wed, 8 Jul 92 18:19:17 GMT


> [Moderator's Note: My experience here has been that with either *67,
> *70, *71 or *72 (all return stutter dial tone) you can 'dial through'
>  ... that is, no pause is required in the modem string, etc.  Other
> places are different on this?  PAT]

I'm in the habit of forwarding one of my home phone lines to my
cellular phone whenever I leave the house.  To make this easier, I set
one of my phone's memory buttons to "72#<cell phone number>" (with no
waits programmed).

This worked just fine until a few weeks ago when Illinois Bell
replaced the 5ESS serving my home with a DMS-100.  Now, there is an
annoyingly long pause after dialing "72#" before I get the stutter
dial tone, and anything I dial without waiting for it is ignored.

So far, the only other changes I've noticed have also been for the
worse.  Can anyone tell me what the alleged benefits of this new
switch are?  Illinois Bell has yet to even inform its residential
customers that there has been a change.  I guess they (incorrectly)
thought that the differences were so slight as to go unnoticed.


Jeff Hibbard, Peoria IL

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: CompuServe Candidategrams
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA
Date: Wed, 8 Jul 1992 18:31:18 GMT


> [Moderator's Note: You are not quite correct. Clinton and Marrou were
> close numerically, and both in the 75300.xxxx series which as we all
> know are 'sponsored' accounts -- that is free accounts given by CIS to
> desirable users. Perot was 71xxx.xxxx, or some distance away. He pays
> for that account I suspect; Clinton and Marrou do not. Likewise, Brown
> had a 75300 number.

So Brown has a 'sponsored' account he does not pay for?  I wonder if
he's received more than $100 from CompuServe in free services?  :-)


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

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

Date: 08 Jul 92 14:46:48 EDT
From: Alan Boritz <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: The Telco Owns the Numbers


[e-mail] (Joel M Snyder) writes:

> ZIP + 4 normally selects at the block level (there's a ZIP + 4 book in
> your post office for your town); for some places, obviously, the + 4
> gets it a lot closer, such as a PO Box (mentioned previously), a
> single office building, etc.

Zip + 4 goes beyond the block and sometimes narrows down where inside
a building the addressee is located.  Sometimes there's a special Zip
+ 4 just for one company.  There are a series of Zip + 4's for groups
of floors within the Empire State Building, and some tenants, who
receive high volumes of mail, have their own code, just to name one
example.  Postnet bar codes go further to include some digits from the
street address.


Alan Boritz     [e-mail]

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

Date: 08 Jul 92 14:47:24 EDT
From: Alan Boritz <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Way Cool MCI Mail Binary File Handling


[e-mail] (John R. Levine) writes:

> MCI Mail has recently upgraded their support for binary files in
> messages.  They have long allowed you to send and receive binary
> message segments, but only through the batch X.PC interface used by
> programs like Lotus Express and Norton Desktop.

"x.pc" is not a batch interface.  It's a link-level protocol that
supports multiple logical sessions and only works with Tymnet's x.pc
servers.  Chuck Forsberg, author of Professional Yam, and DSZ, wrote a
special version of ProYam that will talk to Tymnet's x.pc.  The only
implication of using x.pc is multiple connect time charges (when
connected to more than one port on a host that charges for connect
time), but it has no binary file transfer cabability by itself.


Alan Boritz     [e-mail]

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

Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 09 Jul 92  04:44:22 GMT
Subject: Re: Way Cool MCI Mail Binary File Handling


In a message of <Sun, 5 Jul 92 00:34:44 EDT> from John R. Levine
<[e-mail]>:

> MCI Mail has recently upgraded their support for binary files in
> messages...Now they've extended binary file support to the
> standard interactive interface and the Internet gateway.  You can
> transfer binary or text files interactively using zmodem or Kermit ...
> What's really cool is that binary attachments even work for files
> passed to and from Internet mail!  Binary segments appear as uuencoded
> data ...

DEC runs a gateway that allows a user on internet to send a script of
an FTP transaction and the gateway will do an FTP for the user and
E-Mail him whatever files were requested by GET or any directory
listings.

I've been using UUENCODE/UUDECODE to use DEC's FTP to E-Mail service
to allow me to get files from some systems via FTP as E-Mail to me; if
it does the conversion automatically, that will be nice, as long as
the system knows when I'm getting several messages constituting a
single file.  Otherwise this feature will be useless as a file sent to
me as UUENCODEd data will end up being pressed into a form I am unable
to restore as the original information.


Paul Robinson  - These opinions are mine (Who else would want them?)

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

From: [e-mail] (Nick Sayer)
Subject: Re: "Telephone Scrambler" Plans Available
Organization: The Duck Pond public unix: [phone], log in as 'guest'.
Date: Thu, 9 Jul 1992 03:16:55 GMT


[e-mail] (Stephen Friedl) writes:

> To render the speech channels unintelligble, the incoming audio
> signal is inverted by the ICs internal double-sideband modulator.

If anyone's going to go to the trouble of tapping your phone, they're
likely to have one of those as well.

Serious voice encryption no doubt starts with a digital channel as a
substrate. It has been reported that it is possible to make speech
that is intelligeable, if slightly lower quality, with only a quarter
of a 64 kbps voice channel. If that is true, it means that 16 kbps is
all that is necessary. v.32bis comes fairly close. v.fast will
probably have that 16 kbps and enough extra for a little error
correction to go along with it.

Digital things are comparatively easy to scramble. Though I doubt DES
wouldn't seriously inconvenience the NSA, I bet it would be sufficient
for most people paranoid enough to want to scramble their phone.

Of course if the Cellular industry paid their engineers as much as
their lobbiests, digital cellular (with encryption) would probably
already be making secure (radio-)telephony a reality. Instead, we have
the ECPA, which makes it a myth.


Nick Sayer <[e-mail]>  N6QQQ @ N0ARY.#NOCAL.CA.USA.NA
37 19 49 N / 121 57 36 W          [phone], log in as 'guest'

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

From: [e-mail] (Erez Levav)
Subject: Re: 900Mhz Cordless Phones: Which One?
Organization: Dialogic Corporation
Date: Wed, 08 Jul 92 23:09:41 GMT


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

> As far as I know, only the Tropez and Panasonic phones are out.  Both
> have been reviewed on the net, though perhaps only the Tropez in this
> newsgroup.  (The other may have been misc.consumers.)

I bought the Tropez a few months ago, had it for a week, and returned
to the store.  I liked the features - but the sound quaility was
horrible.  It was very distorted as well as not loud enough.  I (and
my friends) compared it to the Panasonic 3910 and AT&T ??? cordless-s
we have - the Panasonic was way better.  Also, the Tropez has 4
different possible rings, but no volume control on any of them.


Erez Levav         AT: Dialogic       [e-mail]
Xpress Software         300 Littelton Rd.       ...!uunet!dialogic!levave
[phone] x105  Parsippany, NJ 07054  [if none of these work:]
[phone]                        [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Julian Macassey)
Subject: Re: Looking For Supplier of Telephone Jack Converters
Date: 9 Jul 92 04:02:12 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Julian Macassey)
Organization: The Hole in the Wall  Hollywood California U.S.A.


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Eric Engelmann) writes:
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 539, Message 5 of 5

> The World Bank sends a lot of people to remote ends of the Earth with
> notebook PCs and built in FaxModems. These countries have a variety of
> non RJ11 wall jacks. I once saw a set of universal telephone jack
> converters (an idea similar to the AC adapters for small appliances
> used overseas which are readily available in many stores).

    The fact is that power plugs have just a few iterations. Phone
plugs vary from country to country and some countries have none at
all, they just hard wire the phone. The sure fire solution that works
everywhere in the world is outlined below. Using the kit I describe
below, I was once even able to unscrew the wall plate from a phone in
a hotel, not two miles from the world bank, and call my machine in
California.

    A U.S. Modular plug to "Universal" Line Cord

    This is a system that will allow a modem or phone with a U.S.
modular socket to be connected to any telephone line anywhere in the
world. Users of modems, laptop computers and fax machines will find
this device useful.

    Here is what you need: A line cord with a modular plug on one
end and spade lugs on the other. A pair of aligator (crocodile) clips.
A small phillips and flat blade screwdriver to open foreign jacks and
loosen screws.

    The parts list and Radio Shack part numbers are below:

    Line cord 25-Ft Modular-to-Spade        279-364
                     or
    Line cord 12-Ft Modular-to-Spade        279-310

    Aligator Clips with screw terminals        270-347

    Phillps/Flat Screwdriver            64-1950


    These part numbers are suggestions. Parts may be purchased at
most electronics stores, even some supermarkets. Total cost should be
no more than $12.00

    How to use:

    Locate a wall socket or junction block. Open it up. There will
be two wires that carry the phone signals. There may be other wires in
the plug - you won't need them. Locate the two you need, they will
have about 48V DC on them, or will give you dialtone when a phone or
off hook modem is connected accross them. Having located the wires
needed, either un-screw the terminals holding the wire down and slip
the line cord spade lugs under and tighten, or attach the aligator
clips to the line cord and clip on the terminals.

