Telecom/1996-04-telecom-walnutcreek.iso/back.issues/1992.volume.12/vol12.iss551-600

Internet Message Format | 1992-08-01 | 987KB

Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa19695;
          12 Jul 92 14:17 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA24290
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 12 Jul 1992 01:04:05 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA27302
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 12 Jul 1992 01:03:57 -0500
Date: Sun, 12 Jul 1992 01:03:57 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #551

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 12 Jul 92 01:04:00 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 551

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: "Legal" Phreaking? (Jon Baker)
    Re: "Legal" Phreaking? (Charlie Mingo)
    Re: "Legal" Phreaking? (John Higdon)
    Re: "Legal" Phreaking? (Bill Nickless)
    Re: "Legal" Phreaking? (Brad Hicks)
    Re: Phone Phraud Publicity (Phil Howard)
    Re: 1-800 DISA Hacking - A Waste of Time and Money (Peter da Silva)
    Re: 1-800 DISA Hacking - A Waste of Time and Money (Bill Garfield)
    Teleslime (A Tip) (John Higdon)
    Re: The Depths of Sliminess (Art Hunter)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: gtephx![e-mail] (Jon Baker)
Subject: Re: "Legal" Phreaking?
Date: Fri, 10 Jul 92 9:11:53 MST


> [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?

In part, yes.  But that has nothing to do with telecom, so ...

> 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 ...

No issue of morality or right vs. wrong is '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]

Because, there are many computer systems out there that are for free
public access by anyone who wants to dial the number and poke around.
When I get onto a system, how do I know whether or not I'm 'supposed'
to be there?  How do I know whether this system is some private
company's mainframe, or some guy's PC in his garage?

If the system tells me, right up front, 'for authorized personnel
only', then if I don't KNOW that I'm authorized, I'm not supposed to
be there.  If it says 'Welcome!  Glad you're here!  Good Day!', I get
the idea that I'm welcome.  If some Dutch hacker stumbles into a
private computer system and it welcomes him gleefully, I don't think
it's unreasonable for him to believe that he's welcome.  Now, if he
does malicious harm to that system, that's another matter ...


J.Baker     enuucp!gtephx!bakerj


[Moderator's Note: How do you know if you are welcome or not? Well,
was the number advertised as a public service? That might say
something about it. "Good Day" does not imply you are welcome to enter
somewhere, nor does 'hello', nor does 'please sign on'. Those comments
could be addressed to authorized users only.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Charlie Mingo)
Date: Sat, 11 Jul 1992 04:42:06 -0500
Subject: Re: "Legal" Phreaking?


[e-mail] (james.j.menth) writes:

> 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.

   Contributory negligence is only a defense in a suit alleging
negligence.  It is no defense to intertional torts, such as trespass,
assault or battery.  Quite simply, when one person intentionally
commits a wrongful act, it matters not the victim was "negligent"
enough to let him do it.

    You have an absolute right not to be assaulted, and not to have
your computer assaulted.

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

Date: Fri, 10 Jul 92 02:33 PDT
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: "Legal" Phreaking?


On Jul 10 at  1:06, TELECOM Moderator writes:

> Others will say that by punishing the naughty children our
> government is engaged in some sort of vendetta against computer users
> in general.

These guys need to know that it is not nice to fool around with other
people's computers. But I wonder if the prosecutors really think some
of these things through. Specifically, the matter of punishment should
be examined. Throw these guys in prison and you will turn the place of
their incarceration into "Hacker U". Everything they know will be
passed on to some REALLY bad guys who will use this new knowledge to
best (worst?) advantage.

Fines are not a bad idea, and community service would also be
appropriate. But I am not too sure that I am very keen about having
real crooks find out how to "get into the system" the easy way. Of
course, if security is beefed up in the mean time, fine. But then,
that would be a "burden" upon innocent parties, right? Hope they enjoy
it when the graduates of "Hacker U" start in on their weenie security.

It is not about who is right or wrong (I concede the hackers were
"wrong", but so what?), but about what it takes to keep people out.
Punishing hackers does not keep the real baddies out of insecure
systems. Put hackers away if it makes you feel better. I am certainly
not here to justify their actions. But if you want to keep people out
of sensitive data, lock the goddamn door!


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


[Moderator's Note: The fact that one prisoner may learn some criminal
techniques from another prisoner does not invalidate the idea of
prison as a good thing for some people. It merely says the way prisons
are operated need to be changed.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Bill Nickless)
Date: Fri, 10 Jul 92 07:03:50 -0500
Subject: Re: "Legal" Phreaking?


I usually agree with Pat, but this time he writes:

> ....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]

I really, really doubt that the EFF will be providing a defense for
these alleged criminals.  Mike Godwin and others at the EFF have
stated over and over that they don't support computer crime or
criminals.  Their purpose is different.  Remember your story about the
Chicago police that used to use a crank-telephone to interrogate
suspects?  Electrocuting suspects isn't the right way to fight crime.
A reasonable person can be against zapping alleged criminals, and at
the same time deplore the criminals' purse snatching.

I detest the arrogance of juvenile (and not-so-juvenile) delinquent
network crackers.  Here at work for the last week we've been running a
password checking program on all our accounts because we heard it was
being run "for us" in Australia and Sweden.  I have better things to
spend my time on, like making the user environment better for our
users.  Instead I burn cycles on a hundred processors for a week.

On the other hand, Mitch Kapor's advocacy of universal ISDN access and
open national network access is, IMHO, a good thing.  If they want to
push for clearly defined legal protections for computer
communications, that's good too.  Even providing amicus curiae briefs
to ongoing trial to avoid bad precedent is good.  But I sure don't
think they're a hacker's defense fund!


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


[Moderator's Note: The EFF and Mike Godwin have responded to my
comments and unfortunatly due to an overload of messages I cannot
include it in this issue. But the next issue early Sunday morning will
have more on this topic, with comments from the EFF.  PAT]

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

From: mc/G=Brad/S=Hicks/OU=[e-mail]
Date: Fri Jul 10 10:54:38 -0400 1992
Subject: Re: "Legal" Phreaking?


> 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.

Ummm ... Pat ... I'm tired of going around and around on the main
argument here; I'd be being silly if I thought I could win an argument
with the list moderator.  But ... well ... which of these are you
saying ISN'T evil?

The government?  Are we talking about the same government that's used
an inverse neutron bomb on the Bill of Rights; leaving the people
behind but burning down the entire structure?  The same government
that helped defense contractor Kerr-McGee hide behind official secrecy
while poisoning its workers (and possibly murdering Karen Silkwood),
and then turned around and did the same thing when GE's defense
nuclear projects were dumping radioactive material into groundwater?
Not to mention MK-ULTRA, the LaPenca bombing, the CIA drug connection,
the unlawful imprisonment of Leonard Peltier, the harrassment of
CISPES, and looking the other way after (and possibly having been
involved in) the attempted assasination of Judy Barry.  Or the
attempted assassinations of foreign leaders Fidel Castro and Mohamar
Khaddafy?  And have you already forgotten the murder/coverup of Daniel
Castolaro?

The credit bureaus?  The same people who've been using dubious means
to accumulate dossiers on everybody in North America, and fighting
hard to keep from having to admit that AT LEAST one third of those
dossiers are so error-prone as to be worthless?  And who, according to
former insiders, collect an awful lot of non-credit-related
information?  And who fight you tooth and nail when you try to get a
correction?

And after the endless messages over the past month about GTE, PacBell,
and so on, I should think it looked like we were all in agreement that
the telcos are no blushing virgins, what with "slamming," arrogant
billing practices, deliberate misdirection of state PUCs, abuse of
monopoly priviliges, and cooperation in the 800-to-900 scams.

So even if I thought that all hacking were wrong, I admit, the part of
me that likes to see David slay Goliath, and that hates Big Brother
and anybody who tries to set themselves up as a predator on the
people, would inwardly cheer to hear about anarcho-hackers taking on
the evils in government, credit bureaus, and telcos.  And nobody would
be happier than me if some hacker got into and out of a system with
more proof of these crimes.

I guess that makes me "socially responsible."  But it has nothing to
do with why I joined the EFF.  On the other hand, to paraphrase
another group's bumper stickers: "I'm a member of the EFF, and I
VOTE."  Or as one phreak put it, "fear the government that fears your
modem."


J. Brad Hicks    Internet: mhs!mc![e-mail]
X.400:    c=US admd=ATTmail prmd=MasterCard sn=Hicks gn=Brad

I am not an official MasterCard spokesperson, and the message above
does not contain official MasterCard statements or policies.

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

From: [e-mail] (Phil Howard)
Subject: Re: Phone Phraud Publicity
Date: Sat, 11 Jul 92 03:55:46 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest)


wixer![e-mail] (john winthrop) writes:

> 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 ...

Maybe ALL the newsmedia should be sent regular printed copies of this
and many other digests and newsgroups.

They'd sure get an education out of it.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Peter da Silva)
Subject: Re: 1-800 DISA Hacking - A Waste of Time and Money
Organization: Taronga Park BBS
Date: Sun, 12 Jul 1992 05:04:58 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> TELECOM Moderator notes:

> 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]

While I agree with the overall sentiment, I'd like to note that this
smacks too much of "are you now, or have you ever been, a member of
the Communist Party".


BTW, I like the term "phracker".


Peter da Silva, Taronga Park BBS, Houston, TX  [phone]/1032

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

Subject: 1-800 DISA Hacking - A Waste of Time and Money
From: [e-mail] (Bill Garfield)
Date: Sat, 11 Jul 92 10:23:00 -0600
Organization: Ye Olde Bailey BBS - Houston, TX - 713-520-1569
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Bill Garfield)


> If you know his number, can't you just call him back and tell him
> personally?

That isn't as easy as it might sound.

First of all, I speak only enough Spanish to get my face slapped.
Secondly, though we have the ANI -- and even the apartment number and
street address on West 133rd Street -- and even the subscriber's name.
That is not sufficient proof that the subscriber or any resident of
apartment 36 is the culprit.  It only means that _someone_ is using
"Pedro's" telephone line.  As the telephone circuits in apartment
complexes in major cities "appear" in various distribution boxes
(cans) anyone with a bare working knowledge of telephones can "tap
into" Pedro's line at any one of several locations and practice their
deeds with complete anonymity.

It's like a game between the fox and the hound.

Beyond this, I am not at liberty to go into any more detail at this
time.  As I said in my original post, the hackling is calling a _great
deal_ of attention to himself by his continuing actions.


[Moderator's Note: Although you have no proof that Pedro is making the
calls, I don't think it would be out of place for you to call the
number and give them a little pep-rally. Several years ago when my
wallet was picked out of my pocket riding the subway (I caught one and
almost did a "Goetz" on him; the one with my wallet got away) I lost
an IBT calling card in the process. I stopped it the same day, but
when the bill came the next month and I saw a residence number on
there as the origin of one fraud call I rang them up gave them a piece
of my mind, telling him I ought to pollute the number so badly they
could never use it again, fraud calls or otherwise. :)   PAT]

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

Date: Thu, 9 Jul 92 12:16 PDT
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Teleslime (A Tip)


If you happen to know who the telemarketer is and it is within your
LATA, here is a method you might try for retaliation.

Most readers of this forum are well aware of my year-long bout with
the {San Jose Mercury News}. The many lines of my home would be
assaulted regularly by callers wanting to know if I was "receiving the
paper OK".  This, of course, was the foot-in-the-door line that would
determine if you were a subscriber (they did not have subscription
lists in front of them). After getting these calls on private lines
several times a week I started taking action.

I talked to the head of telemarketing at the SJMN. I talked to the
president of the telemarketing contractor. I was assured that the
calls would stop after they entered all of my numbers in their reject
database. The calls continued. The SJMN blamed the contractor. The
contractor blamed the dialer software company. The calls continued.

I had my attorney write threatening letters to both the SJMN and the
telemarketing company. The calls continued. Finally, in desperation, I
called Pacific Bell and reported the problem as "harassment calls". I
explained that I had repeatedly asked the SJMN to stop calling me and
that my requests were ignored. The usage of my telephone was, in my
opinion, being compromised by such continued disturbance.

Bingo! The next day, the telemarketing president called and sounded
very crestfallen. "I guess you called the telephone company?" "Uh-huh"
"I really wish you hadn't done that." "And just what would you have
done in my position?" The long and the short of it is that I have not
had one single call since that time. Through other sources I learned
that the telemarketer immediately removed the entire prefix from the
machine to ENSURE that I would not be called again. (Why could that
not have been done in the first place???)

I can only guess, but it appears that the telco wields a very big
stick (like maybe disconnection of service?) when it comes to
telemarketers.  If I find any of these types offensive and find that
they are local, you can bet another call will be made to Pac*Bell.
This may work in other areas as well.

Footnote:

In the past month, I have changed every single phone number in the
house to another prefix. So far, no calls from the SJMN. We shall see.


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

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

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 Caller-ID 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./s

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #551
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa19719;
          12 Jul 92 14:18 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA10781
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 12 Jul 1992 01:43:12 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA17259
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 12 Jul 1992 01:43:01 -0500
Date: Sun, 12 Jul 1992 01:43:01 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #552

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 12 Jul 92 01:43:00 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 552

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    EFF Response to Recent Indictments (Gerard Van der Leun)
    Pat Townson Owes EFF an Apology (Mike Godwin)
    Re: Alleged Phreakers Indicted in New York (Thor Lancelot Simon)
    Re: Surprise Calling Card Fraud (Steve Forrette)
    Re: Surprise Calling Card Fraud (Ed Greenberg)
    Re: Surprise Calling Card Fraud (Phil Howard)
    Re: Surprise Calling Card Fraud (Bill Berbenich)
    Re: Roommates and Long Distance Doesn't Mix (Jueychong Ong)
    Re: Roommates and Long Distance Doesn't Mix (Art Hunter)
    Re: See Figure 1 (Roger Roles)
    Re: Factoid From _Playboy_ (Alan Boritz)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Fri, 10 Jul 1992 12:08:27 -0400
From: Gerard Van der Leun <[e-mail]>
Subject: EFF Response to Recent Indictment


  FEDERAL HACKING INDICTMENTS ISSUED AGAINST FIVE IN NEW YORK CITY

Yesterday, Federal officials indicted five people in New York City for
computer crime. The indictments name Mark Abene (Phiber Optick), Julio
Fernandez (Outlaw), John Lee (Corrupt), Elias Ladopoulos (Acid
Phreak), and Paul Stria (Scorpion). The indictments charge that the
accused used their computers to access credit bureaus, other computer
systems, and make free long-distance calls.

Prosecutors revealed they relied on court-approved wiretaps to obtain
much of the evidence for their multiple-count indictment for wire
fraud, illegal wiretapping and conspiracy. Each count is punishable by
up to 5 years in prison. The defendants are scheduled to be arraigned
in Manhattan Federal Court on July 16. If found guilty on all counts
the defendants could face a maximum term of 50 years in prison and
fines of $2.5 million.

Otto Obermaier, U.S. Attorney, discounted suggestions that the acts
alleged in the indictment were only "pranks" and asserted that they
represented "the crime of the future." He also stated that one purpose
of the indictment was to send a message that "this kind of conduct
will not be tolerated."

Mark Abene, known to the computer community as Phiber Optick, denied
any wrongdoing.

The Electronic Frontier Foundation's staff counsel in Cambridge, Mike
Godwin is carefully reviewing the indictments.  Mitchell Kapor, EFF
President, stated today that: "EFF's position on unauthorized access
to computer systems is, and has always been, that it is wrong."

"Nevertheless," Kapor continued, "we have on previous occasions
discovered that allegations contained in Federal indictments can also
be wrong, and that civil liberties can be easily infringed in the
information age.  Because of this, we will be examining this case
closely to establish the facts."


EFF | 155 Second Street, Cambridge MA 02141 [phone] | [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Mike Godwin)
Subject: Pat Townson Owes EFF an Apology
Organization: Electronic Frontier Foundation
Date: Fri, 10 Jul 1992 19:17:01 GMT


Pat Townson, with his usual respect for fact, writes:

> 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]

For some reason, Pat's respect for the rights of others stops short of
our right not to be libelled or deliberately misrepresented.
Specifically, Pat believes that it is appropriate to invent and
disseminate vicious misrepresentations about EFF.

The public record, however, puts the lie to Townson's assertions For
example, Mitch Kapor wrote in the September 1991 issue of EFFector:

"The Electronic Frontier Foundation has never condoned the
unauthorized entry into computer systems for any reason. There is
absolutely no question that uninvited computer intrusions represent a
major problem on the electronic frontier; and one which we, and
thousands of others, struggle with on a daily basis."

But perhaps Townson missed that issue. Did he also miss the very first
issue of EFFector, in which Kapor wrote the following comment?

"I regard unauthorized entry into computer systems as wrong and
deserving of punishment."

This was published in March 1991 on paper; it appeared online in late
1990. Is Townson so interested in promoting a view of himself as
anti-hacker that he does not care who he defames in the process?

EFF has worked on occasion to prevent innocent people from being
punished, and to see that government prosecution of the guilty is done
in a way that does not compromise the rights of all of us to due
process. We are proud of this work.

But only someone whose disregard for the truth borders on the
pathological could suppose that we *ever* seek to excuse unauthorized
access, or that we routinely defend those who engage in such acts.

I think there is immense irony in Townson's claim that we're expected
to utter "shrill chatter" as we "defend the darlings" (whoever they
are).  I doubt anyone at EFF is capable of being as shrill as Townson.
And I am certain that we have higher regard for the truth than he
does.


Mike Godwin,     [e-mail]
[phone]   EFF, Cambridge

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

From: [e-mail] (Thor Lancelot Simon)
Subject: Re: Alleged Phreakers Indicted in New York
Date: Sat, 11 Jul 1992 05:58:17 GMT
Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix & Internet, NYC


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail].
unc.edu writes:

> A computer hacker is someone who uses a computer or a telephone to
> obtain unauthorized access to other computers.

It would be nice if once in a while somebody could be bothered to get
this right in a press release ...

>a/k/a "Phiber Optik," Elias Ladopoulos, a/k/a "Acid Phreak," and Paul

Weren't these two mentioned in that {Whole Earth Quarterly} article a
long time back that also heralded the coming of the EFF to the scene?
Wish I remembered more about it, but I do recall those two names.
Seemed like fairly nice guys, for crackers.


Thor Lancelot Simon     [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: Surprise Calling Card Fraud
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA
Date: Fri, 10 Jul 1992 09:48:45 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Mark
Schuldenfrei) writes:

> 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.

[story about calling card number stolen off of hotel's SMDR deleted]

> 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?

I would suggest trying to escalate this within AT&T's fraud
department.  I'm sure that they already do this, but you may want to
verify that they generate reports based on commonality of all
locations that fraudulent cards were recently used from.  After all,
for every valid call, they have a record of the ANI of the calling
number.  It should not be too hard for their computer to figure out
that a large number of calling cards that were used at that specific
hotel had fraudulent charges occur shortly thereafter.  I would think
that AT&T could then persue the matter further, armed with this
information.


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Ed Greenberg)
Subject: Re: Surprise Calling Card Fraud
Date: Fri, 10 Jul 92 16:27:45 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest)


I imagine that the most secure way to use a calling card is to swipe
it through the reader of an AT&T calling card phone.


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] (Phil Howard)
Subject: Re: Surprise Calling Card Fraud
Date: Sat, 11 Jul 92 03:47:11 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest)


[e-mail] (Mark Schuldenfrei) writes:

> 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.

This sounds like a thread for sci.crypt.

The solution is an intelligent call access device that can hear a
series of coded tones coming from a verification point, and respond
with the appropriate reply tones.  The tones first sent would simply
be a random sequence.  The verification computer AND the intelligent
access device would both perform a one-way encryption of that random
value.  The device would send it and the verification computer would
validated it against what it figured out.  The key to the encryption
would be one assigned only to you so the verification computer would
have to already know who you are (at least claiming to be).

> 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?

I've had this happen to me, and the "cracked" card was in fact never
used anywhere.  There is the distinct possibility that the hotel did
not play any part in this theft.

It really should be AT&T's concern at this point.  What I suggest you
might do is buy some stock in AT&T and proceed to complain through the
channels as a stockholder that AT&T needs to take stronger action
against this "profit lossage".  There will be the argument that the
cost to enforce is higher than the loss (and it might be true, at
least today).  But the problem won't go away unless something is done
about it.

[steps up on soapbox]

Otherwise just write it up as yet another symptom of a crime-happy
society that does not enforce the laws it has, and wastes tax money
just trying to make more and more laws that aren't going to be
enforced anyway.

[steps down from soapbox]


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

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

Subject: Re: Surprise Calling Card Fraud
Date: Fri, 10 Jul 92 9:55:21 BST
From: Bill Berbenich <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]


Two methods that I use for preventing calling card fraud:

Bear in mind that for both of these methods I use a LEC/RBOC or a
carrier's own 'pay phone' only.  No COCOTs.  I have learned to spot
these before they can see the whites of my eyes.

(1)  Use the card-reader phones, where you "swipe" (no pun intended)
     the card or insert it momentarily into a slot, and;

(2)  Press the numbers in on a touch-tone phone, but cover my dialing
     finger with my other hand so that only I can see it.  I am REAL
     aware of the people around me and will notice if someone tries to
     look in, in spite of my covering up the touch tone pad.

I have been aware of the potential for SMDR-based calling card fraud
at hotels and motels ever since 1985 when I made an AT&T calling card
call from a motel room.  When I checked out, I was offered a copy of
the SMDR printout, detailing ALL of my calls.  I was somewhat
surprised to see that my calling card number and pin were captured on
paper (and possibly elsewhere), along with the rest of the information
on the calls.

I was less telecom-savvy then, but I still realized the implications
if a hotel employee (or dumpster diver, for that matter) were to get
that information and exploit it for fraudulent purposes.

If there is any way possible to conveniently do so, I use one of the
two methods above to make calling card calls.  The first method is
preferable to me.  I make it a point to cover the numbers on the card
with my hand when I'm swiping or inserting it.  I also try to use a
phone where there isn't someone nearby who can even observe what I am
doing, be it dialing in a number or swiping a card through.


Sign me,
Another telecom paranoid,

Bill Berbenich, School of EE, DSP Lab   Georgia Tech, Atlanta Georgia, 30332
uucp: ...!{backbones}!gatech!eedsp!bill  Internet: [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Jueychong Ong)
Subject: Re: Roommates and Long Distance Doesn't Mix
Organization: Columbia University Department of Computer Science
Date: Thu, 9 Jul 1992 21:20:54 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Chris
Sherman) writes:

> 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.

It isn't that complicated. The 950 number gives the caller access to
the LD "company", but the caller still has to enter his/her calling
card number. e.g. MCI's 950 number is 950-1022, and is a local
telephone number in most areas. If it's not available, there's always
800-950-1022.


jc

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

Subject: Re: Roommates and Long Distance Doesn't Mix
From: [e-mail] (Art Hunter)
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Art Hunter)
Date:     Wed, 8 Jul 1992 07:10:01 -0400
Organization: AFI Communications - Ottawa, Ontario, Canada


> 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

        The CallerID product that I use has the ability to dial out
and to block calls to 900, 976 and any other numbers you wish.  This
is free (once you buy the unit).

        I had one fellow send me mail telling me to stop posting in
here as such a product is not in existance.  Incredible.  Just
incredible.

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

From: [e-mail] (Roger Roles)
Subject: Re: See Figure 1
Organization: Alliant Computer Systems, Littleton, MA
Date: Thu, 9 Jul 1992 20:56:37 GMT


I gave Herb Jacobs a call to refresh my memory when this thread
started. He said that he wrote the version for VMS version 3 after
seeing a version written for TOPS-10, and that he credited the author
of the TOPS-10 version in his. His copy is buried in his files
somewhere, but he said that if he ran across it he would send me a
copy. If that happens in the near future, I will think about typing it
in.


[e-mail], alliant!rdr            Roger D. Roles

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

Date: 06 Jul 92 14:48:20 EDT
From: Alan Boritz <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Factoid From _Playboy_


[e-mail] (Steve Forrette) writes:

> 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?

Probably not at many as the number of psychiatrists-worried-that-a-
psychotic-killer-patient-will-use-a-"call back"-switch-feature-to-
call-the-doctor-stupid-enough-to-call-his-patient-from-a-private-un-
listed-phone-in-his-house!  It really happened in New York, and was
given as an "example" why the NYS-PUC shouldn't let New York Telephone
offer the service.


Alan Boritz     [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: Don't forget about the lawyers who want to be able
to call people at home while not having to risk anyone calling *them*
at home.  PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #552
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa19668;
          12 Jul 92 14:16 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA22157
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 12 Jul 1992 03:52:03 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA20677
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 12 Jul 1992 03:51:52 -0500
Date: Sun, 12 Jul 1992 03:51:52 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #553

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 12 Jul 92 03:51:55 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 553

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: 700 Easyreach Service Should be Called Hard to Reach (Jeff Carpenter)
    Re: 700 Easyreach Service Should be Called Hard to Reach (H. Peter Anvin)
    Re: 700 Easyreach Service Should be Called Hard to Reach (Roger Klorese)
    Re: 700 Easyreach Service Should be Called Hard to Reach (Phil Howard)
    Easy Reach, 0+, and Operator Assisted (John Butz)
    Re: Company Uses Caller-ID to Identify Customers (Paul Robinson)
    Re: Company Uses Caller-ID to Identify Customers (Jueychong Ong)
    Re: Suit Alleges Cellular Caused Brain Tumor (Thor Lancelot Simon)
    Re: Suit Alleges Cellular Caused Brain Tumor (Michael Masterson)
    Do ESS Switches Provide Detailed Call Records? (James M. Simpson)
    Re: SWBell Marketing Voice Mail ([e-mail])
    Re: 911 in Australia (Jeremy Lawrence)
    Re: 911 Circuitry Can Detect 91 (Jeffrey J. Carpenter)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Fri, 10 Jul 1992 12:20:27 -0400 (EDT)
From: Jeffrey J. Carpenter <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: 700 Easyreach Service Should be Called Hard to Reach


TELECOM Moderator noted:

> [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.

You are certainly correct about this, but why couldn't they have
requested a new special service code for this type of service,
something like 500 or 600.  They didn't have to use 700.

I think that the dialing instructions for dialing a 700 can be
confusing and may counteract any convenience that people trying to
reach you might get by having one number to call.


jeff

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

From: [e-mail] (H. Peter Anvin N9ITP)
Subject: Re: 700 Easyreach Service Should be Called Hard to Reach
Reply-To: [e-mail] (H. Peter Anvin)
Date: Fri, 10 Jul 1992 21:46:28 GMT


Seems like there is at least one solution here (although it will still
only work within the USA):

Let AT&T grab another 10XXX (like they already have several); then use
whatever numbers ... maybe starting with 700 numbers, but not
necessarily ...

"What's your phone number?  10456-700-H-PETER-A"

A dedicated country code would probably be the best, especially from
an international standpoint.  Otherwise, maybe we have found a use for
the 600 area code.


hpa

INTERNET: [e-mail]   TALK:      [e-mail]
BITNET:   HPA@NUACC     HAM RADIO: N9ITP, SM4TKN
IRC:      Scalar        NeXTMAIL:  [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Roger B.A. Klorese)
Subject: Re: 700 Easyreach Service Should be Called Hard to Reach
Organization: QueerNet
Date: Sun, 12 Jul 92 05:54:58 GMT


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

> It's so *easy*!  One man, one vote.  One "entity", one phone number.

You get 'one "entity", one phone number'... the number includes the
carrier access code.


ROGER B.A. KLORESE                                +1 415 ALL-ARFF
[e-mail]   {ames,decwrl,pyramid}!mips!unpc!rogerk

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

From: [e-mail] (Phil Howard)
Subject: Re: 700 Easyreach Service Should be Called Hard to Reach
Date: Sun, 12 Jul 92 00:28:47 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest)


[e-mail] (Alan L Varney) writes:

> 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.

It would be nice if there was a way for the caller to select voice,
fax, data, or whatever new gizmo I am attaching.  Thus if someone is
calling me from their "fax subchannel" it would ordinarily and
automatically be directed into my "fax subchannel" even though they
are using the same exact number to reach me as if they were using
voice.

It would also be nice if one could have multiple incoming and outgoing
lines, that only take up ONE number slot as far as ordinary
dialability goes (some specialized access dialing could address
individual lines for diagnostic purposes).

I await ISDN with the hope that at least it can deliver some of this
capability.

> 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.)

What it does is "defragment" the space.


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

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: Sun, 12 Jul 92 00:36 EDT
Subject: Easy Reach, 0+, and Operator Assisted


In article <[e-mail]>, TELECOM Moderator notes:

> [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]
             ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Yes, EasyReach calls can be placed {10288} 0 + 700, 1 + 800 followed by
{0+}700 (using the 800 access method), 10288-0 or 00- ("real" operator
assisted).

I would hesitate to use the words "operator assisted" in reference to
the 0 + 700 dialing however.  No operator will ever come on the line
when an ER700 call is dialed {10288} 0 + 700.  "Operator Assisted"
usually implies surcharges and these surcharges are not part of the
ER700 tariff for 0 + 700 dialing (unless of course you bill to a
calling card or call the operator).  In effect, a 0 + 700 call is
billed like a 1+ call and at similar rates.


John Butz
Easy Reach 700 System Engineering
AT&T Bell Labs    [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: It is not billed 'at similar rates' ... Easy Reach
calls are much more expensive per minute. Also, 'operator assisted'
has come to mean any call other than 1+, IMHO.  Perhaps a better way
to phrase it would have been 'special handling/billing'.   PAT]

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

Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Date: Fri, 10 Jul 92  02:32:53 EDT
Subject: Re: Company Uses Caller-ID to Identify Customers


In TELECOM Digest V12 #546 <[e-mail] (Leonard
Erickson) says:

> [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.

I used to have an account with Mid Atlantic Telecom here in
Washington, DC.  Every month I got the bill for an 'overlay' 800
number that was attached to the ordinary local telephone number as the
equivalent of a second phone number attached to it. I also had an 800
number for a voice mail account I was using at that time.

At the end of each month I would get the bill of the flat-rate service
charge and the bill for the amount of charges for calls received.

On a separate page they sent me a list of the time, date, length of
call and the telephone number calling from, for every call made to
each of the 800 numbers.

A while back, a company selling equipment to cable companies was
selling a system to allow the called party to get the ANI of a caller,
from MCI's 800 network, in real time, usually for ordering
pay-per-view services.  You called it and it does what the Atlanta
number from the 732 network that I reported earlier does: it reads
back to you the number you are calling from.  They got so many calls
they had to stop the demonstration.

I think C&P Telephone company is trying also to cash in on this by
using something similar.  In the latest telephone directory, a local
exchange is marked "Pay Per View."  And the intent, I would assume, is
to allow someone to call a PPV number and using caller-id, it could do
the same thing as the 800 number; more importantly, since it's a local
number, the cable company would not be metered at 16c a minute for
calls coming into it; they could conceivably use the service for
different orders, if the service was cheap enough.

At least one local cable company in the area is using this exchange
for this purpose, a user on a local BBS informed me.


Paul Robinson -- These opinions are MINE (who else would admit it?)

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

From: [e-mail] (Jueychong Ong)
Subject: Re: Company Uses Caller-ID to Identify Customers
Organization: Columbia University Department of Computer Science
Date: Sat, 11 Jul 1992 21:50:08 GMT


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

> 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!]

That was no fine print. When they first introduced the system, they
took two pages (pages 2 and 3) of their catalog to explain their
policy for using Caller-ID. I can understand why few people ask them
to disable it. They ask for your phone number anyway on credit card
orders.

The strange thing is that they don't seem to use it all the time.  On
my last call a few days ago, I had to give them my customer number.


jc

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

From: [e-mail] (Thor Lancelot Simon)
Subject: Re: Suit Alleges Cellular Caused Brain Tumor
Date: Tue, 7 Jul 1992 20:20:18 GMT
Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix & Internet, NYC


In article <[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.

Note that high-voltage power lines are frequently sprayed (well, the
ground under them, I suppose, not the lines themselves, of course!)
with defoliants.


Thor Lancelot Simon     [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Michael Masterson)
Subject: Re: Suit Alleges Cellular Caused Brain Tumor
Organization: Dell Computer Co
Date: Fri, 10 Jul 1992 16:38:09 GMT


[e-mail] (John Higdon) writes:

> 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?

Well, it's about 100 times the power levels of a laser that says
"AVOID EXPOSURE TO BEAM" on the warning label, and that's just talking
about dead surface skin cells ...  heck, .5 watts is about what the
cutting lasers run that are used to cut master disks for CDs.


Cheers,

The opinions expressed do not necessarily reflect those of any other person.
Michael Masterson                          [e-mail]

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

Date: Sat, 11 Jul 92 20:44:10 EDT
From: Matt Simpson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Do ESS Systems Keep Detailed Call Records?


Does anyone out there know if local exchanges keep any kind of call
detail records? Specifically, I'm interested to know if a
law-enforcement agency would be able to obtain a record of all local
calls made to a specific number for some period in the past, without
having requested a trace in advance.

My house has been robbed twice in the last six weeks, and I suspect
the culprits have called in advance to make sure I wasn't home.  There
have been a few times recently when I have been home when I'm normally
at work, and the phone would ring.  When I answered, the caller would
hang up. This rarely happens at times when I'm "supposed" to be home.

I think someone knows my schedule fairly well, but calls just to be
sure.  I'm going to run this idea past the local sheriff, but these
guys aren't too swift about stuff like that. Maybe sometime I'll
entertain you folks with the story of my parents' tenant who suffered
obscene, threatening phone calls, as well as repeated break-ins, and
the local constabulary's incompetent efforts at catching the
perpetrator.

Anyway, I thought if anybody out there could tell me if this is
possible, I could be a little more insistent about it.  I don't know
exactly what kind of switch I'm on. It's fairly new, was installed
about 18 months ago, with much hype about how great it would be. The
company is South Central Bell, and the exchange is 606-987, if that
helps any.


[Moderator's Note: Yes, the new switches do keep very detailed calling
records. Getting them examined may be a hassle, but they do exist. Now
of course if you had that nasty old Caller-ID, or even 'return last
call', you could invade the caller's privacy by noting the calling
number and act on it from that direction. Not only do hackerphreaks
not care for Caller-ID, I suppose most burglars who call ahead to
scope things out don't like it very well either.  PAT]

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

Organization: The American University - University Computing Center
Date: Saturday, 11 Jul 1992 23:00:51 EDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: SWBell Marketing Voice Mail


We may thank Judge Harold Greene for this and *more*.  In his last
year's decision (forced decision) Judge Greene finally is allowing the
RBOCs to participate in the National Information Services Industries.
VoiceMail and a host of other potential services that any *non* RBOC
were always available to anyone or anycompany up until July 1991; as
of that date the "strangle hold" he and his court has held on the
RBOCs is withering away.  Thank you !!!

In our regional area Bell Atlantic offers a host of services including
the VoiceMail, Caller ID, CallBack, and more; they market them as "IQ
Services".

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

From: [e-mail] (Jeremy Lawrence)
Subject: Re: 911 in Australia
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: University Of Wollongong
Date: Fri, 10 Jul 92 04:59:00 GMT


[e-mail] (Ash Nallawalla) writes:

> [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.

The way I heard it here in Oz (radio/newspapers a couple of weeks
ago), the guy was a New Zealander who dialled the the NZ emergency
number, 111, instead of 000.


Jeremy Lawrence                                [e-mail]
Switched Networks Research Centre          or:    [e-mail]
University of Wollongong, Australia                    [phone]

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

Date: Fri, 10 Jul 1992 12:35:04 -0400 (EDT)
From: Jeffrey J. Carpenter <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: 911 Circuitry Can Detect 91


Pushpendra [e-mail] wrote:

> 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 ...

> [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]

What probably was happening was there was a delay long enough to miss
the beginning zero of "011", so what ended up going through was
1-1-911, with the leading ones being ignored.


jeff

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #553
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa19364;
          12 Jul 92 14:12 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA09356
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 12 Jul 1992 05:52:27 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA01574
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 12 Jul 1992 05:52:17 -0500
Date: Sun, 12 Jul 1992 05:52:17 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #554

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 12 Jul 92 05:52:10 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 554

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    The Earliest Talking Clock? (was Jane Barbie) (Bill Higgins)
    Leap Seconds and Telco Time-of-Day Accuracy (Paul Eggert)
    Identa-Ring Decoding Box (Steven A. Rubin)
    Residential ISDN (John Higdon)
    Why Not PEP Over Cellular? (Brian Litzinger)
    Connecting Phone Lines to a Computer (Eric Woudenberg)
    Simple Volume Boost (Chris Ambler)
    1-800-ATF-GUNS and Anonymity (Michael G. Katzmann)
    Idiot Dialing 911 (Cliff Stoll)
    Pager Modem? (Peter Lucas)
    Loop Simulators (Ray Berry)
    Here is the Number to Read Back Your Calling Number (Paul Robinson)
    Looking For Phone Exchange Stats (Douglas W. Martin)
    Telecom in Remote Countries? (Douglas W. Martin)
    Ground Wire on Network Interface? (Jim Rees)
    The Message Center Offers 'Daily Reporter' Service (Justin Leavens)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sat, 12 Jul 1992 22:11:16 -0500 (CDT)
From: [e-mail] (Bill Higgins-- Beam Jockey)
Subject: The Earliest Talking Clock? (was Jane Barbie)


The thread about talking clocks in TELECOM Digest (comp.dcom.telecom)
reminded me of the earliest talking clock I ever heard of...

About ten years ago there was a Silly Science Fair held as part of our
local science fiction convention.  Entrants were encouraged to create
bogus or parody science projects.

Dan Cohn entered one whose centerpiece was a recording of the "cosmic
background radiation--" the microwave hiss of three-degree-Kelvin
blackbody photons left over from the early moments of the hot
universe.  It sounded like this:

"Sssssssssssssss...."

Dan claimed to have applied advanced forms of signal processing to
this (apparent) noise, and after all his fancy algorithms and
equipment had worked on the background radiation, the tape sounded
like this:

[faint voice over background hiss]

"The time...

at the bang...

will be Zero....

exactly."


Bill Higgins                            Internet: [e-mail]
Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory   Bitnet:   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Paul Eggert)
Subject: Leap Seconds and Telco Time-of-Day Accuracy
Organization: Twin Sun, Inc
Date: Sat, 12 Jul 1992 19:10:09 GMT


In comp.protocols.time.ntp <[e-mail]>, Jeff Makey reports that
Pacific Bell's time-of-day service in San Diego adjusted for the June
30 leap second sometime between 28 and 53 minutes late.  (Since they
hang up after reporting the time, it was impractical for him to
determine the exact moment of switchover.)  This suggests that PacBell
adjusts their time-of-day clock manually rather than relying on an
automated system linked to WWV.  And it brings up more general
questions:

How accurate is the time-of-day reported by PacBell, GTE, etc.?

What incentives do the telcos have to report time-of-day accurately?
I can think of a _disincentive_: the service is free, and the more
accurate it is, the more it'll be used.

Surely accurate timekeeping is important within the telco switches for
performance and accounting reasons.  How are times within the switches
synchronized to the times reported to the public?

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

From: Steven A Rubin <[e-mail]>
Subject: Identa-Ring Decoding Box
Organization: HAC - Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore
Date: Sat, 12 Jul 1992 20:02:04 GMT


I currently have a phone line with two different numbers, with
distinctive ringing letting me determine which number the person is
calling on.  I purchased an Autoline Plus box from ITS that 'listens'
to the rings and routes the call to the proper device.  The problem
(more like a frustration) is that the box takes three rings to
determine where to send the call.  Is there a device that can do the
routing on less rings yet still be reliable?

Other than this, I am extremely pleased with this device, and it so
far has 100% error-free routing.

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

Date: Sat, 12 Jul 92 23:21 PDT
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Residential ISDN


I have been having serious conversations with a Pac*Bell rep
concerning the installation of ISDN at my residence. After getting all
of the prices, I was admonished to wait just a bit to see what happens
with Pac*Bell's current RESIDENTIAL ISDN proposal before the PUC. Yes,
you read that right. Pac*Bell may soon be offering ISDN to the common
man.

It seems that for the first time in my memory, I can call the business
office, give my prefix and NOT be told, "Oh, I'm sorry. [Fill in
feature or offering of your choice] is not available in your area." I
have decided to wait for the residential version. Ordering two lines
of Centrex (that I do not need) seems just a bit much even still.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Brian Litzinger)
Subject: Why Not PEP Over Cellular?
Date: Sun, 12 Jul 1992 06:13:04 GMT


I have an adapter that allows me to use a standard fax machine
and V.22bis type modem over my cellular phone.

However, my Telebit Trailblazer+ won't do PEP over it.  It actually
acts slightly odd.  I get the PEP tones of the answering modem, it
goes through the normal PEP undulations and turns the speaker off, but
never sends the connect message, and eventually gives up.

Any ideas?


[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Eric Woudenberg)
Subject: Connecting Phone Lines to a Computer
Organization: Alliant Computer Systems
Date: Sun, 12 Jul 1992 08:02:16 GMT


I'm helping a research lab connect several PBX extensions to a VMEbus
based computer. They would like to develop a program which can answer
calls placed to these extensions and use speech recognition to find a
phone number when given a (spoken) name.

The main problem is how to do the phone line handling and A/D and D/A
conversion. My vision of the ideal solution would be a VMEbus board
with 8 or so RJ-11 jacks on the front. The board would be able to
answer and hangup the phone and also digitize incoming audio and DMA
it into memory, it would also need to be able to output audio from
digital data in memory.

Does anyone know of a board like this? Can anyone give some
suggestions on they might approach this problem? I would be very
interested in talking to someone who knows about this sort of thing.


Thanks,

Eric Woudenberg    ([e-mail])

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

From: [e-mail] (The Squire, Phish)
Subject: Simple Volume Boost
Organization: Fantasy, Incorporated: Reality None of Our Business.
Date: Sat, 11 Jul 1992 11:47:08 GMT


This is probably very simple, but alas, I'm a software weenie :-)

I have a very nice 20 line phone picked up at surplus. All the lights
and such don't work because they want some voltage from a PBX or
something, but all 20 lines work nicely. Because it's a PBX phone,
however, the volume out of the handset is pretty low. I'm also told
that the volume from the mic is low. Interestingly, when another
extension in the house is picked up, I'm told the volume on the other
end improves.

Can anyone explain this? And can any suggest a simple circuit
(preferably passive, or using phone power) to boost volume to the
earpiece?

Thanks in advance.


[e-mail] | Fubar Systems BBS
(805) 54-FUBAR   3/12/24, MNP5, 8N1   FSBBS 2/FSUUCP 1.3

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

From: vk2bea![e-mail] (Michael G. Katzmann)
Subject: 1-800-ATF-GUNS and Anonymity
Date: 11 Jul 92 13:52:44 GMT
Organization: Broadcast Sports Technology., Crofton, MD


There is an advertisment that has been running in the {Washington
Post} over the last few weeks, placed by General Dynamics (heavy
irony), asking members of the public to call the Bureau of Alcohol,
Tobacco and Firearms to report illegal gun dealings.

It says call 1-800-ATF-GUNS, YOU DON'T HAVE TO GIVE YOUR NAME.

This is, at the least, misleading since it implies anonymity for the
caller.  Since as astute comp.dcom.telecom readers know, ANI is
available to 800 service subscribers, the caller's number would surely
be recorded by ATF.

Whilst one can't argue the objectives of the campaign, it is not fair
to mislead the general public. (Perhaps we've all become used to being
lied to by advertisments ... sigh)


Michael Katzmann      Broadcast Sports Technology Inc.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~      Crofton, Maryland. U.S.A
Amateur Radio Stations:
NV3Z / VK2BEA / G4NYV      opel!vk2bea![e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: I've often had the same thoughts about the numerous
signs I see on the subways here urging people to call and seek help
for a problem with cocaine, abusing your children, etc. They all use
800 numbers also, with ANI, I'm sure.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Cliff Stoll)
Subject: Idiot Dialing 911
Date: 12 Jul 1992 00:20:42 GMT
Organization: U.C. Berkeley Open Computing Facility


A friend of mine answered phones at the Buffalo 911 hotline.  Perhaps
it's an urban myth, but she swears that one woman wouldn't dial 911
because "I couldn't find the eleven button on my phone."

Since then, they advertise the service as "nine one one" instead of
"nine eleven."


Cliff Stoll  12 July 92

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

Date: Sat, 11 Jul 1992 21:54:47 -0400 (EDT)
From: Peter Lucas <[e-mail]>
Subject: Pager Modem?


Since there is now a service that forwards Internet mail into the
alphanumeric pager world, I assume there must also exist receivers
that one can connect to a laptop to recieve them, right?  This sounds
pretty wonderful in principle.  Does it work?  Where does one get such
a device and how much is it?  Are there options?  More generally, how
close are we to a nationwide two-way cellular data network?


pete lucas ([e-mail])

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

From: ole![e-mail] (Ray Berry)
Subject: Loop Simulators
Organization: Cascade Design Automation, Bellevue, WA
Date: Sat, 11 Jul 1992 19:51:25 GMT


To vary loop voltage over 100 volt range, vary impedance, etc.; also,
would like a programmable ring generator of variable frequency and
voltage ( 40-130 Vrms, 16-60 Hz) ; the ability to gate it or program
it for particular ring patterns would be a plus.  I need something
that looks like a *real* line- not a quick hack power supply, square
wave inverting ringer, etc.

    I don't know who the vendors of this type of stuff are -- hence this
post.  TIA.


Ray Berry  kb7ht  [e-mail]  [e-mail]

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

Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Date: Sun, 12 Jul 92  00:01:08 EDT
Subject: Here is the Number to Read Back Your Calling Number


There is a number you can dial to obtain the telephone number that you
are calling from.  I got this number off of the RIME BBS Network
"Phones" conference.  I have tried it and it works, even from a U.S.
Government Centrex number.  I do not know if there is a charge for the
call, as I do not remember seeing it on my phone bill.

The exact number to dial is:

    10732-1-404-988-9664

Note this is a special number using the 732 network, a private network
operated by AT&T.

After a tone, it reads back the area code and phone number placing the
call, then what apparently is a checksum digit.  At this point it no
longer has the ANI information and then reads back all zeros.

If AT&T is charging for this; all well and good, they are not likely
to drop it; if not, please be prudent in using it so as not to see it
cancelled.


Paul Robinson - These opinions are mine (Who else would want them?)

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

Date: Sat, 11 Jul 92 08:32:02 -0700
From: [e-mail] (Douglas W. Martin)
Subject: Looking For Phone Exchange Stats


     I am looking for some statistics or even rough estimates of what
percentage of particular exchanges are actually assigned.  There has
been much discussion of area codes running out of exchanges, but what
about exchanges running out of numbers?  That is, in long-established
exchanges (not those involved in recent area code splits) are 99% or
20% etc of numbers actually assigned to phones?  Similarly, if calling
various exchanges, what might be the probability of getting an actual
phone vs an intercept recording?  Obviously, there will be a wide
variation; so I am looking for extremes; e.g. some urban residential
exchanges, vs exchanges like: (907) 852 Barrow Alaska or (819) 793
Baker Lake NWT?  Where might I find such info?


Thanks,

Doug Martin    [e-mail]

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

Date: Sat, 11 Jul 92 08:47:24 -0700
From: [e-mail] (Douglas W. Martin)
Subject: Telecom in Remote Countries?


     I am looking for data on types of equipment and exchange and
phone number assignment in remote countries. E.g.  How many exchanges
are there in Vanuatu? Is there one for each island?  How would numbers
be assigned; e.g. with four-digit numbers would the assignment be
first 2222, 2223, 2322, etc?  And what kind of equipment is in use?
Are there still lots of step-by-step switches?

I am interested in such information for places like Seychelles,
Tuvalu, and the Australian Territories (country code 672).  Any info
is appreciated.  I have seen discussions here about the phone systems
in larger countries; there was a very good series of articles on the
phone system of India.

In addition to small remote island nations, does anyone have info
about the phone system in mainland China?  Their partition of the
country code list is small, I think only one two-digit prefix is
assigned to China?  Does this suggest not very many phones? or simply
that most phones are inaccessible from the rest of the world?


Thanks,

Doug Martin  [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Jim Rees)
Subject: Ground Wire on Network Interface?
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: University of Michigan IFS Project
Date: Sat, 11 Jul 92 15:57:17 GMT


I just had yet another phone line installed, and I now have a new
network interface box on the side of my house.  The other lines are
the old fashioned kind that go directly into the house, with the
protector block mounted in my basement.

I assume that the protector block is now part of the network
interface.  What I don't understand is that there is no ground wire
going in to the network interface box.  All my other protector blocks
require a ground for proper operation.  There are two screw holes on
the "customer" side of the box marked "G," but these are just holes
and don't have any conductors (or screws) in them.  There is no other
obvious place to put a ground wire.

Should I connect up a ground wire somehow?  To what?  Should I install
my own "old-fashioned" protector block in the basement?

The network interface is a Keptel SNI 4600 and the line is basic rate
ISDN, if that makes a difference.

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

From: [e-mail] (Justin Leavens)
Subject: The Message Center Offers 'Daily Reporter' Service
Date: 11 Jul 1992 10:24:50 -0700
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA


  As a recent subscriber to Pacific Bell's Message Center, I was
offerred a free month of their new 'Daily Reporter' service.
Essentially, the service drops you a piece of voicemail every day from
Dow Jones giving you a little blurb on whichever of the topics you
subscribe to (now offerring News, Sports, and Financial categories).
The messages are not cumulative, so yesterday's news is replaced by
today's news. Each topic is $0.75 monthly, $1.50 for two, and $2.00
for all three.

  This is supposed to be an inital test of the system, with future
additions to the topics: weather reports, restaurant and movie
reviews, "and even a daily horoscope!" [oh boy]. To quote more:

  "You'll also be able to receive information customized to your
needs. For example, you'll be able to select only the sports teams you
want to know about, or choose spcific financial reports on the
companies you're most interested in."

  We'll see how this works. Considering Pacific Bell somehow 'lost' my
original order for the Message Center in the first place, and the
problems of the Message Center last year, I'm skeptical. But the
operator I spoke with told me that they were planning on expanding the
functionality of the Message Center in the next few months (that
service to be available for 3X the price of current service) which
would include features that GTE currently offers in it's voicemail
service. Imagine that, GTE actually _ahead_ of Pacific Bell!


Justin Leavens   University of Southern California

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #554
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa19587;
          12 Jul 92 14:15 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA15266
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 12 Jul 1992 06:47:22 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA27790
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 12 Jul 1992 06:47:14 -0500
Date: Sun, 12 Jul 1992 06:47:14 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #555

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 12 Jul 92 06:47:05 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 555

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Digital in $1 Billion Australian Telecom Project (Dec News via M. Solomon)
    More on That Pesky Message Center (Justin Leavens)
    AT&T's Left Hand Doesn't Know What its Right Hand is Doing (Will Martin)
    AT&T Makes Junk Phone Calls (Andrew Klossner)
    Clinton pro Internet? (Joseph Jesson)
    Book on North American Phone System Wanted (Tom Diessel)
    Buying Up the Whole Exchange (was New 5ESS(tm) Here) (Alan Boritz)
    Telephone Vanity Plates? (Alan Boritz)
    Lower Phone Bills (was Per-Call Charge on Caller-ID) (Justin Leavens)
    E-Mail Address of "FERMA" (Chang Hyeoungkyu)
    800 vs. Calling Cards (John Carr)
    Broadcasting News Group Expands Digest Distribution (William Pfeiffer)
    "Two Nine(s)" (Carl Moore)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sat, 11 Jul 1992 02:02:09 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <[e-mail]>
Subject: Digital in $1 Billion Australian Telecom Project


 From: [e-mail] (Dave Price, UNIX Press Relations )
 Newsgroups: biz.dec
 Subject: DECnews/Optus Communications Selects Digital in $1 Billion
 Date: 10 Jul 92 20:29:13 GMT

||||||||||||  DEC n e w s  ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
                                              Digital Equipment Corporation
                                          Maynard, Massachusetts 01754-2571
Editorial contact:

          (UNITED STATES)
          Dick Calandrella
          Digital Equipment Corporation
          [phone]

          (AUSTRALIA)
          Peter Davidson
          Digital Equipment Corporation
          011-61-2-561-7008

          (AUSTRALIA)
          David Foster
          Optus Communications
          011-61-2-238-7723


      OPTUS COMMUNICATIONS SELECTS DIGITAL AS PRIME CONTRACTOR
       IN $1 BILLION (AUS) SYSTEMS INTEGRATION TELECOM PROJECT


MAYNARD, Mass. -- July 9, 1992 -- In a strategic agreement estimated
to be worth $1 billion (AUS) over the next 10 years, Digital Equipment
Corporation was named as the prime contractor to provide the complete
information technology and service needs for Optus Communications, the
second largest telecommunications carrier in Australia.

     Under terms of the agreement, signed in Sydney, Australia on June
22, 1992, Digital will serve as the prime contractor to Optus to
develop an Operational Support System (OSS) for what will be the
world's first fully digital telecommunications network.

     OSS includes the network operating systems and applications
software required to manage the many elements of a digital
telecommunications network.

Building Australia's Second Telecommunications Network

     Optus, which secured the right to operate Australia's second
telecommunications network in November 1991, is a consortium of Bell
South, Cable and Wireless, and several Australian firms.

     Plans call for digital cellular facilities to cover 80 percent of
the population, with fibre transmission facilities built to cover most
major centers by 1997. This will provide virtually all of Australia
with access to Optus' services.

     Under terms of this contract, Digital will be responsible for the
systems integration, management, training, and operation of the entire
information technology needs of Optus, and, in effect, become the
information technology arm of Optus.

Other strategic contractors involved with Digital are:

     *     NorTel Australia Proprietary Limited
         (for the switching equipment)

     *     Fujitsu Australia Limited
         (for the transmission equipment)

     *     Nokia Telecommunications
         (for the digital mobile systems)

     *     Leighton Contractors Proprietary Limited
         (for the building construction)


     Optus Chief Executive Officer, Bob Mansfield, described the
agreement as one of the largest contracts in the world for development
of a fully integrated OSS.

     "This agreement will see the establishment by Digital of a
global OSS Support and Development Center in Australia," Mansfield
said. "Digital will also commit its international marketing
resources to develop an export market for OSS with the potential to
earn up to $1 billion (AUS) for new Australia-developed technology
over the next decade," he added.

     Mansfield also noted that Digital had won its position by
solutions and a business plan which will provide world class service
and long-term export growth for Australia to other carriers and
private network operators.

     Frank Wroe, Digital-Australia Chairman, said that the agreement
with Optus "is a highly significant challenge to Digital. We are
involved with every major telecommunications provider in the world,
but Australia will move quickly to become a leader in fully-
integrated open systems, using fibre technology in end-to-end digital
networking."

     Russ Gullotti, worldwide Vice President of Digital Services,
noted that "this agreement with Optus is the largest single systems
integration and services contract we have signed anywhere in the
world, and we are excited by the challenges and opportunities it will
provide in the global telecommunications arena."


OSS Potential For Export

     OSS will allow Optus to provide superior customer service, and a
software product for export.

     It will also be the first fully integrated OSS. Previous projects
attempted to integrate a mix of mechanical, analog, and digital
technologies that existed in established networks.

     Digital will be the principal marketer of the new systems through
its global operations, and is examining joint venture opportunities
with Optus.

     Digital Equipment Corporation, headquartered in Maynard,
Massachusetts, is the leading worldwide supplier of networked computer
systems, software and services. Digital pioneered and leads the
industry in interactive, distributed and multivendor computing.
Digital and its partners deliver the power to use the best integrated
solutions - from desktop to data center - in open information
environments.

                                ####

DECnews is sent as a courtesy to members of the press.
For subscription information please contact:
  David Price, USS Press Relations, Digital Equipment Corporation
  Voice:603-884-3467   FAX:[phone]   Internet:[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Justin Leavens)
Subject: More on That Pesky Message Center
Date: 11 Jul 1992 15:25:30 -0700
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA


Apparently something happened to the Pacific Bell Message Center again
yesterday. A message today informed users that messages from June 23
to July 8 had been lost, but message receieved between June 28 and
July 8th were being restored "and should begin to be recieved in your
mailbox again soon." Messages receieved between June 23 and June 27th
are apparently gone for good. Callers who reached the Message Center
yesterday during the outage time between 1:15pm and 6:30pm were told
that the Message Center was "experiencing difficulties" and were not
able to leave messages.

All Message Center users, according to the recording, will receive a
credit for a month's free service in an "upcoming" phone bill.

Anyone know the scoop on this outage? Luckily (depending on how you
look at it) I just got my Message Center service and didn't set up my
mailbox until last night, so I didn't lose anything. But this is two
serious outages in one year, this one resulting in the loss of saved
messages. Why does the Message Center seemed to be so plagued with
problems?


Justin Leavens    University of Southern California

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

Date: Fri, 10 Jul 92 8:21:31 CDT
From: Will Martin <[e-mail]>
Subject: AT&T's Left Hand Doesn't Know What its Right Hand is Doing


This appeared on the SWL mailing list; thought you might want to put
it in Telecom, if you didn't already get a copy direct:

 Date:   Thu, 9 Jul 1992 13:08:00 GMT
 Sender: Short Wave Listener's List <[e-mail]>
 From:   Jerry Dallal <[e-mail]>
Subject: So what's a little poor English?


If bad English is a company's worst fault ... I'll take that,
especially if the English is "good enough" to tell you how the product
works.

Consider a blue-chip USA company whose English is usually flawless --
AT&T.  Yesterday, I returned one of their 5405 cordless phones.  (Yes,
there is a broadcasting tie-in, even if not shortwave.)  Why?  Because
their cordless phones are incompatible with THEIR OWN answering
machines.  The 5000 series of phones puts out tones in 80 millisecond
bursts, no matter how long you depress the key.  This is too short to
trigger many of the remote features in their currently-market,
top-of-the-home-use-line 1323 answering machine, as one of AT&Ts
technicians admitted.  (I believe the specs require a 750 millisecond
tone.)

Wait.  It gets better.  The entire 5000 series of phones puts out
burst tones, so AT&T couldn't even specify another one of their models
that IS compatible with their answering machines!

So which is worse, a company whose manuals are written in poor
English, or a company whose telephones and answering machines are
incompatible?

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

From: [e-mail] (Andrew Klossner)
Subject: AT&T Makes Junk Phone Calls
Date: 10 Jul 92 09:14:48 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Tektronix, Wilsonville, Oregon


I send GTE extra money every month to keep my home phone number
unlisted, just so that I can enjoy my dinner without interruptions
from phone solicitors.

Last night such an interruption occurred.  A rep from AT&T, my long
distance carrier, wanted to sell me a package.  Experienced parents
may sympathize with my plight: I had a baby in one hand, a bottle in
the other, and had to break off a hard-to-manage feeding to answer the
damned call.  (I can't ignore the phone; I have a second baby in the
hospital.)

Obviously I can't keep my carrier from knowing my phone number.  What
steps might I take to prevent more such calls?


Andrew Klossner  ([e-mail])

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

From: [e-mail] (Joseph Jesson)
Subject: Clinton pro Internet???
Date: Sun, 12 Jul 92 00:04:56 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)


 From what I have read, Clinton places the improvement of the Internet
(increased bandwidth) VERY high on his list of priorities.  Al Gore,
the father of the NREN bill, also places the "national info highway"
at the top of the list!


joe

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

Date: 12 Jul 92 02:56:58+0200
From: Thomas Diessel <[e-mail]>
Subject: Book on North American Phone System Wanted
Organization: Leibniz-Rechenzentrum, Muenchen (Germany)


Can you recommend an introductory book on the North American ("Bell",
USA/Canada) phone or telecommunication network?



Thomas Diessel
Federal Armed Forces University, Munich  -  Computer Science Department
Werner-Heisenberg-Weg 39  -  W-8014 Neubiberg   Germany

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

Date: 11 Jul 92 21:03:14 EDT
From: Alan Boritz <[e-mail]>
Subject: Buying Up the Whole Exchange (was New 5ESS(tm) Here)


[e-mail] (Dave Levenson) writes:

> 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!

Not only can you get a central office replaced, but you can buy the
whole thing!  My former boss at the City of New York, a former Bell
Labs scientist, explained a while back how Bell had found such a
bargain in the land now occupied by AT&T that the real estate people
had not realized that it was in the area covered by the independent
telco (now known as United Telephone) in northern New Jersey, NOT by
New Jersey Bell.  It cost a bundle to negotiate the territory from the
independent -- and an unlucky Bell employee's job.


Alan Boritz    [e-mail]

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

Date: 11 Jul 92 21:02:59 EDT
From: Alan Boritz <[e-mail]>
Subject: Telephone Vanity Plates?


Did you know that the State of New Jersey issues special vanity
license plates for "Telephone Pioneers?"  Am I the only one that
didn't?  I spotted one on a car in a Mahwah, New Jersey, parking lot
today.  The plates have a "PA" prefix and sport a Telephone Pioneers
of America logo with the familiar bell in the middle.

What'll they think of next?  First Bell-Shaped-Heads, now Bell-Shaped
license plates. ;)


Alan Boritz     [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Justin Leavens)
Subject: Lower Phone Bills (was:Re: Per-Call Charge on Caller-ID Dropped in MI)
Date: 11 Jul 1992 14:30:52 -0700
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA


> [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]

> From my new GTE-CA bill this month:

Where the bill usually reads:

TEMPORARY SURCHARGE AS MANDATED BY FCC     $1.50

was replaced this month with:

TEMPORARY SURCREDIT AS MANDATED BY FCC   - $1.50

This was the result of our legal system in action, wasn't it? Gotta
love it ...


Justin Leavens              University of Southern California
Microcomputer Specialist    [e-mail]

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

Date: Tue, 7 Jul 92 22:37:32 KDT
From: [e-mail] (Chang Hyeoungkyu)
Subject: E-Mail Address of FERMA


Dear netters,

Does anybody know the e-mail address of FERMA?  I'm interested in
DIVAPHONE which is developed by FERMA.  A short description of it can
be found in the 2nd International Conference on Intelligence in
Networks, page 70.

Any help will be very much appreciated!


Best regards,

Chang Hyeoungkyu

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

Date: 12 Jul 1992 07:03:43 GMT
From: John Carr <[e-mail]>
Subject: 800 vs. Calling Cards


Some of our travellers and remote personnel have requested 800 dial-in
access to our network.  They current call in using AT&T Calling Cards.
Should I expect to save money by offering 800 service over their using
CCs or are CCs generaly less expensive (if somewhat less convenient).

An added factor is that many of these calls will originate in hotels
using ripoff AOSs and not all our travellers have grasped the concept
of 10288 completely (though we are trying to re-educate them :-)

The volume would probably be less than 100 call-hours/month.

So, the question is, which is cheaper: 800, AT&T CC direct dialed thru
AT&T, AT&T CC direct dialed thru Big Bob's LD & Fish Emporium.


Thanks,

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Broadcasting Newsgroup Expands Digest Distribution
Date: Sat, 11 Jul 92 19:02:24 CDT


Dear Telecom readers:


Anyone interested in receiving the Usenet newsgroup/mailinglist
rec.radio.broadcasting is encouraged to let us know.  In the past, we
have been reluctant to expand the mailing database due to system
restrictions, but that has been remedied now and we are capable of
adding subscribers.

Rec.radio.broadcasting covers any and all phases of 'domestic' radio
broadcasting and related fields such as engineering, recording,
formats, news and views, radio history, radio news and political
coverage, legal ,matters, new technologies, AM/FM and even some
Television DXing, pirate broadcasting, marketing, network radio and
employment. Virtually any subject pertaining to the arena of domestic
radio broadcasting or matters which are likely to be of interest to
the broadcast community (including listeners) is acceptable for
inclusion.

By 'domestic' we refer to radio which is intended for reception in the
country in which it is broadcast.  While this is not a 'hard-fast'
rule, it is a guideline by which we operate.  International
participation is welcomed.  We do not limit discussion to USA or North
Americam radio.

To subscribe, send e-mail to [e-mail] and let me know.
To submit articles, send to [e-mail]


Thank you.

William Pfeiffer       Moderator - rec.radio.broadcasting

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

Date: Sun, 12 Jul 92 0:40:15 EDT
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject: "Two Nine(s)"


Back in 1975 on a college campus, I heard that a phone in an office
was ABC-2909 (ABC being used, in this message, for the prefix) and was
billed for some calls which the people in that office were sure they
did not make.  It turns out those calls should have been billed to
ABC-9909, which was off-campus.  For all I know, this could have been
before stricter rules were put in for third-party billing.  Anyway, I
heard what had caused the confusion: People commonly said "...two
nines oh nine" when referring to ABC-9909, and ABC-2909 was of course
referred to as "two nine oh nine".

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #555
******************************
^A^A^A^A
^A^A^A^A
Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa09319;
          13 Jul 92 0:18 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA08592
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 12 Jul 1992 22:22:27 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA07106
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 12 Jul 1992 22:06:26 -0500
Date: Sun, 12 Jul 1992 22:06:26 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #556


TELECOM Digest     Sun, 12 Jul 92 21:29:56 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 556

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: The Depths of Sliminess (Bill Mayhew)
    Re: The Depths of Sliminess (Roy Smith)
    Re: The Depths of Sliminess (Joseph Citro)
    Re: The Depths of Sliminess (Michael P. Deignan)
    Re: The Depths of Sliminess (John Higdon)
    Re: Suit Alleges Cellular Caused Brain Tumor (John Higdon)
    Re: Suit Alleges Cellular Caused Brain Tumor (Robert J. Woodhead)
    Re: Payphones With Bogus DTMF Tones? (Alan Boritz)
    Re: Alarm Bells (Alan Boritz)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Bill Mayhew)
Subject: Re: The Depths of Sliminess
Organization: Northeastern Ohio Universities College of Medicine
Date: Sun, 12 Jul 1992 17:10:08 GMT


I try to deal with telemarketers with a respecetful, "No thanks,"
because I know that they are people who are just trying to do a job
the same as anyone else.  I really get mad, however, when the person
on the other end won't termiate the call -- then all bets are off and
I show no mercy.

Phone telemarketers are not the functional equivalent of people who
leave advertising slips in my door.  The latter do little to impair
the intended function of my door for me to enter and exit, and to
admit my intended guests.  Telemarketing prevents me from using my
phone completely during the call.  Telemarketers are more like fuller
brush sales people that tie up my door.  Like the former, like the
latter always see to come calling when I'm the shower! :-)

One thing that disturbs me greatly is receiving unsolicited fax calls
on my home phone.  These universally occur between 11:30 PM and 5:30
AM ET.  I am obliged to get out of bed and answer the phone because I
am on call for systems support at work.  I have no practical means of
fighting back to this particularly pathological form of telemarketing.
I have a suspicion that I receive the fax calls because I meet a
demographic model for a person who is likely to have a fax machine,
but apparently the model is not smart enough to differentiate between
a home and office telephone.

I've been surprised that I've never received any sort of telemarketing
attempts on my cellular telephone.  It would seem that cellular users
would be a juicy techie market and cellular exchange prefixes aren't
terribly secret.  It must be that success rate for telemarketers isn't
very high when potential customers have to pay 40 cents per minute to
listen to advertising.

What would be nice to implement for caller ID is the ability to have
the telco screen incoming from "unknown" numbers.  Any friend or
repair person would unlikely be calling from a station with unknown
number enabled.

I'd love sales droids to get a telco intercept recording informing
them that, "your party does not accept calls from unknown numbers;
this is a recording 2-1-6-1-7."

This would speed up life for both the telemarket employee and myself.
We'd both benefit.  The employee would not have to listen to me being
annoyed at her/his untimely interruption (good for the psyche) and I
would have have to be interrupted.

I disagree with Pat re: caller ID.  Yep, I'd love to have it.  Of
course, I've called the local BOC to plead to have caller ID.  The
hard truth is that I still don't have Caller ID.  There isn't any
prohibition on telelmarketing companies from pestering me until such
time as I may have Caller ID.


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

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

Date: Sun, 12 Jul 92 10:02:28 EDT
From: Roy Smith <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: The Depths of Sliminess
Organization: Public Health Research Institute (New York)


> I use a Caller-ID product that [...] permits me to automatically
> terminate the calls I preselect as telemarketers or whoever I don't wish
> to communicate [...]  It is a DOS machine board that takes up one slot
> and can be run as a TSR or as a dedicated machine.

    Reality check time.  Are you seriously suggesting that people
should go out and buy PC's which they should then dedicate to the task
of screening phone calls?  Sure, maybe it's a fun project for a
technogeek with lots of spare time and money, but we're talking about
plain folks who just don't want to be disturbed by annoying people
selling newspaper subscriptions or replacement windows while they're
eating dinner.

    And explain to me how I'm supposed to "preselect" telemarketers?


[e-mail] (Roy Smith)
Public Health Research Institute
455 First Avenue, New York, NY 10016, USA

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

Date: Sat, 11 Jul 92 19:40:44 CST
From: [e-mail] (Joseph Citro)
Subject: Re: The Depths of Sliminess
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: DRBBS Technical BBS, Omaha


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.

I really hate to be interupted by those nuisance calls. I never buy
anything from unsolicited phone calls.  When I do receive them, rather
than be nasty to them or even wait until they start their spiel, I ask
them to "Hold on for just a minute" then I go continue what I was
doing before, leaving them on the line.  After five or so minutes, I
go back and say "Oh are you still on the line?"  Most times they are
not.  If they do happen to hold on, I hang up on them.  And yes I have
caller ID so if I get any harrassing phone calls, I can return the
favors.


Ybbat (DRBBS) 8.9 v. 3.14 r.1      DRBBS  (1:285/666.0)

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

From: [e-mail] (Michael P. Deignan (KD1HZ))
Subject: Re: The Depths of Sliminess
Organization: The Rhode Island Internet Systems Cooperative Network
Date: Sun, 12 Jul 1992 06:43:58 GMT


[e-mail] (John De Armond) writes:

> Ok Pat, tell us how to do that.... 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?

The first thing I would do is integrate Caller ID into my computer
system, and have the system interpret the phone number against a
database, and announce via its voice subsystem who is calling over my
residential PA system.

In our area, businesses and residential lines have different prefixes
So, I can tell by the prefix whether I am receiving a call from a
business line or another residential line.

If my system doesn't recognize the phone number from its database, it
can simply announce "incoming call from business exchange xxx-xxxx". I
would be less likely to get up and answer the phone, only to have AT&T
on the other end attempting to convince me to "switch back"...


Dr. Michael P. Deignan (deg.pend.)
Domain: [e-mail]
UUCP: ..!uunet!anomaly!kd1hz

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

Date: Sun, 12 Jul 92 00:17 PDT
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: The Depths of Sliminess


[e-mail] (Phil Howard) writes:

> 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).

Since as a Californian, I am not permitted Caller ID ...

Mine works this way. My machine answers the phone with a menu offering
three choices: leave a message, talk to me direct, and page me. If I'm
in bed, very busy, or just grumpy, I remove the 'talk direct' option.
But even when active, it blocks many telemarketing calls, particularly
those from calling machines since most of them cannot deal with an
answering menu of options. In the five years I have used this system,
the number of junk pages received has been minimal.

> 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.

I do not need to make such a request. If you call and do not make a
selection, the machine simply unceremoniously hangs up on you and I
would never know you were there. I figure that anyone calling me
without a touch-tone phone is not worth talking to anyway. In five
years I have yet to see a fallacy with this assumption. Knock yourself
out.

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

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

Date: Sun, 12 Jul 92 08:14 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] (Michael Masterson) writes:

> Well, it's about 100 times the power levels of a laser that says
> "AVOID EXPOSURE TO BEAM" on the warning label, and that's just talking
> about dead surface skin cells ...  heck, .5 watts is about what the
> cutting lasers run that are used to cut master disks for CDs.

This is a perfect example of the "science" used by the product scare
crowd. As anyone with the most rudimentary knowledge of modern
technology knows, the point of a laser is to concentrate a highly
coherent beam of light energy at a target. The "footprint" of a laser
beam is literally millions of times smaller than that which results
from 800 MHz RF originating from a handheld antenna.

The name of the game is "w/cm^2". In the case of the .5 watt laser, we
could be talking about thousands of watts per square centimeter. If we
take that same .5 watt and apply it to an area of about 100
centimeters (conservatively the area covered on the body by cellular
RF), then we are talking about 1/200 watt per square centimeter. Mr.
Masterson's example is several orders of magnitude off from the
discussion and not relavent in any way to the topic.

Again, we are plagued by the "new voodoo": scare mongers who attempt
to frighten the ignorant masses bringing up every conceivable
psuedo-scientific ill that modern inventions supposedly cause. Most of
the scare disolves away with even the slightest investigation and
reality check. The real harm here is that all the "wolf crying" numbs
many, including myself, to those few possibly real dangers.
Unfortunately, our law and rule makers rarely aquaint themselves with
the facts, so we get some very silly restrictions.

Even the people of California enacted Proposition 65, which requires
warning signs and labels on just about everything. It set up a whole
governmental department (pretty lavish in a state that is currently
without a budget!) that does nothing but enforce the placement of
these silly signs. Has our quality of life improved from this law? Get
real!  What it has done is cause many such as myself to now virtually
ignore all warning labels and signs. This is not good.

A good rule of thumb is: check everything out from using established,
recognized sources. And avoid organizations that have names in the
format of "_________ For a Responsible _________" (e. g. "Union of
Concerned Scientests", etc.). These are political action organizations
who "use" science any way they see fit to achieve certain POLITICAL
ends. Let us keep science and politics separate.

On Jul 12 at 14:55, Michael Masterson writes:

> The best lasers listed in the 1992 Uniphase catalog have a beam
> diameter of .5mm, so even if you took enough of them to make up a
> square centimeter, you'd only have about 250 watts, not "thousands" as
> you imply ... try the math yourself.  I've got the warning label from a
> 8 milliwat laser in my hand, it states "avoid exposure to beam",
> that's 8/1000ths of a watt, what, oh, 1/125th of a watt?

Ok here's the math: .5mm = .0025 cm^2. That is one four-hundredth of a
centimeter times .008 or 3.2 watts per centimeter^2 or about 640 times
the amount of RF concentration caused by a cellular phone. But you
changed laser powers on me. I was using a .5 watt laser for my
original figures and you substituted a much less powerful unit in your
rebuttal.  In any even, it still comes out to a comfortable order of
magnitude difference. And just what does the warning label prove? That
some yahoos in the EPA are covering their collective asses.

> not too far off from your 1/200th of a watt, obviously not "several
> orderes of magnitude ... and not relevent in any way to the topic".

If you yourself had finished the math, you would have come up with
more than one order of magnitude. Again, typical of the scare
fanatics.

> flame the right person next time.

I think I hit the mark this time.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Robert J Woodhead)
Subject: Re: Suit Alleges Cellular Caused Brain Tumor
Organization: Foretune Co., Ltd.
Date: Mon, 13 Jul 1992 00:45:41 GMT

[e-mail] (Tony Kennedy) writes:

> BTW, do you realize that eating butter reduces your chances of dying
> of cancer?

Probably by increasing the chances of croaking via heart disease first!


Robert J. Woodhead, Biar Games / AnimEigo, Incs.    [e-mail]

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

Date: 13 Jul 92 14:47:44 EDT
From: Alan Boritz <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Payphones With Bogus DTMF Tones?


[e-mail] (David Sternlight) 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.

Don't bet on it.  I couldn't complete an AT&T calling card call to a
number in Missouri from a LEC's pay phone at a service plaza on I-80
in Indiana (ITC was grabbing the 0+ and 1+ calls).  After a few
unsuccessful tries with "102880 ...," I called the AT&T operator and
asked for assistance.  When SHE couldn't get through she called what
sounded like a marketing person, who explained that I could not place
a 0+ call to that area code because the LEC had not made arrangements
for handling calls to that area and that there was nothing they could
do.  I guess some parts of the country are not as important as others,
as far as AT&T's potential calling card business is concerned. (I
finally completed the call using MCI with MCI's ENFIA access.)


Alan Boritz     [e-mail]


[Moderator Banging Head Against the Wall: Now I have heard everything!
Did you get the name or title of this so-called 'marketing person'? I
would have immediatly tried to reach the office manager wherever she
was located and urge that she be pulled off the phones until she had
been through some sort of training class. What she said was absolutely
preposterous ... the system does not work that way. Just as you
completed the call using MCI/ENFIA, you could have also completed the
call using 1-800-CALL-ATT to route your way around the LEC. No doubt
the LEC was screwed up somehow, but it had *nothing* to do with
'making arrangements to handle 0+ calls to that area'.  Let me ask, do
any of the AT&T readers here become embarrassed by some of the stupid
things their co-workers say to or pass off on the public?   PAT]

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

Date: 12 Jul 92 14:47:04 EDT
From: Alan Boritz <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Alarm Bells


[e-mail] (David Lesher) writes:

> 3) Past history shows how the Bells' "arms-length" unregulated
> subsidiaries are really mostly close-dancing, if not sleeping with,
> the regulated LEC's.

That's always been the case with New York Telephone.  For example,
NYNEX's unregulated subsidiary NYNEX Business Information Systems has
always made a hefty profit on no-bid commissions for City of New York
adds, moves, and changes (the City bid long distance, but never LEC
agency contracts).  They also didn't bifurcate their mobile telephone
operation when they were supposed to.  NYNEX Mobile picked up the MTS,
IMTS, and paging operation, but NY Tel continued to pick up the tab
for the transmitter site until last year.


Alan Boritz     [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #556
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa09128;
          14 Jul 92 2:58 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA27026
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 14 Jul 1992 01:07:22 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA13764
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 14 Jul 1992 01:07:13 -0500
Date: Tue, 14 Jul 1992 01:07:13 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #557

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 14 Jul 92 01:07:10 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 557

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Perot Compuserve Account (Mike Seebeck)
    Re: Perot Compuserve Account ([e-mail])
    Re: Perot Compuserve Account (Matt McConnell)
    Re: Residential ISDN (Robert L. McMillin)
    Re: Residential ISDN (John Higdon)
    Re: Do ESS Systems Keep Detailed Call Records? (Dave Niebuhr)
    Re: Do ESS Systems Keep Detailed Call Records? (John Higdon)
    Re: Do ESS Systems Keep Detailed Call Records? (Phillip J. Birmingham)
    Re: 911 Circuitry Can Detect 91 (Tim Smith)
    Re: 911 Circuitry Can Detect 91 (Steve Forrette)
    Re: Fixed Call Forwarding (Francois Truchon)
    Re: Fixed Call Forwarding (Dane Jasper)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Mike Seebeck)
Subject: Re: Perot Compuserve Account
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Date: Sun, 12 Jul 1992 20:16:51 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Robert Virzi) writes:

> 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

I am not much interested in sending e-mail to Perot or any other
candidate.  I hardly believe that any candidate would read the huge
number of messages we would generate.  I feel sorry for David Bush
suffering the results of netters believing this could be real.

Now, if you had an e-mail address for Neil Bush I have a few flames I
would like love to send his way.


Michael Seebeck   RMH Group, Telecomm Dept.    [phone]
*DISCLAIMER: Its mine, all mine (D.Duck?)


[Moderator's Note: I don't feel sorry for any candidate who receives a
large volume of mail, paper or electronic style. What does he think
people are going to do, remain silent and not express their opinions?
And the idea that electronic mail is somehow a step-child in the way
we communicate -- that paper mail is legitimate (who has yet to
express sympathy for the volume of paper mail David Bush must receive
for Perot each day?) but electronic mail must be restricted somehow
lest it cause too much aggravation for the recipient is very silly.
Electronic mail is where things are at these days. Certainly, let's
get the addresses correct, but most emphatically, keep writing!   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Jon W.)
Subject: Re: Perot Compuserve Account
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Sun, 12 Jul 1992 19:00:37 GMT


     ---- forwarded posting follows ---

  From: [e-mail] (Steve Davis)
 Date: 9 Jul 1992 07:49:16 -0500
 Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections,talk.politics.misc
 Subject: Re: Perot's E-Mail address is...


You can try IN%"[e-mail]", or you can email one of the many
Perot volunteers that have email addresses.  The electronic
representative on my campus is [e-mail].


Stratocaster

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

From: Matt McConnell <[e-mail]>
Date: 12 Jul 92 15:30:37 MDT
Subject: Re: Perot Compuserve Account


I sent this to the gentleman who posted the Perot address and
thought you might want to include it in the Digest.

      ------- Forwarded Message Follows -------

  From:    Self <BA2/MCCOMATT>
  To:      [e-mail]
  Subject: email for pres canidates
  Date: 9 Jul 92 15:23:39

Hi,

Please do NOT post the Ross Perot address AGAIN.  This account is
owned by a young man who did work for the Perot campaign at one time.
He is now being FLOODED with mail!  Also, on CompuServe messages from
the Internet cost the subscriber if he reads the message.  He refused,
deleted, your message without reading it thus the error message.


Matt McConnell  [e-mail]


[Moderotor's Note: This brings up the original question: Does Perot
have an email address for the proposed electronic forum for the
candidates? Should we use '[e-mail]' instead?  PAT]

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

Date: Sun, 12 Jul 92 08:21:15 -0700
From: rlm@ms_aspen.hac.com (Robert L. McMillin)
Subject: Re: Residential ISDN


John Higdon writes:

> I have been having serious conversations with a Pac*Bell rep
> concerning the installation of ISDN at my residence. After getting all
> of the prices, I was admonished to wait just a bit to see what happens
> with Pac*Bell's current RESIDENTIAL ISDN proposal before the PUC. Yes,
> you read that right. Pac*Bell may soon be offering ISDN to the common
> man.

And the operative word is 'may'.  John, when you say you have been
having "serious conversations" with Pac*Bell, just how serious?
Wasn't there some noise recently in the Digest concerning Pac*Bell's
floating a residential ISDN trial balloon as a way of relieving
political pressure?


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

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

Date: Sun, 12 Jul 92 08:47 PDT
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: Residential ISDN


On Jul 12 at  8:21, Robert L. McMillin writes:

> And the operative word is 'may'.  John, when you say you have been
> having "serious conversations" with Pac*Bell, just how serious?  Wasn't
> there some noise recently in the Digest concerning Pac*Bell's floating
> a Residential ISDN trial balloon as a way of relieving political
> pressure?

No, this is real. Unfortunately, there is a good reason for this
proposed offering: information services. In order to deliver some of
the things Pac*Bell has in store, ISDN will of necessity be installed
at subscriber locations (including residences). To keep up the sham of
"competition", Pac*Bell cannot arbitrarily install ISDN for itself and
its products; it must do so under a definitive tariff.

This is the very thing that Mitch Kapor and I have had e-mail
disagreements about. His view (as I have come to understand it) is
that information services from the RBOCs are a Good Thing because they
will hasten the availability of ISDN for the common man. As far as
that goes, he is right on. My concern has always been that the tricky
telcos will tariff the ISDN in such a way as to make it virtually
useless for any purpose other than the delivery of telco-provided
services.

In the case of Pacific Bell, this remains to be seen (but I could give
you a prediction :-)


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

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

Date: Sun, 12 Jul 92 07:10:02 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Dave Niebuhr)
Subject: Re: Do ESS Systems Keep Detailed Call Records


Matt Simpson <[e-mail]> writes:

> Does anyone out there know if local exchanges keep any kind of call
> detail records? Specifically, I'm interested to know if a
> law-enforcement agency would be able to obtain a record of all local
> calls made to a specific number for some period in the past, without
> having requested a trace in advance.

[ ... text deleted about breakins ... ]

> exactly what kind of switch I'm on. It's fairly new, was installed
> about 18 months ago, with much hype about how great it would be. The
> Anyway, I thought if anybody out there could tell me if this is
> possible, I could be a little more insistent about it.  I don't know
> company is South Central Bell, and the exchange is 606-987, if that
> helps any.

> [Moderator's Note: Yes, the new switches do keep very detailed calling
> records. Getting them examined may be a hassle, but they do exist. Now
> of course if you had that nasty old Caller-ID, or even 'return last
> call', you could invade the caller's privacy by noting the calling
> number and act on it from that direction. Not only do hackerphreaks
> not care for Caller-ID, I suppose most burglars who call ahead to
> scope things out don't like it very well either.  PAT]

At PAT's suggestion a few months ago, I found that my 5ESS switch had
"call return" and I've used it with great success in telling a little
twerp off when she called at 3 AM one day.

This incident occurred about two months prior to NYTel made their
public announcement about this feature and "repeat dialing".  Trap and
trace are available but not announced as yet.

I'm now waiting for NYTel to announce Caller-ID which is supposed to
be available in August.

Try *66 for repeat dial; *69 for call return; and *57 for trap and
trace (there will be a charge for this and won't show you the calling
number.  Yours will probably appear though.


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

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

Date: Sun, 12 Jul 92 08:37 PDT
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: Do ESS Systems Keep Detailed Call Records?


Matt Simpson <[e-mail]> writes:

> Does anyone out there know if local exchanges keep any kind of call
> detail records? Specifically, I'm interested to know if a
> law-enforcement agency would be able to obtain a record of all local
> calls made to a specific number for some period in the past, without
> having requested a trace in advance.

You are probably out of luck for several reasons. The level of detail
on calls is "settable" by the telco. If the purpose is to bill count
and duration of local calls FROM a telephone (telcos do not keep any
kind of records concerning calls TO a telephone), then a "peg count"
is used and carries little detail. In the case of unmeasured service,
the telco typically keeps no local records at all. I know Pac*Bell
does not (although some telcos evidently do when they go after the
customer for "excessive" use).