    So there you have it, a modem/phone connector that works
anywhere in the world -- even U.S. hotels with no modular plugs in the
guest's rooms.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Ken Weaverling)
Subject: Re: Company Uses Caller-ID to Identify Customers
Organization: University of Delaware
Date: Wed, 8 Jul 1992 15:43:12 GMT


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

> I recently had an interesting set of conversations. I called
> MacConnection in New Hampshire to order a RAM upgrade....

> 1). They were using Caller-ID to present account information to the
> operators as they answered the phone...

They are using ANI, and not Caller-ID to get the phone number. They
just say it is Caller-ID because the public understands this term
better than ANI.

I usually order software from my office phone.  Caller-ID reports the
phone number of the outgoing trunk I manage to get. Therefore, if it
was possible to pass CLID info up to New Hampshire, they would see one
of 16 different phone numbers.

ANI delivers the billing number. Curious, since everyone who calls
from here to MacConnection would have the same number delivered.  I
wonder how they handle that.


Ken Weaverling (Delaware Tech College)
[e-mail] -or- [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Company Uses Caller-ID to Identify Customers
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: SCN Research/Qic Laboratories of Tigard, Oregon.
Date: Thu, 9 Jul 1992 06:56:05 GMT


[e-mail] writes:

> 1). They were using Caller-ID to present account information to the
> operators as they answered the phone. Multiple phone numbers are
> mapped into a given account [Note: This could cause some problems if a
> number of people share a line in a small company, but that is probably
> a small percentage of the businesses.]

<sigh>

This *isn't* Caller-ID, it's ANI. And it is pretty standard for
companies with 800 number order desks. It's just that the company you
dealt with is being *open* about it.


Leonard Erickson              [e-mail]
CIS: [70465,203]             [e-mail]
FIDO:   1:105/56     [e-mail]
(The CIS address is checked daily. The others infrequently)

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #546
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa17155;
          10 Jul 92 3:16 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA23130
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 10 Jul 1992 01:07:03 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA22938
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 10 Jul 1992 01:06:53 -0500
Date: Fri, 10 Jul 1992 01:06:53 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #547

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 10 Jul 92 01:06:56 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 547

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Alleged Phreakers Indicted in New York (Nigel Allen)
    Some Hackers We Know (John De Armond)
    Re: "Legal" Phreaking? (Michael A. Covington)
    Re: "Legal" Phreaking? (Alan Boritz)
    Re: "Legal" Phreaking? ([e-mail])
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: <[e-mail]>
Subject: Alleged Phreakers Indicted in New York
Date: Thu, 9 Jul 92 22:38:49 EDT


The following press release was issued by the U.S. Justice Department,
as far as I can tell. The obvious disclaimer: I have no involvement
with the U.S. Secret Service, the FBI, or any of the individuals
indicted in this matter.

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

Group of "Computer Hackers" Indicted; First Use of Wiretaps
in Such a Case

Contact: Federico E. Virella Jr., 212-791-1955, or
          Stephen Fishbein, 212-791-1978, of the Office of
          the U.S. Attorney, Southern District of New York; or
          Betty Conkling of the U.S. Secret Service, 212-466-4400; or
          Joseph Valiquette Jr. of the Federal Bureau of
          Investigation, 212-335-2715

   NEW YORK, July 8 /U.S. Newswire/ -- A group of five "computer
hackers" has been indicted on charges of computer tampering, computer
fraud, wire fraud, illegal wiretapping, and conspiracy, by a federal
grand jury in Manhattan, resulting from the first investigative use of
court-authorized wiretaps to obtain conversations and data
transmissions of computer hackers.

   A computer hacker is someone who uses a computer or a telephone to
obtain unauthorized access to other computers.

   The indictment, which was filed today, alleges that Julio
Fernandez, a/k/a "Outlaw," John Lee, a/k/a "Corrupt," Mark Abene,
a/k/a "Phiber Optik," Elias Ladopoulos, a/k/a "Acid Phreak," and Paul
Stira, a/k/a "Scorpion," infiltrated a wide variety of computer
systems, including systems operated by telephone companies, credit
reporting services, and educational institutions.

   According to Otto G. Obermaier, United States Attorney for the
Southern District of New York, James E. Heavey, special agent in
charge, New York Field Division, United States Secret Service, William
Y. Doran, special agent in charge, Criminal Division, New York Field
Division, Federal Bureau of Investigation, and Scott Charney, chief of
the Computer Crime Unit of the Department of Justice, the indictment
charges that the defendants were part of a closely knit group of
computer hackers self-styled "MOD," an acronym used variously for
"Masters of Disaster" and "Masters of Deception" among other things.
The indictment alleges that the defendants broke into computers "to
enhance their image and prestige among other computer hackers; to
harass and intimidate rival hackers and other people they did not
like; to obtain telephone, credit, information and other services
without paying for them; and to obtain passwords, account numbers and
other things of value which they could sell to others." The defendants
are also alleged to have used unauthorized passwords and billing codes
to make long distance telephone calls and to be able to communicate
with other computers for free.

   Some of the computers that the defendants allegedly broke into were
telephone switching computers operated by Southwestern Bell, New York
Telephone, Pacific Bell, U.S. West and Martin Marietta Electronics
Information and Missile Group.  According to the indictment, such
switching computers each control telephone service for tens of
thousands of telephone lines.  In some instances, the defendants
allegedly tampered with the computers by adding and altering calling
features.  In some cases, the defendants allegedly call forwarded
local numbers to long distance numbers and thereby obtained long
distance services for the price of a local call.  Southwestern Bell is
alleged to have incurred losses of approximately $370,000 in 1991 as a
result of computer tampering by defendants Fernandez, Lee, and Abene.

   The indictment also alleges that the defendants gained access to
computers operated by BT North America, a company that operates the
Tymnet data transfer network.  The defendants were allegedly able to
use their access to Tymnet computers to intercept data communications
while being transmitted through the network, including computer
passwords of Tymnet employees.  On one occasion, Fernandez and Lee
allegedly intercepted data communications on a network operated by the
Bank of America.

   The charges also allege that the defendants gained access to credit
and information services including TRW, Trans Union and Information
America.  The defendants allegedly were able to obtain personal
information on people including credit reports, telephone numbers,
addresses, neighbor listings and social security numbers by virtue of
their access to these services.  On one occasion Lee and another
member of the group are alleged to have discussed obtaining
information from another hacker that would allow them to alter credit
reports on TRW.  As quoted in the indictment, Lee said that the
information he wanted would permit them "to destroy people's lives ...
or make them look like saints."

   The indictment further charges that in November 1991, Fernandez and
Lee sold information to Morton Rosenfeld concerning how to access
credit services.  The indictment further alleges that Fernandez later
provided Rosenfeld's associates with a TRW account number and password
that Rosenfeld and his associates used to obtain approximately 176 TRW
credit reports on various individuals.  (In a separate but related
court action, Rosenfeld pleaded guilty to conspiracy to use and
traffic in account numbers of TRW.  See below).

   According to Stephen Fishbein, the assistant United States attorney
in charge of the prosecution, the indictment also alleges that members
of MOD wiped out almost all of the information contained within the
Learning Link computer operated by the Educational Broadcasting Corp.
(WNET Channel 13) in New York City.  The Learning Link computer
provided educational and instructional information to hundreds of
schools and teachers in New York, New Jersey and Connecticut.
Specifically, the indictment charges that on Nov. 28, 1989, the
information on the Learning Link was destroyed and a message was left
on the computer that said: "Happy Thanksgiving you turkeys, from all
of us at MOD" and which was signed with the aliases "Acid Phreak,"
"Phiber Optik," and "Scorpion." During an NBC News broadcast on Nov.
14, 1990, two computer hackers identified only by the aliases "Acid
Phreak" and "Phiber Optik" took responsibility for sending the "Happy
Thanksgiving" message.

   Obermaier stated that the charges filed today resulted from a joint
investigation by the United States Secret Service and the Federal
Bureau of Investigation.  "This is the first federal investigation
ever to use court-authorized wiretaps to obtain conversations and data
transmissions of computer hackers," said Obermaier.  He praised both
the Secret Service and the FBI for their extensive efforts in this
case.  Obermaier also thanked the Department of Justice Computer Crime
Unit for their important assistance in the investigation.
Additionally, Obermaier thanked the companies and institutions whose
computer systems were affected by the defendants' activities, all of
whom cooperated fully in the investigation.

   Fernandez, age 18, resides at 3448 Steenwick Ave., Bronx, New York.
Lee (also known as John Farrington), age 21, resides at 64A Kosciusco
St. Brooklyn, New York.  Abene, age 20, resides at 94-42 Alstyne Ave.,
Queens, New York.  Elias Ladopoulos, age 22, resides at 85-21 159th
St., Queens, New York.  Paul Stira, age 22, resides at 114-90 227th
St., Queens, New York.  The defendants' arraignment has been scheduled
for July 16, at 10 a.m. in Manhattan federal court.

   The charges contained in the indictment are accusations only and
the defendants are presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty.
Fishbein stated that if convicted, each of the defendants may be
sentenced to a maximum of five years imprisonment on the conspiracy
count.  Each of the additional counts also carries a maximum of five
years imprisonment, except for the count charging Fernandez with
possession of access devices, which carries a maximum of ten years
imprisonment.  Additionally, each of the counts carries a maximum fine
of the greater of $250,000, or twice the gross gain or loss incurred.