For local calls, unless you have "Call Trace" in your area, prior
arrangements must be made to trap a calling number to your phone. And
remember, even if such detailed records were kept, those records are
designed for billing purposes and show calls made FROM a telephone.
Every telephone subscriber's records would have to be scanned for YOUR
number's appearance. The last time we heard about this was the famous
Cincinati Bell case.

> Anyway, I thought if anybody out there could tell me if this is
> possible, I could be a little more insistent about it.  I don't know
> exactly what kind of switch I'm on.

It doesn't matter what switch you are on. I can guarantee you that no
records are kept of calling numbers to your telephone. I would not
bother to push the issue.

> [Moderator's Note: Yes, the new switches do keep very detailed calling
> records. Getting them examined may be a hassle, but they do exist.

In his case, no they don't. It would be grand and glorious to believe
that telco keeps indefinitely all records of every single connection
transaction that goes on in every switch (including CALLING numbers),
but such is fantasy. Telcos record those transactions necessary to
bill customers and gauge traffic flow and nothing more.

> Now of course if you had that nasty old Caller-ID, or even 'return
> last call', you could invade the caller's privacy by noting the
> calling number and act on it from that direction.

As a proponent of Caller ID, you weaken your case by suggesting that
all the records necessary to solve any harassment or criminal matter
already exist within the phone company. The fact is, they do not.
Hence, your suggestion for Caller ID, etc., is valid. In this case,
however, the service "Call Trace" would be most desirable since we are
looking for evidence in a serious criminal matter. Call Trace data
would be far superior to the hearsay reporting of a number on a CNID
display.


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


Moderator's Note: If you want to bother taking them to court you
would be correct.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Do ESS Systems Keep Detailed Call Records?
Date: 12 Jul 92 21:51:34 GMT
Organization: Fermi National Accelerator Lab


> [Moderator's Note: Of course if you had that nasty old Caller-ID, or
> even 'return last call', you could invade the caller's privacy by
> noting the calling number and act on it from that direction.

         Unless, of course, the crooks stole your CNID box...


Phillip J. Birmingham   [e-mail]
I don't speak for Fermilab, although my mouth is probably big enough...


[Moderator's Note: Then you would have a problem!  :)   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: 911 Circuitry Can Detect 91
Date: Sun, 12 Jul 92 02:08:25 PDT


> Speaking of 911 stories, this happened a couple of years ago:

Well, speaking of 911, there was an article in the paper a while back
about there being too many non-emergency calls to 911 in the San Jose
area.

I think I know one of the reasons.  Have you ever tried to call the
police without using 911?  I wanted to call them to report a road
hazard (someone had been placing shopping carts in the street at
night).

I looked in the phonebook and got the number.  I called it, and there
was an answering machine.  The message on the answering machine
described various departments, and gave their numbers.  You have to
determine which you want, hang up, and then call that department.

Of course, I didn't have a pen and paper handy, and from the message
it was not clear which number I needed to call.

Next time, I'm going to use 911, emergency or not.  It wouldn't
surprise me if many of the 911 non-emergency calls are from people who
couldn't figure out what other number to call.


Tim Smith


[Moderator's Note: In the case of the Chicago Police, despite the fact
that the Emergency Communications Center, the CPD Public Relations
Department, the telco and others say that 911 should *only* be used
in the event of a dire emergency requiring immediate police
intervention (a stolen car is not an emergency; it already happened),
when you call the district stations they tell you to call 911.  :(  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: 911 Circuitry Can Detect 91
Date: 12 Jul 92 02:26:32 GMT
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA


X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 538, Message 3 of 10:

> [Moderator's Note: My experience here has been that with either
> *67, *70, *71, *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, 12 Jul 92 14:48:43 EDT
From: [e-mail] (F Truchon)
Subject: Re: Fixed Call Forwarding


[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).
> (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).

The name I've heard for the call forwarding feature used for voice
mail services is "Call Forward No Answer" (different telcos, different
names ... what a drag!)

The situation with Call Forward No Answer with Bell Canada (in Quebec
and Ontario) is that it's not offered to residential customers.  I
don't know whether it's offer to business customers though. The Call
Forwarding No Answer feature is used by Bell for their own voice mail
service (TeleReponse, in French) so they may very well be reluctant to
offer it for the reasons you mention.

The situation in British Columbia is different. BC Tel offers three
species of call forwarding to its residential subscribers:

(1) Call Forward No Answer. Forwards to a telco programmed number
    after a number of rings or when busy.
(2) Call Forward Variable. This is the normal user programmable call
    forwarding. Bell Canada only offers this one.
(3) Call Forward Fixed. Once activated, calls are automatically
    forwarded to a telco programmed number. (Not very useful it seems)

Concerning telco voice mail:

The one advantage that I get from subscribing to my telco's voice mail
service rather then forwarding to my voice mail at work (if I could)
is that the dial tone changes on my phone when I have messages. This
is like the flashing LED on answering machines. You can quickly check
if you have messages by listening to the dial tone rather than having
to dial the voice mail number and to log in.


Regards,


Francois Truchon
Bell-Northern Research, Montreal, Canada
uucp: bnrmtl![e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: Ours is called 'Busy/No Answer Transfer'. In our
land line service, this has to be permanently programmed in the CO and
can only go to voicemail or another phone in the same CO. It cannot be
turned on or off. But with our Ameritech cellular service, we can use
*71 to turn it on and off at will, and send the forwarding wherever we
please.  IBT is part of Ameritech, so I wonder why the discrepancy?   PAT]

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

From: Dane Jasper <[e-mail]>
Date: 12 Jul 92 09:04:14 PST
Subject: Re: Fixed Call Forwarding


> 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).

Here in California, there seem to be two types of forwarding - on/off
forwarding, and call forwarding on busy.  The call forward on busy
would take care of turning it on and off when you want to make a call,
etc, and you can forward it anywhere you want, but that's not all you
need.  Those two seem to be the only things offered by Pacific Bell.


Dane Jasper     Business Computing Labs   Santa Rosa Junior College

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #557
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa11617;
          14 Jul 92 4:13 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA15885
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 14 Jul 1992 02:08:18 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA20441
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 14 Jul 1992 02:08:06 -0500
Date: Tue, 14 Jul 1992 02:08:06 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #558

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 14 Jul 92 02:08:05 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 558

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    CCITT FTP Archives (Joshua Hosseinoff)
    Cellular Phone Hacking ([e-mail])
    Caller-ID, Telephone Marketing Request (Tom Streeter)
    European Phone in Canada? (Christian Doucet)
    INMARSAT Call Are Expensive (Monty Solomon)
    Recommendations on Waterproof/Resistant Cordless Phones (Justin Leavens)
    More Than I Wanted to Know About INTELPOST (John R. Levine)
    New files for the Archives (David Leibold)
    House Voice/Data Wiring Question (Mark Blumhardt)
    EPA at Bay City (Thomas K. Hinders)
    Democratic Convention (Including Telecom) (Dave Niebuhr)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 14 Jul 1992 00:35:26 -0400 (EDT)
From: JOSHUA HOSSEINOFF <[e-mail]>
Subject: CCITT FTP Archives


Here are some ftp'able archive sites that have CCITT documents.

prog ccitt
# matches / % database searched:   15 /100%

Host toklab.ics.osaka-u.ac.jp   (133.1.12.30)
Last updated 05:08 11 Jul 1992

    Location: /doc
      DIRECTORY rwxr-xr-x       512  Jun 26 21:59   ccitt

Host src.doc.ic.ac.uk   (146.169.2.1)
Last updated 06:01  9 Jul 1992

    Location: /doc/ccitt-standards
      DIRECTORY rwxr-xr-x       512  Dec 25  1991   ccitt

Host sh.wide.ad.jp   (133.4.11.11)
Last updated 05:27  8 Jul 1992

    Location: /WIDE
      DIRECTORY rwxr-x---      1024  Oct 10  1991   ccitt

Host nz20.rz.uni-karlsruhe.de   (129.13.96.2)
Last updated 05:02  5 Jul 1992

    Location: /pub/doc
      DIRECTORY rwx------      1024  Feb  3 16:51   ccitt

Host isfs.kuis.kyoto-u.ac.jp   (130.54.20.1)
Last updated 05:37 30 Jun 1992

    Location: /ftpmail/ftp.ricoh.co.jp/pub/doc
      DIRECTORY rwxr-xr-x       512  Jun 13 19:13   ccitt

Host iraun1.ira.uka.de   (129.13.10.90)
Last updated 05:08 30 Jun 1992

    Location: /network/standards
      DIRECTORY rwxr-xr-x       512  Nov 28  1991   ccitt

Host ftp.uu.net   (137.39.1.9)
Last updated 15:00 29 Jun 1992

    Location: /doc/standards
      DIRECTORY rwxr-xr-x       512  Mar 24 02:28   ccitt

Host gumby.dsd.trw.com   (129.193.72.50)
Last updated 05:40 28 Jun 1992

    Location: /pub/standards
      DIRECTORY rwxr-xr-x       512  Oct 22  1991   ccitt

Host goya.dit.upm.es   (138.4.2.2)
Last updated 05:38 28 Jun 1992

    Location: /info/doc
      DIRECTORY rwxrwxr-x       512  Jan 30 16:02   ccitt

Host gatekeeper.dec.com   (16.1.0.2)
Last updated 05:07 28 Jun 1992

    Location: /.3/bruno.cs.colorado.edu/pub/standards
      DIRECTORY r-xr-xr-x       512  Feb  8 15:39   ccitt

Host swdsrv.edvz.univie.ac.at   (131.130.1.4)
Last updated 05:49 27 Jun 1992

    Location: /doc
      DIRECTORY rwxr-xr-x       512  Jun 15 17:49   ccitt

Host relay.iunet.it   (130.251.1.17)
Last updated 05:16 27 Jun 1992

    Location: /disk0/documents
      DIRECTORY rwxrwxr-x       512  Oct 20  1991   ccitt

Host corton.inria.fr   (192.93.2.5)
Last updated 06:45 23 Jun 1992

    Location: /ITU
      DIRECTORY rwxr-x---       512  Dec 14  1991   ccitt

Host coombs.anu.edu.au   (150.203.76.2)
Last updated 06:44 23 Jun 1992

    Location: /pub/iserv
      DIRECTORY rwxr-xr-x      2048  Jun 16 10:37   ccitt

Host ariadne.csi.forth.gr   (139.91.1.1)
Last updated 05:08 20 Jun 1992

    Location: /doc/standards
      DIRECTORY rwxr-xr-x       512  Apr  5 23:29   ccitt


Joshua Hosseinoff
[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Cellular Phone Hacking
Date: 14 Jul 92 14:36:10 +1000
Organization: University of New South Wales


  I have seen several books for sale on the topic of cellular phone
modification.  The idea seems to be to change the ESN so that free
phone calls can be made on someone else's line.

  Anyone have any knowledge of potential problems etc?  Does it work?

If possible please E-mail.


Best Wishes,

Henry     University of NSW,  Sydney Australia.


[Moderator's Note: What you suggest is highly illegal in the USA and
probably everywhere else in the world except possibly the Netherlands
where it seems that everything is okay where defrauding the telco is
concerned. Another problem is that in most modern cellular phones, the
chip containing the ESN is difficult to get into, let alone modify.
They tend to be buried under wax, thoroughly soldered in place and
with few or no markings on them. A third problem is that if you could
easily change them (let's say you swap it out entirely for a bunch of
little dip switches or pin wheels you set by hand), is that the place
you call is recorded by the cellular company and if you intend to call
anything other than hotel/radio station switchboards/contest lines,
etc then eventually any regular calling pattern will be investigated.
Wouldn't you love to have your mother get a call from a security
representative for Telecom, asking who she spoke with and how to
reach you?  Would your friends cover for you?  For how long?   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Tom Streeter)
Subject: Caller-ID, Telephone Marketing Request
Organization: University of North Carolina at Asheville
Date: Mon, 13 Jul 1992 22:05:52 GMT


I'm pulling together some material for a class I'm teaching in the
fall, and I've been struck by the continuing discussion of telephone
marketing, privacy, and Caller ID.  It's interesting to read these
comments in light of early attitudes about the impact of the telephone
on home life -- well-documented in Carolyn Marvin's book "When Old
Technologies Were New: Thinking about Electric Communication in the
late Nineteenth Century" (Oxford University Press, ISBN:0-19-506341-4).

The book, especially the second section, makes it fairly clear that
there has historically been a variety of opinions about what social
rights exist when a telephone is present in a household.  The issue
has never been resolved -- and probably never will be -- but many of
the old issues are making a new appearance.  There have been, of
course, a number of changes in the expectations people have about the
"public good" (for lack of a better phrase) new telephone technologies
will play in society, and these are also reflected in many of the
posts dealing with telemarketing as well.

I'd like my students to see comments from participants in this forum
about the issue of personal privacy as it relates to telemarketing and
Caller ID.  I'm going to go back through the archives to pull postings
that pertain to this and collect them into a packet to give to my
students.  I wouldn't feel comfortable about doing this without the
permission of the original poster, so I may be contacting you over the
next few weeks to get your permission to use something you wrote.

I'd also like to include the comments of people who may not have been
moved to submit something to the Digest on this topic.  If you feel so
moved, please answer the following questions and mail the response to
me ([e-mail]). Answer as many or few of the questions as
you want (any and all help is appreciated!)

1.  Who has the right to call you?  What circumstances make this a
less-than-straightforward question to answer?  Are telemarketers the
same as other people?  Why or why not?

2.  Does (or would) the existance of Caller ID on your home phone
change your life in terms of the issues raised in #1?

For PAT's sake -- so to speak -- send your responses to me and not the
Digest since this has been a hot topic there.


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.


[Moderator's Note: Thank you for your final paragraph. Yes readers,
please respond direct to Mr. Streeter -- not me!  I don't care what
your opinion is, I am not interested, and I am overloaded with stuff.
As a matter of fact, 247 unused messages from last week bit the dust
earlier this evening. To the unused posters, sorry!  Try later.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Christian Doucet)
Subject: European Phone in Canada?
Date: Mon, 13 Jul 92 19:33:52 EDT


Greetings!

My sister bought a phone in Amsterdam and it somewhat looks like a
2500 set. She want's to use it here in Canada because it has this
"oldish European look" :). It has a DTMF keypad on it.

I apologize if this is a FAQ but I have three of them:

Will this phone work in Canada?
Will the DTMF keypad work in Canada?
How to wire it?

We opened the unit and here's what we found where the phone line gets
inside:

              (round connector)
                  /  |   |  \
                 /   |   |   \
                /    /   \    \
               /    /     \    \
              /     |     |     \
             /      |     |      \
             o      o     o      o

             a    ground  b      EB

The ground is marked by the international symbol.

Any help appreciated and thanks in advance!


Christian Doucet ----- [e-mail] | Hydro-Quebec
System Administrator - [e-mail]        | voice: + 1 514 858 7704
I speak for myself! -- #include <disclaimer.h>   | fax  : + 1 514 858 7799

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

Date: Mon, 13 Jul 1992 19:57:45 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <[e-mail]>
Subject: INMARSAT Call Are Expensive


Begin forwarded messages:

 Date: Mon, 13 Jul 92 07:54:38 HST
 From: Bob Cunningham <[e-mail]>
 Subject: Re: Suggestion for Taylor UUCP


> I think this need would also be satisfied by the "don't call until
> nn minutes from last successful call has elapsed"-feature that I
> and others have proposed to be added to taylor-uucp.

A feature that I, too, hope could be added to the taylor-uucp
distribution at some point.

It's useful in other circumstances as well, including the converse of
Marc Unangst's situation.

I've a couple of long-distance sites where the charges are $19.50 for
the first three minutes (or fraction thereof) within a three-hour
"cheap" call window; at other times they're $31.50 for the first three
minutes (or fraction).  It's important to make one contact a day, even
at the higher rate if absolutely necessary, but extra unneeded calls
(even -- or actually, especially -- if successful) can be quite costly
[One extra call a day at the higher rate, and I end up with nearly
$1,000 more on that month's phone bill.]

It'd sure be a lot easier to say "don't call within 18 hours of the
last successful call" than to have to do the schedule tweaking I have
to do now.

  Date: Mon, 13 Jul 92 10:40:57 HST
  From: Bob Cunningham <[e-mail]>
  Subject: Re: Suggestion for Taylor UUCP

[Since several people have asked "where in the world" do you have
to pay so much ...]

Those are COMSAT/AT&T combined rates for INMARSAT-A satellite calls to
ships at sea for the Pacific Ocean (rates to ships in the Atlantic are
a dollar or so a minute cheaper).  The ships I'm interested in are
scientific research ships that we (University of Hawaii) operate, but
setup is not unique; there's lots of outfits that work with ship at
sea using modems, although as far as I know, we're the first to try
using Taylor-UUCP for this.

The calls are direct dial, with long-distance part to the nearest
earth station included (from Hawaii, the nearest are in Australia and
California, though that part is relatively cheap), the actual INMARSAT
satellite link to the appropriate ship is the most expensive part.

Incidentally, the same cost applies to voice calls between ship and
shore.  On board, they have a special phone for that, traditionally
called the "gold phone" because of the rate.  Even if they're not THE
most expensive phone calls in the world, they're surely amongst the
most expensive.

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

From: [e-mail] (Justin Leavens)
Subject: Recommendations on Waterproof/Resistant Cordless Phones
Date: 13 Jul 1992 13:03:23 -0700
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA


  A recent incident in which my cordless phone (a Panasonic TX370 or
something to that effect) took a little unexpected dip in our pool has
led me to ask for recommendations on waterproof/resistant cordless
phones. I've been to the department stores (who don't seem to carry
them) and to a Circuit City (who didn't carry one either) and finally
located a Fry's Electronics that had a Sony model and a Columbia model
that claimed to be "water-resistant".

  Does anyone know about these products or have any experience as to
how water-resistant these phones really are? While calling around, my
basic request was "I want one that can float" (not really what I want,
but I want it to be that resistant) and I was told that there are none
that are completely "waterproof".

  Actually, my old Panasonic unit still works, sort of. It clicks
incessantly when on-hook but on standby, beeps at me a few times
before it will connect to the base unit and go off-hook, and pulse
dials even though the setting on the base unit is set on tone (which
is weird, could the base unit have been damaged when the handset went
underwater in standby mode? If I hit the 'Tone' button on the handset
it will dial in tones for that call ...). Luckily it was only a couple
months old and is still under warranty. But I think I'd like to get
one for 'pool use'. Any comments?


Justin Leavens    University of Southern California

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

Subject: More Than I Wanted to Know About INTELPOST
Date: Tue, 14 Jul 92 1:45:56 EDT
From: John R. Levine <[e-mail]>


About three months after I originally asked, the Post Office has sent
me a handy 157 page book explaining Intelpost.  It turns out to be
Group 3 fax with optional pick up and delivery.  There are seven
different delivery options, not all available at every destination
point including regular service in which the receiving post office
drops it in the mail for local delivery, two-hour express service,
pick-up with optional notification by phone or telex, and fax delivery
if the recipient has a fax (presumably the sender doesn't.)

To send an Intelpost message you can either drop off the originals at
one of 200 post offices or establish an account and fax them to the
P.O.  yourself.  The price is $10 for the first page, $4 for every
additional page, $5 extra for any delivery option other than regular
service.  The cover page is free.

Most of the 157 pages list what service is available where in the 39
participating countries.

So, basically, it's fax for situations where the sender and/or
receiver doesn't have a fax machine.


Regards,

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

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

Date: Mon, 13 Jul 92 23:36:23 EDT
From: David Leibold <[e-mail]>
Subject: New files for the Archives


A few new files have hit the TELECOM Digest Archives ...

The new file "autovon.instructions" in the archives at lcs.mit.edu are
instructions and info about how the Autovon works, including official
descriptions of the various precedence levels from Flash Override
down.

There are new South American country codes lists in the country.codes
subdirectory of the telecom-archives directory. The update meant that
the zone 5 lists had to be split in two: zone.5.codes.50-54 and
zone.5.codes.55-59 to represent country codes from 500-54 and 55-599
respectively.

A new African zone 2 list of country codes was sent for inclusion in
the Archives. This should appear when the Moderator is able to update
the Archives, for the file zone.2.codes.

Updates to other countries should eventually appear, but things will
be going fairly slowly. Many thanks to Carl Moore and Manuel
Moguilevsky for ongoing assistance with the lists.


[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] ( Mark Blumhardt)
Subject: House Voice/Data wiring question
Organization: U S WEST Advanced Technologies
Date: Mon, 13 Jul 1992 20:36:16 GMT


I'm having a house built and am going to put in extra wiring.  My goal
is to provide voice and data to various rooms.  I went out and bought
three-pair unshielded twisted pair wiring (rated at 10 MBS), several
two jack outlets and an M Block.

If my goal is to have some pairs connected to the BOC network and
others connected to my 10BASE-T network, how do I wire it up at the
block (I.E. are the voice pairs connected in parallel)?  Is the
10BASE-T network wiring done in a star configuration?  What is the
exact wiring at the block?

Either information directly from you, or a reference to a book would
be great.

Thanks in advance.


Mark

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

Date: 13 Jul 92 14:14:09-0900
From: /PN=Thomas.K.Hinders/OU=CCMAIL/O=CHAN.IS/PRMD=MMC/ADMD=TELEMAIL/C=US/@sprint.com
Subject: EPA at Bay City


I'm being considered for a position as Communications Specialist at a
EPA Cray site in Bay City MI, and I thought that the Telecom readers
might be able to answer a few questions that I have:

    - Who is the FTS provider to EPA?

    - Who is the local telco in Bay City, and how might you rate them on a
    scale of 1 to 10?

    - I would welcome any comments from current/past Bay City residents.

Thanks in advance.


                      Thomas K Hinders
             Martin Marietta Computing Standards
                   4795 Meadow Wood Lane
                     Chantilly, VA 22021
              703.802.5593 (v) 703.802.5027 (f)

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

Date: Sun, 12 Jul 92 12:35:29 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Dave Niebuhr)
Subject: Democratic Convention (Including Telecom)


Some of the Democratic Convention details were given in the July 12,
1992, issue of {Newsday} and I thought I'd pass them along.

60 computer systems will be located on the convention floor.

About 189 miles of communications system wiring, nearly enough to go
from New York City to Baltimore.

56 video screens make up the podium's back wall.

The podium has room for about 40 people and 8 TV locations.

Delegation voting will be electronic with votes recorded via the
pressing of one of three buttons: Yes, No or Abstain.  There will be
two phones mounted on each station with one for communicating with the
podium and the other for calls to other delegations or outside
locations.

The four principal sponsors are American Express, AT&T, Time Warner
and NY Telephone.  75 percent are involved in communications in one
way or another and I'm not sure about Amex.  I wonder who the lucky
ones to end up paying for this will be -- the ratepayers or
stockholders (I'm leaning toward the former).  These paragons of
society are giving $100,000 in cash and providing perks like cable TV
and free magazines (that takes care of Time Warner).



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


[Moderator's Note: Democratic conventions are the only telco
subscribers in the world who can run up BIG bills and leave them
unpaid for years at a time. IBT gave up ever trying to collect what
they had coming from the Democratic convention here in 1968, and
finally wrote it off, meaning of course we rate payers took a hit. I
imagine the subscribers of NY Tel get to pay for this one, probably
sometime around 1996 when it gets written off.   PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #558
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa06425;
          15 Jul 92 4:21 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA21892
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 15 Jul 1992 01:42:03 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA23103
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 15 Jul 1992 01:41:54 -0500
Date: Wed, 15 Jul 1992 01:41:54 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #559

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 15 Jul 92 01:41:55 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 559

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Hatred by Voicemail: Canadian Liberty Network (Ken McVay)
    Detroit Area 313 to Split (John R. Levine)
    Michigan Will Get Area Code 810 in August '94 (Jeffrey Kaplan)
    Airfone System Overload (Jeff Garber)
    Telling my Tip From my Ring (Bob Riegelmann)
    911 Outage in Santa Clara (Marc T. Kaufman)
    Use (Abuse) of ANI? (Sam Israelit)
    What is ESN? (Carl Moore)
    Re: Cellular Phone Hacking (Ron Natalie)
    Re: Cellular Phone Hacking (Bill Squire)
    Re: Cellular Phone Hacking (Richard Cox)
    Re: Perot Compuserve Account (Peter da Silva)
    Re: Perot Compuserve Account (John Higdon)
    Re: Perot Compuserve Account (Chris Kent Kantarjiev)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Hatred by Voicemail: Canadian Liberty Network
Date: Tue, 14 Jul 92 15:07:44 PDT
From: Ken McVay <[e-mail]>


(Reprinted from alt.revisionism at the request of a user who thought
it might be appropriate to discuss this here - knm.)

During the past year or so, a voicemail system calling itself the
"Canadian Liberty Network" operated in Vancouver, British Columbia.
The system operated out of a basement suite -- the owner of the home
disclaimed any knowledge of the system, or the organization or
individuals that operated it, even though he was "renting" the suite.

The system amounted to a voicemail version of Dan Gannon's b-cpu
bulletin board, with readings of the Leuchter report, "66 Questions &
Answers About the Holocaust" and other material of a similar vein.

Pressure from the Canadian government resulted in a court order which
forbade the continued operation of the system. At that point, as I
understand it, the system adopted a Washington State telephone number
and continued to operate. I don't have enough details to know if the
system itself remained in Canada, or moved south of the border, but
the Canadian court just issued a contempt citation against the owners
of the system, citing the continuing operation of the system in
violation of the original order. (Canadian law prohibits dissemination
of hate literature.)

I would like to gather information about this system, or similar
systems anywhere in North America, and solicit your assistance. It is
my belief that the folks who operate these systems are either formally
or informally linked to and supported by American Nazi front
organizations, i.e. Carto and company, but I cannot substantiate that
belief. Any and all information, including news clippings/citations,
sound bites, etc. will be appreciated.

Printed material, including newspaper clippings, Nazi literature
advertising these systems, etc. can be sent to me via snail:

        Ken McVay
        c/o R.R. 1, C-28
        Ladysmith, British Columbia, Canada V0R 2E0

NOTE: I was asked, after posting this request in its original form,
whether or not I would use the information collected to assist the
Canadian government in its efforts WRT this matter. The answer to that
question is an emphatic no, although I _will_ most certainly make
public use of information received which I can confirm, and that may
very well result in the government's obtaining the information anyway.
If you wish to contribute to my education, but do _not_ want your
information used in any public or private forum beyond my "eyes only,"
please make that clear -- your request for complete confidentiality
will be respected without reservation.


[Moderator's Note: I see a flood of mail coming, and am starting to
twitch in anticipation already. Please direct ALL replies to the
author and not to the Digest.  Thanks.   PAT]

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

Subject: Detroit Area 313 to Split
Date: Tue, 14 Jul 92 18:06:37 EDT
From: John R. Levine <[e-mail]>


UPI reports that the 313 area will split to a new 810 code effective
10 Aug 1994.

Oakland, Macomb, Genesee, Lapeer, St. Clair and Sanilac counties as
well as small sections of Saginaw, Shiawassee and Livingston counties
wil go into 810.  Wayne, Washtenaw, Monroe, and small parts of Jackson
and Lenawee counties will remain in 313.  Detroit itself is in Wayne
county and won't change.

As with all NPA splits, rates won't change.  The telco consulted lots
of local leaders so there seems to be little grumbling about the
boundaries.


Regards,

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

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

Date: Tue, 14 Jul 92 14:24:30 -0400
From: [e-mail] (Jeffrey Kaplan)
Subject: Michigan Will Get Area Code 810 in August '94


That's what I heard on the radio a few moments ago.  WXYT said that
Michigan Bell announced that area code 313 will continue in Wayne,
Washtenaw, and Monroe counties.  Counties north of Eight Mile Road
including the north and northeast Detroit suburbs will go to area code
810 in August '94.  A Michigan Bell spokesperson came on to say that
this will not impact long distance phone rates.

Do they mean that you will have to use the new code after that date,
or that you'll be able to?  I understand that area code splits usually
involve a transitional period that this brief radio story did not
mention.


Jeff Kaplan    [e-mail]   [e-mail]

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

Date: Wed, 15 Jul 92 05:19 GMT
From: Jeff Garber <[e-mail]>
Subject: Airfone System Overload


Over the 4th of July weekend, I took a trip with a flight connecting
in Chicago. While we were waiting on the runway at O'Hare to take off
(with 40-50 planes in front of us, according to the captain), a bad
storm came through and shut down the airport. Out of sheer boredom
during the delay, I reached for the GTE Airfone built into the seat in
front of me. I waited for the green LED to come on before proceeding.
It wasn't coming on. Eventually it did illuminate, but it was gone
again before I could get my credit card through the magnetic reader. I
assume with all those planes grounded on the runway in addition to
those in the air that could not land, the call traffic was more than
the system could handle. One lady who managed to get her card through
the reader and dial a number heard a message stating that all circuits
were busy and to please wait. This message repeated at regular
intervals. She waited about half an hour before finally giving up.

Now I'm wondering just what is the traffic capacity of one Airfone
ground station? How many calls must have been in progress to jam it up
like that? On a side note, I'd be interested in seeing a study showing
how much extra Airfone revenue is generated for the airlines when
there are delays versus flights that are on time (why be on time when
you can make extra money by being late?).


Jeff Garber <[e-mail]>    My opinions are just that.

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

From: [e-mail] (Bob Riegelmann)
Subject: Telling my Tip From my Ring
Organization: National Solar Observatory/SP, Sunspot NM, USA
Date: Tue, 14 Jul 92 15:51:47 GMT


I'm re-wiring my house, and I need a trivia answer.  To avoid
confusing local craftpersons after I leave this house, is there a
protocol that associates tip and ring with the color and color stripe
wires?  i.e. does tip go on the blue wire, and ring go on the
blue/white wire? or reverse?

Don't ask me why I'm rewiring, but this house was originally wired by
the Air Force, and was recently on linebacker. Needless to say,
nothing worked when I moved in.


Bob Riegelmann   [e-mail]
P.O. Box 58      Sunspot, NM 88349-0058

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

From: [e-mail] (Marc T. Kaufman)
Subject: 911 Outage in Santa Clara
Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University.
Date: Tue, 14 Jul 1992 16:46:14 GMT


(from the local news):

"Santa Clara County lost its 911 emergency system in most areas for
more than five hours Sunday night and this [Monday] morning due to a
power outage and the failure of a battery-based backup system, phone
company officials said."

"Pacific Bell spokeswoman Judy Peterson said a switch -- which served
as the hub of service for the entire area -- lost power about 11:10 PM
She said a portable diesel generator restored power by about 4:15 AM
after a set of batteries failed to provide enough power."

Evidently, the regular standby diesel generator failed when its
transfer switch burned up.

After the Loma Prieta earthquake there was a post-mortem talk by
members of SMPTE that was broadcast on satellite.  It seems phone
companies don't want to test emergency power systems because "it can
cause disruptions", so when they are needed they are untested.


Marc Kaufman ([e-mail])

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

Date: Tue, 14 Jul 92 14:38:23 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Sam Israelit)
Subject: Use (Abuse) of ANI?


> [Moderator's Note: I've often had the same thoughts about the numerous
> signs I see on the subways here urging people to call and seek help
> for a problem with cocaine, abusing your children, etc. They all use
> 800 numbers also, with ANI, I'm sure.   PAT]

Now come on PAT! This is going a little bit too far. There are a
number of people in the world who don't give a damn about tracking
phone numbers of people with problems so that they can place them on
special lists! This is paranoia! A number of those organizations are
out there doing legitimate work and they have 800 numbers so that you
can call them free of charge (ie, too large a number of the population
are indigent).  And even if that isn't the reason, it doesn't mean
that they are logging your call for help into "The System".

I agree that there are some people who would abuse the use of ANI, but
that doesn't make them all bad!


Sam Israelit    Engineer, Businessman, ... Brewer    Portland, OR

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

Date: Tue, 14 Jul 92 11:49:49 EDT
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject: What is ESN?


I noticed a listing for Bell-Northern Research in Richardson, Texas
(near Dallas) on the 214-684 prefix, and followed by a 7D number
prefixed with "ESN".  What is ESN?


[Moderator's Note: If we were talking about cellular phones, I would
say it means "Electronic Serial Number". In the context you describe
it, I have no idea.  Anyone?    PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Ron Natalie)
Subject: Re: Cellular Phone Hacking
Date: 14 Jul 92 20:18:39 GMT
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.


> Another problem is that in most modern cellular phones,

Actually, I'm not sure what you mean by "modern" cellular phones.

> the chip containing the ESN is difficult to get into, let alone modify.

With the latest phones I think it's actually getting easier.  Some of
the new smaller handhelds actually store the ESN in the same
programmable stuff as the NAM information.


[Moderator's Note: By 'modern', I mean phones made in the past few
years since the cellular carriers got the feds to crack down on the
makers of the phones for not doing a better job of keeping the ESN
tamper-proof. In the very early days, ESN tampering was common.  PAT]

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

Subject: Re: Cellular Phone Hacking
From: [e-mail] (Bill Squire)
Date: Tue, 14 Jul 92 18:00:05 WET/D
Organization: Hack-Tic Magazine


> [Moderator's Note: What you suggest is highly illegal in the USA and
> probably everywhere else in the world except possibly the Netherlands
> where it seems that everything is okay where defrauding the telco is
> concerned.

C'mon Pat be nice.  Using the bluebox is one thing, but somebody's
account is quite another matter.  See the difference?  There has been
quite a problem with the criminal side of "phreaking" with cellular
phones here and I assure you it will earn you a room in one of the
fine hotels operated by the police!  On the technical side, several
cellular phones can be fully programed externally, but I don't do this
and don't know about changing the ESN or anything like that.  We have
three different systems here, ATF1 in the 150MHz band, ATF2 in the
470MHz band and ATF3 in the 900MHz band (470-890 is still TV here).

We also have a public CT2 system called "Greenpoint" with Motorola
Silverlink phones called "Kermits" with a green protective edge
instead of the standard grey.  Henson's famous frog is pictured on
them.  This system uses 40 channels between 864 and 868 MHz with a
maximum transmit power of 10mW.  While there are numerous features
possible, it is only used as a payphone replacement at this time and
as a home cordless phone.  Full details are in EDSI prl-ETS 300 131.
Call [phone] or 93 65 47 16 in France for more information.
Don't believe this has been hacked, but there are allways those out
there that think they have a trick ... until the phone bill arives!


Bill

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

Date: Tue, 14 Jul 92 21:42 GMT
From: Richard Cox <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Cellular Phone Hacking
Reply-To: [e-mail]


>>  The idea seems to be to change the ESN so that free phone calls can be
>>  made on someone else's line.

Changing the ESN per se isn't illegal here in the UK.  In fact it's
become essential now that a number of cellular phone companies have
started to "block" the ESNs of, for example, customers who disconnect
to change to other cellular phone companies, so they can't use their
phones on the network.

Because a cottage industry has been set up to do this, its not too
much of a surprise that as a result there has been a sudden increase
over here of the "cloning" of working ESNs.  This does result in fraud
 -- fraud against the registered user of that ESN -- and of course
that is illegal.  The problem is that it's not as easy to spot by
checking bills, as Pat suggested.  These phones are usually used to
"sell" cheap international calls back home, to visitors and
immigrants.  There wouldn't be any pattern (other than the calls would
all be expensive and international) and the people who receive the
calls would genuinely know nothing about the criminal responsible.

What has been done here, is to arrange for the Cellular system to
"spot" cases where two phones are live on the system with the same ESN
at the same time, or where a phone appears to "move" faster than
normal between two different parts of the country.

Not all cellular systems use our (ETACS) system; I believe USA uses
AMPS and Oz uses something like GSM.  So what may be possible in one
country, is not necessarily possible in another.


Richard Cox

Mandarin Technology, Cardiff Business Park, Llanishen, CARDIFF, Wales CF4 5WF
Voice: [phone]      Fax: [phone]      VoiceMail: [phone]
E-mail: [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Peter da Silva)
Subject: Re: Perot Compuserve Account
Organization: Taronga Park BBS
Date: Mon, 13 Jul 1992 12:07:06 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> TELECOM Moderator notes:

> [Moderator's Note: This brings up the original question: Does Perot
> have an email address for the proposed electronic forum for the
> candidates? Should we use '[e-mail]' instead?  PAT]

perot.com, eh? So if he gets elected we might actually see something
like "[e-mail]"?


Peter da Silva, Taronga Park BBS, Houston, TX  [phone]/1032

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

Date: Tue, 14 Jul 92 02:26 PDT
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: Perot Compuserve Account


The Moderator notes:

> And the idea that electronic mail is somehow a step-child in the way
> we communicate -- that paper mail is legitimate (who has yet to
> express sympathy for the volume of paper mail David Bush must receive
> for Perot each day?) but electronic mail must be restricted somehow
> lest it cause too much aggravation for the recipient is very silly.
> Electronic mail is where things are at these days.

And becoming more so. Over the past years (and particularly the past
year) I have been under the impression that the US Mail has become
slower and less reliable. Letters that used to take a couple of days
to travel coast to coast now take a week. Mail to Los Angeles from
here takes a good five days now (if it makes it at all).

For the price of a stamp, you can send a fax anywhere in the country.
It gets there immediately for sure. E-mail costs considerably less
than that, reaches its destination in less than a day (most of the
e-mail I send and receive takes minutes), and again the odds of being
delivered are exceedingly high.

Accordingly, I now only use the US Mail in the absence of any
alternative. When it started taking three days for a letter to reach
San Francisco from here (40 miles), I reassessed the communication
food chain. Hence, I agree with Pat. If someone is proporting to be
participating in electronic communications, then he had better be sure
that he can deal with commensurate incoming traffic.

The day is coming when we all will look at paper mail as passe and
archaic.  I know I already do.


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


[Moderator's Note: Remember when that guy wrote me a year or so ago
saying I should not have given out [e-mail] since if the
chairman got too much mail they might cut the link to the net? I am
still scratching my head over that one, wondering exactly who would be
the loser.   PAT]

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

Subject: Re: Perot Compuserve Account
Date: Tue, 14 Jul 1992 11:28:44 PDT
From: Chris Kent Kantarjiev <[e-mail]>


It has been suggested that "[e-mail]" is a way to reach
Perot, or at least his administrative assitant.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #559
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa06424;
          15 Jul 92 4:21 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA11124
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 15 Jul 1992 02:20:11 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA00957
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 15 Jul 1992 02:20:00 -0500
Date: Wed, 15 Jul 1992 02:20:00 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #560

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 15 Jul 92 02:20:00 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 560

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: 700 Easyreach Service Should be Called Hard to Reach (Peter da Silva)
    Re: 700 Easyreach Service Should be Called Hard to Reach (Andy Sherman)
    Re: Cellular Phone Hacking (Tom Wiencko)
    Re: Democratic Convention (Including Telecom) (Chuck Paquette)
    Re: Democratic Convention (Including Telecom) (Carl Moore)
    The Voice of the Phone Company (Jeff Garber)
    Creative Solutions (was The Depths of Sliminess) (Ed Hew)
    Re: Pat Townson Owes EFF an Apology (Alan Millar)
    Re: Strange Pulse Dialing Behavior: Summary (Todd Inch)
    Surprise Calling Card Fraud: Followup (Mark Schuldenfrei)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Peter da Silva)
Subject: Re: 700 Easyreach Service Should be Called Hard to Reach
Organization: Taronga Park BBS
Date: Mon, 13 Jul 1992 12:04:00 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (H. Peter Anvin)
writes:

> A dedicated country code would probably be the best, especially from
> an international standpoint.  Otherwise, maybe we have found a use for
> the 600 area code.

No, the best would be to abandon the fixed-length phone number. Other
countries don't have them, having benefited from the U.S. being the
pioneers in this instance.


Peter da Silva, Taronga Park BBS, Houston, TX  [phone]/1032

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

From: [e-mail] (Andy Sherman)
Subject: Re: 700 Easyreach Service Should be Called Hard to Reach
Date: Tue, 14 Jul 92 17:20:57 EDT


n 10 Jul 92 16:20:27 GMT, [e-mail] (Jeffrey J. Carpenter) said:

In response to Pat's explanation of how the 700 number space works:

> You are certainly correct about this, but why couldn't they have
> requested a new special service code for this type of service,
> something like 500 or 600.  They didn't have to use 700.

I imagine that would have taken a fair amount of time, and the people
involved EasyReach wanted to see it deployed in our lifetimes.  AT&T
already had the 700 number space to use.  I suspect that a decision to
open up another X00 NPA would have involved Bellcore, the FCC, the
other IXCs and a cast of thousands.  *AND* it could have involved the
disclosure of detailed plans for a new (and unique) service to their
competitors.

If the service takes off, trust me, the industry will have to find a
standard way to provide it.


Andy Sherman  (Yes, the same one!)
Salomon, Inc.  -  Unix Systems Support  -  Rutherford, NJ
[phone]  -  [e-mail]
"These opinions are mine, all *MINE*.  My employer can't have them."

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

From: vta![e-mail] (Tom Wiencko)
Subject: Re: Cellular Phone Hacking
Organization: Wiencko & Associates, Inc.
Date: Tue, 14 Jul 1992 14:14:26 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail].
edu.au writes:

> I have seen several books for sale on the topic of cellular phone
> modification.  The idea seems to be to change the ESN so that free
> phone calls can be made on someone else's line.

As Pat mentions, this is highly illegal, and there is a significant
amount of technology installed in most cellular phone companies to
detect this.  When you get caught, your number can and probably will
be distributed to one of several nationwide databases which will
restrict your ability to use that phone.  It is also more difficult
than just changing the ESN, and in the interest of propriety I will
not expand on just what needs changing.

> Anyone have any knowledge of potential problems etc?  Does it work?

Jail, law suits, and other nasty things.  Note well that most cellular
companies have well staffed and well equipped fraud departments, and
some significant technology exists to detect fraudulent access, and in
many cases to locate the offender.

> [Moderator's Note: What you suggest is highly illegal in the USA and
> probably everywhere else in the world except possibly the Netherlands
> where it seems that everything is okay where defrauding the telco is
> concerned. Another problem is that in most modern cellular phones, the
> chip containing the ESN is difficult to get into, let alone modify.
> They tend to be buried under wax, thoroughly soldered in place and
> with few or no markings on them. A third problem is that if you could
> easily change them (let's say you swap it out entirely for a bunch of
> little dip switches or pin wheels you set by hand), is that the place
> you call is recorded by the cellular company and if you intend to call
> anything other than hotel/radio station switchboards/contest lines,
> etc then eventually any regular calling pattern will be investigated.

In fact, most cellular switches I am familiar with are generally
programmed to collect *everything*, including free, service, and even
unanswered calls.  Getting listings of calls made to/from certain
numbers or calls made by a particular ESN are relatively simple.
Tracking numbers that do not have the correct ESN or whose ESNs change
is also not terribly difficult.

There is also an effort taking place to establish a standard
interconnect scheme between cellular companies to track fraud and
cellular system abuse.  This system, when in place, will make it
extremely difficult to defraud cellular companies.


Tom Wiencko                  [phone]
Wiencko & Associates, Inc.   gatech!vta!tom

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

From: Chuck Paquette <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Democratic Convenvtion (Including Telecom)
Date: Tue, 14 Jul 92 17:37:59 EDT


Our Moderator's hit on the Democratic Party's payment record to telcos
brought up a number of issues.  As former staffer for both the Federal
Election Commission and a financially squeezed presidential candidate
(Hart), I think I can shed some light on telco billing policies toward
political parties and candidates.

First, Watergate changed most things in terms of financing campaigns,
and one was that vendors (including telcos) can no longer provide
special favors or exceptions to normal billing practices to political
parties or candidates.  A write-off would now be subject to a lot of
scrutiny by the Federal Election Commission, and unless it was done in
accordance with normal business practices would bring a suit or
indictment against the telco for an illegal corporate contribution.

Normal telco billing policies require stiff deposits for newly
constituted organizations, and campaigns are no exception.  So the
Brown or Perot campaigns are probably given little leeway
payment-wise, not because of any judgment call about their finances
(guess which one is a better risk?), but because political customers
are scrutinized under federal law.

Similarly, political parties now get no special treatment.  If the
1992 bill to NY Telephone and AT&T was not paid, the Democratic
National Committee would no doubt have all phone service to them
cutoff in the NYNEX region and all AT&T service suspended.  Also,
given the nationwide credit database used by RBOCs, nonpayment would
also endanger service everywhere.

Back in the pre-divestiture days, telephone service to campaigns
(including long distance of course) was handled by the candidate's
local telco, even for national candidates.  For example, when the Hart
presidential campaign in D.C. wanted six additional phones in the
Portland, Maine office, they wired deposit money to Mountain Bell in
Denver, where Hart was Senator.

As I recall, the Hart campaign used a succession of long distance
carriers (MCI, Sprint, Alltel, and a few more) and ended up owing them
all hundreds of thousands of dollars.  I've heard the carriers have
learned their lesson since 1984.

I suspect there was a reason AT&T carried the national Democrats for
so long.  AT&T was and is quite regulated and their regulators include
a lot of Dems, and they probably didn't want to lead the charge for
payment.  No need to anger anyone.  As I said above, their patience
would no longer be legally possible today.

Finally, remember that each political party now receives a payment in
the $10 million range for their conventions from the federal
Presidential Campaign Fund (that's our $1 checkoff).  So the
Republicans no longer need solicit from the likes of IT&T (as they did
at their 1972 convention -- long story) and the Democrats can pay their
bills.  Our Moderator despairs even more!

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

Date: Tue, 14 Jul 92 10:10:52 EDT
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject:  Re: Democratic Convention (Including Telecom)


Democratic conventions with bills written off?  How do the Republicans
handle such phone bills?


[Moderator's Note: Republicans pay their bills!  :)  Actually, as the
other poster on this thread today notes, Hart was the most notorious
example of a politician-deadbeat where telco was concerned.  PAT]

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

Date: Wed, 15 Jul 92 05:17 GMT
From: Jeff Garber <[e-mail]>
Subject: The Voice of the Phone Company


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

> Several years ago, before Aspen/Octel was popular, I had heard "the
> woman behind the telco voice" referred to as Ramona.  Note that the
> voice that Octel uses (at least until recently, apparently "Jane"
> retired) is the same as was used for many years by The Phone Company.
> Perhaps Octel thought a simple pseudonym would be better for marketing
> and training purposes ...

> Does anyone know if this voice was originally called Ramona by TPC,
> and if Jane (or both) is a pseudonym?

I remember seeing a story on television about "The Voice of the Phone
Company" several years ago. If I remember correctly, Ramona was the
lady who frequently recorded "time" and intercepts for TPC, but she
retired and her sister (or cousin or other relative) Jane Barbie took
her place (they have similar voices). The program I saw said these
ladies were chosen for their lack of a regional accent (I don't
remember where they are from) and a "friendly" quality in the tone of
their voices (personally, I always thought intercepts sounded harsh
and anything BUT friendly). I remember noticing that when one of them
(probably Jane) was interviewed, she sounded much different and less
harsh since she was was speaking naturally instead of uttering canned
phrases.

Apparently, Octel is quite proud that they were able to get Jane to
record their prompts. When the company I used to work for installed
its Aspen system, the vendor made a big fuss about the fact that it
was Jane Barbie, "the same voice the phone company uses!" Other people
I know who use Aspen were told the same thing.


Jeff Garber <[e-mail]>    My opinions are just that.

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

From: [e-mail] (Ed Hew)
Subject: Creative Solutions (was The Depths of Sliminess)
Organization: XeniTec Consulting, Kitchener, Ontario, CANADA
Date: Wed, 15 Jul 1992 05:28:48 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Phil Howard)
writes:

> 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)?

Time for some creative solutions ...

Why not impliment a feature similar to "Identicall" where
telemarketers calls would (be ughhh, legislated to) ring with a
specific identifible teleslime chime.  We could then simply ignore it,
knowing that what's awaiting should we choose to answer.  That might
take the annoyance level down to that of a lawn mower across the
street at 6:30 AM on a Sunday.  Of course the telco would charge me
another $1.35 for this feature, but that's a whole lot cheaper than my
time.

Better yet, have all telemarketers pay the telecom $1 for each
completed call, the profits from which would be split between the
telecom and service account holder who answers the phone.  The telecom
gets more revenue, and I wind with paid telecom service for life.
Alternatively, there might well be a lot fewer such calls wasting my
time.


Ed. A. Hew,    <[e-mail]>    ....!uunet.ca!xenitec!eah
XeniTec Consulting Services, Kitchener ON, Canada [phone]

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

Date: Tue, 14 Jul 92 14:01:44 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Alan Millar)
Subject: Re: Pat Townson Owes EFF an Apology
Organization: The Bolis Group, San Jose, CA


In article <[e-mail]> you write: [re: Pat Townson]

> But only someone whose disregard for the truth borders on the
> pathological could suppose that we *ever* seek to excuse unauthorized
> access, or that we routinely defend those who engage in such acts.

> And I am certain that we have higher regard for the truth than he
> does.

You know, I was starting to think you had a good point about libel.
But you corrected that.


                  email:
Alan Millar       [e-mail]
                  ames!zorch!bolis!amillar


[Moderator's Note: Next thing you know, they'll be saying I owe Gary
Hart and the entire Democratic Party an apology for claiming they do
not pay their bills in uh, a 'timely and business-like manner.' :)  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Todd Inch)
Subject: Re: Strange Pulse Dialing Behavior: Summary
Organization: Maverick International Inc.
Date: Wed, 15 Jul 92 05:56:47 GMT


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

> 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.

Exchanges never transmit pulses to the far end.  Remember: Pulses are
just quick disconnects of the phone from the line -- there is (was) no
reason to disconnect the other caller when you disconnect yours
momemtarily.  So, your CO (phone company equipment) isn't being
"nasty", there's just no reason for the additional complexity of
adding this feature which you think should exist.

Customer equipment MIGHT theoretically be able to listen for "clicks"
from pulse dialing and guess that these are pulses, but it would be a
near-impossibility to get this to actually work from a technical
aspect.  (No, I didn't dial a "1" - I just dropped the handset on the
table, I just turned on my speakerphone, I just got a call-waiting
beep, my furnace just started and I'm on the cordless phone, my
roommate picked up the extension phone, or any other source of
"clicks" on a phone line.)

In fact, most CO's would probably accept "clickless" pulses which had
triangle or sine-shaped wave forms instead of square pulses.  The
corners of the square pulses are what make the clicks.  If someone
were to ever build such a phone (might be kind of a novelty -- silent
dialing) there is NO possibility of customer equipment at the far end
ever decoding for it (unless maybe it detected gaps in the caller's
breathing cause by the disconnection pulses?  :-)

Followups please CC me via mail -- my newsfeed has leaks - TIA.

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

From: [e-mail] (Mark Schuldenfrei)
Subject: Surprise Calling Card Fraud: Followup
Organization: Progress Software Corp.
Date: Tue, 14 Jul 1992 14:35:15 GMT


The original posting was about my wife's unused AT&T calling card
number being stolen after it's only use being within a hotel room in
Miami.  I suspected SMDR records were used.

I still have no response from AT&T, or the FBI, and at this point am
expecting none.  I did get an interesting call last night from my
local RBOC (New England Telephone, part of Nynex).  They wanted to
"warn me" that the bill was over 1000 dollars for last month, and was
I aware of that?

I mentioned the call from AT&T, which it seems has not contacted them
as promised.  The bill, minus fraudulent calls to Costa Rica, seems to
be the normal $70 dollars or so.  My caller promised to enter a "perm
records" on the account, to charge back the additional calls to AT&T.

She also suggested that the originating phone numbers for the calling
card calls were probably residences. This gives me a real urge to make
long distance call or two, and imply I'm an immigration officer. But
that would be illegal, and I shall not do it.  Best of luck to AT&T's
stockholders, however, it seems that the fraud unit is willing to
write off $1000 dollars at a time.

Oh, and for your information, the hotel group in question is the Art
Deco Hotels in Miami Beach, dba the Lesley, Carlyle and Cardozo.  Do
not make calling card calls from their rooms, is my best advice.


    Mark Schuldenfrei, speaking for myself only, and not
    for my employer, or the INS for that matter...

Mark Schuldenfrei ([e-mail])


[Moderator's Note: When you call, NEVER claim to be anyone other than
yourself ... but you can still give them hell and tell them to clean
up their act or eventually respond to a federal investigator.    PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #560
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa07019;
          15 Jul 92 4:35 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA30251
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 15 Jul 1992 02:24:49 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA10302
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 15 Jul 1992 02:24:15 -0500
Date: Wed, 15 Jul 1992 02:24:15 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #559


TELECOM Digest     Wed, 15 Jul 92 01:41:55 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 559

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Hatred by Voicemail: Canadian Liberty Network (Ken McVay)
    Detroit Area 313 to Split (John R. Levine)
    Michigan Will Get Area Code 810 in August '94 (Jeffrey Kaplan)
    Airfone System Overload (Jeff Garber)
    Telling my Tip From my Ring (Bob Riegelmann)
    911 Outage in Santa Clara (Marc T. Kaufman)
    Use (Abuse) of ANI? (Sam Israelit)
    What is ESN? (Carl Moore)
    Re: Cellular Phone Hacking (Ron Natalie)
    Re: Cellular Phone Hacking (Bill Squire)
    Re: Cellular Phone Hacking (Richard Cox)
    Re: Perot Compuserve Account (Peter da Silva)
    Re: Perot Compuserve Account (John Higdon)
    Re: Perot Compuserve Account (Chris Kent Kantarjiev)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Hatred by Voicemail: Canadian Liberty Network
Date: Tue, 14 Jul 92 15:07:44 PDT
From: Ken McVay <[e-mail]>


(Reprinted from alt.revisionism at the request of a user who thought
it might be appropriate to discuss this here - knm.)

During the past year or so, a voicemail system calling itself the
"Canadian Liberty Network" operated in Vancouver, British Columbia.
The system operated out of a basement suite -- the owner of the home
disclaimed any knowledge of the system, or the organization or
individuals that operated it, even though he was "renting" the suite.

The system amounted to a voicemail version of Dan Gannon's b-cpu
bulletin board, with readings of the Leuchter report, "66 Questions &
Answers About the Holocaust" and other material of a similar vein.

Pressure from the Canadian government resulted in a court order which
forbade the continued operation of the system. At that point, as I
understand it, the system adopted a Washington State telephone number
and continued to operate. I don't have enough details to know if the
system itself remained in Canada, or moved south of the border, but
the Canadian court just issued a contempt citation against the owners
of the system, citing the continuing operation of the system in
violation of the original order. (Canadian law prohibits dissemination
of hate literature.)

I would like to gather information about this system, or similar
systems anywhere in North America, and solicit your assistance. It is
my belief that the folks who operate these systems are either formally
or informally linked to and supported by American Nazi front
organizations, i.e. Carto and company, but I cannot substantiate that
belief. Any and all information, including news clippings/citations,
sound bites, etc. will be appreciated.

Printed material, including newspaper clippings, Nazi literature
advertising these systems, etc. can be sent to me via snail:

        Ken McVay
        c/o R.R. 1, C-28
        Ladysmith, British Columbia, Canada V0R 2E0

NOTE: I was asked, after posting this request in its original form,
whether or not I would use the information collected to assist the
Canadian government in its efforts WRT this matter. The answer to that
question is an emphatic no, although I _will_ most certainly make
public use of information received which I can confirm, and that may
very well result in the government's obtaining the information anyway.
If you wish to contribute to my education, but do _not_ want your
information used in any public or private forum beyond my "eyes only,"
please make that clear -- your request for complete confidentiality
will be respected without reservation.


[Moderator's Note: I see a flood of mail coming, and am starting to
twitch in anticipation already. Please direct ALL replies to the
author and not to the Digest.  Thanks.   PAT]

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

Subject: Detroit Area 313 to Split
Date: Tue, 14 Jul 92 18:06:37 EDT
From: John R. Levine <[e-mail]>


UPI reports that the 313 area will split to a new 810 code effective
10 Aug 1994.

Oakland, Macomb, Genesee, Lapeer, St. Clair and Sanilac counties as
well as small sections of Saginaw, Shiawassee and Livingston counties
wil go into 810.  Wayne, Washtenaw, Monroe, and small parts of Jackson
and Lenawee counties will remain in 313.  Detroit itself is in Wayne
county and won't change.

As with all NPA splits, rates won't change.  The telco consulted lots
of local leaders so there seems to be little grumbling about the
boundaries.


Regards,

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

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

Date: Tue, 14 Jul 92 14:24:30 -0400
From: [e-mail] (Jeffrey Kaplan)
Subject: Michigan Will Get Area Code 810 in August '94


That's what I heard on the radio a few moments ago.  WXYT said that
Michigan Bell announced that area code 313 will continue in Wayne,
Washtenaw, and Monroe counties.  Counties north of Eight Mile Road
including the north and northeast Detroit suburbs will go to area code
810 in August '94.  A Michigan Bell spokesperson came on to say that
this will not impact long distance phone rates.

Do they mean that you will have to use the new code after that date,
or that you'll be able to?  I understand that area code splits usually
involve a transitional period that this brief radio story did not
mention.


Jeff Kaplan    [e-mail]   [e-mail]

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

Date: Wed, 15 Jul 92 05:19 GMT
From: Jeff Garber <[e-mail]>
Subject: Airfone System Overload


Over the 4th of July weekend, I took a trip with a flight connecting
in Chicago. While we were waiting on the runway at O'Hare to take off
(with 40-50 planes in front of us, according to the captain), a bad
storm came through and shut down the airport. Out of sheer boredom
during the delay, I reached for the GTE Airfone built into the seat in
front of me. I waited for the green LED to come on before proceeding.
It wasn't coming on. Eventually it did illuminate, but it was gone
again before I could get my credit card through the magnetic reader. I
assume with all those planes grounded on the runway in addition to
those in the air that could not land, the call traffic was more than
the system could handle. One lady who managed to get her card through
the reader and dial a number heard a message stating that all circuits
were busy and to please wait. This message repeated at regular
intervals. She waited about half an hour before finally giving up.

Now I'm wondering just what is the traffic capacity of one Airfone
ground station? How many calls must have been in progress to jam it up
like that? On a side note, I'd be interested in seeing a study showing
how much extra Airfone revenue is generated for the airlines when
there are delays versus flights that are on time (why be on time when
you can make extra money by being late?).


Jeff Garber <[e-mail]>    My opinions are just that.

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

From: [e-mail] (Bob Riegelmann)
Subject: Telling my Tip From my Ring
Organization: National Solar Observatory/SP, Sunspot NM, USA
Date: Tue, 14 Jul 92 15:51:47 GMT


I'm re-wiring my house, and I need a trivia answer.  To avoid
confusing local craftpersons after I leave this house, is there a
protocol that associates tip and ring with the color and color stripe
wires?  i.e. does tip go on the blue wire, and ring go on the
blue/white wire? or reverse?

Don't ask me why I'm rewiring, but this house was originally wired by
the Air Force, and was recently on linebacker. Needless to say,
nothing worked when I moved in.


Bob Riegelmann   [e-mail]
P.O. Box 58      Sunspot, NM 88349-0058

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

From: [e-mail] (Marc T. Kaufman)
Subject: 911 Outage in Santa Clara
Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University.
Date: Tue, 14 Jul 1992 16:46:14 GMT


(from the local news):

"Santa Clara County lost its 911 emergency system in most areas for
more than five hours Sunday night and this [Monday] morning due to a
power outage and the failure of a battery-based backup system, phone
company officials said."

"Pacific Bell spokeswoman Judy Peterson said a switch -- which served
as the hub of service for the entire area -- lost power about 11:10 PM
She said a portable diesel generator restored power by about 4:15 AM
after a set of batteries failed to provide enough power."

Evidently, the regular standby diesel generator failed when its
transfer switch burned up.

After the Loma Prieta earthquake there was a post-mortem talk by
members of SMPTE that was broadcast on satellite.  It seems phone
companies don't want to test emergency power systems because "it can
cause disruptions", so when they are needed they are untested.


Marc Kaufman ([e-mail])

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

Date: Tue, 14 Jul 92 14:38:23 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Sam Israelit)
Subject: Use (Abuse) of ANI?


> [Moderator's Note: I've often had the same thoughts about the numerous
> signs I see on the subways here urging people to call and seek help
> for a problem with cocaine, abusing your children, etc. They all use
> 800 numbers also, with ANI, I'm sure.   PAT]

Now come on PAT! This is going a little bit too far. There are a
number of people in the world who don't give a damn about tracking
phone numbers of people with problems so that they can place them on
special lists! This is paranoia! A number of those organizations are
out there doing legitimate work and they have 800 numbers so that you
can call them free of charge (ie, too large a number of the population
are indigent).  And even if that isn't the reason, it doesn't mean
that they are logging your call for help into "The System".

I agree that there are some people who would abuse the use of ANI, but
that doesn't make them all bad!


Sam Israelit    Engineer, Businessman, ... Brewer    Portland, OR

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

Date: Tue, 14 Jul 92 11:49:49 EDT
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject: What is ESN?


I noticed a listing for Bell-Northern Research in Richardson, Texas
(near Dallas) on the 214-684 prefix, and followed by a 7D number
prefixed with "ESN".  What is ESN?


[Moderator's Note: If we were talking about cellular phones, I would
say it means "Electronic Serial Number". In the context you describe
it, I have no idea.  Anyone?    PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Ron Natalie)
Subject: Re: Cellular Phone Hacking
Date: 14 Jul 92 20:18:39 GMT
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.


> Another problem is that in most modern cellular phones,

Actually, I'm not sure what you mean by "modern" cellular phones.

> the chip containing the ESN is difficult to get into, let alone modify.

With the latest phones I think it's actually getting easier.  Some of
the new smaller handhelds actually store the ESN in the same
programmable stuff as the NAM information.


[Moderator's Note: By 'modern', I mean phones made in the past few
years since the cellular carriers got the feds to crack down on the
makers of the phones for not doing a better job of keeping the ESN
tamper-proof. In the very early days, ESN tampering was common.  PAT]

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

Subject: Re: Cellular Phone Hacking
From: [e-mail] (Bill Squire)
Date: Tue, 14 Jul 92 18:00:05 WET/D
Organization: Hack-Tic Magazine


> [Moderator's Note: What you suggest is highly illegal in the USA and
> probably everywhere else in the world except possibly the Netherlands
> where it seems that everything is okay where defrauding the telco is
> concerned.

C'mon Pat be nice.  Using the bluebox is one thing, but somebody's
account is quite another matter.  See the difference?  There has been
quite a problem with the criminal side of "phreaking" with cellular
phones here and I assure you it will earn you a room in one of the
fine hotels operated by the police!  On the technical side, several
cellular phones can be fully programed externally, but I don't do this
and don't know about changing the ESN or anything like that.  We have
three different systems here, ATF1 in the 150MHz band, ATF2 in the
470MHz band and ATF3 in the 900MHz band (470-890 is still TV here).

We also have a public CT2 system called "Greenpoint" with Motorola
Silverlink phones called "Kermits" with a green protective edge
instead of the standard grey.  Henson's famous frog is pictured on
them.  This system uses 40 channels between 864 and 868 MHz with a
maximum transmit power of 10mW.  While there are numerous features
possible, it is only used as a payphone replacement at this time and
as a home cordless phone.  Full details are in EDSI prl-ETS 300 131.
Call [phone] or 93 65 47 16 in France for more information.
Don't believe this has been hacked, but there are allways those out
there that think they have a trick ... until the phone bill arives!


Bill

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

Date: Tue, 14 Jul 92 21:42 GMT
From: Richard Cox <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Cellular Phone Hacking
Reply-To: [e-mail]


>>  The idea seems to be to change the ESN so that free phone calls can be
>>  made on someone else's line.

Changing the ESN per se isn't illegal here in the UK.  In fact it's
become essential now that a number of cellular phone companies have
started to "block" the ESNs of, for example, customers who disconnect
to change to other cellular phone companies, so they can't use their
phones on the network.

Because a cottage industry has been set up to do this, its not too
much of a surprise that as a result there has been a sudden increase
over here of the "cloning" of working ESNs.  This does result in fraud
 -- fraud against the registered user of that ESN -- and of course
that is illegal.  The problem is that it's not as easy to spot by
checking bills, as Pat suggested.  These phones are usually used to
"sell" cheap international calls back home, to visitors and
immigrants.  There wouldn't be any pattern (other than the calls would
all be expensive and international) and the people who receive the
calls would genuinely know nothing about the criminal responsible.

What has been done here, is to arrange for the Cellular system to
"spot" cases where two phones are live on the system with the same ESN
at the same time, or where a phone appears to "move" faster than
normal between two different parts of the country.

Not all cellular systems use our (ETACS) system; I believe USA uses
AMPS and Oz uses something like GSM.  So what may be possible in one
country, is not necessarily possible in another.


Richard Cox

Mandarin Technology, Cardiff Business Park, Llanishen, CARDIFF, Wales CF4 5WF
Voice: [phone]      Fax: [phone]      VoiceMail: [phone]
E-mail: [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Peter da Silva)
Subject: Re: Perot Compuserve Account
Organization: Taronga Park BBS
Date: Mon, 13 Jul 1992 12:07:06 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> TELECOM Moderator notes:

> [Moderator's Note: This brings up the original question: Does Perot
> have an email address for the proposed electronic forum for the
> candidates? Should we use '[e-mail]' instead?  PAT]

perot.com, eh? So if he gets elected we might actually see something
like "[e-mail]"?


Peter da Silva, Taronga Park BBS, Houston, TX  [phone]/1032

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

Date: Tue, 14 Jul 92 02:26 PDT
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: Perot Compuserve Account


The Moderator notes:

> And the idea that electronic mail is somehow a step-child in the way
> we communicate -- that paper mail is legitimate (who has yet to
> express sympathy for the volume of paper mail David Bush must receive
> for Perot each day?) but electronic mail must be restricted somehow
> lest it cause too much aggravation for the recipient is very silly.
> Electronic mail is where things are at these days.

And becoming more so. Over the past years (and particularly the past
year) I have been under the impression that the US Mail has become
slower and less reliable. Letters that used to take a couple of days
to travel coast to coast now take a week. Mail to Los Angeles from
here takes a good five days now (if it makes it at all).

For the price of a stamp, you can send a fax anywhere in the country.
It gets there immediately for sure. E-mail costs considerably less
than that, reaches its destination in less than a day (most of the
e-mail I send and receive takes minutes), and again the odds of being
delivered are exceedingly high.

Accordingly, I now only use the US Mail in the absence of any
alternative. When it started taking three days for a letter to reach
San Francisco from here (40 miles), I reassessed the communication
food chain. Hence, I agree with Pat. If someone is proporting to be
participating in electronic communications, then he had better be sure
that he can deal with commensurate incoming traffic.

The day is coming when we all will look at paper mail as passe and
archaic.  I know I already do.


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


[Moderator's Note: Remember when that guy wrote me a year or so ago
saying I should not have given out [e-mail] since if the
chairman got too much mail they might cut the link to the net? I am
still scratching my head over that one, wondering exactly who would be
the loser.   PAT]

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

Subject: Re: Perot Compuserve Account
Date: Tue, 14 Jul 1992 11:28:44 PDT
From: Chris Kent Kantarjiev <[e-mail]>


It has been suggested that "[e-mail]" is a way to reach
Perot, or at least his administrative assitant.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #559
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa28384;
          16 Jul 92 2:27 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA06692
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 16 Jul 1992 00:29:10 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA29048
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 16 Jul 1992 00:29:00 -0500
Date: Thu, 16 Jul 1992 00:29:00 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #561

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 16 Jul 92 00:29:00 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 561

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Unions Wrap Up AT&T Talks (Phillip Dampier)
    AT&T Voicemark (Ken Jongsma)
    AT&T Automated Rate Information (Ken Jongsma)
    Baby Bells Get Attention (Phillip Dampier)
    Newport LAN2LAN/Compression Error Rates (Chris Cox)
    Pac*Bell Joins the Fray (John Higdon)
    Overseas AT&T Calling Card? (Peter Quodling)
    ECTL: New Speech Mailing List (David C. J. Leip)
    Helpful Ameritech ISDN Person (Matthew Holdrege)
    Auto Attendant and KSU Wanted (Thomas Metro)
    Nynex Cellular Mobile Perks (Monty Solomon)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Phillip Dampier)
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Date: Wed, 15 Jul 1992 16:07:34 -0500
Subject: Unions Wrap Up AT&T Talks


UNIONS WRAP UP LOCAL ISSUE TALKS WITH AT&T,
CLEARING WAY FOR NATIONAL CONTRACT RATIFICATION

WASHINGTON -- Unions representing 127,000 AT&T workers announced that
they had reached settlement with the company at six local issues
bargaining tables after marathon talks over the weekend, clearing the
way for a national membership ratification vote on a new three-year
contract.

A settlement on national bargaining issues had been announced earlier,
on July 1, by AT&T, the Communications Workers of America (CWA), which
represents 100,000 workers at AT&T, and the International Brotherhood
of Electrical Workers (IBEW), which represents another 27,000.

However, that settlement was contingent upon successful completion of
further talks on issues specific to various individual work groups and
manufacturing plants.

The local issues settlement came late last night following intense
bargaining sessions that saw negotiators meeting at one point for 43
straight hours from Friday through yesterday morning.

Membership ratification of the complete settlement package will take
several weeks to complete, the unions reported. Strengthened
employment security was identified as the unions' chief goal in the
talks, and union negotiators said they had achieved further gains in
this area in the local talks.

The national settlement calls for over 30 improvements in the employee
job transfer system at AT&T, as well as access to a larger pool of
available jobs and a better chance to be rehired into new jobs.

The settlement also boosts base wages for most workers by 12.3 percent
over the three years, provides $3,300 worth of AT&T stock to each
employee, raises pension benefits by 13 percent, and expands worker
training and family care provisions.

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

From: [e-mail] (Ken Jongsma)
Subject: AT&T Voicemark
Date: Wed, 15 Jul 92 15:57:08 EDT


I had an occasion to use AT&T Voicemark (The store and forward message
service) the other morning. First, a kudo ...

I needed to record a message at 5AM the other morning for delivery
later in the morning, but I couldn't remember the Voicemark number.
(Actually, I did remember the number, but thought it was a 700 number
like Alliance, when it really was an 800 number.)

Anyway, I called the 1-800-CALL-ATT number, waded through the menus
and got to a live operator. I asked her for the Voicemark number.
Within 60 seconds she found the number, apologized for taking so long
and connected me to the number herself. (She said they had a huge book
of various AT&T departments/products and it took a while to find
things.)  All this at 5AM. I was impressed.

Anyway, Voicemark worked as advertised. A couple of comments, since I
know at least one Voicemark engineer reads the Digest:

Please add the ability to send the same message to multiple numbers.
it's a drag having to rerecord the same message.

Voicemark stumbles when it encounters an answering machine. I did not
know that one of the target numbers was answered by a machine.
Voicemark called the machine at the designated time and left my
message. Fortunately the machine recorded the message. It didn't know
what to do when Voicemark said "Press # to reply" though! Eventually
Voicemark gave up and hung up.  I could have told Voicemark to use a
live operator, had I known there was a machine on the other end, but I
didn't know at the time.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Ken Jongsma)
Subject: AT&T Automated Rate Information
Date: Wed, 15 Jul 92 16:01:50 EDT


I was in the Little Rock airport the other day and noticed something
interesting: The AT&T Darth Vader phones (old CRT style) had a small
sticker on them that said "For free AT&T rate info, Dial 0 + AC +
number + 0".

Well, you can't do that. These phones capture the number and kill the
dial after 0 + AC + number. They then outpulse the number with the
receiver muted. When the "bong" occurs, you can dial 0, but that just
gets you the AT&T operator. I expected something more automated.

Anyone know why these phones are stickered this way?


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Phillip Dampier)
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Date: Wed, 15 Jul 1992 16:20:57 -0500
Subject: Baby Bells Get Attention


   MIAMI -- With Florida's attorney general accusing a baby of Ma Bell
of acting like Ma Barker, the telephone company is trying to restore
its image by warning consumers they may have been overcharged.

   Florida Attorney General Bob Butterworth said Southern Bell
Telephone Co. owes $14 million in refunds to customers who were
pressured into ordering expensive services or billed for services they
did not order.

   Phone companies in Pennsylvania, California and Wisconsin also have
been fined or ordered to make restitution for deceptive marketing,
said Gene Kimmelman, legislative director of the Consumer Federation
of America in Washington.

   Southern Bell spokesman Spero Canton said Tuesday that a few
dishonest sales people were to blame and were no longer with the
company. He also said that when the company found out about the
practices 1 1/2 years ago, it refunded more than $850,000 to about
30,000 customers.

   Butterworth, however, said company employees tried to persuade
customers to accept only a fraction of what they were owed.

   To help alert consumers to refunds they might be owed, Southern
Bell, one of the so-called Baby Bells created by the breakup of AT&T,
planned to place full-page ads in newspapers around Florida
encouraging customers to check their bills. Canton said bills were
being itemized this month to provide a rundown of charges.

   Customer service hours would be extended for the next two weeks to
handle calls, he said.

   Butterworth said Monday he would sue to force the company to make
refunds to at least 225,000 of its 4.7 million Florida customers.

   "We all grew up trusting Ma Bell," Butterworth said. "We didn't
expect to encounter Ma Barker."

   The optional services included touch-tone dialing ($1 a month);
call forwarding ($2.45 a month); call waiting ($3.50); speed calling
($2.20 to $3); and wire maintenance (up to $2.50 a month), in which
the phone company agrees to fix problems inside a customer's home.
Before the American Telephone & Telegraph Co. monopoly was broken up
by court order, the maintenance service was free.

   Kimmelman said watchdog groups such as his are pushing in Congress
for safeguards against such abuses. The federation is backing a bill
passed July 1 by the House Judiciary Committee that would limit phone
companies from getting into new information services so long as they
remain the local monopoly.

   In 1990, Bell of Pennsylvania was ordered to pay $42 million in
refunds.  That same year in California, Pacific Telesis Group was
ordered to refund $3.5 million. In 1989, Wisconsin Bell was fined $1.2
million.

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

From: ramrod![e-mail] (Chris Cox)
Subject: Newport LAN2LAN/Compression Error Rates
Organization: LaserMaster Technologies, Minneapolis, MN  USA
Date: Wed, 15 Jul 1992 13:35:30 GMT


We have been using a pair of Newport LAN2LAN/Compression NIC's
providing a wide-area link between Minneapolis and Amsterdam for about
six weeks now.

The link is working pretty well, however, I am seeing (what is to me!)
an alarming number error messages in the file server SYS$LOG.ERR files
at each end of the link -- typically between 2 and 30 link status
error messages per HOUR.

The cards are installed in NetWare 3.11 file servers, connected to
Republic Telecom MUXes with 64kb of our 128kb bandwidth assigned to
them.  They are routing both IP and IPX.

Has anyone any experience with a feel for the relative significance of
this sort of error level rate?

Am I being overly paranoid?

Thanks in advance.


Chris Cox  W0/G4JEC      [phone]
Network Administrator    LaserMaster Technologies

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

Date: Wed, 15 Jul 92 04:52 PDT
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Pac*Bell Joins the Fray


In commercials that began on July 13th, Pac*Bell started pushing its
own Calling Card, making comparisons with other carriers' cards. As
some of you may know, Pac*Bell's monopoly on intraLATA calling will be
ending in the forseeable future. The ads proudly tout the fact that
with the Pac*Bell Calling Card "it is never necessary to dial an
access code".

Well, as they always say in business, if you have a liability --
feature it. While AT&T tells you that to avoid being ripped off by AOS
slime you should dial the AT&T access code, Pac*Bell says go ahead and
get screwed. At least you don't have to dial an access code! As I have
noticed over and over, AOS criminals cannot accept the AT&T-only card
while, of course, they readily accept an LEC card. Hence, "no need to
dial an access code".

The other face of the access code mention is that when intraLATA
competition is a reality, it will be necessary to use a code if you
wish to use a different carrier than Pacific Bell. By indoctrinating
the public with the notion that using an access code is "inconven-
ient", it will enhance its position as default carrier.

These very misleading commercials point out what I have been preaching
for years. Advertising is not meant to inform, only to sell. How many
people do you think there are out there who actually believe that
"Friends and Family" is just the cheapest plan there is? I would wager
that it is quite a few and that would indicate a very successful
campaign.

On July 27, Pac*Bell will launch its new Centrex spots. All of the
Centrex advertising that I have seen so far is borderline fraudulent.
Example: A software company executive in Scotts Valley is crowing
about how he stayed "up and running" after the earthquake because he
had Centrex while a neighbor business with a PBX was down (no power)
for two days. Yeah, right! I wonder how the software company kept its
computers running for two days, or did the people just talk on the
phone shooting the breeze? And even if it DID keep its computers
running on backup power, why would that have not worked for a PBX
switch?

I will be eagerly awaiting Pac*Bell's latest Pac of Lies.


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

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Overseas AT&T Calling Card?
Organization: The New Software Group
Date: Wed, 15 Jul 1992 13:36:22 GMT


Some time back, I heard mention (in this forum, I believe) of an AT&T
calling card specifically for people living overseas. I am an
Australian about to relocate back there, and would like to have an
AT&T card for when I am travelling, or need to contact people in the
U.S.

Anyone know what it is called, or which part of AT&T to ask about it.


Peter Quodling                 Internet:     [e-mail]
Distrib. Computing Components    UUCP: ...!decwrl!blumon.enet!quodling
Part of The New Software Group.  Phone: [phone]
Digital Equipment Corporation    Fax:   [phone]
110 Spitbrook Road, ZKO1-3/J35
Nashua, NH 03062-2642            I said it, not them...

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

From: [e-mail] (David C. J. Leip)
Subject: ECTL: New Speech Mailing List
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Wed, 15 Jul 92 14:33:38 -0400


Announcing a fairly new mailing list.

         Electronic Communal Temporal Lobe
        =================================


    The Electronic Communal Temporal Lobe (or ECTL) is a moderated
mailing list for SIE'ers (Speech Interface Enthusiasts). It's a fairly
new international list which serves as a place to post notices and
queries or debate issues of interest to SIE'ers (Typically issues
regarding speech interface research).  Subscription is open to all.
Presently, there are about 350 subscribers from 25 different nations.

    To subscribe just send a message to the moderator (me), David
Leip, at the following address. Please include your name, institution,
department, daytime phone, and e-mail address.

The address is: [e-mail]

If for any reason you have trouble mailing to that account, please
contact me at the address or phone number below.


David Leip            University of Guelph
[e-mail]  Computing & Information Science
[phone] ext.3709        Guelph, Ontario, Canada  N1G 2W1

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

Date: Tue, 14 Jul 92 19:49 GMT
From: Matthew Holdrege <[e-mail]>
Subject: Helpful Ameritech ISDN Person


I'm sorry I didn't post this earlier. If anyone is interested, I can
give you the name and number of a helpful and knowledgeable IBT
datacomm salesman who has many contacts with IBT/Ameritech marketing
and Switch Operations.  He really helped smooth the way for my ISDN
installs.

Why is he so helpful you ask? Well, he isn't a Bell employee. He is an
independant authorized reseller. His prices are the same as IBT's and
his service is far superior. I don't know if this kind of relationship
is unique to IBT, but I would like to find a similar agent in Southern
California.

Email if you need his name and number. Email if you know of a good
reseller in Southern California.


Matt Holdrege  [e-mail]  [e-mail]  714-229-2518

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

Date: Wed, 15 Jul 92 4:52:22 EDT
From: Thomas Metro <[e-mail]>
Subject: Auto Attendant and KSU


I am looking for a device to do the following:

   1. Answer the telephone on the first ring.
   2. Play a greeting message.
   3. When the greeting message ends, ring through to an attached
      phone.

Most voice mail systems can do this, but I am looking for a dedicated,
low cost ($100/line) device that can do the above. If the device will
work with two lines, that would be even better.

One thought I had was to use one of those fax/phone switches. I'm not
sure, but I think I have heard of some that allow you to record your
own greeting (as apposed to the synthesized or "burnt-in-ROM" kind).
I'm not entirely sure if one of those boxes would even do the trick in
terms of following steps 1 through 3.

What can you tell me about an old KSU with a part number of 400D KTU
on the line cards. I'm sure it was common many years ago. Are the
customer side lines standard analog (i.e. can I plug in a POT)? What
features/ functions does this KSU provide?

Please send replies via mail -- I can't always keep up with the volume
on this group.


Thanks,

Tom    [e-mail]
Venture Logic      Newton, MA

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

Date: Wed, 15 Jul 1992 05:35:06 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <[e-mail]>
Subject: Nynex Cellular MobilePerks


In an ad in the 7/14/92 {Boston Globe}, Nynex Mobile is promoting
their MobilePerks program where customers get a MobilePerks point for
every minute of local airtime used.

These points can be used towards plane tickets, hotels, rental cars,
gas, etc.

Points can also be cashed in for cellular airtime, a portable cellular
phone, or portable cellular fax machine.

I don't know if you get points for incoming calls.

Any Nynex Mobile customers here have more information?


Monty Solomon / PO Box 2486 / Framingham, MA  01701-0405
[e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #561
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa00812;
          16 Jul 92 3:23 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA26030
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 16 Jul 1992 01:17:28 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA14476
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 16 Jul 1992 01:17:14 -0500
Date: Thu, 16 Jul 1992 01:17:14 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #562

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 16 Jul 92 01:17:14 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 562

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: The Depths of Sliminess (Peter da Silva)
    Re: The Depths of Sliminess ([e-mail])
    Re: The Depths of Sliminess (James Joseph)
    Re: The Depths of Sliminess (B. J. Herbison)
    Personal Identification (was The Depths of Sliminess) (Gregory G. Woodbury)
    Re: Teleslime (A Tip) ([e-mail])
    Re: What is ESN? (Andrew G. Minter)
    Re: What is ESN? (Kevin Culhane)
    Re: What is ESN? (Francois Truchon)
    Re: European Phone in Canada? (Peter Knoppers)
    Re: European Phone in Canada? (Rop Gonggrijp)
    Re: Perot Compuserve Account (John Slater)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Peter da Silva)
Subject: Re: The Depths of Sliminess
Organization: Taronga Park BBS
Date: Mon, 13 Jul 1992 01:50:05 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> Clint Ruoho <cr@farpoint.
tucson.az.us> writes:

> 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.

So, technically, does any activity that is paid for, whether it's
useful work or not. Telemarketing, as far as I'm concerned, reduces
the available resources in the economy, reduces people's quality of
life, and encourages defensive measures that would otherwise be
unnecessary. Therefore it is a drain on the conomy ... not a
contribution to it.

> And still, I'd rather have somebody working as a telemarketer
> instead of collecting welfare.

I'd rather have them collecting welfare. At least that leaves them
free to engage in productive (if non-remunerative) pursuits.

I'd much prefer that they engaged in productive work, like prostitution.

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

> 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?

Get "blocked ID blocking", which would play a recording at the CO
saying "I'm sorry, but you need to disable blocking on your line
before calling this number" if someone called with their ID blocked.
That at least lets the teleslime know that you're not interested in
anoymous calls (yes, I assume that they would have their ID blocked as
a matter of course).

This service is actually more useful than Caller-ID itself.

BTW ... isn't it time to move this thread to TELECOM-PRIVACY?

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Michael P. Deignan (KD1HZ)) writes:

> The first thing I would do is integrate Caller ID into my computer
> system, and have the system interpret the phone number against a
> database, and announce via its voice subsystem who is calling over my
> residential PA system.

I see. How does a minimum-wage grocery sacker afford that sort of
stuff?  Or do minimum-wage sackers deserve to get interrupted? Don't
want the hoi polloi to get uppity ...


Peter da Silva, Taronga Park BBS, Houston, TX  [phone]/1032


[Moderator's Note: Peter is correct that this thread has pretty much
worn out its welcome here. As has happened before, I've carried it far
longer than I should in this group. Off to comp.privacy with it!  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: The Depths of Sliminess
Organization: CompuData Inc., DeLand
Date: Mon, 13 Jul 92 07:06:38 GMT


TELECOM Moderator noted:

> So for you folks that don't like answering the phone blind and
> risking a call from (oh my God!) a 'telemarketing slime',

I don't think you are understanding the issue even yet.  The problem
is quite simply that some pest is interrupting whatever I am doing to
drag me over to the phone so that he can try to sell me something.

You are ignoring the direct cost to me or my employer, even before I
have decided if the call is from someone important.  Concentration on
work is interrupted, even if I can decide to ignore the call.  No, I
don't have a secretary.  As a writer, I have learned to type fairly
well over the years, and it is faster than hand-writing.

The existence of door-to-door salescritters in no wise justifies the
existence of phone salescritters.  You can't use one evil to justify
another.


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

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

Date: Tue, 14 Jul 92 11:32:45 -0400
From: [e-mail] (James Joseph)
Subject: Re: The Depths of Sliminess


> [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]

    I am neither for, nor against caller ID.  I just don't care one
way or the other.  But how can you promote caller ID as the cure-all
for the nuisance calls?  I am not smart enough to look at a number and
determine who is making the call.  May be it is my wife calling from a
payphone to tell me that her car went kaput on the way home.  Or it
may be the sales-slime.  Is there something more to the caller-ID than
I know of? All it can do is flash the caller's number on a display on
the callee's phone, right?  If I am at the receiving end, and do not
recognize the call I want to pick up the phone and find out who it is,
just in case it is something important.


james joseph    [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: Although I use Caller-ID to screen calls, I use it
more as a way to have recourse to a (previously) unknown caller for
whatever reason. I tend to pick and choose who I will answer when the
number is known to me ... but I always answer unknown numbers.  PAT]

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

Date: Tue, 14 Jul 92 06:47:43 PDT
From: B.J. <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: The Depths of Sliminess


> How do I know it's a telemarketer until I answer the phone?