    ------

   In separate but related court actions, it was announced that
Rosenfeld and Alfredo De La Fe have each pleaded guilty in Manhattan
Federal District Court to conspiracy to use and to traffic in
unauthorized access devices in connection with activities that also
involved members of MOD.

   Rosenfeld pled guilty on June 24 before the Shirley Wohl Kram,
United States District Judge.  At his guilty plea, Rosenfeld admitted
that he purchased account numbers and passwords for TRW and other
credit reporting services from computer hackers and then used the
information to obtain credit reports, credit card numbers, social
security numbers and other personal information which he sold to
private investigators.  Rosenfeld added in his guilty plea that on or
about Nov. 25, 1991, he purchased information from persons named
"Julio" and "John" concerning how to obtain unauthorized access to
credit services.  Rosenfeld stated that he and his associates later
obtained additional information from "Julio" which they used to pull
numerous credit reports.  According to the information to which
Rosenfeld pleaded guilty, he had approximately 176 TRW credit reports
at his residence on Dec. 6, 1991.

   De La Fe pled guilty on June 19 before Kenneth Conboy, United
States District Judge.  At his guilty plea, De La Fe stated that he
used and sold telephone numbers and codes for Private Branch Exchanges
("PBXs").  According to the information to which De La Fe pleaded
guilty, a PBX is a privately operated computerized telephone system
that routes calls, handles billing, and in some cases permits persons
calling into the PBX to obtain outdial services by entering a code.
De La Fe admitted that he sold PBX numbers belonging to Bugle Boy
Industries and others to a co-conspirator who used the numbers in a
call sell operation, in which the co-conspirator charged others to
make long distance telephone calls using the PBX numbers.  De La Fe
further admitted that he and his associates used the PBX numbers to
obtain free long distance services for themselves.  De La Fe said that
one of the people with whom he frequently made free long distance
conference calls was a person named John Farrington, who he also knew
as "Corrupt."

   Rosenfeld, age 21, resides at 2161 Bedford Ave., Brooklyn, N.Y.
Alfredo De La Fe, age 18, resides at 17 West 90th St., N.Y.  Rosenfeld
and De La Fe each face maximum sentences of five years, imprisonment
and maximum fines of the greater of $250,000, or twice the gross gain
or loss incurred.  Both defendants have been released pending sentence
on $20,000 appearance bonds.  Rosenfeld's sentencing is scheduled for
Sept. 9, before Shirley Wohl Kram.  De La Fe's sentencing is scheduled
for Aug. 31, before Conboy.

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

From: [e-mail] (John De Armond)
Subject: Some Hackers We Know
Date: Thu, 09 Jul 92 22:09:34 GMT
Organization: Dixie Communications Public Access.  The Mouth of the South.


Some familiar names from the net have made the {New York Times.}

New York -- Five computer hackers have been indicted on federal
charges of breaking into computer systems run by telephone companies,
credit reporting services and educational institutions, officials said
Wednesday.

The hackers, in their teens and 20s, did it to show off for their
peers, to harass people they didn't like, to obtain services without
paying and to get information they could sell said U.S. Attorney Otto
Obermaler.

During these invasions, they obtained 176 credit reports from the TRW
credit information company, destroyed an education series of a
television station, and left electronic graffiti on an NBC television
news show.

The defendants were part of a group of hackers -- people adept at
using computers to get into other computers or data systems -- who
called themselves MOD, for "masters of disaster" or "masters of
deception."

Mr. Obermaier said MOD's members include Julio "Outlaw" Fernandez, 18;
John "Corrupt" Lee, 21; Mark "Phiber Optik" Abene, 20; Elias "Acid
Phreak" Ladopolous, 22; and Paul "Scorpion" Stira, 22. All are New
Yorkers.

Several charges.

They are charged with computer tampering, computer fraud, wire fraud,
illegal wire tapping and conspiracy. Each count is punishable by up to
five years in prison.

The indictment charges that in November 1989, MOD destroyed the
information in WNET Channel 13's Learning Link computer in New York
City. Learning Link provided educational and instructional material to
schools and teachers in New York, New Jersey and Connecticut.

The hackers also allegedly broke into telephone switching computers
operated by South western Bell, New York Telephone, Pacific Bell, US
West and Martin Marietta Electronics Information and Missile Group. "

           -------- end of exerpt -------

It's going to be interesting to see the excuses developed by certain
users on this network to justify these (alleged) hackers (allegedly)
did.  (If you don't like my use of the term "hacker", tough.  This
word, like the word 'gay' has been prostituted and I'm tired of
fighting it.)


John De Armond, WD4OQC   Rapid Deployment System, Inc.
Marietta, Ga   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Michael A. Covington)
Subject: Re: "Legal" Phreaking?
Organization: University of Georgia, Athens
Date: Thu, 9 Jul 1992 05:22:19 GMT


> [Moderator's Note: Let me ask those of you who persist in the belief
> that it is the system operator's fault if there is a break-in to a
> system with weak security, do you feel the same way about physical
> assaults on other people?
 ...

> the law is intended to protect the *weakest* members of society.  PAT]

Good point.  Our draft computer regulations here contain a comment
that impermissible snooping is still impermissible "even if the
operating system or other software permits these acts."

More simply, computers aren't required to defend themselves (although
most can do so, to some extent).

But I think our Dutch friend's point was quite different.  The way I
read it, he was claiming that the penalty for phone phreaking should
be propor- tional to actual monetary loss, and that personal
exploration often cost the phone company nothing.

I seem to recall, too, that he was refuted by some facts about the
ways phone companies have to pay each other for long distance calls!


Michael A. Covington, Ph.D. |  [e-mail]  |  ham radio N4TMI
Artificial Intelligence Programs | U of Georgia | Athens, GA 30602  U.S.A.

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

Date: 09 Jul 92 14:48:03 EDT
From: Alan Boritz <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: "Legal" Phreaking?


In article <[e-mail]> TELECOM Moderator notes:

> [Moderator's Note: Let me ask those of you who persist in the belief
> that it is the system operator's fault if there is a break-in to a
> system with weak security, do you feel the same way about physical
> assaults on other people?

Oh, come on, Pat.  That's not a fair analogy.  There's a big
difference between a vicious destructive electronic attack on system
resources, and a curious experimenter who doesn't realize the full
extent of his actions. It's not always as absurd as you suggest.

> That is, if you are attacked by a person much larger and stronger
> than yourself, can't we conclude that if he robs you it is really your
> fault?

If you're a cop walking a beat could we conclude that you were at
fault if a perpetrator does you in because you didn't know how to fire
your weapon?  An MIS director, or system manager, is responsible for
his facility and should take system security issues seriously to
protect sensitive material or resources from unauthorized access.  If
he doesn't, or won't, then he should pay -- with his job.  There are
too many qualified and responsible professionals currently available
in today's ailing job market for companies to get along with anything
less.


Alan Boritz     72446.461.compuserve.com


[Moderator's Note: Don't you think these latest allegations describe a
'vicious destructive electronic attack'?  I can tell you now the crock
of baloney which will be presented on Usenet ad infinatum over the
next two years: One bunch of messages will claim the proprietors of
the victimized computers are the ones really at fault who should be
punished. Others will say that by punishing the naughty children our
government is engaged in some sort of vendetta against computer users
in general. Still other fools will observe how the government's
actions will stifle and chill the intellectual curiosity of hacklings
everywhere, and where would we be today without Apple Computer, et al
ad nauseum.  Let's listen to the shrill chatter from the EFF and its
Socially Responsible membership as they defend the darlings against
the evil government, credit bureaus, telcos, etc. By the way, has the
EFF announced who the attorney will be to represent these young
'victims' yet?  PAT]

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

Date: Fri, 10 Jul 92 05:22:38 GMT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: "Legal" Phreaking


Want to read something fascinating about "phone phreaks" "dark
side" hackers and other "high-tech" rebels and outlaws?
Get a copy of CYBERPUNK by Katie Hafner and John Markoff
(Simon and Schuster, 1991).

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #547
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa19333;
          10 Jul 92 4:27 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA06676
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 10 Jul 1992 02:03:13 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA28185
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 10 Jul 1992 02:03:04 -0500
Date: Fri, 10 Jul 1992 02:03:04 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #548

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 10 Jul 92 02:03:00 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 548

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: 1-800 DISA Hacking - A Waste of Time and Money (Bill Garfield)
    Re: "Legal" Phreaking? (James J. Menth)
    Re: "Legal" Phreaking? (Holt Sorenson)
    Re: The Depths of Sliminess (James J. Sowa)
    Re: The Depths of Sliminess (Peter da Silva)
    Phone Phraud Publicity (John Winthrop)
    Re: Suit Alleges Cellular Caused Brain Tumor (Michael Masterson)
    Re: Suit Alleges Cellular Caused Brain Tumor (John Higdon)
    Re: Suit Alleges Cellular Caused Brain Tumor (Tony DeSimone)
    Re: Suit Alleges Cellular Caused Brain Tumor (Jon Krueger)
    Re: Suit Alleges Cellular Caused Brain Tumor (Robert L. McMillin)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Re: 1-800 DISA Hacking - A Waste of Time and Money
From: [e-mail] (Bill Garfield)
Date: Fri, 10 Jul 92 00:50:00
Organization: Ye Olde Bailey BBS - Houston, TX - 713-520-1569
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Bill Garfield)


> It would seem that given the ANI from this guy, one could track him
> down and do a little pounding on him.