> [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]

Caller-ID is almost useless for this purpose.  My friends don't always
call from the same numbers, people I do business with don't always
call from the same numbers, telemarketers don't call from the same
numbers, and, the biggest current problem, most telemarketers seem to
call from other LATAs anyway.

If an unknown number appears with Caller-ID, it could also be a
telemarketer.  But, if a friend is calling from a non-standard
location I don't want to miss the call -- the topic is probably more
important than idle chatter.

Caller-ID can sometimes be useful to show that friends are calling,
but if the number isn't a friend's number then the number is almost
always useless.  It only helps with repeated annoyance calls from the
same number (or bank of numbers).

> [Moderator's Note: ... 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.

Caller-ID is about as useful as a peephole that only shows the color
of the caller's socks.  It will help if a friend has a distinctive
pair of socks, but a pair of white socks doesn't tell you anything.


B.J.

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

From: wolves![e-mail] (Gregory G. Woodbury)
Subject: Personal Identification (was The Depths of Sliminess)
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Wolves Den UNIX
Date: Wed, 15 Jul 1992 03:21:37 GMT


In responding to several bashers of telemarketers, the Moderator
suggests that Caller-ID is the perfect answer to knowing who is
calling.

This, I suggest in turn, is *not* the answer.

Caller-ID will tell me if a caller from a properly equipped exchange
is at a particular number.  It does not tell me *who* at that number
is calling.  It helps, but not much.

It also does not cover situations where someone is calling from
somewhere else.  It simply returns the number from wherever they are
calling.  Once again, there is no way of knowing *who* is calling in
particular.

There are systems available that allow someone to give out special
codes so that "special" people can be identified by their dialing, but
these are not always available, or universally applicable.  (Consider
someone calling from a COCOT that blocks touchtone after connecting;
several systems will not work in such cases.)  About the only one that
works in any sort of universal fashion is the "distinctive ring" that
assigns multiple numbers to one pair and rings in different fashions,
but that is not universally available, and costs to bloody much for
most folks tastes.

Saying that Caller-ID is the way to go is just to much of a "pat"
answer.

Gregory G. Woodbury @ The Wolves Den UNIX, Durham NC
UUCP: ...dukcds!wolves!ggw   ...duke!wolves!ggw           [use the maps!]
Domain: [e-mail]  [e-mail]  [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: It may not be perfect, but Caller-ID is the best we
have available at present. Anyway, see my earlier comments. I don't
care *who* calls as long as I have some recourse later if desired.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Teleslime (A Tip)
Organization: CompuData Inc., DeLand
Date: Mon, 13 Jul 92 07:39:19 GMT


[ call phoneco to report harrassing calls ]

Around here (Southern Bell), the phone company effectively encourages
such calls, as they increase revenue.  If you call to report such a
problem, they take the opportunity to try to sell a `service' where,
for so much per month, you can key a certain number to have the calls
logged.

It looks like profiteering from crime, but of course they don't care.
They don't have to.  They're the phone company.

The encouragement of such calls is found in their unwillingness to
take responsible action to provide the service they purport to
provide.  The harassing calls bureau is now a sales desk.


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


[Moderator's Note: Thanks to everyone who participated in this thread
which now has to be closed out.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Andrew G. Minter)
Subject: Re: What is ESN?
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Andrew G. Minter)
Organization: BNR Europe Limited
Date: Wed, 15 Jul 1992 10:24:16 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, Carl Moore (VLD/VMB)
<[e-mail]> writes:

> I noticed a listing for Bell-Northern Research in Richardson, Texas
> (near Dallas) on the 214-684 prefix, and followed by a 7D number
> prefixed with "ESN".  What is ESN?

An ESN number is an internal number on Northern Telecom's global,
digital corporate network. It's seven digits because NT is a big
company.

One day all telephone networks may be like it.


Cheers,

Andrew (no, I don't work in sales)

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

Subject: Re: What is ESN?
From: Kevin Culhane <[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 15 Jul 1992 10:36:12 -0400


In article <[e-mail]> Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
writes:

> I noticed a listing for Bell-Northern Research in Richardson, Texas
> (near Dallas) on the 214-684 prefix, and followed by a 7D number
> prefixed with "ESN".  What is ESN?

At BNR, ESN stands for Electronic Switched Network -- it is used to
communicate between all BNR and Northern Telecom sites.  It provides
long-distance telecom routing at the lowest cost using SL-100's and
other assorted goodies.

To get to any site in North America or the UK, one dials 6 + ESN +
extension.

The ESN code, however, is pretty useless if you're off-net.


Kevin Culhane     [e-mail]

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

Date: Wed, 15 Jul 92 17:26:31 EDT
From: [e-mail] (F Truchon)
Subject: Re: What is ESN?


ESN is an acronym for "Electronic Switched Network". In this context,
it simply refers to NT/BNR's corporate voice network. Basically, a
telephone network is implemented by leasing voice trunks between the
Meridian 1 (SL1) PBX's at various locations. I believe that the first
two or three digits of an ESN telephone number refer to a particular
PBX (same as for public networks).

Is ESN a standard name for corporate voice networks or is it only used
with NT's Meridian 1 PBX?


Regards,

Francois Truchon    Bell-Northern Research, Montreal, Canada
uucp: bnrmtl![e-mail]
P.S.: Usual disclaimer applies...

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

From: Peter Knoppers <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: European Phone in Canada?
Organization: Delft University of Technology, Dept. of Electrical Engineering
Date: Tue, 14 Jul 1992 09:37:58 GMT


[e-mail] (Christian Doucet) writes:

> My sister bought a phone in Amsterdam and it somewhat looks like a
> 2500 set. She want's to use it here in Canada because it has this
> "oldish European look" :). It has a DTMF keypad on it.

She has probably bought a type T65-TDK phone.

> I apologize if this is a FAQ but I have three of them:

> Will this phone work in Canada?

If the Canadian telephone system is anything like the USA system, yes.

> Will the DTMF keypad work in Canada?

DTMF is an international standard; it should work.

> How to wire it?

 ..picture deleted...

Any Dutch telephone has four wires named a, b, e and eb. The standard
coloring for the wires is:

    a  = red
    b  = blue
    e  = green
    eb = yellow

A and b correspond to tip and ring in the US. Connect those to the
wire pair from your phone company. Polarity is unimportant. If you
want the internal ringer to operate you must connect wire eb to b. If
you want an external ringer to operate together with the internal one,
connect it between eb and b. This puts it in series with the internal
ringer. If you don't want the internal ringer to operate, don't
connect eb. Do not connect the e (earth) wire. It is needed to
generate an out-of-band signal to PBXs by pressing the white (in some
sets black) push button.  This type of out-of-band signal is (to my
knowledge) not used outside the Netherlands.

If your phone is indeed a T65 or other model with mechanical ringer,
you can adjust the volume of the ringer with the toothed white wheel
in the bottom of the set. There is a big and a small bell symbol near
this wheel indicating higher and lower volume.


Peter Knoppers - [e-mail]

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

Subject: European Phone in Canada?
From: [e-mail] (Rop Gonggrijp)
Date: Wed, 15 Jul 92 16:50:46 WET/D
Organization: Hack-Tic Magazine


[e-mail] (Christian Doucet) writes:

>   [Amsterdam phone in Canada]
>
>               (round connector)
>                   /  |   |  \
>                  /   |   |   \
>                 /    /   \    \
>                /    /     \    \
>               /     |     |     \
>              /      |     |      \
>              o      o     o      o
>
>              a    ground  b      EB
>
> The ground is marked by the international symbol.

a and b are the tip and ring, if you want the phone to ring, connect
EB (Extra Bel) to b. Phone should work otherwise. DTMF is the same the
world over.

This EB wire is because they wanted to always make sure that extra
bells were hooked up in SERIES with the bell in the phone. Old
principle, doesn't really apply to modern ringers anymore. It is handy
to keep using the system, because you can determine by the wiring in
the outlet whether the phone that is plugged in will ring. Kinda handy.

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

Date: Wed, 15 Jul 92 09:09:15 BST
From: [e-mail] (John Slater - Sun UK - City SE)
Subject: Re: Perot Compuserve Account


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

> perot.com, eh? So if he gets elected we might actually see something
> like "[e-mail]"?

whitehouse.gov, surely?
           ^^^

John


[Moderator's Note: And thanks to Dennis Rears for the same suggestion
in an almost identical message not included here.   PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #562
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa02983;
          16 Jul 92 4:40 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA27576
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 16 Jul 1992 02:24:07 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA08231
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 16 Jul 1992 02:23:58 -0500
Date: Thu, 16 Jul 1992 02:23:58 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #563

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 16 Jul 92 02:23:54 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 563

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Cellular Phone Hacking (Rop Gonggrijp)
    Re: Cellular Phone Hacking (Alan Boritz)
    Re: Cellular Phone Hacking (Chris Arndt)
    Re: Cellular Phone Hacking (Paul Robichaux)
    Telecom Fraud (was Cellular Phone Hacking) (Steven S. Brack)
    DISA Hacking vs CNI (Andrew Klossner)
    Re: "Legal" Phreaking? (Peter da Silva)
    Re: "Legal" Phreaking? (Susan B. Huntsman)
    New Law in the Netherlands (was "Legal" Phreaking) (Dave Weitzel)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Cellular Phone Hacking
From: [e-mail] (Rop Gonggrijp)
Date: Wed, 15 Jul 92 16:30:44 WET/D
Organization: Hack-Tic Magazine


[e-mail] writes:

[Question on cellphone hacking: can you swap the ESN?]

> Anyone have any knowledge of potential problems etc?  Does it work?

> If possible please E-mail.

> [Moderator's Note: What you suggest is highly illegal in the USA and
> probably everywhere else in the world except possibly the Netherlands
> where it seems that everything is okay where defrauding the telco is
> concerned.

Many things that can be done with cell-phones are 'highly illegal'
(even here in Holland I might add), but that does not mean that we
cannot discuss the possiblities here. This guy may just be curious. In
fact: that may be why he wanted us to reply be e-mail, so that no
'criminals' could see his post. Ofcourse he could also be a 'criminal'
himself. Who knows. Let's stop the whole discussion on what is
illegal, where it is illegal and all the flames concerned.

> Another problem is that in most modern cellular phones, the
> chip containing the ESN is difficult to get into, let alone modify.
> They tend to be buried under wax, thoroughly soldered in place and
> with few or no markings on them.

If they solder it in like that, it means they have something to fear.

> A third problem is that if you could easily change them (let's say
you swap it out entirely for a bunch of little dip switches or pin
wheels you set by hand), ...

Do you have a schematic? Here in Holland this would NEVER work,
because on the newest network you not only send an ESN, but also an
answer to a 'question' from the cellular exchange. This 'signature' is
generated by a little module that you can't open (it's one chip). So
you can only replace the module by another one, but then it would not
match with the numbers stored in the cellular exchange.

There IS no easy hack into this one, in fact there might not even be a
complicated one. This is what you get if 'the system' puts its mind to
making phreaking impossible instead of catching the phreaks, but let's
forget about that flame ...

> ... is that the place you call is recorded by the cellular company
> and if you intend to call anything other than hotel/radio station
> switchboards/contest lines, etc then eventually any regular calling
> pattern will be investigated.  Wouldn't you love to have your mother
> get a call from a security representative for Telecom, asking who she
> spoke with and how to reach you?  Would your friends cover for you?
> For how long?

Is this really related to cellular phones or technology? This trick is
as old as phone-phreaks. Phreaking does not happen anymore because of
it, right?


[Moderator's Note: In landline service here in the USA, it is quite
common for telco investigators to find patterns of calling and then
(at first politely, then later sometimes in a harassing way) inquire
about the matter from 'regular' recipients of such calls. In an almost
apologetic and innocent-sounding way ("Our operator must have written
down the wrong number for billing when the call was placed, can you
help by telling us who called you?") they pry for details. Far too
many mothers, grandmothers and air-headed friends, lovers, etc are
very naive about this and run their mouth willingly.  PAT]

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

Date: 15 Jul 92 15:06:29 EDT
From: Alan Boritz <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Cellular Phone Hacking


[e-mail] (Ron Natalie) writes:

>> the chip containing the ESN is difficult to get into, let alone modify.

> With the latest phones I think it's actually getting easier.  Some of
> the new smaller handhelds actually store the ESN in the same
> programmable stuff as the NAM information.

> [Moderator's Note: By 'modern', I mean phones made in the past few
> years since the cellular carriers got the feds to crack down on the
> makers of the phones for not doing a better job of keeping the ESN
> tamper-proof. In the very early days, ESN tampering was common.  PAT]

The EIA spec (which was incorporated verbatum within FCC rules) always
specified that the ESN was to be, "buried within."  It was intended to
be installed within more than one solid state device so that tampering
with any portion would render the apparatus permanently inoperable.
The manufacturers (like Motorola) that made equipment that allowed
it's ESN to be changed in the field did not comply with the letter or
the spirit of the law.  While the cellular service industry will
always have law enforcement agencies on their side for any fraud issue
(after all, many law enforcement agencies depend upon cellular phone
service to bypass inadequately planned radio systems), who is more at
fault?  Slime-ball pirates for stealing the service, or the cellular
equipment manufacturers for failing to follow FCC rules and making the
process possible?

[e-mail] (Richard Cox) writes:

>> The idea seems to be to change the ESN so that free phone calls can be
>> made on someone else's line.

> Changing the ESN per se isn't illegal here in the UK.  In fact it's
> become essential now that a number of cellular phone companies have
> started to "block" the ESNs of, for example, customers who disconnect
> to change to other cellular phone companies, so they can't use their
> phones on the network.

It would seem that one type of fraud begets another.  Once an ESN is
in the "dead file" the phone is practically useless.  If those
cellular operators had any brains they wouldn't play Russian Roulette
with their livelihood.


Alan Boritz    [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: The cell companies frequently ignore the list in
their cutthroat efforts to get business. Ameritech adds one to the
negative listing here; the phone shows up with a customer of Cellular
One and they kill it from the list and reactivate it because they want
the business. It works the same way in reverse with Cell One here
blacklisting an ESN they had 'difficulty' with; the customer goes to
Ameritech and later complaining he cannot roam so Ameritech removes it
from the negative list. Back and forth, and so it goes.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Chris Arndt)
Subject: Re: Cellular Phone Hacking
Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo
Date: Wed, 15 Jul 1992 21:19:52 GMT


It seems that there is a lot of talk about hacked ESNs and cellular
fraud here, but no victims. Here's and intersting little first-hand
account.

My GTE Mobilenet bill is always small enough, and I travel little, so
checking it every month is easy.

Last month, I had over $80 of fraudulent calls on my bill, including
one marathon hour plus call placed in New York. As this has happened
once before, I knew to call customer service and they gave me credit
for the fraudlent calls no questions asked.

Curious about GTE's lack of interest in following up on this, I called
my account manager and asked him what GTE was doing about fraud. He
said that, since I brought it up, they'd like to change my number. I
said OK. What a pain in the behind!! I thought that they would just
cancel the old number and give me a new one to put in my phone. No, I
had to fill out a whole new service application, with all the
financial info on it. I did it anyway,'cause I pursuaded them to give
me a cooler number. However, when I was done, I called my account
manager back and said that, if they were serious about beating the
hackers, they were going to have to make the number changing process
easier. He said, he'd look into it. Sigh.

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

From: [e-mail] (Paul Robichaux)
Subject: Re: Cellular Phone Hacking
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: New Technology, Inc.
Date: Wed, 15 Jul 1992 13:07:24 GMT


In <[e-mail]> vta![e-mail] (Tom Wiencko)
writes:

> Jail, law suits, and other nasty things.  Note well that most cellular
> companies have well staffed and well equipped fraud departments, and
> some significant technology exists to detect fraudulent access, and in
> many cases to locate the offender.

My wife is a customer service manager for BellSouth Cellular, which
provides cellular service throughout much of the southern US. Her
office has a bulletin board covered with "fraud alert" notices
generated by BellSouth Cellular HQ in Atlanta.

Perhaps not surprisingly, the bulk of reported frauds involve "human
engineering": providing fake information to establish service,
activating several numbers then leaving town, and so on. Technological
fraud only accounts for a fractional portion of BSC's losses.

> There is also an effort taking place to establish a standard
> interconnect scheme between cellular companies to track fraud and
> cellular system abuse.  This system, when in place, will make it
> extremely difficult to defraud cellular companies.

I wonder how this fits into the MFJ? My understanding was that
landline companies couldn't share this type of information, and I'm
not sure I understand how cellular "children" of RBOCs could (granted,
cellular providers who aren't associated with an RBOC are home free.)


Paul Robichaux, KD4JZG    [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: I don't think the MFJ says anything about telcos
not being able to exchange information for billing purposes, and
certainly fraud billing would be in the category of 'discussable'
topics.   PAT]

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

Date: 15 Jul 1992 14:27:26 -0400 (EDT)
From: [e-mail] (Steven S. Brack)
Subject: Telecom Fraud (was Cellular Phone Hacking)


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail].
co.uk (Richard Cox) writes:

> What has been done here, is to arrange for the Cellular system to
> "spot" cases where two phones are live on the system with the same ESN
> at the same time, or where a phone appears to "move" faster than
> normal between two different parts of the country.

A friend of mine had an experience with calling card fraud, where two
calls were placed, one by him, and one by the person who had stolen
his CC number, from two locations hundreds of miles apart, within
minutes of one another.

It makes me wonder why the issuing telcos couldn't detect and possibly
block calls made on the same CC but made too far apart in distance and
too close together in time to have been made by the same person.


Steve Brack

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

From: [e-mail] (Andrew Klossner)
Date: Tue, 14 Jul 92 14:02:26 PDT
Subject: DISA Hacking vs CNI
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Tektronix, Wilsonville, Oregon


Bill Garfield tells us that ANI has little value in catching hackers:

> you send a team of investigators out to the address associated
> with the number and you find zero.

Our Esteemed Moderator turns this upside down and proclaims ANI of
great value in catching hackers:

> Do you see why so many hackers ... absolutely despise
> Caller-ID and its cousin ANI?

Perhaps Pat was low on sleep that night?

> 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
> ... "Are you a hackerphreak, or just trying to be Socially
> Responsible?"

These continue to be real social concerns, and belittling them does
not make them go away.  As the subject of much teleslime and the
brother of an abused wife, I think we could elevate the plane of this
discussion a bit.


Andrew Klossner  ([e-mail])

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

From: [e-mail] (Peter da Silva)
Subject: Re: "Legal" Phreaking?
Organization: Taronga Park BBS
Date: Mon, 13 Jul 1992 01:37:33 GMT


You know, a lot of these guys claim they need to hack for education
purposes: they can't get access to the latest software any other way.
A recent note in alt.hackers.malicious reveals more of the real
motivation: they do it for the thrill ... it's a sport to them. Pity
they don't pay any attention to what balloonists (who frequently have
to make non-prearranged use of other people's property) refer to as
"landowner relations" ... paying for damages, looking for alternatives
to landing in someone's crop, giving farmers free rides, and so on.

In article <[e-mail]> gtephx!bakerj@enuucp.
eas.asu.edu (Jon Baker) writes:

> Because, there are many computer systems out there that are for free
> public access by anyone who wants to dial the number and poke around.

Mine included. [phone].

> When I get onto a system, how do I know whether or not I'm 'supposed'
> to be there?

Well, when it says:

    Welcome to the AT&T 386 UNIX System

    (new users sign on as "new") login:

That's a sign you're supposed to be there. When it then plays for you
a list of rules for this BBS, that's a clue it's OK so long as you
follow those rules.

When it says:

    Authorised users only

    login:

That's probably a clue you shouldn't be there.

> How do I know whether this system is some private company's
mainframe, or some guy's PC in his garage?

> Where did you get the number? If you did it wargames-dialing, then you
> should probably assume you're not supposed to be there. If you got it
> from the "Houston Area BBS List" then you can probably assume it's OK
> to login.

How can you possibly "stumble onto" a system?


Peter da Silva, Taronga Park BBS, Houston, TX  [phone]/1032

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

Date: Tue, 14 Jul 92 17:25:04 -0600
From: [e-mail] (Susan B Huntsman)
Subject: Re: "Legal" Phreaking?


> If the system tells me, right up front, 'for authorized personnel
> only', then if I don't KNOW that I'm authorized, I'm not supposed to
> be there.  If it says 'Welcome!  Glad you're here!  Good Day!', I get
> the idea that I'm welcome.  If some Dutch hacker stumbles into a
> private computer system and it welcomes him gleefully, I don't think
> it's unreasonable for him to believe that he's welcome.  Now, if he
> does malicious harm to that system, that's another matter ...

I agree.  I am not a hacker but I like to look around, if the system
stops me I know that I am not to go any farther. Without minimal
security how is one to know what they can look at and what is off
limits.

> [Moderator's Note: How do you know if you are welcome or not? Well,
> was the number advertised as a public service? That might say
> something about it. "Good Day" does not imply you are welcome to enter
> somewhere, nor does 'hello', nor does 'please sign on'. Those comments
> could be addressed to authorized users only.  PAT]

The (US Government) had a problem with Welcome.  The system said
Welcome to TSO; Enter logon.  I think someone used it as a defense to
a break-in (at least that is the rumor going around). The logon is
now:

Notice: This is a U.S. Government Computer System. Unauthorized access
is prohibited by (public law 100-235) the computer fraud and abuse act
of 1986. If you are not an authorized user please exit immediately.

enter logon:

I am of the opinion that you should not have to lock anything. Nobody
has a defense for taking anything, But in these days I think 'Lock it
up or lose it' is the only way to keep people out.:]


SHuntsman

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: New Law in the Netherlands (was "Legal" Phreaking)
Organization: The MITRE Corporation, McLean VA 22102
Date: Wed, 15 Jul 1992 20:12:30 GMT


For those of you who haven't seen the July 13 issue of {Computerworld}:

Under the headline "Netherlands, Mexico chase after hackers" with a
byline crediting James Daly on page 14:

" ...In the Netherlands, hackers now face up to six years in jail for
illegally entering a secured data system. The law, which is expected
to become official next spring, begins with a maximum penalty of six
months' imprisonment for hackers who enter a secured computer system
but gets progressively more rigorous.

  "Imprisonment can be as long as four years if data in the system has
been changed and six years for hacking a system that serves a common
use, such as a hospital database.

   "Critics contend that the proposal does not differentiate between
internal and external computer crime. Cracking the password of a
colleague, according to the law, can merit prosecution."

   Hackers also said they believe the law will only increase the
danger to computer systems because they will no longer give cheap
warnings if a system has poor security ..."  The article goes on to
talk about chasing down software pirates in Mexico.  Isn't a public
telephone network a "system that serves a common use"?


Dave Weitzel      "Standard disclaimer here"

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #563
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa03365;
          17 Jul 92 4:07 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA22042
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 17 Jul 1992 02:26:52 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA24093
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 17 Jul 1992 02:26:44 -0500
Date: Fri, 17 Jul 1992 02:26:44 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #564

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 17 Jul 92 02:26:45 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 564

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Telecom Fraud (was Cellular Phone Hacking) (Kevin Alexander)
    Re: Telecom Fraud (was Cellular Phone Hacking) (Brian de Alwis)
    Re: Telecom Fraud (was Cellular Phone Hacking) (Marc T. Kaufman)
    Re: Telecom Fraud (was Cellular Phone Hacking) (Adam Shostack)
    Re: Telecom Fraud (was Cellular Phone Hacking) (Leonard Erickson)
    Re: Telecom Fraud (was Cellular Phone Hacking) (Ihor J. Kinal)
    Re: Telecom Fraud (was Cellular Phone Hacking) (Robert L. McMillin)
    Cracker Running Rampant! (Michael Bender)
    Re: Pat Townson Owes EFF an Apology (Mike Godwin)
    Godwin Speaks Out ... (Sam Israelit)
    Re: Democratic Convention (Including Telecom) (Charlie Mingo)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Kevin Alexander)
Subject: Re: Telecom Fraud (was Cellular Phone Hacking)
Date: 16 Jul 1992 10:14:26 -0500
Organization: Texas A&M University, College Station


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail].
UTOLEDO.edu (Steven S. Brack) writes:

> A friend of mine had an experience with calling card fraud, where two
> calls were placed, one by him, and one by the person who had stolen
> his CC number, from two locations hundreds of miles apart, within
> minutes of one another.

> It makes me wonder why the issuing telcos couldn't detect and possibly
> block calls made on the same CC but made too far apart in distance and
> too close together in time to have been made by the same person.

I don't think that would be very smart.  For example, while I'm at
college I use my parents Sprint FON card, and I'm about 100 miles
apart from them.  So let's say my father goes to San Francisco on
business and uses his card to call home/wherever and I'm calling long
distance somewhere else.  I'm sure one of us would be really ticked
off if we wouldn't make our calls.

I know many students here at A&M who also use thier parents long
distance calling cards.


Kevin Alexander    [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: Rather than automatically killing the account, this
could be set up as an exceptions type situation. It would be brought
to the attention of a human being who would see the record indicated
this would likely (or not likely) happen. Each subscriber could
indicate how they wanted such a situation to be handled for them.  PAT]

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

Date: Thu, 16 Jul 1992 11:12:33 -0400
From: [e-mail] (Brian de Alwis)
Subject: Re: Telecom Fraud (was Cellular Phone Hacking)
Organization Cognos Incorporated, Ottawa CANADA


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail].
UTOLEDO.edu (Steven S. Brack) writes:

> It makes me wonder why the issuing telcos couldn't detect and possibly
> block calls made on the same CC but made too far apart in distance and
> too close together in time to have been made by the same person.

How would the telco's know who was the legitimate caller?


Brian de Alwis. Brain on loan to Cognos Inc, Ottawa, Ontario.
[e-mail], or bsdealwi@napier.{waterloo.edu,uwaterloo.ca}

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

From: [e-mail] (Marc T. Kaufman)
Subject: Re: Telecom Fraud (was Cellular Phone Hacking)
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: CS Department, Stanford University, California, USA
Date: 16 Jul 92 15:41:17 GMT


[e-mail] (Steven S. Brack) writes:

> It makes me wonder why the issuing telcos couldn't detect and possibly
> block calls made on the same CC but made too far apart in distance and
> too close together in time to have been made by the same person.

Then my wife at home and myself on a business trip couldn't use the same
card number to charge calls.


Marc Kaufman ([e-mail])

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

From: [e-mail] (Adam Shostack)
Subject: Re: Telecom Fraud (was Cellular Phone Hacking)
Organization: Aiken Computation Lab, Harvard University
Date: Thu, 16 Jul 1992 17:33:09 GMT


The difference here is that while only one user should be using a
unique cellular phone at any given time, I can choose to loan my
credit card number to friends.  I have done this in the past, and if
telco made this impossible it would be a serious pain.

However, it would be nice if telco could give you the option of
restricting your card to one user at a time, or perhaps limiting it so
it couldn't be used out of the country.  (I know the international
number is different, but ATT USA Direct calls accept US credit cards
for international calls.)


Adam Shostack     [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Telecom Fraud (was Cellular Phone Hacking)
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: SCN Research/Qic Laboratories of Tigard, Oregon.
Date: Thu, 16 Jul 1992 14:14:39 GMT

[e-mail] (Steven S. Brack) writes:

> It makes me wonder why the issuing telcos couldn't detect and possibly
> block calls made on the same CC but made too far apart in distance and
> too close together in time to have been made by the same person.

Probably because they'd PO a bunch of *legitimate* customers. I used
to have four people sharing a house with me. We *all* had AT&T calling
cards which (as is *normal*) had the same card number and the same
PIN. So if I made a call from a phone booth just across the state
line, and one of the others was on a trip and made a call your idea
would have us getting blocked.

Heck, I know a lot of folks who don't even carry the cards, they just
memorize the number. Makes it a lot harder to lose!


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

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

Date: Thu, 16 Jul 92 10:18:05 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Ihor J Kinal)
Subject: Re: Telecom Fraud (was Cellular Phone Hacking)
Organization: AT&T

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail].
UTOLEDO.edu (Steven S. Brack) writes:

> It makes me wonder why the issuing telcos couldn't detect and possibly
> block calls made on the same CC but made too far apart in distance and
> too close together in time to have been made by the same person.

Nice idea, but some obvious problems -- I'm on the road in Dallas, and
my wife is off in the Catskills -- we both place calls, and all of a
sudden, we're blocked.

Yes, we could get separate numbers, but ...


Ihor Kinal     include standard disclaimer
att!trumpet!ijk [real mail address].

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

Date: Thu, 16 Jul 92 07:11:35 -0700
From: rlm@ms_aspen.hac.com (Robert L. McMillin)
Subject: Telecom Fraud (was Cellular Phone Hacking)


Steven S. Brack <[e-mail]> writes:

> It makes me wonder why the issuing telcos couldn't detect and possibly
> block calls made on the same [calling card] but made too far apart in
> distance and too close together in time to have been made by the same
> person.

Because the callers could be husband and wife, for instance.  It's
quite possible that more than one person could have the same card
number and be quite separated.


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

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

Date: Thu, 16 Jul 92 01:49:48 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Duke of Canterbury)
Subject: Cracker Running Rampant!


A friend of mine at a small midwestern university has been having a
horrendous cracker problem on their main Sun system that's connected
to the Internet.  One of the problems that he is having is that the
computer center there didn't take the cracker seriously until a few
days ago, when he rebuilt a new kernel, and rebooted the system (!).

My friend isn't a computer center employee, he's a humanities and
social science professor that is probably the most skilled person in
the SunOS/UNIX environment at the school, but because of internal
politics, the computer center staff and director is unwilling to give
him much responsibility, and he really doesn't want that much, he
would much rather have the computer center staff doing their jobs and
learning about the system rather than spending their time installing
copies of the latest DOS spreadsheet, but unfortunately, their level
of expertise, coupled with their immense desire not to work more than
eight hours a day, has caused this cracker problem to get out of hand.

Imagine a system that has more suid programs than users!  Their
password file is readable by all, and various password cracker
programs have been run against it and many accounts have been
compromised.  In our discussions of computer break-ins, this is a
classic example of the system administrators not doing their job, even
after getting information from CERT and Sun on how to plug their many
holes.

I generally have sympathy for the type of person that I call a hacker,
one that explores but doesn't disrupt or destroy, but this person is
not a hacker; he is a malicious person somewhere in the world (they
think he's in Australia) that has not only refused to stop accessing
the system after repeated requests by e-mail, but also has root
privledge and the skill to modify the kernel to do his bidding.  He
engages in a cat-and-mouse game that often culminates in my friend or
one of the system administrators knocking him off of the system, just
to have him reappear and knock the legitimate users off of the system.

I have included his latest e-mail that he has sent to many of the
faculty and staff at the university.  Notice the adolescent logic that
he uses and the premise that he is only helping to "enhance" security,
and how he is doing them a service by knocking other crackers off of
the system.  Things like this infuriate me, because certainly one side
of the situation is that the system administrators aren't doing their
jobs (for whatever reasons), but the other side is that little shits
like this are what may cause the internet to crumble because no
organization will want to be connected to it.

What would you do in my friend's situation?  If you have some
constructive ideas, please send me some e-mail or post; I'm a regular
reader of c.d.t and I'll forward them on to my friend.

e-mail from cracker follows:

> Good morning, evening, afternoon..
>
>      A couple of things..  I believe I am now being called 'Blackmailing'
> which is an interesting thought. As far as I knew, a blackmailer was someone
> who made someone do something with the threat of something other if they
> didn't do it. [hmm] I have made it QUITE clear to Chris and Lance recently
> that I am not on [your system] to cause havock, nor to randomly delete
> stuff. I ALSO was trying to arrange this chat with tom to inform him of
> EXACTLY what the holes in his security were, and tell him how to fix them.
> Not to sit there and justify my actions to you. And then to happily wave
> bye-bye as you run around closing up holes.  What I think I will do now is
> just leave. Leaving everything I have put here lying around for someone else
> to find, and not breathing a word of what is wrong. I have fixed a couple of
> things so that it will be relativly hard to become root if someone DOES
> break in [chowning root of /etc and /usr/bin] but still quite simple if you
> know what the basic holes in SunOS are.

>      I am on IRC a lot, with the nickname Zarg, and I will answer your
> questions there.  I'm not sure if I will tell you whats up with [your
> system], but you can only try, can't you.

>      I'm now going to have a look thru the mail and see exactly what I am
> blackmailing you about/for, because if I am, I would really like to know
> what It's about..

>                       Zarg

> PS: Want to hear a joke?  I set up a cron job to do a suid file find at 5am
> every morning. [As there is I think another hacker wandering around, armed
> with the /etc/passwd file, and a copy of Crack] Now someone must have seen
> that, [I told Lance, but I dont' think he's stupid enought to do this] and
> went and deleted ALL of roots cron, and puts everyones name in
> ../cron/cron.deny! Also apparently, he did a chmod 700 / as well.. Funny.

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

From: [e-mail] (Mike Godwin)
Subject: Re: Pat Townson Owes EFF an Apology
Organization: Electronic Frontier Foundation
Date: Wed, 15 Jul 1992 15:20:43 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Alan
Millar) writes:

> You know, I was starting to think you had a good point about libel.
> But you corrected that.

> [Moderator's Note: Next thing you know, they'll be saying I owe Gary
> Hart and the entire Democratic Party an apology for claiming they do
> not pay their bills in uh, a 'timely and business-like manner.' :)  PAT]

I stand by my statements that Pat Townson has little regard for the
truth, and that he owes us an apology. It may well be the case that
Gary Hart (or whoever) doesn't pay his bills. But this is a non
sequitur, since the particular lie that Pat tells is that EFF defends
the unauthorized intrusion into others' computer systems.

If Townson has respect for the truth, why does he persist in
misrepresenting EFF? I think it's because he wants to create an image
of himself as being a hardliner. I think any honest person would have
trouble with Pat's deliberate misrepresentation of someone else in
order to further his own purposes.


Mike Godwin,    [e-mail]
[phone]  EFF, Cambridge

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

Date: Thu, 16 Jul 92 12:25:15 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Sam Israelit)
Subject: Godwin Speaks Out ...


In TELECOM #552, Mike Godwin chastised PAT with the paragraph:

> I doubt anyone at EFF is capable of being as shrill as Townson.
> And I am certain that we have higher regard for the truth than he
> does.

Well Mike, you had me leaning towards your side until I read the 13
July edition of {ComputerWorld}, specifically the article "Wiretap
snares alleged hackers". In that article, you state:

"This whole indictment could very well be an attempt to frame some
people who the authorities believe glorify hacking."

This sounds like a sensationalist defense strategy to me Mike. Why
does it have to be a conspiracy on the part of the government to frame
these people? Maybe the government just bungled another investigation,
since they do have a pretty fair track record of doing that.

Though you carefully couch your statement so that the wording cannot
be legally used against you, when it is all boiled down you are doing
the same thing that PAT did when he said: "Let's listen to the shrill
chatter from the EFF ..."  PAT is just a little less selective with
his wording. If you believe his statement is below the level of
"regard for the truth" held by your organization, then from the
{ComputerWorld} article I can see that your regard for the truth is
actually at a pretty low level.

Sorry to be inflamatory, but I call 'em as I see 'em ...


Sam Israelit

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

From: [e-mail] (Charlie Mingo)
Date: Wed, 15 Jul 1992 15:08:24 -0500
Subject: Re: Democratic Convention (Including Telecom)


Our Esteemed Moderator writes:

> [Moderator's Note: Democratic conventions are the only telco
> subscribers in the world who can run up BIG bills and leave them
> unpaid for years at a time. IBT gave up ever trying to collect what
> they had coming from the Democratic convention here in 1968, and
> finally wrote it off, meaning of course we rate payers took a hit. I
> imagine the subscribers of NY Tel get to pay for this one, probably
> sometime around 1996 when it gets written off.   PAT]

   NY Tel is waaaay ahead of you on this one.  According to the {New
York Times} (July 10 at B1), NY Tel has charged the Democrats over
$600 for each line it installs at the Garden (more than twice the
price the Republicans will be charged in Houston -- I guess telcos
have long memories).

   The breakdown is as follows: $150 is the "regular" charge for
installing a business line (I'm glad I don't live there), plus $207 as
a "special-event charge" (because they have to take the lines out four
days later -- this is $9 less then the Dems were charged in 1980), and
the remaining $250-odd dollars is a deposit for all those message
units and tolls.

   Considering that there are several hundred lines installed at this
bargain rate, I think NY Tel would have to work hard to lose money on
this job.  As for the poor Democrats, this is the price they have to
pay for meeting in NYC.  When will they ever learn how to save money?


[Moderator's Note: The big news today of course is that Ross Perot has
pulled out of the campaign, and things are looking brighter for the
Democrats than anytime in the past twelve years. This may be their
year for victory, for only the fourth time in forty years (Kennedy,
Johnson, Carter, (??) Clinton (??).  PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #564
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa19984;
          18 Jul 92 13:37 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA03904
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 18 Jul 1992 11:35:50 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA13276
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 18 Jul 1992 11:35:41 -0500
Date: Sat, 18 Jul 1992 11:35:41 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #565

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 18 Jul 92 11:35:44 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 565

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    EARN Survey (Turgut Kalfaoglu)
    Inquiry: Info on Motorola People Finder (Tony J. Rinella)
    GTE and CLASS/ISDN (Randy Gellens)
    NZ Telecom Voice Mail (Randy Gellens)
    CLASS Services Available from Pacific Bell Now! (Well, Almost) (J. Leavens)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Organization: European Academic Research Network (EARN)
Date: Saturday, 18 Jul 1992 14:01:16 GMT
From: Turgut Kalfaoglu <[e-mail]>
Subject: EARN Survey


EARN (European Academic and Research Network) is conducting a survey
of network usage, in order to have a clearer picture of the needs,
wants, and opinions of the people who use EARN, as well as the users
of other networks. The results of this survey will play an important
part in decisions regarding EARN service, planning and development,
and will be available to other networks as well.

This survey questionnaire should take about 15 minutes to complete. It
consists of questions on communications usage, electronic mail usage,
awareness and usage of network services, and the quality of the
services provided. Most questions can be answered by putting an "X",
or a number or letter from a key, in the appropriate place (or
places). If there are any questions which you are unwilling or unable
to answer, just go on to the following question. Please send in just
one completed questionnaire, even if you have more than one electronic
mail address.

Please return the completed questionnaire by 31 July 1992 to the
electronic mail address:

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

If you are reading this questionnaire via electronic mail, the best
way to fill it out and return it is to use the reply function of your
mail system with the text of the original message included.  Another
possibility is to "forward" the questionnaire to the above address.
Finally, you can "save" or "receive" the questionnaire as a file, fill
it out, and then send it via electronic mail to the above address.  In
any event, when filling out the questionnaire please do not erase any
lines or parts of lines. The format of the questionnaire must be
preserved in order to allow electronic processing of the answers.  If
you have accidentally erased parts of the questionnaire, you can get
another copy of the questionnaire, by sending electronic mail to:

   [e-mail]    (or LISTSERVFRORS12.CIRCE.FR)

with the line:  GET USER SURVEY

If all else fails, print the questionnaire on paper, fill it out, and
send it to the following postal address:

     EARN Office
     C.I.R.C.E.
     B.P. 167
     91403 Orsay Cedex
     FRANCE

EARN OFFERS 10 PRIZES!!! There will be a drawing among all those who
send in completed questionnaires by 31 July 1992. Ten people will be
selected at random. The ten winners will receive free memberships in
the Internet Society (value: 70 USDollars) or may receive the 70
USDollars.

Thank you for helping us improve our service.


                  EARN User Survey Questionnaire
                  ==============================


Frequency key:

Use the following key for all questions of "How often ...":

             0 = never, not at all
             1 = less than once a month
             2 = less than once a week (but at least once a month)
             3 = 1 to 3 times a week
             4 = 4 times a week or more

Please answer the following questions by putting the appropriate number
or letter between the underscores (e.g., _2_)

Part 1. Communications Usage

Q1. How often do you use computers for the following? (use frequency key)
 _ _ a. electronic mail
 _ _ b. file transfer
 _ _ c. remote login


Q2. How often do you use the following for communications? (use frequency key)
 _ _ a. personal computer
 _ _ b. Unix workstation
 _ _ c. dumb terminal
 _ _ d. X-terminal
 _ _ e. other (eg, Minitel):


Part 2. Electronic mail usage

Q3. How often do you correspond with people who are: (use frequency key)
 _ _ a. within your institution
 _ _ b. others in your country
 _ _ c. abroad


Q4. How many people do you correspond with by e-mail?
    (1= none, 2= 1-10 people, 3= 11-100 people, 4= more than 100 people)
 _ _ a. within your institution
 _ _ b. others in your country
 _ _ c. abroad


Part 3. Network services

Q5. How often do you use the following network services? (use frequency key)
 _ _ a. Listserv
 _ _ b. Netserv
 _ _ c. Trickle
 _ _ d. Astra
 _ _ e. Relay
 _ _ f. Netnews
 _ _ g. FTP
 _ _ h. Telnet
 _ _ i. IRC
 _ _ j. X.500
 _ _ k. Archie
 _ _ l. Gopher
 _ _ m. WAIS
 _ _ n. World-Wide Web

Q6. How many distribution lists do you belong to?
    (1= none, 2= 1-5 lists, 3= 6-20 lists, 4= more than 20 lists)
 _ _ a. related to your profession
 _ _ b. related to computers
 _ _ c. others


Q7. How often do you use online databases containing the following information?
                                                            (use frequency key)
 _ _ a. library catalogs, bibliographies
 _ _ b. computer program collections
 _ _ c. whole texts
 _ _ d. information of professional interest
 _ _ e. computer network information
 _ _ f. other:


Q8. What online databases are most important to you?
    a.                     b.                    c.


Part 4. Quality of service

Q9. Rate the importance to you of each one of the following networks
    on a scale of 0 to 5 (0=totally unimportant, 5= extremely important):
_ _ a. EARN
_ _ b. BITNET
_ _ c. Internet
_ _ d. EUNET
_ _ e. X.400

Q10. Which of the following 12 factors limit your usage of these 6 services?
                                     (put an "x" in all appropriate places)
                                   1       2         3    4     5       6
                                  mail distribution FTP Telnet news databases
                                          lists
                                  ---- ------------ --- ------ ---- ---------
 a. not aware of service          _ _      _ _      _ _   _ _   _ _    _ _
 b. not available to me           _ _      _ _      _ _   _ _   _ _    _ _
 c. difficulty of use             _ _      _ _      _ _   _ _   _ _    _ _
 d. response time                 _ _      _ _      _ _   _ _   _ _    _ _
 e. lack of documentation         _ _      _ _      _ _   _ _   _ _    _ _
 f. quality of documentation      _ _      _ _      _ _   _ _   _ _    _ _
 g. lack of human support         _ _      _ _      _ _   _ _   _ _    _ _
 h. quality of human support      _ _      _ _      _ _   _ _   _ _    _ _
 i. lack of need                  _ _      _ _      _ _   _ _   _ _    _ _
 j. lack of time                  _ _      _ _      _ _   _ _   _ _    _ _
 k. cost                          _ _      _ _      _ _   _ _   _ _    _ _
 l. difficulty in finding sources _ _      _ _      _ _   _ _   _ _    _ _


Q11. What suggestions do you have for new services or improved quality
    of service in the network?





Part 5. Personal information

Q12. Occupation: _ _  (1= computer professional, 2= researcher/lecturer,
      3= administrator/office worker, 4= librarian, 5= student, 0= other)

Q13. Country: _  _  (use two-letter country code)

Q14. Age: _  _  (optional)

Q15. Sex: _ _  (m/f) (optional)

     Thank you for completing this questionnaire!

                                  *END*

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

From: [e-mail] (Tony J. Rinella)
Subject: Inquiry: Info on Motorola People Finder
Date: Sat, 18 Jul 92 08:13:51 GMT
Reply To: [e-mail]
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)


VAX/VMS site seeking information on the Motorola People Finder or
equivalent. Any and all information would be appreciated.

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

From: MPA15AB![e-mail]
Date: 18 JUL 92 09:40
Subject: GTE and CLASS/ISDN


I called the GTE business office to ask them when the rest of CLASS
would be offered (sans CLID), and also to ask about SS7 links to
PacBell (I have had Busy Number Redial for some time, but only for
numbers within the switch (which is surrounded by PacBell areas)).  I
asked when ISDN would be available ;-).

The rep said CLID hadn't yet been approved by the PUC!  When I pointed
out that the PUC had approved it weeks ago, and mentioned the
front-page articles in the {L.A. Times} and other papers, she said
they were flat wrong.  She started to suggest I call the business
service reps to ask about ISDN, but then remembered that the business
and residence reps were the same.  She did give me another number to
call, though.

A media rep called me back from the other number, and he seemed to
know what he was talking about, and to be quite reasonable.  (Quite a
change from the business office types!).  He said November was the
target date for CLASS features other than CLID, Call Trace, and Call
Return.

He said GTE's objection to CLID was that they felt it was impossible
to educate people about what CLID was and what it meant, and how to
ensure your number was or wasn't displayed in an environment with
three forms of blocking and no way to know which is in effect for any
given line.  I suggested that they offer a code which would read back
the state of all options, and he said he liked the idea but it would
have to come from Bellcore.  He mentioned that California has the most
sophisticated phone consumers in the country, and also some of the
least sophisticated, who come from countries where you can't even get
a phone, and trying to educate them about CLID would be very hard.

He said Call Trace would take longer to implement because of the
education requirement.

As for Call Return, he said they wouldn't want to offer it right away,
because if you returned a toll call, the number would show up on your
bill.  He said GTE was considering a billing modification that would
blank out the last four digits of the number in such cases.

He said I was the first person ever to ask him about ISDN :-(

Regarding SS7 links, he said GTE was working on them between their own
switches.  Links to PacBell would come, but he didn't know when.

On other matters, he said he was bothered by the practice of IXCs
selling ANI data, especially when the customers turn around and use it
for marketing and other purposes.  That surprised me, coming from a
phone company representative.

He said he wasn't aware of "block blocking" (Anonymous Call Reject).
Didn't the PUC order it as part of CLID in California?

Anyway, he promised to have someone call me back with more information
on SS7 links, CLASS availability, and ISDN.


Randy Gellens            [e-mail]
>>>>>>> If mail bounces, forward to [e-mail] <<<<<<<<
Opinions are personal; facts are suspect; I speak only for myself

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

From: MPA15AB![e-mail]
Date: 18 JUL 92 09:21
Subject: NZ Telecom Voice Mail


Reprinted with permission from an internal electronic newsletter.
Note that NAP is an interesting product, in that it is a break from
the traditional way of doing telephony applications.  The usual
approach is to use small, dedicated computers, often coresident with
the switch.  NAP is a platform that runs on large, general purpose
computers which supports a variety of voice applications.  Among the
advantages of using this approach are that you get the security and
data integrety afforded by large computers, the 4GLs and environmental
software to develop orp enhance voice applications quickly, and the
scalability of the hardware.

I don't work with NAP, but I try and follow the developments.


                UNISYS NEWS NETWORK, JULY 9, 1992


UNISYS WINS MAJOR TELECOMMUNICATIONS CONTRACT

The Telecom Corporation of New Zealand has purchased the Unisys
Network Applications Platform (NAP) as the first step in enhancing its
soon-to-be deployed intelligent telephone network.  The NAP system
will allow Telecom to offer a variety of voice messaging and fax
services to its customers.  NAP will offer as many as 11,700
simultaneously accessible message ports and accommodates approximately
1.6 million voice mailboxes.  Telecom services approximately 1.4
million telephone lines and expects about 50,000 customers to use its
message center.

"The Unisys system was chosen for its ability to handle a large number
of calls and to deliver the high level of service Telecom customers
expect," said Barry Bailey, Telecom's Networks Organization managing
director.  "Another major influence in the decision was the fact that
the same system is already used by a number of telephone companies
around the world."

As equivalent of the now widely used PC voice and fax boards, with
digital and/or analogue interconnections, has been built for the large
platform.  This provides a much more flexible application development
environment for integration with corporate database repositories.

NAP gives Telecom an advanced development environment in Unisys LINC,
and a powerful processor.  The open nature of this platform also
allows interface with databases from information suppliers, which
allows Telecom to provide a comprehensive range of audiotext and
interactive voice response services.

"The new Unisys System will give us the ability to provide both our
residential and business customers throughout New Zealand in the next
year and into the future, with a wide range of products and services
such as Message Delivery and Fax Mail," said Telecom's corporate
executive, sales and marketing, Tom Potrykus.

It can accommodate the integration of facsimile and electronic mail
messages into a "universal mailbox".  The system is also being
developed to cater for video and images.  Applications for the system
will be developed in Wellington by the Unisys-owned systems
integration company, SynerCom.

                             --------

Randy Gellens            [e-mail]
>>>>>>> If mail bounces, forward to [e-mail] <<<<<<<<
Opinions are personal; facts are suspect; I speak only for myself

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

From: [e-mail] (Justin Leavens)
Subject: CLASS Services Available from Pacific Bell Now! (Well, Almost)
Date: 16 Jul 1992 11:35:31 -0700
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA


  I got a call last night informing me that Pacific Bell was now
authorized to offer the three CLASS services to residential customers
and have them activated July 21. These services are Select Call
Forwarding ($3.50) BusyRedial ($3.50) and Priority Ringing ($4.00). Of
course, "the more you buy, the more you save", and they give 15%
discounts on two features (which includes the old, standard features
like Three-Way and Call Waiting), adding a 5% discount for every
feature up to 30%.

  My setup now includes Call-Waiting, Three-Way Calling, BusyRedial,
Priority Ringing, and The Message Center for $16.10 a month (plus
basic rates and all that other good stuff).

  Pacific Bell is also waiving the $5.00 installation fee on these new
services for a couple of months.

  A couple of questions maybe for PAT and others who have these
services already: Do they work outside your local telephone area
(that's the LATA, right?)? The rep I spoke to said that they weren't
sure yet whether or not out of area calls would be handled correctly,
even calls from local GTE areas.  I know SS7 is in place and working
to some degree, but is it fairly well implemented for these features
to work USA-wide, as long as the switches are new enough to handle it?


Justin Leavens   University of Southern California


[Moderator's Note: In IBT territory, three-way and call-forwarding
work anywhere we can dial, local, interstate or international. Message
Center takes calls from anyone who rings you anywhere. Callers cannot
dial direct or be direct call-forwarded to Message Center; they must
connect through transfer on busy/no answer via your number. What you
call 'Busy Redial' we call 'Repeat Dialing'. It and 'Return Last Call
Received' work (almost) anywhere in the IBT LATA, but not elsewhere.
We have two styles of 'priority ringing'. One is in the form of a
second and/or third telephone number which rings on your main line
with distinctive ringing. Anyone dialing those numbers comes through
with short rings, etc. We can elect to have those numbers follow call
forwarding or not; if not, then even if the main number is forwarded,
the additional numbers on the line will 'ring through'. If they 'ring
through', then they follow whatever the main line would do regards
message center, call-waiting, etc, but as they have distinctive rings,
they also have distinctive call-waiting signals. The other style of
'priority ringing' involves designating up to ten numbers which when
they call you cause a distinctive ring and will or will not follow
call forwarding instructions as designated. These have to be in the
IBT LATA.  PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #565
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa22851;
          18 Jul 92 15:01 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA23584
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 18 Jul 1992 13:09:37 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA28346
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 18 Jul 1992 13:09:28 -0500
Date: Sat, 18 Jul 1992 13:09:28 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #566

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 18 Jul 92 13:09:00 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 566

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Phone Tap in Murder Case Ruled Illegal (Randy Gellens)
    Official Area Code 718 and 917 Annoncement (Dave Niebuhr)
    Please Help Save Old 2500 Desk Phone (Gary Korenek)
    3W vs 0.6W  (Dave Brillhart)
    710 Intercept Changes in Southern CA (Randy Gellens)
    Switched 56? (Bill Chiarchiaro)
    Help! Looking for Antique Phone Cord (Daniel MacKay)
    Telephone Keypad Question (Dominique J. Cheenne)
    Cordless Phones Self-Dialing (Bob Hutson)
    Locating Cellular Information (Peter Wan)
    Pay Attention to Place Names! (Carl Moore)
    Ellis and Liberty Islands in N.Y. Harbor (Carl Moore)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: MPA15AB![e-mail]
Date: 17 JUL 92 21:10
Subject: Phone Tap in Murder Case Ruled Illegal


 From the {Los Angeles Times} [date lost]

                 PHONE TAP IN MURDER CASE RULED ILLEGAL

LAW: Suspicious husband recorded wife and her lover before he was
killed.  Their convictions are overturned.

By Philip Hager
Times Legal Affairs Writer

SAN FRANCISCO -- A husband's secret tapes of his wife's suspicious
telephone conversations with her lover were improperly used to convict
the two of murdering the husband, the state Supreme Court ruled
Thursday.

In a rare defeat for prosecutors, the court ruled unanimously that
federal law bars a family member from wiretapping the family telephone
and that the tapes cannot be used as evidence in a criminal case.

The justices rejected the state's two key contentions in the case:
that the law permits domestic or "interspousal" wiretapping and that
even if illegally made, the tapes were admissible because the
government was an innocent recipient of evidence acquired by a
citizen.

The court acknowledged that the tapes were the "linchpin" of the
prosecution's case but reluctantly concluded that the two lovers'
conviction must be reversed.

"We may question the wisdom of Congress in adopting such a broad-based
suppression [of evidence] sanction," Justice Armand Arabian wrote for
the court.  "... We may not, however, substitute our judgment for that
of [Congress]."

Deputy State Atty. Gen. Morris Beatus said an appeal to the U.S.
Supreme Court will be considered.  If an appeal fails, prosecutors
hope to retry the accused killers even without the taped evidence,
said Assistant Santa Clara County Dist. Atty. Joyce Allegro.

"In an egregious case like this, it's really a shame that the tapes
cannot be used," she said.  "There was no government impropriety
here."

Mark L. Christiansen of Sacramento, lawer for the male defendant in
the case, praised the ruling, saying it will strengthen legal barriers
against wiretapping by third parties.

"This is going to make home telephones much more secure," he said.
"Even in the best of families, one spouse may prefer that the other
not overhear everything they say."

Laurance S. Smith, attorney for the female defendant, called the
ruling "a tremendous victory" for the right to privacy.  "If this
decision had gone the other way, anyone in a household could tape
conversations by anyone else in the household," he said.  "And if
there was anything juicy, it could be turned over to the local
prosecutor."

The case arose in 1986 after Joe Otto, a 61-year-old electrician,
became suspicious of his wife, Brenda, a 39-year-old divorcee he had
married a month before.  Otto hid a voice-activated tape machine under
a bed.  It recorded all calls in or out of the couple's home.

One tape picked up a whispered conversation between Brenda Otto and
Marvin Mark, in which Mark said "everything was wrong" and "I tried
every possible way," but then added: "I got a better plan."

An uneasy Otto played the tape to his daughter and a neighbor who was
a police officer.  In response to his daughter's concern, Otto began
carrying a gun under his jacket.  He also gave his daughter a copy of
his will in which he left her virtually all of his $300,000 estate and
gave Brenda $1.

Three days later, another call was taped in which Brenda Otto and Mark
spoke cryptically about the daughter being absent from the home that
night.  Later in the evening, Otto was bludgeoned to death.  The body
was discovered after Brenda Otto appeared screaming and naked at a
neighbor's home, claiming robbers had killed Otto and assaulted her.

                            ---------

[I can understand it being illegal to tap one's own phone, and also
that evidence received through government (police) misconduct should
be suppressed.  It also makes sense to me that if you illegally tap
your phone, you shouldn't be able to profit from it, such as by using
the tapes in a civil suit.  But if the government had no hand in
making the tape (didn't put you up to it, etc.), then the tape should
be usable in a criminal case. -- RCG]


Randy Gellens            [e-mail]
>>>>>>> If mail bounces, forward to [e-mail] <<<<<<<<
Opinions are personal; facts are suspect; I speak only for myself

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

Date: Sat, 18 Jul 92 07:32:54 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Dave Niebuhr)
Subject: Official Area Code 718 and 917 Annoncement


The July "Hello" insert in my NYTel bill announced to the public that
area code 718 was moving to the Bronx, thus leaving Manhattan as the
sole holder of area code 212.

The details are and I quote:

"From July 1, 1992 throught May 15, 1993, calls to Bronx customers
will be completed whether the caller dials 212 or 718.  During this
period, there will be no change for Bronx customers dialing out,
except they will be able to dial Manhattan using either seven digits
or 1 + 212 + seven digits.

"On May 16, 1993, the change to 718 wilol become permanent.  Customers
who dial an incorrect area code will hear an announcement giving
dialing instructions.  These changes in dialing will not affect
charges for telephone calls."

The July "Hello" insert in my NYTel bill also announced to the public
that area code 917 is introduced in New York City.

The details are and I quote:

"In recent years, the demand for telephone service has increased.  To
avoid a predicted shortage of telephone numbers, area code 917 has
been introduced in the five boroughs of New York City to serve pagers,
cellular telephones and certain other communications services in the
212 and 718 area codes.

"July 1,1992, paging and cellular telephone companies will begin
assigning telephone numbers with the area code 917 to NEW customers.
Customers with EXISTING 212 and 718 pager and cellular numbers will be
assigned new telephone numbers in the 917 area code over the next few
years.

"Please be aware that when dialing a number in the new 917 area code,
you are not calling someone across the country.  You are most likely
calling someone with a pager or cellular telephone.

"Charges for calling the 917 area code from 212 or 718 are still local
calls.  Charges from other areas also would not change."


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

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

From: [e-mail] (gary korenek)
Subject: Please Help Save Old 2500 Desk Phone
Organization: Ferranti International Controls Corporation
Date: Sat, 18 Jul 1992 01:31:35 GMT


I have an old (1981 or so) Western Electic 2500 desk phone that is
broken.  This is a request for information about having it repaired.

When I pick up the receiver I hear dial tone in the earpiece, so far,
so good.  But when I speak into the mouthpiece, I cannot hear my own
voice in the earpiece.  In other words, I can hear the caller, but the
caller cannot hear me.

I have checked the round microphone cartridge (on another phone), it
works.  So the problem is somewhere in the phone's internals.  Also
the paticular wall-jack and wiring is good, as other phones work with
it.

Can someone offer me any advice on how to get this phone working
again?  Is there a common (simple?) part that I could replace?
Ideally, might someone know a way I could get this phone repaired in
the Houston, Texas area?

If I played the game AT&T's way, I would have to send the phone in,
and they would send back a refurbished newer phone.  Well, I want to
keep and use this particular 2500 phone (sentimental attachment, I
suppose).

Please don't reply "call AT&T", I already did that.  Now it is on to
Plan B.

Please send response via e-mail, and to anyone that may be able to
help; thanks in advance.


Gary Korenek ([e-mail])
Ferranti  International  Controls  Corp.
Sugar Land, Texas          [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Dave Brillhart)
Subject: 3W vs 0.6W
Date: Sat, 18 Jul 1992 13:11:17 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Dave Brillhart)
Organization: Harris Semiconductor


I am about to purchase a cellular phone. I have two questions that
salesmen can't seem to agree upon, and whose information always seems
to be biased towards the particular model they are pushing at the
time ...

1.) Are 3.0W units really going to buy me alot more compared to the
    compact 0.6W phones -- in regards to TX (and RX?) sound quality,
    battery life, max distance from the closest transceiver, or other
    issues I haven't thought of?

2.) Is there really a regulation that restricts 3.0W units
    to the "transportable" size? At our local AT&T center, a sales
    lady tried to tell me -- when I asked if she predicted even more
    compact 3W units in the near future --  that regulations prohibit
    the small single enclosure pocket sized phones from being more than
    0.6W. Now I can believe that battery technology might limit futher size
    reductions of the more powerful transmitters, but what she told me
    makes no sense (but then many regulations make no sense).

I ask because if 3W units are that much better and they aren't going to
get smaller in the near future, then it's time for me to buy.

Thanks for any response.


Dave Brillhart                       Harris Semiconductor
[e-mail]    Mail Stop 62A-024
Voice: [phone]                P.O. Box 883
Fax:   [phone]                Melbourne, FL 32902-0883


[Moderator's Note: The answer is in the application, and where the
phone will be used. My handheld 0.6 watt unit works fine in a very
populated urban area like Chicago which is saturated with cell sites.
A year ago, my handheld worked fine in Coffeyville, KS and latched on
to the cellular carrier in Tulsa, OK about sixty miles away. Not all
work that well. The three watt units are mostly for automobiles.  And
yes, regulations say you can't have a three watt handheld since there
is a risk with the antenna so close to your head that you might
irradiate your brain cells, and become goofy like your Esteemed
Moderator, whose battery hasn't taken a full charge in many years. PAT]

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

From: <MPA15AB![e-mail]>
Date: 84 JUL 92 01:02
Subject: 710 Intercept Changes in Southern CA


The intercept I get when I trial and dial any 1-710-xxx-xxxx has
changed from "Your call can't be completed as dialed" to "It is not
necessary to dial a '0' or '1' when calling this number."

My guess is that Southern California will soon see 710 used as a
prefix, as this is the standard intercept one gets when dialing 1+ or
0+ and any prefix.


Randy Gellens            [e-mail]
>>>>>>> If mail bounces, forward to [e-mail] <<<<<<<<
Opinions are personal; facts are suspect; I speak only for myself

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

From: [e-mail] (Bill Chiarchiaro)
Subject: Switched 56?
Organization: MIT Lincoln Laboratory, Lexington MA
Date: Sat, 18 Jul 92 11:14:15 -0400


  Can someone tell me the real story on the so-called Switched 56
service?

  I've heard that a direct-dial, 56-kbps digital service is becoming
available in the U.S.  I didn't find any information in the c.d.t
archive.  I called my local telco business office which referred me to
the Boston ISDN office.  They sent me to a Network Consultant who
admitted that he would be the person to carry out a Switched 56 work
order, but that for me to get any substantive information I would have
to talk to a marketing office.  The marketing office has been a black
hole.

  Any suggestions?  I'm primarily interested in this service for use
within eastern Massachusetts (508/617).  Does it exist?  How does it
work?  What are the installation and service costs?


Thanks,

Bill Chiarchiaro    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Daniel MacKay)
Subject: Help! Looking For Antique Phone Cord
Organization: NSTN Network Operations Centre, Nova Scotia, Canada
Date: Sat, 18 Jul 1992 15:17:53 GMT


Hello!

I'm doing some restoration on a friend's antique phone -- 1930s, he
guesses, -- and part of the work will be to replace both the handset
and line cord.  I'm having a tough time finding something similar to
the original cord that it came with -- silver satin just won't cut it
in on a period set in a period room!

I suspect the two cords were originally the same stuff; brown, silk
cover, 1/4" thick with big rubber-covered wires inside.

I don't need a whole spool of this, obviously; 12' or so would be
plenty for both.  Any suggestions on where to get this would be very
much appreciated!  Thanks!


Daniel MacKay             [e-mail]
NOC Manager, NSTN Operations Centre   902-494-NSTN
Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada

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

From: [e-mail] (Dominique J. Cheenne)
Subject: Telephone Keypad Question
Organization: University of Nebraska - Lincoln
Date: Sat, 18 Jul 1992 15:24:35 GMT


This question might seem trivial to some but it has puzzled me for a
while ...

Why are the letters "Q" and "Z" missing from the telephone keypad? And
why do the letters start on the number 2 key? Starting the alphabet on
the number 1 key would allow for all letters to be present with room
to spare ...

Feel free to email me directly if desired.


Thanks in advance.

Dominique J. Cheenne
[e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: Telephone numbers do not usually begin with '1',
and having the letters /ABC/ there would have effectively precluded
them from being the starting letter in an exchange name, back when
telco officially used words to identify central offices. In order to
keep the zero available as a single digit way to reach the operator,
letters were not used there either. Imagine life with no AVEnue,
AUStin, BIShop, BOUlevard, CIRcle, CAThedral or COLumbus ... Since
only eight digits are left, two letters had to be elimininated, with
/QZ/ least likely to be needed. Imagine life without QUAyle ... PAT]

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

From: atari![e-mail] (Bob Hutson)
Subject: Cordless Phones Self-Dialing
Organization: Atari Computer Corp.
Date: Sat, 18 Jul 1992 09:18:16 GMT


About eight years ago my friend (owner of a first generation cordless
phone) left for a short vacation.  Upon returning he learned that the
police visited him twice in response to "911" calls from his address.
It was later determined that his cordless phone (with weak nicads) had
called the "911" number.

Last month this same friend's cordless phone (a new one) had nicad
problems.  The phone could still receive calls, but any attempt to dial
out resulted in "Thank you for using ATT ...".

This is confusing to me.  His default LD carrier is MCI.  What could
possibly cause the phone to call the ATT operator?

Last week he replaced the nicads and the problem went away.  Can
either of these problems be explained?

Thanks in advance.


Bob Hutson    ....uunet!ames!atari!bab   (work) 408-745-2142  Sunnyvale, CA


[Moderator's Note: By 'first generation', do you mean 1970?  That's
when I had my first cordless. The remote units looked like a 2500 desk
set with rotary dial.

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

From: [e-mail] (peter wan)
Subject: Locating Cellular Information
Organization: Skidmore College, Saratoga Springs NY
Date: Sat, 18 Jul 1992 14:59:30 GMT


I am looking for general and technical information regarding cellular
systems and cellular technology. Are there any FTP archives which have
such information, and can anyone suggest any printed books which cover
the topic? Are there any vendors out there that will provide info on
their products? Any suggestions are welcomed via email.


[e-mail]

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

Date: Sat, 18 Jul 92 10:29:24 EDT
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject: Pay Attention to Place Names!


Whenever possible, I map telephone-exchange place names to post office
names (this is in the U.S.).  But sometimes, a nonpostal name appears
for a telephone exchange.

Last night (July 15), someone noticed a poster, in a community center,
which referred to Rawlinsville with no state name or phone number or
road directions.  This was in Cecil County, Maryland, and I was able
to offer a suggestion that it was referring to Rawlinsville, Pa., in
southern Lancaster County.  (Rawlinsville is the place name for
717-284 phone prefix.)

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

Date: Sat, 18 Jul 92 10:25:20 EDT
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject: Ellis and Liberty Islands in N.Y. Harbor


Earlier this year, I visited Ellis and Liberty Islands in the New York
harbor, and have the following information on the phone prefixes there
(pay phones only), in area 212:

Ellis Island, zipcode 10003; phone prefix 668

Liberty Island, zipcode 10004; phone prefix 825 (which I also noticed
in phone book listings for Governors Island).

Both prefixes are in (old) New York City zone 1.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #566
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa26045;
          18 Jul 92 16:34 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA12256
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 18 Jul 1992 13:36:34 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA31217
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 18 Jul 1992 13:36:22 -0500
Date: Sat, 18 Jul 1992 13:36:22 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #567

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 18 Jul 92 13:36:20 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 567

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Rochester Tel to Cut Rates (Phillip Dampier)
    DMS-100 Peculiarity - HELP!!! (Ehud Gavron)
    My 800 Number (Kenton A. Hoover)
    Answering Machine Ringbacks (Michael Glowacki)
    Going UP (John Higdon)
    St.Pierre and Miquelon (Clive Feather)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Phillip Dampier)
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Date: Sat, 18 Jul 1992 12:14:43 -0500
Subject: Rochester Tel to Cut Rates


ROCHESTER TELEPHONE ASKS FOR RATE CUT

Rochester Telephone Corporation Thursday filed a petition with the New
York State Public Service Commission to cut the cost of long distance
calls within its service territory.

In addition, Rochester Tel wants to expand the local calling areas for
several communities receiving its services, the company said.

The PSC must grant approval for the change, which would not affect
rates on long distance calls made out of Rochester Tel's territory.

A PSC spokeswoman declined to comment about Rochester Tel's plan, but
she did say it would be reviewed thoroughly. Rochester Tel is seeking
to change the way long distance toll rates are calculated, said
spokeswoman Diana Melville.

Currently, toll rates are set through a formula that pools the
revenues of larger telephone companies such as Rochester Tel and
smaller ones such as Ogden Telephone and Seneca Gorham Telephone.

The formula was created so that all telephone companies charge the
same rates, regardless of the size of their customer base or how
efficiently they operate.

However, Rochester Telephone believes the system forces it to charge
higher rates, which means it contributes too much to the pool,
Melville said.  "We want to charge our customers the rates closer to
what it costs for the company to provide the service," Melville said.

Business customers would be billed the same rate for local service and
long distance calls to exchanges within the Rochester Tel service
territory (the Rochester LATA). Businesses would be charged 7.1 cents
for the first three minutes of a call and two cents each additional
minute, regardless of the time of day or distance of the call.

Businesses now pay monthly rates for local measured service that are
based on the time of day and duration of the call.  Long distance
calls within Rochester Tel's service territory are billed on distance,
time of day, and duration.

For some residential customers, local calling areas would be expanded
to eliminate billing based on the distance, time or day, and duration
of the call.

Under the proposed plan, calls made between 8 am and 9 pm will be
billed at 17 cents per minute.  Calls made between 9:01 pm and 7:59 am
and on weekends/holidays will be billed at 7.65 cents per minute -- a
55% discount over day rates.

Rochester Tel also plans to offer residential customers two optional
service plans to expand their local calling areas even further.

Under one plan, customers can pay $5.95 per month to call communities
that up until now have been long distance. Customers receive 60
minutes of calls after 5 pm and before 8 am weekdays, weekends, and
holidays (9.9 cents per minute). If customers make more than 60
minutes of calls to those areas during off peak hours, they will be
billed at 5.9 cents per minute.

The second plan would cost customers $3.95 per month for 30 minutes of
calls (13.2 cents per minute).  If customers make over 30 minutes per
calls, they will be billed at 7.65 cents per minute.

Other proposals:

Geneseo will now be able to call Avon numbers for free.  For $5.95 per
month, Geneseo customers will be able to make 60 minutes of calls at
certain times to such places as Caledonia, Hemlock, Pavilion, and
Perry.

Leicester residents will now be able to call Perry residents for free.
Using the above $5.95 plan, Leicester customers will be able to call
Avon, Castile, Livonia, and Pavilion for less.

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

From: [e-mail] (Ehud Gavron 602-570-2000 x. 2546)
Subject: DMS-100 Peculiarity - HELP!!!
Date: 18 Jul 92 20:20:00 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: ACES Consulting Inc.


I'm in the process of moving to a new location in rural Tucson AZ
outskirts.  US West was kind enough to give me two lines without
realizing that they only had one pair going to the pole.  1/2 mile of
"C-cable"* is on its way.

Here's what really ticks me off though.  I used to be on a 1AESS and
now I'm on a DMS-100.  My custom calling features are call-waiting**
and speed-dial 30.  HOWEVER, I find the following peculiarities:

    1. If there is no call waiting call coming in
       and I flash the switchhook, I get a SECOND
       dialtone.  However, I am unable to dial any
       number on it since at the 4th digit I get a
       fast busy signal.  (It won't dial 2-digit
       speed-dialed calls either).

    2. If I attempt to program speed dial via:
       [dial tone] 75# [confirm tone + dial tone] nnNPA-NXXX,
           wait then it fails (fast busy).

       If I do the same but leave off the pound:
       [dial tone] 75 and wait [confirm tone + dial tone]
           nnNPA-NXXX, wait then it works!  (Number programmed)

    Number 2 is a nuisance, but as I rarely _program_ speed
        calling numbers, I could live with it.  However, number 1
        is a big hassle since I'm used to tapping the switchhook
        and redialing a number very rapidly.  Now I have to hold
        it down and count One-Ringy-Dingy.

Does anyone know:
    1. WHY
    2. WHY
    3. WHY?


* Does anyone know what C-cable is?  What is it used for?  What do I
  have now that is not a C-cable?

**This feature ought to be mandatory for everyone I ever call ...


Ehud Gavron        (EG76)       [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Kenton A. Hoover)
Subject: My 800 Number
Date: 18 Jul 92 00:28:25 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: GenBank Computing Resource for Mol. Biology


PacBell sent me an mailing for 'open collar' workers in May.  I guess
they figured out from my having four phone lines that I was a
work-at-home.  In fact, I'm not, but the mailing promised me a free
book if I would take a telemarketing call.  Not being the type to pass
up an offer like this, I called from work, not home (can't be too
complacient) and they promptly connected me to a telemarketer.

She took my address for the book (just got the book "The Work-At-Home
Book", full of useful tips on how to use your cat as stapler, make
extra filing space out of pots and pans, and making a postage meter a
decorative item, but I digress), and went thru my past few months
bills looking for services to pitch to me.  She did sell me a local
area calling plan for an unnamed area, but the thing I was really
intrigued by was that I could have my very own PacBell sales person
assigned to me.  I think this is a win -- I get pretty tired of
explaining to whoever I end up ordering from why I need 24 voice
circuits delivered on T1 to a residence.

But the best part was that I found out that you can now get 'Custom
800' on a residential line.  Custom 800 is 800 service delivered 'on
top' of an exiting line, rather than having a special '800' line.
This sounded great, but it had to cost a mint, right (I'd costed out
800 service at previous employers to lower datacomm costs)?  Nope -- I
was informed that I could have it for $5/month, plus costs, and it
could cover whatever service areas PacBell covered (I just got it for
service area 1, since I don't know anyone in LA).  Well, I thought, I
must at least have to use a business line for it, right?  Wrong --
this was specifically for residential service.

I had to have it.  For $60/year, I could impress the babes by saying
"My number?  1-800-BIG-STUD" But it got better.  One, I did get to
pick my own number (and no, I'm not going to mention it here) and two,
it was instant gratification, since the number was activated within
about 15 minutes of my order.

Well, I've had the number since May, and its been great.  Why has it
been great, you might ask?  Well, its because I call my home answering
machine alot from pay phones.  I don't always have change, so I tend
to use my calling card.  And as most of us know, PacBell whacks you
for $0.35 every time you do that.  But with my 800 number, I just pay
$0.185/minute prime time (less at night, when I do most of my
calling), and they don't have a call setup charge.  So, if I make 14
calls home a month from pay phones (and I do), its a wash versus my
calling card costs.  Of course, if I'm calling from downtown, I lose,
but most of my calls would be about $0.25/minute milage (south bay to
home).

There are a few problems: they don't break down the 800 billing by
call, just total minutes in a certain calling period.  So, I don't get
the numbers that called me.  Thats a little irritating, since I can't
dispute a bill.  Also, you pay in advance for the service, but since
that's only $5/month, its nothing on top of my total phone bill.

So, if you want to impress the babes (or the dudes, depending on your
polarity and preferences) or you call home alot, you might want to
look into 800 service.


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

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Answering Machine Ringbacks
Date: Sat, 18 Jul 92 2:09:57 CDT


Two stories came to me tonight about answering machines and strange
hehavior on the network. Both involved puzzling ringing either on the
recording or to another phone. They didn't involve crazy conference
calling or human intervention.

First off, tonight a friend called us from the airport. No one was
home to take the call, and he wanted to save his quarter to speak with
a live person.  So he hung up after the usual four rings, before the
answering machine picked it up. Then he tried again later, just
getting a busy signal for 45 minutes.

He got through later when someone was home and learned why he couldn't
get through. The connection wasn't broken. Instead the answering
machine recorded about 45 minutes of a phone ringing on the other end.
The pay phone didn't ring, just somewhere a phone was ringing and the
answering machine recorded it. We couldn't figure it out.

Then I started to think the switch in the central office was messed up
somehow.  I have no idea what kind of switch it is. The company is
TDS - Waunakee Telephone Company in Wisconsin. Perhaps some reader is
aware of this small telco and what equipment they use. I only read
this Digest to learn about this sort of thing. So I ask you what could
have been going on?

By no means is this answering machine sophisticated, so it couldn't
have dialed anyone. (Nor did the cat! :) Apparently this has happened
once before recently.

The second story involves a Centrex system at the university. My
friend from the airport reported that in his office, he or his office
mate would call someone and get their answering machine. If they hung
up before the OGM was finished, the phone would ring soon to give them
the answering machine and the last of the outgoing message. He offered
this as a clue to the last mystery. It seemed to me to be unrelated,
but it might be.

The friend said the Centrex system was responsible for the ringbacks
(not in those words). He thought it was too slow in detecting the fact
he had hung up and would call him back to complete the connection.

I think that's plausible, but I want to know what the readers of
TELECOM Digest think about this mystery. What could or should explain
the things we've observed?


Michael Glowacki     University of Wisconsin -- Madison


[e-mail]    [e-mail]   AOL: MichaelG1

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

Date: Sat, 18 Jul 92 19:08 PDT
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Going UP


Federal regulators are about to make yet another decision that will
almost guarantee that your phone bills will go up even more: approval
for phone companies to get into the video delivery business. Every new
venture that phone companies are allowed to pursue means that old
reliable finance cash cow, the regulated ratepayer, will have to fork
over even more.

And what will be the ultimate result? Your telephone dollars will buy
even more of the drek and waste that litters every cable company in
the land. How many more shopping channels can we support? How many
more news operations? How many more movie channels? My local cable
company (considered one of the best in the country) has over 50
"basic" channels and more often than not, there is nothing worthwhile
to watch.

This is a case where competition can actually have deleterious effects
on an industry. The plethora of program producers are chasing after a
limited number of dollars and spreading them thinly among themselves.
This means that no one producer has the necessary funds to produce
really quality entertainment. The result is mediocrity that makes
former FCC Chairman, Newton Minnow's "Vast Wasteland" look like
entertainment and information heaven.

I have no love for any cable company, including mine. This is an
industry crying for comeuppins. But the answer is not to water it down
even more and to finance the project with your utility dollars. We are
giving the green light to our nation's telcos to provide everything
that has to do with information. Telco's will own the cable plant,
switching centers, and microwave towers. They will provide the
audiotex product (and control the content). They will provide the
news. They will (with this decision) provide the video entertainment.
After having just reviewed "The President's Analyst", I can just
imagine what our society -- owned and operated by "TPC" -- will look
like.

Here it comes: The United Bell States of America. And I thought we
were "breaking up" the telephone company. What a laugh.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Clive Feather)
Subject: St.Pierre and Miquelon
Date: Sat, 18 Jul 92 15:43:44 BST


A few weeks ago there was some discussion about St.Pierre & Miquelon.
It turns out that our local library has all the French phone books,
including that for St.Pierre & Miquelon, so I went and looked.

If I understand the French correctly, the telephone system works like
this.

France is divided into 100 "departments". For telephone purposes, these
split into:

    Paris/Ile de France: departments 75, 77, 78, 91-95
    Provincial:          departments 01-19, 2A, 2B, 21-74, 76, 79-90
    DOMs:                departments 971 (Guadelope  - country code 590),
                                     972 (Guyana     - country code 594),
                                     973 (Martinique - country code 596),
                                     974 (Reunion    - country code 292).

In addition, there are five TOMs:

    Mayotte               (country code 269)
    New Caledonia         (country code 687)
    Polynesia             (country code 689)
    St.Pierre & Miquelon  (country code 508)
    Wallis & Futuna       (country code 681)

[I don't know what DOM and TOM mean.]

Paris and Provincial numbers are eight digits, and DOM and TOM numbers
are 6 digits, not beginning with a 1 (I don't know about 0).
Provincial numbers beginning with 93 are in Monaco, and 628 in
Andorra. All numbers on St.Pierre begin 412, 413, 414, or 415, and on
Miquelon 416.

Dialling instructions depend on where you are calling from and to. A
tilde indicates a second dialtone, a # indicates a digit.

Within mainland France, you dial ######## for the same system (Paris
or Provincial, or 16~######## for the other). To dial a DOM or a TOM,
you dial 19~CCC######, and to dial a foreign country you dial
19~CCCAAA#######, where CCC is the country code, and AAA the area code
(if any). To get operator assistance or directory enquiries, you dial
19~33CCC, except that the country codes 1 and 7 need to be followed by
an additional 1.

 From a DOM or a TOM, the codes are:

    Same DOM/TOM:   ######
    Paris           16~1########
    Provincial      16~########
    DOM/TOM         19~CCC######
    Foreign         19~CCCAAA#######

except that since all Guadelope numbers begin 2, 8, or 9, and all
Martinique numbers being 5, 6, or 7, there is interdialing between
the two (i.e. just dial the 6 figure number).

Operator assistance for foreign countries from DOMs and from St.Pierre
and Miquelon (the library didn't have the other four books) varies:

    Guadelope             10
    Guyana                19~594CCC
    Martinique            19~596CCC
    Reunion               19~262CCC       for operator
                          19~26212CCC     for directory
    St.Pierre & Miquelon  10

Finally, there are two special dialing instructions. From Guadelope,
numbers in St.Barthelems and St.Martin (both French and Dutch parts) of
the form 3##### can be dialled direct. From St.Pierre and Miquelon to
Canada (*not* the USA or Caribbean), dial 00~NPA#######.


Clive D.W. Feather     | IXI Limited
[e-mail]          | 62-74 Burleigh St.
Phone: [phone] | Cambridge   CB1 1OJ
Fax:   [phone] | United Kingdom

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #567
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa02948;
          19 Jul 92 21:36 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA09916
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 19 Jul 1992 14:44:42 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA06911
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 19 Jul 1992 14:44:34 -0500
Date: Sun, 19 Jul 1992 14:44:34 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #570

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 19 Jul 92 14:44:35 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 570

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Godwin Speaks Out ... (Jim Thomas)
    Re: Godwin Speaks Out ... Not! (Mike Godwin)
    Re: Going UP (David Sternlight)
    Re: Going UP (Jayson Raymond)
    Re: Do ESS Systems Keep Detailed Call Records? (Kevin W. Williams)
    Re: Do ESS Systems Keep Detailed Call Records? (Jon Baker)
    Re: 1-800-ATF-GUNS and Anonymity (Andy Sherman)
    800 Number For Help With Personal Problems (was Abuse of ANI?) (Jim Haynes)
    Re: Use (Abuse) of ANI? (David Lesher)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sun, 19 Jul 1992 11:14:47 -0500
From: jim thomas <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Godwin Speaks Out ...
Organization: Northern Illinois University


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Sam
Israelit) writes:

> In TELECOM #552, Mike Godwin chastised PAT with the paragraph:

>> I doubt anyone at EFF is capable of being as shrill as Townson.
>> And I am certain that we have higher regard for the truth than he
>> does.

> Well Mike, you had me leaning towards your side until I read the 13
> July edition of {ComputerWorld}, specifically the article "Wiretap
> snares alleged hackers". In that article, you state:

> "This whole indictment could very well be an attempt to frame some
> people who the authorities believe glorify hacking."

> This sounds like a sensationalist defense strategy to me Mike. Why
> does it have to be a conspiracy on the part of the government to frame
> these people? Maybe the government just bungled another investigation,
> since they do have a pretty fair track record of doing that.

Considering that EFF took a blind-side broadside from oudda-da-bloo, I
think Mike Godwin's return salvo was both justified and, under the
circumstances, restrained. Nor do I see anything in Mike Godwin's
comment from CW cited above that is shrill. Those who have followed
federal actions over the past two years have every reason to be
suspicious of LE's motives and methods.

The initially highly-publicized Sun Devil produced little of
significance and resulted in litigation against federal and civil
participants for their efforts against Steve Jackson Games; The
prosecution dropped its case against Craig Neidorf before it had even
concluded its opening arguments; and regardless of what one thinks of
Len Rose's actions, there is considerable room for the judgment that
he was treated unjustly and unfairly.  One need only read Bill Cook's
published work and read the transcripts in the Neidorf trial (avail-
able in CuD archives at ftp.eff.org) to realize that Mike's above-
cited comment should be taken seriously.  The indictment of the five
MOD people, while alleging some serious charges, also raises some
issues that justify Mike's statement.

There is also strong justification for objecting to the sentences
given "hackers," for questioning the competency of some law
enforcement officials in the 1990 cases, and for concern over the
implications of the investigative and prosecutorial methods used
against alleged "hackers."  Expressing such concerns is an attempt to
preserve truth and accurracy and hardly strikes me as "shrill" or
"sensationalist." It certainly is both more honorable and more honest
than to attack the messenger with ad hominems rather than address the
message.


Jim Thomas      Co-editor, Cu Digest


[Moderator's Note: The current issue of CuD (distributed Sunday via
email and newsgroup) covers the indictment in detail and includes some
commentary on the topic. Readers who have not seen it should request a
copy from Jim at the address shown above.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Mike Godwin)
Subject: Re: Godwin Speaks Out ... Not!
Organization: Electronic Frontier Foundation
Date: Sun, 19 Jul 1992 11:12:40 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Sam
Israelit) writes:

> Well Mike, you had me leaning towards your side until I read the 13
> July edition of {ComputerWorld}, specifically the article "Wiretap
> snares alleged hackers". In that article, you state:

> "This whole indictment could very well be an attempt to frame some
> people who the authorities believe glorify hacking."

> This sounds like a sensationalist defense strategy to me Mike. Why
> does it have to be a conspiracy on the part of the government to frame
> these people?

This is the first time I've seen this quotation. I said no such thing.
I will now contact {Computerworld} and seek a retraction. I do not for
a moment believe that the government has set out to frame anyone.