You would think so, wouldn't you?  The problem is, you send a team of
investigators out to the address associated with the number and you
find zero.  The hackling, it seems, has broken into the basement of
one of several apartment buildings.  The cable pairs loop from
building to building, and the hackling merely bridges onto any working
pair and he's off and running.  Once the telco trucks show up on the
block, the hackling is long gone only to surface the next night from a
different cable and pair.

NYNEX and Sprint security have both told us this thing, believe it or
not, has direct ties to organized crime ... yes, the Mafia.  On the
occasion that they HAVE been able to track down the half-tap, they
break down the door only to find a vacant, deserted apartment with a
card table and chair and just maybe a 2500 set along with it.  But the
hackling and his very basic computer gear (typically Commodore 64 and
modem) are long gone. Like trying to rid the sewers of rats.

Our best defense is just what we've done ... lock it down tight as a
drum and monitor it daily.  My only reason for the recent post was to
hopefully get our current hacker to realize the futility of his
efforts and for God's sake go away. We typically get hacked on for two
or three days at a time and then they're gone for a month or so, but
this current pest has been banging steadily away for the past five
weeks and I'm getting a little sick of it.

Our IXC can block inward from area 212 for us but that undermines much
of the usefulness of our circuits.  Maybe when they reassign the Bronx
to its own NPA we'll look at that option again.


[Moderator's Note: Do you see why so many hackers (geeze, I hate the
way that word has been confiscated!) absolutely despise Caller-ID and
its cousin ANI?  It keeps them on the run too much. So the next time
you hear someone carrying on about 'a woman in a shelter whose husband
is looking for her so he can beat her up' or the one about 'companies
will make lists so they can practice teleslime on people who call them
if they are allowed to see the caller's number' -- in short, all the
silly comments you read on Usenet from one day to the next -- just
look the person squarely in the eye and ask them point blank, "Are you
a hackerphreak, or just trying to be Socially Responsible?" :)   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (james.j.menth)
Subject: Re: "Legal" Phreaking?
Organization: AT&T
Date: Fri, 10 Jul 1992 14:12:42 GMT


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

> Although I'd agree that cracking and phreaking are wrong, and
> should be prosecuted, I think that the owner of a computer must accept
> some legal blame if he does maintain some basic level of security.
       -----------

I think if you said 'civil liability' instead of 'legal blame' you
would be correct.  This is called 'contributory negligence' ( like
proposals for limiting recoveries for being injured while not wearing
seat belts ) and may reduce your chances, or degree of recovery, for
your damages.  While I agree with Paul about hacking damage I don't
think that the criminal penalty of the offender should be reduced.
The TV thief should be charged with burglary, no matter how easy the
entry was.  The hacker doing damage should be charged with whatever
the law allows, without regard to what protection scheme was in place.

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

From: [e-mail] (Holt Sorenson)
Subject: Re: "Legal" Phreaking?
Organization: sdf Public Access UNIX, Dallas--unrestricted free shell access
Date: Fri, 10 Jul 1992 06:21:24 GMT


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

> I did a little hacking when I was a teenager, and I broke into
> my first computer with the first username/password that I tried.  It
> was uucp/<no password>.  I also discovered that a large number of
> computers still had default passwords and other easy methods of entry
> -- methods that a 14-year old kid with a C-64 can use.  As such, I'd
> say that many computer systems maintain a level of security that is
> comparable to leaving the door of a house closed but unlocked.

I had my days doing such things. In fact, that's where I learned UNIX.
I can unfortunately report that my first break in was root,
nopassword.  This IS negligence. The company that I got into had very
detailed records about their customers that were there for the taking.

So, system security on anything from computers to PBX controllers is
very important. The System Administrators have to take some
responsiblity or else they, their business, and it's customers will be
taken advantage of.


Holt Sorenson

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

Date: Thu,  9 Jul 92 08:54:14 EDT
From: [e-mail] (James J Sowa)
Subject: Re: The Depths of Sliminess
Organization: AT&T - Network Wireless Switching Systems


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Justin Leavens) writes:

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

> But the bottom line is that the call costs you nothing, you don't have to
> answer the phone if you don't want to, and if you don't want what is
> being sold, then say so right away, cutting them off if you have to

> [Moderator's Note: ...  easy to pick the phone up, say 'no thank
> you' and disconnect.

Pat,

What seems to be missed is, that people are interrupted by these sales
tactics ringing their telephone.  I believe that many people drop
whatever they are doing to go and answer a ringing telephone (Maybe
this would be another good thread to decide if this is sane behavior
or not).  But there is this feeling that is missed in the previous
posts that this is not an inconvenience on the called person.


Jim Sowa     att!cbnewsc!jjjs   [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Peter da Silva)
Subject: Re: The Depths of Sliminess
Organization: Taronga Park BBS
Date: Fri, 10 Jul 1992 00:37:47 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Justin Leavens) writes:

> [Moderator's Note: I agree with you completely, Justin. I've always
> felt the reaction here from some people, calling them 'slime', etc.
> was a bit much. They are just people earning a living, and it is quite
> easy to pick the phone up, say 'no thank you' and disconnect. After
> all, when we see a commercial on television we are free to change the
> channel and watch something else.  PAT]

I find this an odd contrast to your reaction to people who ring and
hang up. I'll take them over a telemarketer any day, at least they
didn't deliberately interrupt me for something they can be almost
certain I don't want (I don't know what the return rates are, but if
it's like other advertising a few percent would be high). Yes, it
makes a difference if the behaviour is deliberate or accidental.

As for "it's better they have a job than nothing at all"... I don't
buy that argument. Unless a person is doing productive work,
contributing to the economy, their job is worthless. Yes, that
includes Dan Quayle.


Peter da Silva, Taronga Park BBS, Houston, TX  [phone]/1032

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

Date: Fri, 10 Jul 92 00:53:34
From: wixer![e-mail] (john winthrop)
Subject: Phone Phraud Publicity


Last night I saw a little segment on CNBC's Steals-N-Deals about phone
fraud.

It seems like most of the press is still behind the time in reporting
about fraud such as this ... maybe someone should send them a copy of
the Digest showing how 800 numbers can be forwarded to 900's and such ...


John Winthrop (Wixer![e-mail])

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

From: [e-mail] (Michael Masterson)
Subject: Re: Suit Alleges Cellular Caused Brain Tumor
Organization: Dell Computer Co
Date: Thu, 9 Jul 1992 14:35:24 GMT


[e-mail] (Thor Lancelot Simon) writes:

> ... some cities for short-range police radios.  As I recall, in more
> than one case handheld transciever units were replaced with
> belt-mounted + handset or the like because of large-scale problems
> with glaucoma.  Tumors didn't factor into this, however, as I recall.
> Does anybody remember more of this discussion?

I've got one of those radios, it operates in the same band as
cellular, and there's very stringent warnings about not holding the
antenna too close to the face, or touching it to your
face/eyes/forehead while transmitting.  This radio is much more
powerful than a portable cellular phone, however, and more importantly
(from the glaucoma/cataract angle), it's typically held right in front
of the face, while cellular antennas are on the side of the head above
and to the rear; they have much lower power, and are much further away
from the eyes.


The opinions expressed do not necessarily reflect those of any other person.
Michael Masterson                          [e-mail]

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

Date: Thu, 9 Jul 92 10:19 PDT
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: Suit Alleges Cellular Caused Brain Tumor


[e-mail] (Paul Eggert) writes:

> It's too bad that important public policy issues like this are so
> often decided in the courts, which do not use the scientific method to
> arrive at their results.

Another non-scientific place that these issues are decided is in the
pool of bureaucrats in Washington. For instance, there are some VERY
strict rules regarding permissable RF radiation at the base of FM
towers. Radio stations must be in compliance with these standards in
order to get renewal on the license.

But note several things. The "limits" are figures drawn out of thin
air, loosly based on what some ANSI personel probably discussed over
coffee one day. The "public" does not go to mountain top transmitter
sites, so apparently these regulations are meant to protect
maintainence personel. The problem here is that there is not one
credible report of any malady whatsoever associated with long term
exposure to high 100 MHz fields (of the strength associated with
transmitter site locations). In other words, these rules are based
upon fantasy.

Sometimes complying with these rules can be very costly and become
great hardship to a marginal enterprize. And for what? If the
crackpots do not burden us with garbage, then sympathetic government
bozos will.

[e-mail] (Thor Lancelot Simon) writes:

> On the other hand, there really may be something to worry about here.
> Last time this came up in RISKS, it was pointed out that before the
> advent of cellular phone service, the same frequencies were used in
> some cities for short-range police radios.