What I told {Computerworld} was that, with regard to the erasure of
data at Learning Link, in which individuals purporting to be two of
the defendants called up and claimed credit for the vandalism, it was
possible that someone other than the named defendants had made the
call. I explicitly stated to *every* member of the press that we had
no reason to believe at this time that the government had done
anything wrong in pursuing these indictments. Other press reports, so
far, have been accurate.

This make me furious.

It should be noted that we are not handling these individuals'
defense, so attributing their defense strategy to us is a mistake.

I ask Sam Israelit and all others who read the {Computerworld} article
to accept my statement that at no time did I suggest, to
{Computerworld} or anyone else, that the government had framed anyone.
This sounds very much as if the {Computerworld} reporter, like Pat
Townson, is so certain that EFF is going to say something patently
shrill, that he invented the comment.


Mike Godwin,     [e-mail]
[phone]   EFF, Cambridge


[Moderator's Note: How would the late Senator McCarthy (R-WI) phrase
it if he was the moderator here? Old Joe would probably wave a copy of
{Computerworld} in the air and ask, "Do you deny ever saying anything
to this magazine in the way they quoted you?" But seriously, it was
the magazine article which ticked me off also. If you say you did not
say it, then I believe you.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (David Sternlight)
Subject: Re: Going UP
Date: Sat, 18 Jul 92 19:30:49 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)


Higdon's message contains much more heat than light, and sounds like
it was written by a cable company or data service provider other than
the phone companies.

First of all, it is simply untrue that there is no quality on cable,
though by use of the word "entertainment" it's not clear what Higdon
wants. Just a few examples:

C-SPAN   C-SPAN 2  Bravo   Arts and Entertainment
HBO original movies   CNN  CNN Headline news.

Second, dial-up access to video services means that far more niche
markets can be satisfied, since there are far more channels available
on a fiber optic pipe into one's home, than on a cable with fixed
frequency allocations. Moreover, one doesn't have to modify the
subscriber equipment to add channels; just dial another number.

Third, fiber optic pipes into our homes will make data services,
highly sophisticated telephone services, interactive ordering and many
other thing available at low cost. Some who want to grab some of these
dollars, such as newspapers and others, also oppose phone company
entry for naked economic reasons. But such opposition is not in the
public interest since they aren't as technologically ready, nor have
they the market base or cost structure to provide such services as
cheaply as the phone companies can.

Finally, cross subsidization can be trivially handled by the state
PUCs with proper rules and accounting procedures. There's evidence
this works -- look at the very low cost of Long Distance calls
compared to local calls in many cases, due to the removal of
cross-subsidization by the regulatory process. Thus the opponents'
biggest propaganda objection is just plain silly, and only the
gullible will fall for it.


David Sternlight        David Sternlight Inc.        email:[e-mail]

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

From: Jayson Raymond <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Going UP
Date: Sat, 18 Jul 92 20:14:50 PDT


While I too share Mr. Higdon's concern for the increase we the regular
customer will have to fund for telco provided video, I'm excited by
the prospect of the phone company finally having a 'reason' to bring
high bandwidth home. Afterall Mr. Higdon, weren't you recently
complaining about not being able to receive ISDN at home?

However, this exacerbates the problems opened up with the previous
ruling allowing RBOCs to provide content. Let the telco's compete with
the cableco's and eliminate the "natural monopoly", make them fight
for our dollars by competing with each other in quality and services
in delivery (medium). But by god, keep both of them out of creating
the message, for it is far too easy and tempting to use one to gain
control of the other. And I agree with Higdon here, without regulating
this, the US will certainly become the U.B.S.A (or U.C.S.A).

As for the "Vast Wasteland" of media sub-mediocrity coming out of even
more choices, I think the real point to keep in mind is that video on
demand is an existing market that makes it very clear, even to those
who have no vision, of the potential that can come from bringing high
bandwidth home. It's only the tip of the iceberg, as Gibson, et al
have popularized.

Now that McGowan is gone, who'll slay the reawoken Goliath?


Jayson Raymond

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

From: [e-mail] (Kevin W. Williams)
Subject: Re: Do ESS Systems Keep Detailed Call Records?
Organization: gte
Date: Sun, 19 Jul 1992 07:46:18 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, Matt Simpson <SYSMATT@ukcc.
uky.edu> writes:

> Does anyone out there know if local exchanges keep any kind of call
> detail records? Specifically, I'm interested to know if a
> law-enforcement agency would be able to obtain a record of all local
> calls made to a specific number for some period in the past, without
> having requested a trace in advance.

> [Moderator's Note: Yes, the new switches do keep very detailed calling
> records. Getting them examined may be a hassle, but they do exist. Now
> of course if you had that nasty old Caller-ID, or even 'return last
> call', you could invade the caller's privacy by noting the calling
> number and act on it from that direction. Not only do hackerphreaks
> not care for Caller-ID, I suppose most burglars who call ahead to
> scope things out don't like it very well either.  PAT]

Pat,

 The keyword here is 'keep'. Most machines can maintain very detailed
STATUS, and can report them via Special Study reports. If Usage
Sensitive Service is applied, the switch will bill each call, so it
could be researched via billing checks. If the line is not on Special
Study, and USS Billing is not being applied, no record is kept of a
local call.

 If requested in advance, the line can be placed on special study, Hot
Number status, or Annoyance Call Monitor. Then the information desired
could be retrieved later.

Disclaimer: I speak GTD-5ese. People speaking 5ESSese or DMSese would
call these things different names, but the functionality is
equivalent.


Kevin Wayne Williams    UUCP : ...!ames!ncar!noao!asuvax!gtephx!williamsk

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

From: gtephx![e-mail] (Jon Baker)
Subject: Re: Do ESS Systems Keep Detailed Call Records?
Organization: AG Communication Systems, Phoenix, Arizona
Date: Sun, 19 Jul 1992 15:12:07 GMT


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

> Matt Simpson <[e-mail]> writes:

>> Does anyone out there know if local exchanges keep any kind of call
>> detail records? Specifically, I'm interested to know if a
>> law-enforcement agency would be able to obtain a record of all local
>> calls made to a specific number for some period in the past, without
>> having requested a trace in advance.

> You are probably out of luck for several reasons. The level of
> detail on calls is "settable" by the telco. If the purpose is to
> bill count and duration of local calls FROM a telephone (telcos do
> not keep any kind of records concerning calls TO a telephone), then
> a "peg count" is used and carries little detail. In the case of
> unmeasured service, the telco typically keeps no local records at
> all. I know Pac*Bell does not (although some telcos evidently do
> when they go after the customer for "excessive" use).

Entirely correct; there is probably no way to trace the calls that
were placed to your home in the past, if they were local calls.

However, you still have an alternative.  On a line-by-line basis, the
telco can keep records of all calls going TO your telephone.  Most
modern switches will have some form of 'annoyance call' trace, such
that when your CO receives a call for your line, it can generate a
record of where that call came from.  If it came in on a trunk, that
may be all that they know.  However, if they set up an annoyance call
trace for any call going TO your line in all the CO's in your area,
then any time anyone calls you from one of those CO's, it will
generate a record.

If you expect this pattern of robbery to continue, I would suggest
that you push this matter with the sheriff and telephone company.  If,
as you claim, they have a modern switching system, then they can
perform this sort of trace.  It's a bit of trouble for them, but
that's why the trace feature is there.


J.Baker     enuucp!gtephx!bakerj


[Moderator's Note: Well I know that in 1974 when I caught Illinois
Bell ripping me off, it was after I called the Business Office to
complain about the excessive number of message units on my account and
the service rep told me in a snotty way I must have made all those
calls. Since that CO (Chicago-Wabash) went ESS earlier that year, I
told her to send me the print out. I got pages of local call detail in
the mail which I reviewed. I assumed responsibility for any number I
recognized as well as those I did not recognize from times of day when
I was likely in my office and could have used the phone. I did a name
and address check on those I did not recognize from times I knew I
could not have been on the phone. *Lots* of calls had been made to
such places as 'IBT Company Vehicle Repair Depot' and 'IBT Co., 65
East Congress Parkway' (the CO building itself!). I called back and
pointed out that obviously some technicians were using my pair to make
all their calls and I would not pay. The service rep wrote off all the
message units on my bill that month to get me to shut up.  And on a
couple occassions since I have requested the local call detail from
the month before to audit.  PAT]

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

Date: Sun, 19 Jul 92 04:54:01 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Andy Sherman)
Subject: Re: 1-800-ATF-GUNS and Anonymity


In article [e-mail], vk2bea![e-mail] (Michael G.
Katzmann) writes

  (description of government run tip hotline deleted)

> It says call 1-800-ATF-GUNS, YOU DON'T HAVE TO GIVE YOUR NAME.

> This is, at the least, misleading since it implies anonymity for the
> caller.  Since as astute comp.dcom.telecom readers know, ANI is
> available to 800 service subscribers, the caller's number would surely
> be recorded by ATF.

> [Moderator's Note: I've often had the same thoughts about the numerous
> signs I see on the subways here urging people to call and seek help
> for a problem with cocaine, abusing your children, etc. They all use
> 800 numbers also, with ANI, I'm sure.   PAT]

Do remember that *can have* ANI delivery is not the same as *has* ANI
delivery.  Unfortunately, you can't know for sure.  If you really want
to be anonymous, use a pay phone.


Andy Sherman  (one and the same)
Salomon, Inc.  -  Unix Systems Support  -  Rutherford, NJ
[phone]  -  [e-mail]
"These opinions are mine, all *MINE*.  My employer can't have them."

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

From: [e-mail] (Jim Haynes)
Subject: 800 Number For Help With Personal Problems (was Abuse of ANI?)
Date: 19 Jul 1992 09:29:01 GMT
Organization: University of California; Santa Cruz


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Sam
Israelit) writes:

> A number of those organizations are out there doing legitimate work
> and they have 800 numbers so that you can call them free of charge
> (ie, too large a number of the population are indigent).  And even if
> that isn't the reason, it doesn't mean

Then there was a expose' here a while back about a man in Aptos who
handled incoming 1-800 numbers for various drug abuse programs.  He
was essentially a front for a for-profit rehabilitation hospital.  It
was alleged that the callers were asked first about their medical
insurance.  If they had no insurance then the answerer was to get rid
of the caller as quickly as possible.  But if the caller had insurance
the answerer was to decide the person needed in-patient treatment, and
arrange for a plane ticket to Los Angeles where the hospital was
located, and proceed to admit the person to the hospital.


[e-mail]     [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: There should be extra-special, very severe
punishments for abusing the trust of people who call on the phone
seeking help. It is distressing to think that people get up the
courage to admit they have a problem, finally trust someone enough to
ask for help and wind up getting betrayed. This makes the legitimate
counselors' job even harder.  I'd personally like to yank the service
out on some of those jerks.  PAT]

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

From: David Lesher <[e-mail]>
Subject: Use (Abuse) of ANI?
Date: Wed, 15 Jul 92 18:34:57 EDT
Reply-To: [e-mail]  (David Lesher)
Organization: NRK Clinic for habitual NetNews abusers - Beltway Annex


Today's [Ides of July] {Washington Post} had a story on this in of all
places, the food section!

It was really about how Betty Crocker and Friends solicit and collect
marketing data from your call, but it did discuss the ANI aspects.

With the sole exception of calling the ANI 'Caller-ID' (Just cuz we
here in c.d.t. are pedantic does not mean everyone is ...) they got
all the fine print correct, including the fact that you can't block it
as you might do with CID, and it always shows up on bills.


[e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #570
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa03091;
          19 Jul 92 21:40 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA09594
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 19 Jul 1992 13:26:09 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA28754
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 19 Jul 1992 13:26:02 -0500
Date: Sun, 19 Jul 1992 13:26:02 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #569

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 19 Jul 92 13:26:00 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 569

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Cellular Phone Hacking (Felix Finch)
    Re: Cellular Phone Hacking (Nigel Roberts)
    Re: Cellular Phone Hacking (David Sternlight)
    Re: Telecom Fraud (was Cellular Phone Hacking) (James Hartman)
    Re: Telecom Fraud (was Cellular Phone Hacking) (Richard Nash)
    Re: Telecom Fraud (was Cellular Phone Hacking) (Bill Walker)
    Re: Telecom Fraud (was Cellular Phone Hacking) (Jeffrey Jonas)
    Re: Locating Cellular Information (John Nagle)
    Re: 3W vs 0.6W (Steve Forrette)
    Re: 3W vs 0.6W (Jeff Sicherman)
    Re: Suit Alleges Cellular Caused Brain Tumor (Peter da Silva)
    Re: Suit Alleges Cellular Caused Brain Tumor (Ed Ravin)
    Re: Perot Compuserve Account (Larry Johnson)
    Re: Perot Compuserve Account (Ronald Elliott)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Felix Finch)
Subject: Re: Cellular Phone Hacking
Organization: Scarecrow Repair, Dutch Flat.
Date: Sat, 18 Jul 1992 04:04:46 GMT


Bill Squire writes:

>> [Moderator's Note: What you suggest is highly illegal in the USA and
>> probably everywhere else in the world except possibly the Netherlands
>> where it seems that everything is okay where defrauding the telco is
>> concerned.

> C'mon Pat be nice.  Using the bluebox is one thing, but somebody's
> account is quite another matter.  See the difference?

Pat, is this guy for real?  By this logic, it's a no no to rob a
person, but ok to rob a bank.  Dang, Pat, I'm in the wrong business!


Felix Finch, scarecrow repairer / [e-mail] / uunet!crowfix!felix

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

From: [e-mail] (Nigel Roberts)
Subject: Re: Cellular Phone Hacking
Organization: IC Software AG (on contract at DEC)
Date: Sun, 19 Jul 1992 01:28:06 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> (by Rop Gonggrijp)
our Esteemed Moderator notes ...

> help by telling us who called you?") they pry for details. Far too
> many mothers, grandmothers and air-headed friends, lovers, etc are
> very naive about this and run their mouth willingly.  PAT]


What do you mean "Far too many?". I'd have thought you'd be pleased
when the Good Guys catch the Bad Guys.


Nigel Roberts        |  [e-mail]  | Tel. [phone]  |
European Engineer   |  [e-mail] |  &   [phone] |
Fax  [phone]


[Moderator's Note: Well generally I am ... but I was trying to speak
from his perspective in that example.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (David Sternlight)
Subject: Re: Cellular Phone Hacking
Date: Thu, 16 Jul 92 17:57:15 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)


In a discussion of telephone fraud, the Moderator says phone companies
call recipients of such calls, and try to find out who called. He then
says:

> Far too many mothers, grandmothers and air-headed friends, lovers,
> etc are very naive about this and run their mouth willingly.

Am I reading too much into this, or is the moderator on the side of
the crooks, and opposed to catching them?


David Sternlight        David Sternlight Inc.        email:[e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: I was trying to explain why calling private phones
on a regular basis -- establishing calling patterns -- is a bad idea
where people who are into phone fraud are concerned.   PAT]

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

Subject: Re: Telecom Fraud (was Cellular Phone Hacking)
From: unkaphaed![e-mail] (James Hartman, Sysop)
Date: Sat, 18 Jul 92 13:35:15 GMT
Organization: Unka Phaed's UUCP Thingy


[e-mail] (Steven S. Brack) writes:

> It makes me wonder why the issuing telcos couldn't detect and possibly
> block calls made on the same CC but made too far apart in distance and
> too close together in time to have been made by the same person.

What if, for example, my wife and I are both traveling at the same
time, and I only have one Sprint card?  I write down the number on a
piece of paper, take it with me, and give the card to my wife, who
happens to be going to New York while I go to L.A.  Then we just
happen to call home to check the answering machine within minutes of
each other -- but, since I gave her the card, and since we're married,
we both have the use of the same card number.

Or, would this be illegal use of the card in the first place?

Note: As, I'm not married, this is a hypothetical (but possible)
example.  :-)


[e-mail] (James Hartman, Sysop)
Unka Phaed's UUCP Thingy, [phone]
1200/2400/9600/14400 v.32bis/v.42bis

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

Date: Sat, 18 Jul 1992 07:19:44 +0100
From: [e-mail] (Richard Nash)
Subject: Re: Telecom Fraud (was Cellular Phone Hacking)


> [e-mail] (Steven S. Brack) writes:

> Then my wife at home and myself on a business trip couldn't use the same
> card number to charge calls.

No problem! Joint credit cards could be issued with unique PINS that
identify each user.  Thus, only a simultaneous use of the credit card
could be from a fraudulent source.  This scheme has the added benefit
of assisting both users of the account to identify and reconcile their
own transactions. (The billing system records the entire credit card
including the PIN).


Richard Nash         Edmonton, Alberta Canada T6K 0E8
UUCP:                   trickie![e-mail]
Amatuer Radio Packet:   VE6BON @ VE6MC.AB.CAN.NA
                        VE6BON.ampr.org [44.135.147.206]

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

Date: Fri, 17 Jul 92 09:59:51 -0700
From: [e-mail] (Bill Walker)
Subject: Re: Telecom Fraud (was Cellular Phone Hacking)
Organization: Qualcomm, Inc.


What if the two calls were made by two members of the same family?
And even if one of the calls was fraudulent, which call would you
block?  Whoever got in second would lose, whether it was the owner or
the thief.


Bill Walker - [e-mail] - QUALCOMM, Inc., San Diego, CA
All opinions expressed are mine, and do not reflect those of my employer.


[Moderator's Note: See one explanation or work-around mentione
elsewhere in this issue. Separate PINS if not separate cards.  PAT]

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

Date: Fri, 17 Jul 92 11:00:16 -0400
From: krfiny![e-mail]
Subject: Re: Telecom Fraud (was Cellular Phone Hacking)


Ooooh!  Ooooh!  Ooooh!  Ooooh!  Teacher, call on me!  I know the
answer!

There are several valid reasons for a single calling card to have
calls from distant origins:

1) the calling card is shared by several people, such as a family.
Just as the home phone number is shared by the family, the calling
card is used by the husband at the office, the kids at college, etc.
Or a small business has its people in the field using the main number
to bill back calls.  Perhaps accounts can be flagged as shared/not
shared.

2) the origin of the phone calls is not always accurate.  As explained
previously in TELECOM in great detail, many alternate carriers have a
POP (Point of Presence) that may not be in your same county, or state.
Calls from a few miles away may appear to have originated from
different states.

There are commercials for various credit cards where the card holder
gets a call from security verifying some unusual activity on their
account and preventing fraud.  Similarly, I think that calling card
fraud can be detected not by origin but usage pattern analysys.
Sudden changes such as many overseas calls or very long calls should
warrant verification from the account owner.  I do not agree to
service denial/shutoff based on this information because there are too
many cases of TELECOM readers having valid accounts terminated due to
misinterpretation of account use.


jeffrey jonas    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (John Nagle)
Subject: Re: Locating Cellular Information
Date: Sat, 18 Jul 92 19:29:30 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest)


[e-mail] (peter wan) writes:

> I am looking for general and technical information regarding cellular
> systems and cellular technology. Are there any FTP archives which have
> such information, and can anyone suggest any printed books which cover
> the topic? Are there any vendors out there that will provide info on
> their products? Any suggestions are welcomed via email.

       I suggest "Digital Cellular Radio" (the book) for an unique
view of the current problems and future directions of cellular
technology.  Don't have the author's name handy, though.  Check Books
In Print.  This is a fun book to read, and it focuses on the issues of
scaling up cellular systems to large numbers of users.  Propagation of
UHF signals in cities in covered in detail.  The advantages of
spread-spectrum are explored.  Compression is discussed.  Power
control is analyzed.  How the designers of the existing system screwed
up by choosing Chicago as a testbed is explained.  Reading this book
convinced me that cellular systems have to go spread spectrum
eventually.  So I bought some Qualicomm stock.

        (I think, though, the existing cellular providers are a little
afraid of spread spectrum, because there's no fundamental reason that
there has to be only one cellular company in a band with spread
spectrum systems.  It could break the duopoly.  Eventually it probably
will.)


John Nagle

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: 3W vs 0.6W
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA
Date: Sat, 18 Jul 1992 22:19:50 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail].
harris.com (Dave Brillhart) writes:

>1.) Are 3.0W units really going to buy me alot more compared to the
>    compact 0.6W phones -- in regards to TX (and RX?) sound quality,
>    battery life, max distance from the closest transceiver, or other
>    issues I haven't thought of?

This reminds me of a feature on some of the Motorola bag phones that I
consider to be just a marketing gimmick: a .6W/3W switch.  The sales
people will tell you that when you are running the bag phone off of
batteries, it is a good idea to switch it to .6W to extend the battery
life; when you have it plugged into the cigarette lighter in your car,
switch it to 3W for best reception.

Of course, astute TELECOM Digest readers will note that the phone
doesn't always transmit at the maximum power level, but is instead
commanded by the base station to transmit at the lowest level that's
necessary for a good signal.  So, if you're near a cell, and only need
200mW to get a good signal, your phone only transmits with 200mW,
regardless of whether you have a 600mW or 3W model (this is primarily
so that the cell size can be scaled -- not to conserve battery
capacity, although that is a nice side effect).  In any event, the
only thing that the 600mW setting of the bag-phone switch accomplishes
is cutting off your calls when they need more than 600mW to get
through -- they don't save any battery capacity otherwise.  Since I
can't imagine that even under battery power you'd rather have your
calls cut off when they need more than 600mW just so you can 'save
your batteries,' I conclude that this is just a marketing gimmick.


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

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

Date: Sat, 18 Jul 92 16:29:16 -0700
From: Jeff Sicherman <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: 3W vs 0.6W
Organization: Cal State Long Beach


In article <[e-mail]> TELECOM Moderater explains
what went wrong a long time ago:

> And yes, regulations say you can't have a three watt handheld since
> there is a risk with the antenna so close to your head that you might
> irradiate your brain cells, and become goofy like your Esteemed
> Moderator, whose battery hasn't taken a full charge in many years.

And here, all this time, I thought it was a short circuit ...  :-)


Jeff Sicherman

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

From: [e-mail] (Peter da Silva)
Subject: Re: Suit Alleges Cellular Caused Brain Tumor
Organization: Taronga Park BBS
Date: Sun, 19 Jul 1992 11:48:46 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Michael Masterson) writes:

> Well, it's about 100 times the power levels of a laser that says
> "AVOID EXPOSURE TO BEAM" on the warning label, and that's just talking
> about dead surface skin cells ...  heck, .5 watts is about what the
> cutting lasers run that are used to cut master disks for CDs.

There's a little difference in the concentration. .5 watts over a
skillionth of a square centimeter is not the same as .5 watts over the
detectable field volume of a typical radio transmitter.


Peter da Silva, Taronga Park BBS, Houston, TX  [phone]/1032

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

From: [e-mail] (Unix Guru-in-Training)
Subject: Re: Suit Alleges Cellular Caused Brain Tumor
Organization: Prodigy Services Co.
Date: Sun, 19 Jul 1992 01:03:40 GMT


In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Ang Peng Hwa)
writes:

> Redrawing her subjects, she found that virtually all lived within
> 100 yards of either a substation or a high voltage line.

One of the early studies which found a correlation between childhood
leukemia and electromagnetic field emissions was done on some suburban
development -- nearly all the leukemia cases happened in houses that
were immediately near the step-down transformer on the utility poles
in the area.  For that neighborhood, the step-down transformers were
located on the corners of street intersection.  Hence it's not a case
of different income classes or any of the other factors suggested by
other posters.

One testimony I heard (all in well-reasoned tones by various
scientists who were discussing EMF at a public hearing about a
water-supply construction project in my neighborhood) is that it's
clear that EMF can cause cell damage -- the question is what
frequencies and what power levels cause the problems.  There may be
"windows", similiar to the atmospheric window which allows visible
light to penetrate but blocks out (well, it used to anyway, before the
ozone hole) ultraviolet rays and other stuff outside the frequency
range between infrared and ultraviolet.  One theory is that EMF
exposure within the "windows", i.e. of a certain frequency for at
least a certain time, can cause damage to the body but other
frequencies (or the same frequencies but without sufficient exposure)
will not cause problems.

The microwave industry (remember, microwaves are non-ionizing
radiation too) has a goodly amount of occupational diseases,
especially glaucoma in people who have to work on antennas (the name
Samuel Yannon comes to mind, who had to sue his employers heavily in
order to have his glaucoma recognized as work-related).  Of course,
we're talking huge differences between the power levels at a TV
repeater station or a long distance phone link and the piddling 600
milliwatts of a cellular phone.

> There is an extremely well-written (truly delightful to read despite
> the subject matter) book on this subject by Paul Brodeur.

One of the topics examined by Brodeur was a street in Connecticut
where single family homes were located next to a high-powered
electrical substation (we're talking complete with giant transformers
and the like).  Leukemia and brain tumors seemed to be the order of
the day for the residents on that street, as well as the residents
along the lines feeding the substation.  Again, we're talking EMF
levels orders of magnitude higher than cellular phone output.

I've read parts of Brodeur's series in the {New Yorker}, (the book is
called "Currents of Death") and he does document all his sources well
enough for any other interested parties to verify his conclusions.
Alas, he does run on and on and on in his writing, almost as bad as my
posting here. :-)


Ed Ravin- [e-mail]  [e-mail]
           [phone]  my opinions, nobody else's

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

From: dprmpt![e-mail] (Larry)
Subject: Re: Perot Compuserve Account
Date: 19 Jul 92 09:56:47 GMT
Reply-To: dprmpt![e-mail] (Larry)
Organization: Data-Prompt


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Peter da
Silva) writes:
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 559, Message 12 of 14

> In article <[e-mail]> TELECOM Moderator notes:

>> [Moderator's Note: This brings up the original question: Does Perot
>> have an email address for the proposed electronic forum for the
>> candidates? Should we use '[e-mail]' instead?  PAT]

> perot.com, eh? So if he gets elected we might actually see something
> like "[e-mail]"?

Nah!  He'll probably use "[e-mail]".  Of course, it
probably wouldn't be a bad idea if the government started running
itself like most .com sites (i.e. in the black).


Larry Johnson    UUCP: ...!uunet!dprmpt!larry

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

From: caron![e-mail] (Ronald Elliott)
Subject: Re: Perot Compuserve Account
Date: 19 Jul 92 01:11:53 GMT
Reply-To: caron![e-mail]
Organization: Science and Technology Center, Apple Valley Ca.


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

> perot.com, eh? So if he gets elected we might actually see something
> like "[e-mail]"?

I would think more like [e-mail] but its a moot point
anymore!


Ronald Elliott                   Science and Technology Center
caron![e-mail]              P.O. Box 2968
                                     Apple Valley, Ca 92307
                        Serving Education throughout the High Desert Area


[Moderator's Note: Moot point you say?  You want to know how far
behind I am in posting articles here sent to me?  How far behind am I?
How about I run some messages giving Harry Truman's email address!
Talk about moot points!   PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #569
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa03104;
          19 Jul 92 21:41 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA22629
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 19 Jul 1992 12:19:40 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA28019
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 19 Jul 1992 12:19:31 -0500
Date: Sun, 19 Jul 1992 12:19:31 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #568

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 19 Jul 92 12:19:35 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 568

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    CompuServe: FCC May Reconsider Modem Fee (Curtis E. Reid)
    FCC Modem Tax Rumor on Compu$erve (Michael Harpe)
    Need Help With Gandalf Modems (Kipp Cannon)
    Calling Cards For Married Couples (Nigel Allen)
    AT&T Mail vs. MCI Mail: Which is Better? (Leonard Wan)
    Wanted: VME Based Tel Interface Board (Marc E. Fiucznski)
    Advice Needed: Dialback Management (Peter Alexander Merel)
    Information Wanted on Westel (David Dodell)
    Any Cordless Phones With Calling Number ID? (Henry W. Troup)
    Wireless Phones That Work With Computers Around (Lance Ellinghouse)
    Looking For TTD Specifications (John A. Hammond)
    Statement by NCTA President on FCC Video Dialtone Proceeding (Nigel Allen)
    x.25 Packet Rates - Sample Rates Wanted (Steve Cavrak)
    Wanted: Two-line Controller (Timothy Stark)
    Caller*ID Device: Name Delivery System (Timothy Stark)
    Caution: Men at Retirement (David Leibold)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 18 Jul 1992 16:41:49 -0500 (EST)
From: "Curtis E. Reid" <[e-mail]>
Subject: CompuServe: FCC May Reconsider Modem Fee


Here is a blurb I found on CompuServe.  I hope this is not another
urban legend but CompuServe seemed very serious about it.  I called
their 800 line and they said it must be true if it's posted in "What's
New."

#######

MEMBERS URGED TO FIGHT "MODEM FEE"

  (16-Jul-92)

  A commissioner with the U.S. Federal Communications Commission (FCC)
recently stated that the FCC may again examine the possibility of
imposing "modem fees" for information service companies. Observers
have said the fees could drive up telephone line costs to information
services companies by as much as 300 percent, some or all of which
online service members would likely bear.

  CompuServe again needs your help in fighting any proposed cost
increase so that online services can grow and remain affordable. The
ramifications of the FCC's possible action is explained online (GO
FCC).  This area is free of connect charges.

  CompuServe asks that you send a letter to the FCC in opposition to
modem fees and also to write to certain U.S.Senators to encourage
legislation that would require the FCC to allow CompuServe and other
information services companies to use new and more efficient
technologies without being subjected to higher telephone line access
charges. Also, please copy Congressman Edward Markey of Massachusetts,
Chairman of the House Telecommunications Subcommittee. In 1987, a
similar letter writing campaign by online services users helped
prevent increased access charges from being implemented.

  The GO FCC area lists the names and address of FCC commissioners and
U.S. Senators to whom you should write. Or, CompuServe will soon make
available an FCCgram you can send electronically for 29 cents to the
FCC and Senators. (Composing online is free.) A sample message is
provided.  CompuServe is subsidizing this low 29-cent rate.

  GO TELECOM to read more about this issue in the Regulatory Affairs
section of the Telecommunications Forum.

  Your support of affordable information services is deeply
appreciated.


Curtis E. Reid                [e-mail]
Rochester Institute of Technology/NTID    [e-mail] (DECUS)
P.O. Box 9887                716.475.6089 TDD/TT 475.6895 Voice
Rochester, NY 14623-0887        716.475.6500 Fax

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

From: [e-mail] (Michael Harpe)
Subject: FCC Modem Tax Rumor on Compu$erve
Organization: University of Louisville
Date: Fri, 17 Jul 1992 14:50:39 GMT


I captured this from Compu$erve this morning.  No permission at all,
but I don't think they'll mind.  Here goes another round of modem tax
rumors ...


[Moderator's Note: Mr. Harpe sent a copy of the same thing supplied by
Curtis Reid. No need to repeat it here.   PAT]

  --- End forwarded material   ---

Mike Harpe
University of Louisville

Disclaimer:  I am acting for myself, U of L isn't involved.


[Moderator's Note: Well, here we go again. Someone had better get on
the phone to CIS and ask them if they realize the problems caused by
the spreading of this report and their request for help ... unless it
really is true this time around. I strongly urge everyone to sit tight
on this until/unless there is some independent verification. Fred, you
seem to know about these things ... what can you tell us?  And whatever
you have to say, can you see to it CIS gets the message also?   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Kipp Cannon)
Subject: Need Help With Gandalf Modems
Date: 16 Jul 92 03:14:08 GMT


        I would like information on the use of Gandalf MODEMS.  I have
two model LDS309's, but they are significantly different internally.
There are various jumpers for setting all sorts of modes, but some are
either different in layout or completely missing in one of them.  I
would like to know how to hook them up and configure them.  One is
labelled revision C5 and I think the other is revision A, but it isn't
labelled externally.  Please send me information.  Thanks in advance.


Kipp   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Calling Cards For Married Couples
Date: Sun, 19 Jul 92 1:24:51 EDT
Organization: Echo Beach, Toronto


Some people have mentioned that a married couple might share the same
calling card number.

They don't have to share the same number. One of them could be
assigned a special calling card number (sometimes called a fictitious
number) that would be billed on the same account. Some telephone
companies and long distance carriers may be reluctant to do this
because there are a limited number of possible fictitious numbers, and
some residential service representatives may not have been trained how
to set up this kind of calling card.

Similarly, another family member (such as a child away at university)
could be given his or her own calling card with a separate number, but
billed to the family telephone account.

If you have problems requesting a separate calling card number for
yourself or your spouse, explain that Nigel Allen told you that the
separate number would be a good idea, and that he said to mention his
name in case the business office was reluctant to process the request.
(This may not necessarily work, but it's worth a try. :-) )


Nigel Allen     [e-mail]   [e-mail]

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

Date: Sun, 19 Jul 92 08:07 GMT
From: Leonard Wan <[e-mail]>
Subject: AT&T Mail vs. MCI Mail: Which is Better?


Does anybody know which offers better service? AT&T Mail or MCI Mail?
AT&T seems to provide a more professional service, is that true?

And, does any body know of any software that can be used with AT&T
mail?  (Alternatives to the expensive ACCESS PLUS), just like Norton
Commander and others availalbe to MCI Mail, substituing Lotus Express?


[Moderator's Note: Both have good service. It really comes down to
your individual preference. Many people select the email carrier which
also serves as their LD carrier.  MCI Mail offers Dow Jones News as
part of their package; AT&T Mail offers the FYI service which was part
of the old EasyLink (Western Union email) system.    PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Marc E. Fiucznski)
Subject: Wanted: VME Based Tel Interface Board
Organization: Electronic Hardware Standards Laboratory, MITRE Corporation,
Date: Sat, 18 Jul 1992 19:01:06 GMT


We are currently working on a project that is attempting to implement
a PBX on a LAN (fddi or ethernet).  We have a UniVoice UV-4
Voice/Telephone Interface Board for the VME bus.  It works ok, but we
would like to look at other boards.

If anyone can help me with this, or point me in the right direction
please!  Vendor contact or addresses would also be fine.


Sincerely,

Marc E. Fiuczynski    [e-mail]    703-883-1221

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

From: [e-mail] (Peter Alexander Merel)
Subject: Advice Needed: Dialback Management
Organization: Customised Software Solutions Centres, AOTC
Date: Sun, 19 Jul 1992 06:04:00 GMT


I'm working at a site running an ethernet of Suns, and we have a
requirement for a sort of virtual dialback manager. The idea as I
understand it is:

You ring into one modem on one machine. That machine accepts your
details, and then hangs up the modem and tells a completely different
machine to call you back on another modem which is in a modem pool of
outgoing only modems.

We know about dialback modems, but it seems they are not as secure as
we'd like. I'm sure something like I describe must exist, but we don't
know what it is called or where to get it. Please help.


Internet: [e-mail]  UUCP: {uunet,mcvax}!munnari!cssc-syd!pete
Snail: 1/18-20 Orion Road, Lane Cove NSW 2066 Australia  Phone: [phone]


[Moderator's Note: A very secure (I suggest entirely foolproof) method
for using callback modems would include the use of three-way calling
on the lines. We all know that if the same modem is used to accept
incoming calls and then dial back to the user there is always the
possibility a hacker will simply sit on the line after the modem
disconnects, wait until it goes off hook, simulate dial tone and seize
the connection, thus defeating the security of calling back to only
registered numbers. Likewise, hackers have gone so far as to find out
the bank of numbers used for outcalls, dialed into them and sat there
waiting for a modem to go off hook to make a call then fraudulently
seized the line in the same way. The same line can be used in both
directions in a secure and effective way to defeat hackers: simply
have the line equipped with three-way calling from telco (not call
waiting!) and make a hook flash the first part of any outgoing dialing
string.

Here is what will happen: The modem goes off hook and does ADTD! (or
whatever is used to flash the hook) followed by a pause and the number
to be dialed. If no one is holding the line on the other end waiting
for the modem to go off hook, then the switch hook will be ignored and
a fresh dial tone brought up -- there is no basis for a three way
call.  On the other hand, if someone *is* sitting there waiting to
play tricks, then the hook flash will put that person on hold and
provide fresh dial tone for a 'three-way' call ... of course, the
calls will never get conferenced together, much to the hacker's
chagrin ... and he can sit there on hold as long as he wants while the
modem scoots around him on the three-way side to reach the registered
user at the authorized number, using the 'consultation' feature of
three-way calling rather than the 'conference' feature. Without
three-way calling from telco on the line, flashing the hook will do
nothing but put the call back where it was; but with three-way and a
hook flash as the first command in every dialing string, never the
hacker and outcalling modem shall meet. So forget about the two
modems, one machine telling the other one what to do, etc. It isn't
necessary. Just use existing features in the CO to hustle your hacker
nemesis out of the way should he be parked there waiting for you.  Can
anyone tell me precisely why this would not be foolproof?  PAT]

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

Date: Sat, 18 Jul 92 21:26:18 mst
From: [e-mail] (David Dodell)
Subject: Information Wanted on Westel


I am considering signing up with a company called "Westel" based out
of Texas as my business long distance carrier.  Anyone with any
experience with this company?


David
Internet: [e-mail]    FAX: [phone]
Bitnet: ATW1H @ ASUACAD                     FidoNet=> 1:114/15
        Amateur Packet ax25: [e-mail]

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

Date: Sun, 19 Jul 1992 10:07:00 +0000
From: Henry (H.W.) Troup <[e-mail]>
Subject: Any Cordless Phones With Calling Number ID?


I'd like to have a cordless phone with calling number ID for when I'm
out in the garden, etc.  Are there any yet?  I expect it'd be
expensive.


Henry Troup - [e-mail] (Canada) - BNR owns but does not share my opinions

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

From: Lance Ellinghouse <[e-mail]>
Subject: Wireless Phones That Work With Computers Around
Organization: Mark V Systems Limited, Encino, Ca.
Date: Sun, 19 Jul 1992 14:54:16 GMT


Does anyone know of any good quality wireless phones that will work
reliably around 40+ PC's and Workstations???

I have been told that there are NONE that will do this.

Please tell me I am wrong.


Thank you,

Lance Ellinghouse   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (John A. Hammond)
Subject: Looking For TTD Specifications
Date: 18 Jul 92 23:44:32 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail] (John A. Hammond)
Organization: Tektronix, Inc., Beaverton,  OR.


Hi,

I am looking for the specifications for TTD, the (no flames please)
Baudot code format for terminals used by deaf people.  In particular,
I need the mark/space frequencies and bit timing.

Please e-mail replies.


Thanks in advance,

John Hammond

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Statement by NCTA President on FCC Video Dialtone Proceeding
Date: Sat, 18 Jul 92 22:53:28 EDT
Organization: Echo Beach, Toronto


Here is a press release from the National Cable Television
Association.  I pass it on without any additional comment.


 Statement by NCTA President on FCC Video Dialtone Proceeding
 Contact: Peggy Laramie of the National Cable Television Association,
          202-775-3629

   WASHINGTON, July 16 /U.S. Newswire/ -- Following is a statement by
National Cable Television Association President and CEO James P.
Mooney on the FCC video dialtone proceeding:

   "When you cut through all the technical ballyhoo, this is a kind of
half-step toward encouraging phone companies to build a lot of hugely
expensive TV plant, with telephone customers financing the investment.
The other half-step belongs to Congress; whether they'll take it
remains to be seen."

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Cavrak)
Subject: x.25 Packet Rates - Sample Rates Wanted
Organization: University of Vermont -- Division of EMBA Computer Facility
Date: Sun, 19 Jul 1992 10:37:00 GMT


The local phone company would like us to begin using x.25 service for
some of our telecom services (including an educator "bbs") and quotes
a packet charge ($0.70 / kilopacket) that seems "uneconomical."

What are rates for kilopackets elsewhere in the country?

Are there any experiences with using x.25 service for BBS support?

Please reply to me directly and I'll post a summary in a week or so.


Thanks,

Steve

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

From: [e-mail] (Timothy Stark)
Subject: Wanted: Two-Line Controller
Date: Sat, 18 Jul 92 18:29:25 PDT


     I am looking for a two-line controller because I have two lines
and one single-line TDD machine. I prefer that the device handle
incoming calls from either of two lines and out-going calls on desired
line. Does anyone have information about it? If so, please include
company name and phone number (order phone number). Thanks!


Timothy Stark               Internet: [e-mail]
837 North Van Dorn St       GENIE: T.STARK1
Alexandria, Va. 22304-2723  TDD Phone Number: [phone]


[Moderator's Note: Is Radio Shack still producing/selling theirs?  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Timothy Stark)
Subject: Caller*ID Device: Name Delivery System
Date: Sat, 18 Jul 92 18:35:44 PDT


       Last week I went to a Sears store and I found the Caller*ID 370
system that allows name display instead of number or both. I called
C&P Telephone Company; they have no information about that but said
that it is illegal in the area. Then, I called the Bell Altantic
Catalog Department and found out information. They told me that they
know about the service and C&P Telephone anticipates they will have it
in two years. It is being tested in California but all phone companies
have not set date for it.  What do you think?  Any suggestions? I need
that because I want to keep myself from getting prank calls, unknown
random numbers, etc.  Thanks!


Timothy Stark               Internet: [e-mail]
837 North Van Dorn St       GENIE: T.STARK1
Alexandria, Va. 22304-2723  TDD Phone Number: [phone]


[Moderator's Note: A Caller-ID device which said John Doe was calling
would be of less value than one which gave a specific number if you
have no idea who John Doe is. At least with the number displayed, you
have some recourse to the telephone subscriber.  People keep talking
about Caller-ID as a way to screen or avoid answering unwanted calls,
and they base their complaints about Caller-ID on the shortcomings
they find in their perception of the purpose of number delivery. If
they would realize the primary purpose is to identify and provide
recourse to the subscriber of the calling telephone -- the person who
legally remains responsible for the uses made of the instrument -- and
only secondarily as a way to avoid unwanted calls, I suspect there
would be fewer complaints. Clue: you continue answering all calls as
you do now (or diverting to answering machine, etc) ... and if you
don't like what you hear, the caller no longer has the comfort of
hiding behind the phone. That's Caller-ID, period: the inability of
callers to remain anonymous. Names are okay; numbers much better.  PAT]

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

Date: Sun, 19 Jul 92 02:27:52 EDT
From: David Leibold <[e-mail]>
Subject: Caution: Men at Retirement


A story that probably came from the {Boston Globe} and as reported in
{The Globe and Mail} told the story of a sign warning motorists of
"Fat Telephone Workers Ahead". The sign was made by a telephone crew
member named Mike Koczat to send off a retiring co-worker in style.
However, the sign tends to get motorists slowing down out of curiosity
whenever it is used.

Perhaps there is safety in humours ...