Ah, yes. I read RISKS occasionally. It is great comedy. But before you
go off totally immersed in terror, consider this: if you could focus
(such as with a magnifying glass) the superlative power of a handheld
cellular phone (0.6 watt) into a microscopic concentrated dot, you
MIGHT be able to cause (through heating effects) cell changes in an
organism. However, at the antenna itself the energy is thousands of
times more dispersed than that required to even be detected by an
organism's physical make up and every millimeter removed makes the
dispersal even greater. Do you have any idea how LITTLE power 0.6 watt
is?

> As I recall, in more than
> one case handheld transciever units were replaced with belt-mounted +
> handset or the like because of large-scale problems with glaucoma.
                                 ^^^^^^^^^^^

The clip-on two-way "microphone" is much easier to use than holding on
to the radio. Perhaps you could point us to the studies linking
glaucoma to the use of police radios. I am unaware of any such thing.


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

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

Date: Thu,  9 Jul 92 21:55:51 GMT
From: [e-mail] (Tony DeSimone)
Subject: Re: Suit Alleges Cellular Caused Brain Tumor
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Tony DeSimone)
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories


On Tue, 7 Jul 1992 13:45:34 GMT, [e-mail] (Irving_Wolfe)
said:

> There is an extremely well-written (truly delightful to read despite
> the subject matter) book on this subject by Paul Brodeur.  He's not a
> scientist, but a writer; however, he's very bright and thorough and
> took the trouble to read everything available and interview actual
> workers in the field.  I wish I remembered the book's title, but you
> should be able to find it under the author's name.

"Currents of Death : Power Lines, Computer Terminals, and the Attempt
to Cover up Their Threat to Your Health".

Never read it, but I have decided it's a piece of trash (how's that
for being open-minded).  I read a review in IEEE Spectrum by someone
who *is* a scientist, and she savaged the book.  Anyway, the
sensationalist title is enough to turn me off.

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

Date: Thu, 9 Jul 1992 20:09:34 -0700
Subject: Re: Suit Alleges Cellular Caused Brain Tumor
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Ask Computer Systems Inc., Ingres Division, Alameda CA 94501
From: [e-mail] (Jon Krueger)


Ang Peng Hwa writes:

> [discovers that] virtually all [people] lived within 100 yards of
> either a substation or a high voltage line.  True, no study has
> vindicated those findings.  But as a researcher, I am inclined to take
> findings that were discovered, more seriously than those one set out
> to find.

Indeed science moves forward by noticing trends and anomolies.  But it
moves in circles if it fails to test them under controlled conditions.
The findings to take seriously are the ones that replicate.

> Then there was the PC Magazine editor Winn Rosch who did a pretty
> decent article on the subject of emissions from the computer monitor.
> Like John, he concluded that there was no definitive study. But at the
> end of the article, Rosch said he now sits five feet away from the
> monitor.

And what should we conclude if he sat six feet away?

What should we conclude if another user saw the same facts and decided
to sit two feet away?

The Rosch standard isn't calibrated.  The anecdote is interesting but
learning that Rosch's monitor gets a Rosch 5 does us no good.


Jon Krueger  [e-mail]

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

Date: Thu, 9 Jul 92 07:35:29 -0700
From: rlm@ms_aspen.hac.com (Robert L. McMillin)
Subject: Re: Suit Alleges Cellular Caused Brain Tumor


Tony Kennedy <[e-mail]> writes:

> Ang Peng Hwa <[e-mail]> writes:

>> The "theory" of non-ionizing radiation was discovered
>> accidentally by a researcher who was looking for the cause of
>> leukemia. He/she (can't remember) found nothing until one day,
>> looking around her, saw that there were lots of power lines.
>> Redrawing her subjects, she found that virtually all lived
>> within 100 yards of either a substation or a high voltage
>> line.

> One objection to this is that it indicates a correlation between
> leukemia and power lines, not a causal connection. A reasonable
> explanation might well be that poverty is correlated with leukemia,
> and houses near power lines are cheaper.

The confusion of cause and effect is more than a little common among
the scientifically illiterate.  To paraphrase Ambrose Bierce, this is
not unlike someone who has only seen a hare when persued by a dog
declaring the dog the cause of the hare.

> BTW, do you realize that eating butter reduces your chances of dying
> of cancer?

Regardless of whether this assertion is true, it IS a fact that eating
lots of butter increases your chances of arteriosclerosis, and thus
being felled by a heart attack.  This raises another good point:
assessment of relative risk is yet another skill virtually unknown to
the technophobic.  According to a recent article in {Forbes}, thanks
to the many lawsuits that dominate the environmental regulation
process, we now have laws on the books that cost several millions of
dollars per potential life saved; some even total in nine figures.
For instance: which will more likely kill people, the potential risk
of acquiring cancer from nitrates, a preservative commonly used in
bacon and other pork products, or the bacterial infections (ptomaine,
salmonella, etc.)  that would result if the bacon were left
unpreserved?

For too long, we have lived with the "Bambi" view of nature: nature as
essentially benign, and indeed generally beneficial.  She is not, and
has never been thus.  Nature is neutral.  She slays as easily as she
nurtures.  In this century, we have tamed a good many of the worst
diseases thrown at man.  Nature, never content to stand still,
responded with AIDS.  Those people who fear technology and see
"man-made" as a curse would do well to remember this.


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

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #548
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa19784;
          10 Jul 92 4:46 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA19418
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 10 Jul 1992 02:26:09 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA23593
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 10 Jul 1992 02:25:59 -0500
Date: Fri, 10 Jul 1992 02:25:59 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #549

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 10 Jul 92 02:26:00 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 549

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    AT&T New Rate Table (Paul Robinson)
    Surprise Calling Card Fraud (Mark Schuldenfrei)
    Re: Some EasyReach Comments (Phil Howard)
    Re: Fixed Call Forwarding (Steve Forrette)
    New 5ESS(tm) Here (Dave Levenson)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Date: Fri, 10 Jul 92  00:37:28 EDT
Subject:  AT&T New Rate Table


The following now gives us the current rates for all AT&T interstate
calls.  I forgot to post it sooner on this newsgroup, sorry.

 From page 2D of the May 19 1992 {USA Today}.


NOTICE TO AT&T CUSTOMERS

AT&T has filed with the Federal Communications Commission to increase
interstate domestic daytime direct dial usage charges between 1.6% and
2.3% and to make changes in interstate domestic Evening and
Night/Weekend direct dial usage charges resulting from reductions of
2.4% to increases of 4.4% on the following services:

            (R)                       (R)                 (R)
AT&T MEGACOM    WATS Service, AT&T PRO    WATS I, AT&T PRO    WATS,
                                   sm
AT&T Plan D Service (AT&T CustomNet   Service,
                                        sm
AT&T Plan Q Service (AT&T Small Business   Options Area Code Plan),
AT&T WATS Domestic, AT&T WATS-OneLine Access and AT&T WATS.

In addition, AT&T has also filed to increase usage charges by 1.5% for
                                                     (R)
the following AT&T 800 Services:  AT&T 800 READY LINE    and AT&T
MEGACOM 800 Service.

NOTICE TO AT&T CUSTOMERS

   Effective May 29, 1992, AT&T will change the international calling
rates to 11 countries for certain AT&T services.  The new rates
increase the charges for the additional 6-second billing periods by 5%
on direct-dialed calls to:

    Haiti            Malta
    Honduras         Morocco
    Iran             Namibia
    Israel           Trinidad & Tobago
    Ivory Coast      Turkey
    Libyan APSJ

   The new rates apply to all international rate periods for AT&T
   (R)                        (R)
PRO    WATS, AT&T MEGACOM WATS   , and AT&T Software Defined
Network - International (switched access and dedicated access).

   Any customer who has a question about this rate change can call
AT&T at 1 800 222-0900.

NOTICE TO AT&T CUSTOMERS

On May 15, 1992 AT&T filed with the Federal Communications Commission
to change dial station day, evening and night/weekend prices for
interstate calls within the U.S. and calls between Puerto Rico/U.S.
Virgin Islands and the U.S. Mainland.  Dial station rates apply when
the person originating the call dials the telephone number desired,
completes the call without the assistance of a Company operator, and
the call is billed to the calling station.  These rates are scheduled
to become effective on June 1, 1992.


                   DIAL STATION - U.S. INTERSTATE RATES

                  DAY               EVENING          NIGHT/WEEKEND
                Proposed            Proposed           Proposed
           ------------------  ------------------  ------------------
   Rate    Initial  Additional Initial Additional  Initial Additional
  Mileage   Minute    Minute    Minute   Minute     Minute    Minute
 --------- ------------------  ------------------  ------------------
   1-10    $0.20      $0.20    $0.13     $0.13      $0.11    $0.11
  11-22     0.22       0.22     0.13      0.13       0.12     0.12
  23-55     0.22       0.22     0.13      0.13       0.12     0.12
  56-124    0.22       0.22     0.14      0.14       0.12     0.12
 125-292    0.22       0.22     0.14      0.14       0.13     0.13
 293-430    0.23       0.23     0.14      0.14       0.13     0.13
 431-925    0.23       0.23     0.15      0.15       0.13     0.13
 926-1910   0.24       0.24     0.15      0.15       0.13     0.13
1911-3000   0.25       0.25     0.15      0.15       0.13     0.13
3001-4250   0.30       0.30     0.21      0.21       0.16     0.16
4251-5750   0.33       0.33     0.22      0.22       0.17     0.17


        DIAL STATION RATES - PUERTO RICO / U.S. VIRGIN ISLANDS
                          to/from U.S. MAINLAND

                  DAY               EVENING          NIGHT/WEEKEND
                Proposed            Proposed           Proposed
           ------------------  ------------------  ------------------
   Rate    Initial  Additional Initial Additional  Initial Additional
  Mileage   Minute    Minute    Minute   Minute     Minute    Minute
 --------- ------------------  ------------------  ------------------
 926-1910   0.24       0.24     0.15      0.15       0.13     0.13
1911-3000   0.25       0.25     0.15      0.15       0.13     0.13
3001-4250   0.30       0.30     0.21      0.21       0.16     0.16

 Puerto Rico
 to/from
 Virgin
 Islands    0.22       0.22     0.14      0.14       0.12     0.12

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

From: [e-mail] (Mark Schuldenfrei)
Subject: Surprise Calling Card Fraud
Organization: Progress Software Corp.
Date: Wed, 8 Jul 1992 17:30:44 GMT


I received a surprising call from AT&T's Calling Card Fraud unit this
past weekend, and thought I would solicit some advice, and warn the
unsuspecting.

My wife returned to Miami for graduation ceremonies for her Phd this
spring, in early May.  (I'll name some names here.)  She stayed in the
Lesley Hotel, managed by Art Deco Hotels and one Mister Ardati.

She never uses her AT&T calling card, and has one only at my
insistence.  Before she left, I suggested strongly to her that to
eliminate theft, she use the card only from her motel room, paying the
surcharge if necessary, and only use the keypad to self-dial the
calling card number.  She assures me that the card was in her
possession the whole time, never spoke the calling card number, and
only dialed from within the room.

You can guess the rest.  Several calls from Miami to Costa Rica have
now been placed on her calling card number.  We still have possesion
of the card, and it has not been used before or since (and AT&T
cancelled it, once the fraud was detected.) (And, they promised to
waive the fraudulent calls.)

I called the manager, and mentioned the circumstances to him, and told
him I suspected the SMDR call logs were being poached.  He assures me
(although he had never heard of SMDR) that his employees and his
Hitachi PBX are above reproach, that I am making false accusations,
and the hotel will "go after me" if I pursue this. I find such a
threat hollow, but I'm willing to bet that it means he is taking no
action.

The local (Boston) FBI office took a complaint, but the gentleman
assured me that the over-extended staff in Miami will not be able to
look into it. (I appreciate his courtesy and honesty, if not the
reality behind it).  He suggested that it's the defrauded parties
responsibility (ie AT&T). AT&T's fraud control people have promised to
escalate this, and call me back if they wish to pursue the matter. The
representative who handles only individual cases of fraud assured me
this is commonplace in Miami, and implied it is common in larger
cities around the US.

The implications of for individuals and industry are rather
frightening.  If public places are not safe for the use of calling
cards, if neither speaking the number nor touch-tone entry are secure,
if private hotels and motels are not secure, how does one make phone
calls when on the road?  Call Me cards are too limited, and Custom
Calling cards are not much better.

More specifically, does anyone have suggestions for what I can or
should do about this situation?  I'd like to think that some action
can be taken: this is a special case of a calling card that has never
been used for another purpose or time that I can recall.  Can anyone
suggest an officer, or person that I should contact, or either AT&T or
Federal or State authorities?  Or, as I suspect, should I treat this
as an untreatable symptom of a racing crime rate?


Mark Schuldenfrei, definitely not speaking for his employer today, but
reachable at work as [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Phil Howard)
Subject: Re: Some EasyReach Comments
Date: Wed, 08 Jul 92 19:43:11 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest)


[e-mail] (Ed Greenberg) writes:

> * I wish you could have different billing and default numbers.  For
> instance, I wish my default number could be my voicemail, not my home.
> That way, each night I could set eight hour forwarding to the hotel
> and just let it expire.  No can do though, I must manually reforward
> the number in the morning.

We just need to get them to add another field in the data record which
might be called the "fall back number" as opposed to the "home base"
number, which is the billing number under their current system.

The only technical reason I can see for not doing this is it does
increase the memory required by some amount, and of course this does
mean going back and hacking on the code.

More likely I suspect it is some manager who wears his ties too tight
that is making the decisions.

> * The menu tree changes depending on the state of things.  It's
> different if you are forwarded or not, or if you are calling from a
> number that is enabled for sent-paid or not. This makes it impossible
> to type ahead.

This can be annoying.

> * It would be nice if AT&T would sell it with integrated voicemail as
> the default when not programmed.  I'd pay .15 or .25 (nite or day) to
> play back my messages, and, of course, my callers would have to pay it
> to leave messages.

One of these days, someone high up in AT&T (like maybe a stockholder)
will realize the potential of integrating the entirety of services,
including reading TELECOM Digest :-)

> * It would be nice if I could add, change and delete PINS automagically
> using the DTMF interface.

You can't????

> * It would be nice if I could set my own variable length master pin.

You can't????

> * This could be the start of an integrated remote long distance
> system.  For instance, how about the ability to complete outgoing
> calls from the command mode?  This could include a repitoire of speed
> calling numbers.  AT&T could charge you in the EasyReach portion of
> your bill, with a calling card surcharge.  If they REALLY wanted to be
> snazzy, they could let you complete such calls WITHOUT a calling card
> surcharge.  Coupled with voicemail mentioned above, this becomes a
> really powerful mobile office.

In almost no organization do the technical people that understand such
abstract concepts make the marketing decisions.  Too bad.

> * Some people have suggested that the reason that EasyReach is limited
> to AT&T subscribers is to build a base of presubscribed users.  Maybe
> so.  The shortsightedness of this approach is apparent though, since
> EasyReach is a really useful thing for people with no local phone
> service.

Perhaps someone with a "new idea" got it through the upper management
with that as an excuse.  Given the excuses I've heard from the people
there, it sure seems like one of these is the case.

> I hope that you AT&T Marketing and Technical Gurus out there will pick
> up on some of these ideas.

The technical people probably will, if they hadn't already thought of
it themselves.  The marketing people apparently are not.


Phil Howard  ---  KA9WGN  ---  [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: Fixed Call Forwarding
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA
Date: Thu, 9 Jul 1992 22:07:30 GMT


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

> Here's what I think Fixed Call Forwarding is: On busy or no answer,
> with the number of rings before no answer selectable as 4 or 6, a call
> to the subscriber number is forwarded to another number, but that
> number can't be changed as with Call Forwarding, nor can (?) the
> forwarding be turned on or off.  According to NJB, Fixed Call
> Forwarding is _not_ available except in combination with Answer Call,
> but the Answer Call brochure seems to indicate that Fixed Call
> Forwarding is at least tariffed as a separate service (it's $2/month).

> Can anyone tell me if Fixed Call Forwarding is available either here
> (was the service rep wrong?) or anywhere else (just because I'm
> curious).

> [Moderator's Note: We have it here in Chicago on cellular service and
> on wireline service only for connection to voicemail. You tell them
> how many rings to program it for when you sign up.   PAT]

It has been commonly available as a separate tariffed service in both
US West and Pacific Bell territory for several years, long before
either of them offered their own voicemail.  In fact, I've subscribed
to it from both carriers, and it seems to work fine.  Both carriers
allowed me to choose any ring interval I wanted (one to eight rings),
although choosing one ring seemed to let it ring three rings before it
transferred, so the pratical choices available were anywhere from
three to eight rings.

In both cases, I was served from a 1AESS, so your mileage on other
switches may vary.  US West was somewhat more flexible in the ways you
could order it than Pacific Bell.  For example, with US West, you
could have Call Waiting on the same line as busy/no answer transfer.
If you were already on the line and a second call came in, you would
get the call waiting beep, and if you didn't answer after the preset
number of rings, it would transfer to the no-answer destination.
Also, if you had invoked Cancel Call Waiting and another call came in,
it would busy-transfer immediately.

Pacific Bell does not allow Call Waiting to co-exist with either busy
or no-answer transfer on the same line.  Also, they require that the
destination number be at the same address and billed to the same name
(in my situation with US West, it was to other service at the same
address but billed to a different person).  I pressed Pacific Bell
about the "incompatibility" with Call Waiting, and was (of course)
told that "the equipment can't handle it."  I persisted, and told them
how I had had exactly this configuration on a 1AESS in US West
territory, and since my Pacific Bell exchange at the time was also a
1AESS, I could not accept this explanation.

I finally got in touch with someone who read me a clause word-for-word
from the tariff, which clearly stated that Call Waiting cannot
co-exist with busy or no-answer transfer on the same line.  I was also
told that since the CPUC sets the tariffs, there was nothing that
Pacific Bell could do about this.  Of course, I could not let this
explanation stand.  I asked, "So, you wanted to provide this service,
but the CPUC told you that you couldn't, because some customers might
find this TOO useful?"  I also corrected him by observing that the
CPUC approves or rejects the tariffs that Pacific Bell submits, and it
is extremely unlikely that there would be any reason for the CPUC to
put this restriction in themselves.

In the end, he seemed to realize that there really are some customers
out there that know about all of the dirty tariff tricks that are
pulled, and how the blame gets shifted away from the "innocent"
Pacific Bell and to the CPUC.  Unfortunately, I was never able to
order the service I wanted.


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Dave Levenson)
Subject: New 5ESS(tm) Here
Organization: Westmark, Inc.
Date: Thu, 9 Jul 1992 02:03:48 GMT


In the wee small hours of July 4th of this year, the Millington, NJ
central office switch was replaced by a nice new 5ESS switch.  It
replaced a 1A-ESS switch which had been installed there approximately
ten years ago.  A New Jersey Bell employee claims that this
early-retirement of the analog switch was the result of pressure from
AT&T.  They wanted ISDN service at the Bell Labs Liberty Corner
location, which is served by this switch.

Apparently, if you're a big enough customer, you can get the local
telco to supply you with ISDN, even if they have to replace the whole
central office to do it!

I haven't asked NJ Bell if this means that we can get ISDN residence
or small business service, but when I get a chance to call the local
business office ...

I was out of town when the cut occurred.  When I returned home, I
first noticed that local call-setup seemed faster.  I also noticed
that when I use three-way calling, there are no CO-induced clicks as
additional parties are added to or removed from the conversation.  So
far, I haven't noticed any of the problems reported earlier in this
forum by Mr. Higdon.  Our voice and data service continue to function
as well as they did before, and the Caller*ID service works as well as
it did.  Our 800 inbound calls still arrive as they did.  The local
number for a quiet termination seems to have changed.  The dial tone
(but not the audio on a conversation) is about 1 dB below the level I
measured a couple of months ago.  This seems to be the case on all six
trunks that terminate here -- those with SLC-96 and the metallic
loaded loops. The metallic circuits used to show 52 volts on-hook, and
now show 48.


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 #549
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa19744;
          12 Jul 92 14:19 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA20766
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 12 Jul 1992 00:11:13 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA27740
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 12 Jul 1992 00:11:03 -0500
Date: Sun, 12 Jul 1992 00:11:03 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #550

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 12 Jul 92 00:11:08 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 550

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: The Depths of Sliminess (Robert S. Helfman)
    Re: The Depths of Sliminess (Peter da Silva)
    Re: The Depths of Sliminess (Art Hunter)
    Re: The Depths of Sliminess (Mike Coyne)
    Re: The Depths of Sliminess (Tony Kennedy)
    Re: The Depths of Sliminess (Phil Howard )
    Re: The Depths of Sliminess (Clint Ruoho)
    Re: The Depths of Sliminess (John De Armond)
    Re: The Depths of Sliminess (Syd Weinstein)
    Re: The Depths of Sliminess (Roy Smith)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Robert S. Helfman)
Subject: Re: The Depths of Sliminess
Organization: The Aerospace Corporation, El Segundo, CA
Date: Sat, 11 Jul 1992 14:56:11 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> Roy Smith <[e-mail].
nyu.edu> writes:

> In article <[e-mail]> is written:

>> But the bottom line is that the call costs you nothing, you don't have to
>> answer the phone if you don't want to,

> How do I know it's a telemarketer until I answer the phone?
> It costs me the annoyance of stopping whatever I am doing and having
> to go answer the phone.  It's invasive.
> [Moderator's Note: How do you know? Simple. You say to your telco and
> your utility commissioners, "I want Caller-ID available in our phone
> exchange now. I want control of my phone instead of telemarketers,
> phreaks and other people having control of it."  When installed, then
> you answer those calls you wish and ignore the others.  PAT]

PAT, I agree that Caller-ID would be nice, but for those of us with
less settled lives (and less settled friends), knowing what phone
number is calling only works for folks who call you from their home or
office or some other number you recognize. What about: 1) Friends who
call from a random payphone to say they're "in the 'hood" (as we say
in L.A.) and want to drop by for a visit (at least three times a month
this happens to me -- in L.A. it's considered really gauche to just
drop in unannounced);

2) The tradesman who's on his way to your house and can't find his way
through the maze of streets and calls from a payphone;

3) Your bank or the video store or any of those other ad-hoc calls
whose origin phone number would be meaningless to you if it popped up
on your Caller-ID LCD?

Yeh, you'll say: "Let the answering machine get it." Well, PAT, that
takes just as long (longer, in fact) to listen to their blabbing so
you can determine who it is before picking up. That's one reason I
don't screen all the time -- it actually distracts me longer from
whatever I was doing.

I can't imagine life without a phone, but I'll bet it's really peaceful.

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

From: [e-mail] (Peter da Silva)
Subject: Re: The Depths of Sliminess
Organization: Taronga Park BBS
Date: Sun, 12 Jul 1992 03:47:02 GMT


TELECOM Moderator notes:

> [Moderator's Note: Fifty years ago there was a breed of person known
> as the 'door-to-door salesman', [...]

Telemarketers are worse than door-to-door salesmen. With door-to-door
salemen you can look through the door and see who's there before
opening it (and we don't have caller-ID here and YES I've called
Southwestern Hell and bitched about it) and you get to see the person
you're dealing with and they can't contact nearly as many houses per
day and they usually have an actual product (they're not often doing
surveys) and they're very rarely computers or robots (I can't say as
I've ever had a robot knock at my door ... I'd probably invite it in).

We still get door-to-door guys selling religion. It can be amusing on
occasion. "Oh, I'm a Pagan and it just so happens we need a virgin for
our next service ... you look like a likely candidate ...".

I don't do that to the local Jehovah's Witnesses guy because he was
nice enough to ask me before parking his car in front of my house. I
don't buy his product, but courtesy begets courtesy. Telemarketeers
don't deserve any.


Peter da Silva, Taronga Park BBS, Houston, TX  [phone]/1032

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

Subject: Re: The Depths of Sliminess
From: [e-mail] (Art Hunter)
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Art Hunter)
Date: Sat, 11 Jul 1992 06:22:40 -0400
Organization: AFI Communications - Ottawa, Ontario, Canada


> How do I know it's a telemarketer until I answer the phone?
> It costs me the annoyance of stopping whatever I am doing and having
> to go answer the phone.  It's invasive.

        I use a CallerID product that permits me to add a name to the
phone number sent by the Telco.  Further, this permits me to
automatically terminate the calls I preselect as telemarketers or
whoever I don't wish to communicate.  I can have this change as a
function of day of week and time of day.  Further, I can group callers
into ten groups and have them managed according to day/time as well.
There is the ability to have a screen of notes, automatic or manual
switch to an answering machine, records of all inbound and outbound
calls and a host of other features.  I have been using it for over a
year now and find it very useful.

        It is a DOS machine board that takes up one slot and can be
run as a TSR or as a dedicated machine.

        Terminating a telemarketer's call, once you know the number
they are calling from, is easy.

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: The Depths of Sliminess
Date: 10 Jul 92 19:47:58 GMT
Organization: The University of Texas at Austin


Justin Leavens writes (edited heavily):

> I know telemarketers are pretty much regarded as slime here in this
> forum, but personally, I consider it better that these people are
> working than unemployed  ... well, the answer is that telemarketing
> is a legal method of marketing a product ... telemarketers are
> generally either students trying to make some extra cash, or people
> who can't find other work and are lured by the high wages that are
> paid to telemarketers.

> The bottom line is that unless a telemarkter is _rude_ to you,
> there is no reason to be _rude_ to them. They're not doing anything
> illegal ...

Our Moderator seconds these thoughts with:

> ... it is quite easy to pick the phone up, say 'no thank you' and
> disconnect. After all, when we see a commercial on television we are
> free to change the channel and watch something else.  PAT]

I completely disagree with these arguments.  Cold call Telemarketers
are considered a nuisance by most telephone subscribers as well as by
me.  Subscribing to telephone service does NOT imply permission for
them to call any more than leaving my door unlocked implies permission
to come in and originate a call on my phone.  I subscribe to the phone
service to facilitate communication with friends, relatives, and
businesses.  The businesses advertise in the yellow pages which does
imply permission to conduct the advertised business over the phone.
My listing in the white pages does not imply consent to all business
calls.

The fact that telemarketing is legal does not prove that it is ok.  It
is legal to shout, "Show us your tits" at women, but it is not ok.
(This practice is reportedly common for some motorcycle groups and
auto races.)  In either case legality only proves there is no
consensus that you should go to jail for it.

The argument that you can just hang up is unfair.  I must pick up the
phone to achieve the purpose for which I subscribed.  Why should I
have to shed myself of these people trading parasiticly on my purpose
for subscribing?  Why should I pay for "my share" of the switch
capacity?

The comparison of telemarketing to TV ads also fails. TV advertising
is inserted into programming paid for by the advertiser.  We get our
quid pro quo.  You can escape that, with varying success, by paying
for the programming yourself, as in renting a movie, subscribing to
PBS or HBO, or reading a book.

Further, it matters nothing how worthy the individual telemarketer is.
They are committing a nuisance on millions of people a day, and it may
be a worthy nuisance, but it is a nuisance.  Also "the business will
fail without telemarketing" does not work.  If you have to commit a
mass nuisance to make your business survive, that is a message from a
free market that you are in the wrong business.

Personally, I am flexible about calling for political issues and
candidates or legitimate charities.  I can even handle bill collectors
and landlords. :-( An unsolicited call from a real estate agent,
photographer, or carpet cleaner really steams me.

Universal access is a major regulatory goal.  The use of caller id,
answering machines, call blocking, answering services, unlisted
numbers and more to cope with nuisance calls is a serious threat to
universal access.  Why not just stop the threat at the nuisance call
source?


[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Tony Kennedy)
Subject: Re: The Depths of Sliminess
Date: 10 Jul 92 22:35:47 GMT
Organization: SCRI, Florida State University


> [Moderator's Note: How do you know? Simple. You say to your telco
> and your utility commissioners, "I want Caller-ID available in our
> phone exchange now. I want control of my phone instead of
> telemarketers, phreaks and other people having control of it."  When
> installed, then you answer those calls you wish and ignore the others.

Do you define telemarketers to be anyone whose telephone number you
don't know in advance?


[Moderator's Note: No, not at all. I don't refuse to answer a call
just because I do not recognize the number. As we all know, that could
be a mistake. The purpose of Caller-ID is not to insure you only
answer calls from numbers you recognize, but to give you as the
recipient of the call some recourse against the caller later if
needed.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Phil Howard)
Subject: Re: The Depths of Sliminess
Date: Sat, 11 Jul 92 03:07:26 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest)


> [Moderator's Note: How do you know? Simple. You say to your telco and
> your utility commissioners, "I want Caller-ID available in our phone
> exchange now. I want control of my phone instead of telemarketers,
> phreaks and other people having control of it."  When installed, then
> you answer those calls you wish and ignore the others.  PAT]

Saying you want something does not get it.  Illinois Bell actually
knows when Caller ID will be available here, and that is still nearly
two years away.  I doubt anything can get it any sooner.  In the mean
time telemarketer calls continue to be an annoyance.

Caller ID is also not a solution.  It only tells me where someone is
calling from, not who is calling or why.  A relative or friend I want
to talk to may be calling from a phone I have no knowledge or record
of.  Should I have to brush them off by not answering just because
the telemarketers also call from numbers I don't know about (at least
the first time)?

[e-mail] (Fred Wedemeier) writes:

> It's not really the same. You would get mighty PO'd if the people
> leaving slips on your door would instead ring the doorbell and _hand_
> them to you rather than stuffing them in a crack for you to see when
> you came home or left. You generally answer the doorbell when it rings

I'm as much against leaving the flyers as I am against telemarketing
phone calls, but for different reasons.  The flyers attract attention
to homes and apartments that are currently unoccupied, making them a
possible target for burglars, especially when these flyers get left
for a day or more because you are on vacation.

> So you start screening calls with an answering machine, which is a
> rudeness to family, friends, and associates whose calls you want to
> receive. (Is Fred really not there, or is he listening to me talking
> while he decides if he'll honor me by picking up the phone??)

At least MY message says I might be there listening.

> An upside to all this? A friend of mine has an insurance agency and he
> makes cold calls to drum up business (yeah, two strikes against him
> but he's still a friend). He sometimes gets hold of shut-ins who
> haven't heard a real human voice in days and _want_ to talk. He'll
> spend 5-10 minutes just talking even though he knows he won't sell
> insurance.

Sounds like something their relatives should be doing.

[e-mail] (James J Sowa) writes:

> What seems to be missed is, that people are interrupted by these sales
> tactics ringing their telephone.  I believe that many people drop
> whatever they are doing to go and answer a ringing telephone (Maybe
> this would be another good thread to decide if this is sane behavior
> or not).  But there is this feeling that is missed in the previous
> posts that this is not an inconvenience on the called person.

My "call screening system" works this way.  An ordinary answering
machine is set to answer on the first ring and has a message that
suggests that the telephone does not ring (it actually does, but I
don't react to it, though that would be longer to explain on the
announcement).  I ask the calling party to announce who they are so I
might pick up the phone, or if I don't pick up they can leave a
message (three minutes available from the beep).

The only problem I have encountered with this is that many people are
not leaving sufficient time for me to actually get up and go answer
the phone.  So far these cases have only occurred when I was not at
home anyway.  I should probably upgrade the message to ask that
sufficient time be allowed to answer starting from when they say who
they are.

If you are tempted to look up my listed phone number and call me to
see what my message says ("your dime"), you might at least leave a
message saying that it was just a TELECOM Digest reader checking the
announcement.


Phil Howard  ---  KA9WGN  ---  [e-mail]

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

Date: Friday, 10 July 1992 19:50:21 GMT
From: Clint Ruoho <[e-mail]>
Organization: Farpoint Development Group
Subject: Re: The Depths of Sliminess


Peter de Silva writes:

> As for "it's better they have a job than nothing at all"... I don't
> buy that argument. Unless a person is doing productive work,
> contributing to the economy, their job is worthless. Yes, that
> includes Dan Quayle.

I would consider telemarketing productive work ... it certainly
contributes to the economy.  And still, I'd rather have somebody
working as a telemarketer instead of collecting welfare.

I had the oppurtunity (I'm not sure if that's the best word) to work
as a Telemarketer for a local newspaper this summer.  My job lasted
just over a week, as my low salary didn't justify the stress of a
phone sales job.

Most of the people I called weren't rude to me, and I only had a few
impolite responses in the whole week.  Most people were satisfied by
saying "I'm not interested" and hanging up.


Clint Ruoho <[e-mail]>

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

From: [e-mail] (John De Armond)
Subject: Re: The Depths of Sliminess
Date: Sat, 11 Jul 92 00:59:56 GMT
Organization: Dixie Communications Public Access.  The Mouth of the South.


> [Moderator's Note: How do you know? Simple. You say to your telco and
> your utility commissioners, "I want Caller-ID available in our phone
> exchange now. I want control of my phone instead of telemarketers,
> phreaks and other people having control of it."  When installed, then
> you answer those calls you wish and ignore the others.  PAT]

Ok Pat, tell us how to do that.  I've got Caller-ID on all my phones
and can even log the data to a computer if desired.  I want to talk to
just about anyone who calls EXCEPT teleslime. The phone is ringing and
a number appears on the screen that I don't recognize.  Explain to me
how to use that magic Caller-ID box to make the distinction between a
friend whose number I don't recognize or a potential customer calling
and teleslime?

Now tell me how I can make that distinction now that the phone company
here in Atlanta is allowing per-line blocking and the teleslime
numbers come up as "private"?

As usual, the PUC and the phone company have done just the opposite of
what is proper for the private citizen.  Instead of requiring Caller-ID
information be transmitted from any commercial account and allowing
per-call blocking only on private lines, they've allowed the business
users to defeat the whole purpose of Caller-ID.


John De Armond, WD4OQC       Rapid Deployment System, Inc.
Marietta, Ga      [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Syd Weinstein)
Subject: Re: The Depths of Sliminess
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Datacomp Systems, Inc.  Huntingdon Valley, PA
Date: Fri, 10 Jul 1992 14:15:22 GMT


Roy Smith <[e-mail]> and Pat talk about answering the
phone re telemarketers ...

> [Moderator's Note: How do you know? Simple. You say to your telco and
> your utility commissioners, "I want Caller-ID available in our phone
> exchange now. I want control of my phone instead of telemarketers,
> phreaks and other people having control of it."  When installed, then
> you answer those calls you wish and ignore the others.  PAT]

And I still say, as Roy does, having to interrupt myself to go look at
the phone display to see whether its someone I know, or an unknown
(most telemarketers are 'unknown' to me normally) is still an
invasion.  An example (contrived) "I used to be able to put up a sign,
saying no soliciting" and if a salesman called on me, at my door, I
could have him arrested and tried for trespassing.  That would stop me
from having my door bell rung and interrupting me.  (Of course it wont
work for political and some other sub classes, but most salesman)

What do I do that is similar for telemarketers?


Sydney S. Weinstein, CDP, CCP          Elm Coordinator - Current 2.3PL11
Datacomp Systems, Inc.                 Projected 2.4 Release: Oct 1,1992
[e-mail] or dsinc!syd      Voice: [phone], FAX: [phone]

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

Date: Fri, 10 Jul 92 11:47:54 EDT
From: Roy Smith <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: The Depths of Sliminess
Organization: Public Health Research Institute (New York)


    First off, unless I seriously misunderstand the technology,
all CID will do for me is tell me the phone number of the person who's
calling.  Do you really think I remember and recognize the phone
numbers of all the people I am willing to accept phone calls from
(even assuming it was a finite set)?

    Second, if I'm eating dinner, or sitting on the throne, or
whatever, I still have to interrupt what I'm doing to go look at the
damn CID display.  Once I've gotten myself over to the phone to look
at the display, I might as well have just picked the handset up and
listened for ten seconds.  My private time has still be invaded.

    Third, CID would be just another electronic gadget I'd have to
pay for.  Why should I pay for a service to screen out annoying calls
when it makes a lot more sense (to me, anyway) to cut the annoying
calls off at the source by making them illegal.

    Which makes more sense: to make it illegal to urinate on the
sidewalk, or to build an industry selling rubber boots and nose
filters to protect innocent people from the annoyances of walking
through the puddles?


[e-mail] (Roy Smith)
Public Health Research Institute
455 First Avenue, New York, NY 10016, USA

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #550
******************************