[e-mail]    [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #568
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa07531;
          20 Jul 92 0:12 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA00686
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 19 Jul 1992 22:26:51 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA25958
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 19 Jul 1992 22:26:43 -0500
Date: Sun, 19 Jul 1992 22:26:43 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #571

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 19 Jul 92 22:26:35 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 571

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Telephone Keypad Question (Tony Harminc)
    Re: Telephone Keypad Question (Steve Forrette)
    Re: Telephone Keypad Question (Gordon Burditt)
    Re: Leap Seconds and Telco Time-of-Day Accuracy (Bruce Albrecht)
    Re: Leap Seconds and Telco Time-of-Day Accuracy (Jon Baker)
    Re: SWBell Marketing Voice Mail (Peter da Silva)
    Re: 911 Circuitry Can Detect 91 (Carl Moore)
    Re: 700 Easyreach Service Should be Called Hard to Reach (Steve Forrette)
    Re: 700 Easyreach Service Should be Called Hard to Reach (Carl Moore)
    Re: Detroit Area 313 to Split (Carl Moore)
    Re: Overseas AT&T Calling Card (David M. Miller)
    Re: AT&T Voicemark (Jeffrey J. Carpenter)
    Re: Fixed Call Forwarding (Dave Levenson)
    Re: Telephone Vanity Plates? (Bob Blackshaw)
    Re: Godwin Speaks Out ... (John R. Levine)
    Re: European Phone in Canada? (Herman R. Silbiger)
    Re: "Telephone Scrambler" Plans Available (Bruce Ferrell)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sat, 18 Jul 92 16:46:05 EDT
From: Tony Harminc <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Telephone Keypad Question


[e-mail] (Dominique J. Cheenne) wrote:

> Why are the letters "Q" and "Z" missing from the telephone keypad?

> [Moderator's Note: Telephone numbers do not usually begin with '1',
> and having the letters /ABC/ there would have effectively precluded
> them from being the starting letter in an exchange name, back when
> telco officially used words to identify central offices. In order to
> keep the zero available as a single digit way to reach the operator,
> letters were not used there either. Imagine life with no AVEnue,
> AUStin, BIShop, BOUlevard, CIRcle, CAThedral or COLumbus ... Since
> only eight digits are left, two letters had to be elimininated, with
> /QZ/ least likely to be needed. Imagine life without QUAyle ... PAT]

I have several Northern Electric (now Northern Telecom) 300 series
sets (made under licence from Western Electric in the US in the 1940s)
with QZ (and "Operator") on the zero hole.


Tony H.

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: Telephone Keypad Question
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA
Date: Sat, 18 Jul 1992 22:24:55 GMT


I've noticed that some phone manufacturers (seen mostly on cheaper
models and COCOTS) now label the 1 key with "QZ".  However, many voice
processing applications, such as Octel voicemail, tell you to "use 7
for Q, and 9 for Z."  Considering that there are differing opinions as
to where Q and Z should be mapped for those applications that need
them, it seems unwise to label them at all on the keys.


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Gordon Burditt)
Subject: Re: Telephone Keypad Question
Organization: Gordon Burditt
Date: Sun, 19 Jul 1992 06:01:37 GMT


> /QZ/ least likely to be needed. Imagine life without QUAyle ... PAT]

That's 'QUAyl'.  Dan Quayl donated his 'e' to the potatoe.


Gordon L. Burditt     sneaky.lonestar.org!gordon

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

Date: Sun, 19 Jul 92 10:13:40 CST
From: [e-mail] (Bruce Albrecht)
Subject: Re: Leap Seconds and Telco Time-of-Day Accuracy


In <[e-mail]>, Paul Eggert writes:

> In comp.protocols.time.ntp <[e-mail]>, Jeff Makey reports that
> Pacific Bell's time-of-day service in San Diego adjusted for the June
> 30 leap second sometime between 28 and 53 minutes late.  (Since they
> hang up after reporting the time, it was impractical for him to
> determine the exact moment of switchover.)  This suggests that PacBell
> adjusts their time-of-day clock manually rather than relying on an
> automated system linked to WWV.  And it brings up more general
> questions:

> How accurate is the time-of-day reported by PacBell, GTE, etc.?

When I was in college (Grinnell, IA, 1975-1979), GTE's time of day was
off by two minutes(!!!) for the entire daylights savings time season.


[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Jon Baker)
Subject: Re: Leap Seconds and Telco Time-of-Day Accuracy
Organization: AG Communication Systems, Phoenix, Arizona
Date: Sun, 19 Jul 1992 15:01:15 GMT


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

> Surely accurate timekeeping is important within the telco switches for
> performance and accounting reasons.

Surely it is ...

> How are times within the switches synchronized to the times reported
> to the public?

I suspect not at all.  The time-of-day reporting system you describe
is an outboard box, completely independent of the telephone switching
system.  You call a number, you're connected to this box, it states
the time, and that's it.

In the GTD5, the time-of-day is synchronized to the network clocking
signal.  This signal, which is used to clock all PCM traffic through
the switch, is typically obtained from an External Clock
Synchronization Source (a T1 span to an adjacent higher-order office).
All the CO's in a network are, in theory, synchronized to each other,
with the master timing source coming from the Grand Master Of Clocks
in Hillsboro (?), Missouri.  If anyone knows more about this Grandaddy
of clocks, I'd be interested to hear about it.  I believe that MCI and
the US Navy also operate similar 'Master Clocks'.

The time-of-day, as you state, is used for billing and other purposes.
It is accurate to within +/- 15 seconds per day.  But, it has no
relation to the recorded announcement.


Jon Baker (bakerj@gtephx)    UUCP: !enuucp!gtephx!bakerj

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

From: [e-mail] (Peter da Silva)
Subject: Re: SWBell Marketing Voice Mail
Organization: Taronga Park BBS
Date: Mon, 20 Jul 1992 01:56:18 GMT


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

> We may thank Judge Harold Greene for this and *more*.  In his last
> year's decision (forced decision) Judge Greene finally is allowing the
> RBOCs to participate in the National Information Services Industries.

God help us all, because nobody on the ground will. This will put
existing non-RBOC service providers out of business, and (based on the
quality of service Southwestern Bell has come up with in the past ... a
Minitel based information services system that makes Prodigy look like
Usenet) reduce the available quality and variety of services available
to the public.

The RBOCs should be restricted to providing services for which they
can demonstrate are a natural monopoly and for which no third party
alternative can be expected, like Caller-ID, instead of crap like
"Voice Mail" which has been available from third parties for years.


Peter da Silva, Taronga Park BBS, Houston, TX  [phone]/1032

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

Date: Sun, 19 Jul 92 9:58:39 EDT
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: 911 Circuitry Can Detect 91


Some phone books do list non-emergency numbers, and I take them to be
for matters which should get police attention but are not as urgent.

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: 700 Easyreach Service Should be Called Hard to Reach
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA
Date: Sun, 19 Jul 1992 08:50:40 GMT


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

> In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (H. Peter Anvin)
> writes:

>> A dedicated country code would probably be the best, especially from
>> an international standpoint.  Otherwise, maybe we have found a use for
>> the 600 area code.

> No, the best would be to abandon the fixed-length phone number. Other
> countries don't have them, having benefited from the U.S. being the
> pioneers in this instance.

The problem with this solution is that the modifications to telco
switches, private PBXs, etc., would be non-trivial.  I mean, it would
take at least a couple of years, right folks?  :-)


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

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

Date: Sun, 19 Jul 92 10:11:30 EDT
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: 700 Easyreach Service Should be Called Hard to Reach


500 and 600 are among the N00 listed as available as last resort if
needed before 1995 as geographical area codes.  Relief to area code
shortage is to come in 1995 when area codes generalize to NXX; the
delay is due to the need to reprogram all switches to accept such area
codes.

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

Date: Sun, 19 Jul 92 11:01:14 EDT
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Detroit Area 313 to Split


The 10 August 1994 date is only about five months before the deadline
for being ready for area codes of form NXX.  That deadline had been
July 1, 1995 but was moved to six months earlier (Jan. 1, 1995).  Of
the N0X/N1X area codes (excluding 610,710,N00,N11), now only 910 is
not either in use or announced for future use.

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

Subject: Re: Overseas AT&T Calling Card
Date: Sun, 19 Jul 92 03:35:46 -0500
From: [e-mail]


The Australian OTC ("Overseas Telecommunications Commission") offers
what it calls "OTC CallCard" in conjunction with AT&T.  Works as
normal in the States, while callers from Australia or any other
country offering the USA Direct service may dial an international
toll-free number for connection to an AT&T operator.  Charge is
approximatly A$2.20/minute if I remember correctly.

To obtain information, you can ring OTC Sydney on (US) 800-332-2682.


Best regards,

David M Miller      Internet:    [e-mail]
PO Box 695          CompuServe:  100032,341
Hornsby NSW 2077    GEnie:       D.MILLER3@GENIE
Australia

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

Date: Sun, 19 Jul 1992 14:05:18 -0400 (EDT)
From: Jeffrey J. Carpenter <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: AT&T Voicemark


Excerpts from netnews.comp.dcom.telecom: 15-Jul-92 AT&T Voicemark Ken
[e-mail]:

> I had an occasion to use AT&T Voicemark (The store and forward message
> service) the other morning. First, a kudo ...

> Please add the ability to send the same message to multiple numbers.
> it's a drag having to rerecord the same message.

This can be done, but you cannot do it automatically.  You need to
enter the sequence in to bring an operator on the line to assist you
(I can't remember the sequence off the top of my head), but they can
add additional numbers on for you.



jeff

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

From: [e-mail] (Dave Levenson)
Subject: Re: Fixed Call Forwarding
Organization: Westmark, Inc.
Date: Sun, 19 Jul 1992 16:51:20 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, francois%tollys.UUCP%
[e-mail] (F Truchon) writes:

> Concerning telco voice mail:

> The one advantage that I get from subscribing to my telco's voice mail
> service rather then forwarding to my voice mail at work (if I could)
> is that the dial tone changes on my phone when I have messages. This
> is like the flashing LED on answering machines. You can quickly check
> if you have messages by listening to the dial tone rather than having
> to dial the voice mail number and to log in.

But don't forget the infinite series that results: You go off-hook to
listen for dial-tone.  You hear steady tone for a second or two,
indicating that at the time you went off-hook, there were no messages
waiting.  You go back on-hook, secure in the knowlege that you don't
have to call anybody back right now ...

But while you were off-hook checking, somebody called, and by the time
you were finished checking, and back on-hook, they had been forwarded
to the telco voice mail system (because your line was busy).  They
leave a message, but you were finished checking by the time they were
finished recording it.

You must pick up again, after a minute or so, to see if anybody left a
message while you were checking for messages.  And of course, the same
thing could happen during your next check-for-messages!

The light on your answering machine, or on your telephone if it could
be activated by the telco's voice mail service, would seem to be a
better idea.  You can check it (by looking at it) without missing
another call in the process.

To use their service correctly, you must go off-hook at least once
after every conversation, to see if a call arrived while your were
busy.  This means that for every call you place or receive, you must
go off-hook at least two times -- once to make the call itself, and a
second time, to see if you missed a call while you were busy.  This
approximately doubles the number of dial-tone registers required to
serve your community.  That expense, of course, is partially offset by
the service charge imposed on the users of their voice mail service.
It is also partially imposed on all users of their basic telephone
service.

I don't consider that an advantage.


Dave Levenson        Internet: [e-mail]
Westmark, Inc.        UUCP: {uunet | rutgers | att}!westmark!dave
Warren, NJ, USA        Voice: 908 647 0900  Fax: [phone]

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

From: cos![e-mail] (Bob Blackshaw)
Subject: Re: Telephone Vanity Plates?
Organization: Corporation for Open Systems
Date: Sun, 19 Jul 1992 20:38:47 GMT


In <[e-mail]> Alan Boritz <72446.461@CompuServe.
COM> writes:

> Did you know that the State of New Jersey issues special vanity
> license plates for "Telephone Pioneers?"  Am I the only one that
> didn't?  I spotted one on a car in a Mahwah, New Jersey, parking lot
> today.  The plates have a "PA" prefix and sport a Telephone Pioneers
> of America logo with the familiar bell in the middle.

> What'll they think of next?  First Bell-Shaped-Heads, now Bell-Shaped
> license plates. ;)

 Maryland does this also, except it is TPAnnnn, with telephone
pioneers of America across the bottom. As a life member, I thought
about it, but why spend the money.


Bob

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

Subject: Re: Godwin Speaks Out ...
Organization: I.E.C.C.
Date: 19 Jul 92 17:26:02 EDT (Sun)
From: [e-mail] (John R. Levine)


> Well Mike, you had me leaning towards your side until I read the 13
> July edition of {ComputerWorld}, specifically the article "Wiretap
> snares alleged hackers". In that article, you state:

> "This whole indictment could very well be an attempt to frame some
> people who the authorities believe glorify hacking."

> This sounds like a sensationalist defense strategy to me Mike.

Mike isn't the only one who thinks so.  The current issue of the RISKS
Digest contains a long piece quoted (legally) from {Newsbytes} and
written by two people familiar with the case and with the individuals
involved.  While they agree that there are straighforward charges that
the people involved commited calling card fraud and other crimes, they
are very concerned about a large and vague conspiracy charge which
seems to be very poorly supported.  The authors contend that the
conspiracy charge appears politically motivated, in particular to
support the FBI's current campaign to make phone systems easy to tap.
Anyone interested should read the original.

Now can we stop calling each other names and get back to phone phun?
Perhaps we can encourage our hard-working Moderator to set an example
by in the future not posting personal attacks either from others or
from himself.  I've found this policy quite successful in comp.compilers,
the group that I moderate.


Regards,

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


[Moderator's Note: Mike Godwin has since complained that he did NOT
say the thing attributed to him ... and in fact he repudiated it.  But
you say you *do* feel that way? An LDM (Latter-Day McCarthyite) will
take your statement to the Committee shortly.  :)   PAT]

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

Date: Sun, 19 Jul 92 19:39:24 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Herman R Silbiger)
Subject: Re: European Phone in Canada?
Organization: AT&T


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Christian Doucet) writes:

> My sister bought a phone in Amsterdam and it somewhat looks like a
> 2500 set. She want's to use it here in Canada because it has this
> "oldish European look" :). It has a DTMF keypad on it.

> Will this phone work in Canada?
> Will the DTMF keypad work in Canada?
> How to wire it?

The phone will work in Canada.  I am not sure about the connections,
but I would get a modular cord with spade lugs at one end (Radio Shack
has them, and try a and b, a and EB, and b and EB in turn, using the
red and green from the modular cord.

I was in one of the Primafoon stores in the Netherlands, which are
operated by Netherlands PTT Telecom.  They had more than 30 different
models on display, including some candy apple colors.  All the phones
on display had RJ-11 connectors.


Herman Silbiger

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

From: [e-mail] (Bruce Ferrell)
Subject: Re: "Telephone Scrambler" Plans Available
Organization: Sacramento Public Access Unix, Sacramento, Ca.
Date: Mon, 20 Jul 92 04:02:49 GMT


You're partially right ... IF the cellular industry had engineers
there might be the kind of advances you want.  Right now what passes
for an engineer in cellular (and most alternative long distance) is
really a project engineer.  AT&T seems to be the exception as they do
engage in research and development. The rest only test and evaluate
the products of the equipment manufacturers to be sure they can use it
AND still make a profit.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #571
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa27324;
          20 Jul 92 9:12 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA19143
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 20 Jul 1992 07:10:03 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA24897
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 20 Jul 1992 07:09:55 -0500
Date: Mon, 20 Jul 1992 07:09:55 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #572

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 20 Jul 92 07:10:00 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 572

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: What is ESN? (Vance Shipley)
    Re: What is ESN? (Alan L. Varney)
    Re: Airfone System Overload (Gordon Hlavenka)
    Re: Way Cool MCI Mail Binary File Handling (Bruce Ferrell)
    Re: Payphones With Bogus DTMF Tones? (Alan Boritz)
    Re: Surprise Calling Card Fraud: Followup (Scott Colbath)
    Re: AT&T Automated Rate Information (Rudolph T. Maceyko)
    Re: Telecom Fraud (was Cellular Phone Hacking) (Phil Wherry)
    Re: Cracker Running Rampant! (Roger Gonzalez)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Vance Shipley)
Subject: Re: What is ESN?
Organization: SwitchView Inc., Waterloo, Ontario
Date: Mon, 20 Jul 1992 03:34:41 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (VLD/VMB)
writes:

> I noticed a listing for Bell-Northern Research in Richardson, Texas
> (near Dallas) on the 214-684 prefix, and followed by a 7D number
> prefixed with "ESN".  What is ESN?

"Electronic Switched Network", both a Meridian PBX feature package
name and the name used to describe the Northern Telecom/BNR private
switched telephone network.  Typically each PBX has a three digit
location code.  A seven digit ESN number would be LOC-XXXX where LOC
is the location code specifying which PBX and XXXX is the directory
number on that switch.  It is only valid within the ESN network.


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

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

Date: Sun, 19 Jul 92 20:51:52 CDT
From: [e-mail] (Alan L Varney)
Subject: Re: What is ESN?
Organization: AT&T Network Systems, Lisle, IL


In article <[e-mail]> francois%tollys.UUCP%
[e-mail] (F Truchon) writes:

> ESN is an acronym for "Electronic Switched Network". In this context,
> it simply refers to NT/BNR's corporate voice network. Basically, a
> telephone network is implemented by leasing voice trunks between the
> Meridian 1 (SL1) PBX's at various locations. I believe that the first
> two or three digits of an ESN telephone number refer to a particular
> PBX (same as for public networks).

> Is ESN a standard name for corporate voice networks or is it only used
> with NT's Meridian 1 PBX?

   Don't know, but if it's just BNR's, won't the lawyers be upset that
you didn't use the (trademark/servicemark) symbol?

   For years, AT&T had several "corporate" networks, each with it's
own purpose, funding and connectivity.  On the manufacturing/research
side, there was "CORNET", a "Hardware-defined network" using seven-digit
access numbers to reach almost anywhere.  The "NXX" digits usually
defined a location, and the last four digits typically matched the
extension.  In some cases, an off-premises extension would be used to
extend a number to a remote location.  This was often used to provide
CORNET lines to Western Electric CO installations, since installers
were not allowed to use the CO telephones (One Bell System, ya'
know?).  Most TELCos also had their own "network", and so did the
Operations part of the Long Distance service.  But you couldn't call
between them.

   Several other large companies used versions of CORNET long before
1984 changed the business.  I don't believe any are left, since things
like SDN (Software Defined Network) are more flexible, and have better
real-time controls and data collection.  Why, you might wonder, would
"The Phone Company" want a private network when they OWNED the
network?  It's simple -- CORNET allowed AT&T to easily restrict most
telephones from making non-business calls.  This prevented (they say)
lots of abuse, at least by the non-management employees.  Having "9"
unblocked on your telephone was a "power" symbol at many factories.
Since most telephones factory telephones were black, dial-pulse
beauties, a common "lock" was a physical lock in the "9" hole of the
dial, preventing "9" or "0" calls.  "8" usually got you to CORNET,
others were internal.

   As usual, the legal/regulatory area also made itself felt.  CORNET
could be justified because it prevented those abuses that might have
otherwise required lots of record-keeping and justification of every
call made by AT&T -- just to be sure AT&T wasn't "giving away"
personal calls as a benefit.

   And, of course, it also allowed AT&T to concentrate on providing
GREAT service to it's paying customers, and fixing the CORNET problems
when there was time available ...


Al Varney -- just MY memories ... and opinions.

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

From: [e-mail] (gordon hlavenka)
Subject: Re: Airfone System Overload
Organization: Vpnet Public Access
Date: Sun, 19 Jul 1992 22:19:50 GMT


> during the delay, I reached for the GTE Airfone built into the seat in
> front of me. I waited for the green LED to come on before proceeding.
> It wasn't coming on. Eventually it did illuminate, but it was gone
> again before I could get my credit card through the magnetic reader. I
> assume with all those planes grounded on the runway in addition to
> those in the air that could not land, the call traffic was more than
> the system could handle. One lady who managed to get her card through
> the reader and dial a number heard a message stating that all circuits
> were busy and to please wait. This message repeated at regular
> intervals. She waited about half an hour before finally giving up.

As the guy who designed that seatback phone for GTE, I think I can
answer this for you.  (GTE "restructured" me out of the company a few
years ago, and I'm now employed by "the other" ATG phone carrier,
In-Flight Phone Corp.  Look for us on USAir 757s.)  (But I'm on the
General Aviation side, not Commercial, so if it eats your dime, don't
flame _me_ :-)

The aircraft itself has a maximum capacity of (4) phone calls.  This
is a limitation imposed by the amount of radio equipment carried
onboard.  It takes about two lineal feet of shelf space in the
equipment bay to handle those four calls.  They may decide to
double-install some high volume aircraft, but they didn't do so while
I was there.  Real estate in the equipment bay is SCARCE.

There are four cabin trunks available to connect handsets to the
onboard switching computer (called the ACU).  If all these trunks are
in use, the green LED on your handset will not illuminate -- in fact
the handset is not even powered up at this point.

(The cordless GTE system can have as many as eight phones in the
cabin, and they can all connect to the ACU.  But you can still only
have four radios -- four calls per aircraft.)

When the green LED comes on, this indicates that a cabin trunk is
available.  You can seize this trunk by running your credit card
through the handset.  If 20 people all pick up their handsets at the
same time, they will all get green lights.  The first four to swipe
their cards through will connect to the ACU, and everybody else's LEDs
will go out.  When one of the four hangs up (in the holder, not just
by pressing NEWCALL) all 16 of those LEDs come back on and you can all
race for the trunk.  If you listen to the handset while waiting for
the LED to come on, you'll hear a "beep-beep-beep-beep" signal.  When
the beeps stop, your LED is on!

Once you are connected to the ACU your credit card is checked and (if
it's a valid card) you are issued either a dialtone or a message
indicating "all lines busy."  The ALB message means that your ACU is
unable to open a channel to the ground station.  This could be because
the ground station's 31 (max) channels are all in use, or because your
aircraft has fewer than four radios installed, and those that are
installed are in use.  Three years ago, very few ground stations were
fully stuffed out to 31 channels.

> On a side note, I'd be interested in seeing a study showing
> how much extra Airfone revenue is generated for the airlines when
> there are delays versus flights that are on time (why be on time when
> you can make extra money by being late?).

I only know that call volume went up a _lot_ when there was a weather
problem.  I'm sure that made (makes!) certain non-travelling people
very happy! :-) And yes, the airline gets a cut of the call revenue.
But I doubt it's enough to make up for the aggravation caused by a
delay.

               ********** Important note **********

I hold no grudge against GTE for canning me on five seconds notice.
(Well, maybe a little ;-) I will not respond to requests for details
on the operation of their system.  Besides, it will all be obsolete in
a couple of months when they deploy Genstar.  Right.


Gordon S. Hlavenka    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Bruce Ferrell)
Subject: Re: Way Cool MCI Mail Binary File Handling
Organization: Sacramento Public Access Unix, Sacramento, Ca.
Date: Mon, 20 Jul 92 03:56:42 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Alan Boritz) writes:

> [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.

The protocol that MCI Mail uses for batching is called MEP2.  That's
all I've ever been able to find out about it.  If any one knows
more ... I'm all ears.  The times I've tried to contact MCI Mail for
information, I've gotten the equivelent of a blank stare.

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

Date: 20 Jul 92 07:30:12 EDT
From: Alan Boritz <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Payphones With Bogus DTMF Tones?


[e-mail] (Alan Boritz) writes:

> Don't bet on it.  I couldn't complete an AT&T calling card call to a
> number in Missouri from a LEC's pay phone at a service plaza on I-80
> in Indiana (ITC was grabbing the 0+ and 1+ calls).

> I guess some parts of the country are not as important as others,
> as far as AT&T's potential calling card business is concerned. (I
> finally completed the call using MCI with MCI's ENFIA access.)

> [Moderator Banging Head Against the Wall: Now I have heard everything!
> Did you get the name or title of this so-called 'marketing person'? I
> would have immediatly tried to reach the office manager wherever she
> was located and urge that she be pulled off the phones until she had
> been through some sort of training class.

Oh, I'm used to this kind of nonsense from AT&T people.  The last time
I took the trouble of memorializing a bell-shaped person's name was
when I was doing a market survey in preparation for a new switch at
the Empire State Building, to replace an old tired Horizon-advanced.

When I explained to our marketing person that I wanted switch
diagnostics, including trunk group busy peg counts (we were grossly
over-trunked, typical for a NY Tel-engineered leased PBX), she
replied, "What's a peg count?" She was lost by the time we got to
"busy studies." I never got specs on whatever small-to-medium size
switch AT&T was trying to push on (presumably) inexperienced business
customers.

However, after they later left us with no service for three days
(power supply failure, and they hadn't backed up the configuration
tapes in over three years) I wouldn't have specified AT&T product
anyway.

> Let me ask, do any of the AT&T readers here become embarrassed by
> some of the stupid things their co-workers say to or pass off on the
> public?  PAT]

What about when AT&T announced that they were discontinuing the System
85, and then followed it up with a denial that that would ever happen?
One of my former City of New York co-workers has copies of both
releases, right from the source.

The trade media has been suggesting for some time (when they don't
fall for phony press releases) that AT&T is getting out of the
interconnect business.  Could the horrendous service and inevitable
hostile escalation be because they're already accepted that fate, or
is it a symptom of incompetent management?

Perhaps it may be more topical instead of trading "stupid AT&T jokes"
to ask, "what smart business does AT&T conduct that makes their
incompetence at least tolerable?"


Alan Boritz    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Scott Colbath)
Subject: Re: Surprise Calling Card Fraud: Followup
Date: 19 Jul 92 20:35:58 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Mark
Schuldenfrei) writes:

> Best of luck to AT&T's stockholders, however, it seems that the
> fraud unit is willing to write off $1000 dollars at a time.

So if the bill was one thousand dollars, what would the actual cost be
to AT&T for the services they provided? Just curious :)


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

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

Date: Mon, 20 Jul 1992 02:38:36 -0400 (EDT)
From: Rudolph T Maceyko <[e-mail]>
Organization: University of Pittsburgh
Subject: Re: AT&T Automated Rate Information


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Ken
Jongsma) writes:

> I was in the Little Rock airport the other day and noticed something
> interesting: The AT&T Darth Vader phones (old CRT style) had a small
> sticker on them that said "For free AT&T rate info, Dial 0 + AC +
> number + 0".

> Well, you can't do that. These phones capture the number and kill the
> dial after 0 + AC + number. They then outpulse the number with the
> receiver muted. When the "bong" occurs, you can dial 0, but that just
> gets you the AT&T operator. I expected something more automated.

> Anyone know why these phones are stickered this way?

I was recently at the University of Maryland and had the fortunate
experience of using one of their dorm phones.  It was an AT&T 2500-ish
black set, and had probably the same sticker on the bottom, and it was
wrong, too.

But the weirdest thing about the U of Md telephone system is ...

"Dial 34567 for an AT&T Operator."

They suggested using 800 numbers to access other IXC's.


Rudy Maceyko  <[e-mail]> or <[e-mail]>
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania USA

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

From: [e-mail] (Phil Wherry)
Subject: Re: Telecom Fraud (was Cellular Phone Hacking)
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Phil Wherry)
Organization: The MITRE Corporation, McLean, Va
Date: Mon, 20 Jul 1992 12:51:28 GMT


For whatever it's worth, GTE Sprint _does_ do the sort of geographic
checking that has been discussed here: a call originating from point
"A" closely followed by one from point "B" (where A and B are
physically distant) will send up a red flag. An associate had three or
four people sharing a single account from locations across the
country; Sprint kept cutting their access off because of this
geographic checking. Despite his best efforts, he was unable to get
Sprint to prevent this from happening automatically. (In this case, I
have to side with Sprint; he had too many people using the same number
to have any real control over the account.) He eventually bit the
bullet and got a bunch of separate cards.


Phillip Wherry   Member of the Technical Staff
The MITRE Corporation, McLean, VA [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Roger Gonzalez)
Subject: Re: Cracker Running Rampant!
Organization: UNH Marine Systems Engineering Lab
Date: Mon, 20 Jul 1992 04:26:57 GMT


Sounds like this system needs a complete wipe to me.  There are too
many dark corners in Unix and SunOS in which to hide back doors.
Trying to chase down each separate hole will take (literally) forever,
as he will open them as quickly as you close them.  And that's probably
what he wants.  All the suid programs are him arming himself for a
piecewise war.  Pull the network, reinstall the OS, change every
password, recompile every source-distributed binary.

Its a serious hassle, but your friend's site screwed itself from the
start by not enforcing security, and not responding on the first
breakin.


Roger Gonzalez   -  [e-mail]
Division of Bit Banging and Reluctant Robotics
UNH Marine Systems Engineering Laboratory, Durham, NH  03824-3525
[phone] -4399 (fax)

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #572
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa29306;
          20 Jul 92 10:02 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA26872
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 20 Jul 1992 07:57:07 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA07199
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 20 Jul 1992 07:57:00 -0500
Date: Mon, 20 Jul 1992 07:57:00 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #573

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 20 Jul 92 07:57:00 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 573

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Going UP (John Higdon)
    Re: Going UP (John R. Levine)
    Re: St.Pierre and Miquelon (Charlie Mingo)
    Re: St.Pierre and Miquelon (Tom Hofmann)
    Re: St.Pierre and Miquelon (Mark Brader)
    Re: House Voice/Data Wiring Question (Andrew Klossner)
    Re: Suit Alleges Cellular Caused Brain Tumor (Marc T. Kaufman)
    Re: Suit Alleges Cellular Caused Brain Tumor (Ang Peng Hwa)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sun, 19 Jul 92 17:26 PDT
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: Going UP


[e-mail] (David Sternlight) writes:

> First of all, it is simply untrue that there is no quality on cable,
> though by use of the word "entertainment" it's not clear what Higdon
> wants. Just a few examples:

> C-SPAN   C-SPAN 2  Bravo   Arts and Entertainment
> HBO original movies   CNN  CNN Headline news.

HIGDON responds:

If you feel that twenty-four hours a day of legislative antics
(C-SPAN), [Bravo: unfamiliar], the decline and fall of A&E, the very
occasional HBO original offering (for an exhorbitant monthly fee), and
twenty-four hours a day of sensationalist news coverage constitutes
quality programming, then we have a matter over which honest men may
differ. But the only reasons I respond to your post:

> Third, fiber optic pipes into our homes will make data services,
> highly sophisticated telephone services, interactive ordering and many
> other thing available at low cost.

Ah, yes. The promise of fiber. This is, of course, what the telcos
wave in front of the bright-eyed masses when it wants to monopolize
and control potentially money making businesses. Cable companies
already have interactive ordering if you are willing to pay. If and
when telcos find it advantageous to "wire" neighborhoods with fiber,
it will be because they have a definite profitable motive. "Other"
uses that may interest you will probably be priced out of existence.
Please try to keep your feet on the ground and remember that if the
telcos set up broadband data highways it will be for the purpose of
selling you their own data services (which they alone control and
originate), not so that you may communicate with others of your own
choosing.

> But such opposition is not in the public interest since they aren't
> as technologically ready, nor have they the market base or cost
> structure to provide such services as cheaply as the phone companies
> can.

And why can the phone companies do this so cheaply? There is no magic
here; there is no "in place" plant (regarding fiber) that could be
efficiently utilized. This is the old shell game regarding the telcos'
vast capital reservoir: the regulated ratebase. But apparently you
don't believe this:

> Finally, cross subsidization can be trivially handled by the state
> PUCs with proper rules and accounting procedures. There's evidence
> this works -- look at the very low cost of Long Distance calls
> compared to local calls in many cases, due to the removal of
> cross-subsidization by the regulatory process. Thus the opponents'
> biggest propaganda objection is just plain silly, and only the
> gullible will fall for it.

It would seem that you have not looked very deeply into this topic.
Such naivete and simplification could only be the result of ignorance.
The cost of long distance calls has nothing to do with anything; they
are handled by separate companies from the telcos. In the case of LD
handled by the telcos themselves, I invite you to examine California's
intraLATA pricing structure.

But as to other matters, telcos REGULARLY cross subsidize services to
the detriment of competition. How do you suppose that Pac*Bell, for
instance, can offer "The Message Center" for less than the cost of the
special features alone required to support it? Magic? Voodoo? You bet
it is. And it appears that you have fallen for the old "Arms Length"
eyewash all the way.

Perhaps before you continue to dismiss my diatribes with a wave of the
hand, you might (as I have) dig a little into the industry and speak
to some of the independent providers. And then you might look at some
of the real figures and tariffs rather than parroting the RBOC
handouts.  If you are really interested in facts rather than fluff and
propaganda, you might find out what some of the independents are
REALLY worried about.

So perhaps you can tell us just exactly how the telcos will install
new equipment and technolgy over the next several decades so much more
cheaply than anyone else? Perhaps you can tell us how the telcos pull
money out of thin air without tapping the ratebase? Perhaps you can
tell us about all the advantages of having major amounts of
information originate from one source?

Inquiring minds do indeed want to know.


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

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

Subject: Re: Going UP
Date: Mon, 20 Jul 92 1:16:37 EDT
From: John R. Levine <[e-mail]>


> I don't fear telco monopolies as much as some seem to, and despite
> your refutation of the LD carrier example, the principle is
> unchanged -- PUCs can easily prevent cross-subsidisation.

I fear you have an exaggerated idea of both the technical skill and
the political muscle of most state PUCs.  Preventing cross-subsidy is
a very tricky business.  For example, how do you allocate costs when a
regulated and non-regulated operation share a facility?  By floor
space?  Business volume?  What if the two operations share a power
system, the supply is very expensive because it's super reliable and
non-interruptable, the non-regulated part doesn't really need that
fancy a supply, but telco says it was easier (due to floor space
limits or economies of scale) to get one big supply than two smaller
ones.  Or when they share repairmen?  Or any of a thousand other
things.

A skilled team of accountants could eventually sort all this stuff
out, but in nearly all cases regulation seems to consist of the PUC
saying "Are you guys cross-subsidizing?" and telco saying "Nope, not
us."  The PUC in principle needs to audit every shared facility and
every sale or transfer between the regulated and non-regulated side,
and that is a tremendous amount of work.  There's also the issue of
whether regulated facilities are offered in a non-discriminatory way
to all competitors, a separate and in some cases more important issue
than cross-subsidy.

For an example, voice mail is supposed to be a competitive business.
Everyone agrees that Pac Bell's offering is junk.  So where are the
higher quality competitive offerings?  According to lots of previous
telecom messages, Pac Bell has made it extremely hard to get forward
on no answer and stutter dialtone control, the two features that
competitive voicemail needs.  Somehow, they're only available in the
COs where Pac Bell voicemail is needed, or they need special expensive
interoffice trunks into every CO where there is a subscriber, or some
such thing.  And this doesn't even begin to address the question of
whether the features are overpriced to kill the competition.

Here in Massachusetts, telco offers voice mail (at $83/year, not
exactly cheap) and you can't even order the separate features yet.
This is competition?

Local phone companies should be in the phone business.  They should be
busy providing CLASS* and nationally interoperable ISDN and
inexpensive intra-lata packet nets.  Instead they're doing cruddy
voicemail and cruddier Minitel because they think there's more money
in unregulated businesses where they can jack their prices up without
limit, once they get rid of those pesky competitors.

> Finally, cross subsidization can be trivially handled by the state
> PUCs with proper rules and accounting procedures. There's evidence
> this works -- look at the very low cost of Long Distance calls
> compared to local calls in many cases, due to the removal of
> cross-subsidization by the regulatory process.

That's not a very good analogy -- there's a lot more than two long
distance companies, and a long distance company doesn't have to run a
wire to your house to sign you up as a customer.  Furthermore, you'll
note that local telcos are completely forbidden from competing in the
long distance market so the subsidy issue is moot -- any subsidy would
subsidize all long distance companies equally.

If you look at the actual experience of local telcos in competitive
markets, the experience is pretty awful.  In places where telcos offer
voice mail, for example, they do their best to bundle features and
make them hard to order so that competitive voice mail systems don't
stand a chance.  Around here, you can't even order forward on no
answer and remotely controlled stutter dialtone, so there's no
competition at all for telco's voice mail other than to note that for
what they charge you could buy and throw away an answering machine
every 10 months or so (and it wouldn't mysteriously lose a week's
worth of messages every now and then, either.)

The local telco here is also offering a relabelled and rather
expensive Minitel product with their "added value" being a yellow
pages data base.  Probably it'll lose money and fail like their
earlier overpriced and underperforming on line service front end did
(it ran at 1200 bps, no matter how fast your modem was,) the
ratepayers will eat the loss, and telco will once again whine that the
problem was overregulation, and they won't face up to the fact that
the product was junk.

In reality, I expect that what will really happen with cable is that
the telcos will end up buying the cable companies in order to kill the
only plausible source of dial tone competition.


Regards,

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


* - well, all of the CLASS features except one, but let's not go into
that.

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

From: [e-mail] (Charlie Mingo)
Date: Sun, 19 Jul 1992 16:10:20 -0500
Subject: Re: St.Pierre and Miquelon


On 7/18/92, [e-mail] (Clive Feather) wrote:

> [I don't know what DOM and TOM mean.]

Mail, c'est tres simple:  DOM = Department d'Outre-Mer,
                          TOM = Territoire d'Outre-Mer.

  In France, a DOM is a regular department in the national system, but
not attached to the 'hexagone' (just as Hawaii is a regular US state
not attached to the 'Lower 48').  A TOM is an overseas possession, not
unlike Puerto Rico or American Samoa.

  I think St. Pierre & Miquelon has been upgraded recently from TOM to
DOM, as part of a fishing dispute with Canada over the Grand banks.

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

From: [e-mail] (Tom Hofmann)
Subject: Re: St.Pierre and Miquelon
Organization: Ciba-Geigy Ltd., Basel, Switzerland
Date: Mon, 20 Jul 1992 07:02:47 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Clive Feather) writes:

>[I don't know what DOM and TOM mean.]

DOM = Departement outre mer (being considered part of the French
      republic)
TOM = Territoire outre mer (not being considered part of the French
      republic)

> Within mainland France, you dial ######## for the same system (Paris
> or Provincial, or 16~######## for the other).

 From Provincial to Paris you dial 16~1########.  From abroad you dial
+331######## for Paris and +33######## for the rest of France.  That's
why the notation for Paris phone numbers is "(1) ##.##.##.##".

> From Guadelope, numbers in St.Barthelems and St.Martin (both French
> and Dutch parts) of the form 3##### can be dialed direct.

The Information that I have says that Guadeloupe, St. Barthelemy, and
St. Martin have the same country code +590.  To call St. Maarten
(Dutch part, country code +599-5) from +590 land you simply dial 3.


Tom Hofmann     [e-mail]

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

Date: Mon, 20 Jul 92 00:53 EDT
Subject: Re: St.Pierre and Miquelon
From: [e-mail] (Mark Brader)
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Mark Brader)
Organization: SoftQuad Inc., Toronto, Canada


In volume 12 issue 567, Clive Feather ([e-mail]) writes:
> [I don't know what DOM and TOM mean.]

Overseas Department and Overseas Territory, respectively.


Mark Brader, SoftQuad Inc., Toronto, utzoo!sq!msb, [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: Thanks to Dave Albert ([e-mail]) and
Nigel Roberts ([e-mail]) for providing the same
answer in almost exactly the same words.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Andrew Klossner)
Subject: Re: House Voice/Data Wiring Question
Date: 20 Jul 92 02:00:46 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Tektronix, Wilsonville, Oregon


> "I'm having a house built and am going to put in extra wiring."

I recently did the same.

> "If my goal is to have some pairs connected to the BOC network
> and others connected to my 10BASE-T network ..."

STOP.  10BASE-T is not suitable for residential use, because it emits
a boatload of EMI.  (10BASE-T systems don't meet FCC class B.)  If you
operate a 10BASE-T network, there's a good chance your TV will be
useless, and your neighbors' sets might also be impacted.  FCC rules
say that it's your responsibility to limit EMI, so you could find
yourself forbidden to operate this network.

I addressed this problem by running a 10BASE-2 COAX cable throughout
my house.

I also ran three-pair cable to each of 52 boxes, where I'm mounting
two-jack outlets.  All cables are "home-runned", i.e., everything
connects directly to the wire closet where I have a panel of punchdown
blocks.  I figure you can't have too much copper in a house.


Andrew Klossner  ([e-mail])
(uunet!tektronix!frip.WV.TEK!andrew)

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

From: [e-mail] (Marc T. Kaufman)
Subject: Re: Suit Alleges Cellular Caused Brain Tumor
Organization: CS Department, Stanford University, California, USA
Date: 20 Jul 92 03:06:36 GMT


[e-mail] (Unix Guru-in-Training) writes:

> One of the early studies which found a correlation between childhood
> leukemia and electromagnetic field emissions was done on some suburban
> development -- nearly all the leukemia cases happened in houses that
> were immediately near the step-down transformer on the utility poles
> in the area.  For that neighborhood, the step-down transformers were
> located on the corners of street intersection.  Hence it's not a case
> of different income classes or any of the other factors suggested by
> other posters.

I suppose it's too much to suggest that the other common factor of
pole transformers in the 60's and earlier was PCB transformer oil.
PCBs are a known carcinogen.

> One testimony I heard (all in well-reasoned tones by various
> scientists who were discussing EMF at a public hearing about a
> water-supply construction project in my neighborhood) is that it's
> clear that EMF can cause cell damage -- the question is what
> frequencies and what power levels cause the problems.

And its so much more exciting to blame cancer on things you can't see.

> One of the topics examined by Brodeur was a street in Connecticut
> where single family homes were located next to a high-powered
> electrical substation (we're talking complete with giant transformers
> and the like).  Leukemia and brain tumors seemed to be the order of
> the day for the residents on that street, as well as the residents
> along the lines feeding the substation.  Again, we're talking EMF
> levels orders of magnitude higher than cellular phone output.

And of course, this well controlled study took into account the fact
that giant transformers are designed to keep their magnetic fields
INSIDE the core, to minimize loss.  And they probably also had PCBs in
them.

> I've read parts of Brodeur's series in the {New Yorker}, (the book is
> called "Currents of Death") and he does document all his sources well
> enough for any other interested parties to verify his conclusions.
> Alas, he does run on and on and on in his writing, almost as bad as my
> posting here. :-)

True, true.  I respectfully suggest that those people really concerned
with powerline induced cancers move out to the country and disconnect
from the electric utility.  It is also known that EMF levels INSIDE
houses is higher than EMF levels due to powerlines, primarily because
you are so much closer to the radiator.

I hope your next television is kerosene powered.


Marc Kaufman ([e-mail])

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

Date: Mon, 20 Jul 92 17:49:04 SST
From: Ang Peng Hwa <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Suit Alleges Cellular Caused Brain Tumor


Ed Ravin, after giving more details that support my earlier statement
writes:

> One testimony I had heard ... is that it's clear that EMF can cause cell
> damage -- the question is what frequencies  and what power levels cause
> the problems.

A distant relative of mine working at the US FDA says he conducted an
experiment in which he found that small amounts of non-ionizing
radiation was actually *good* for the body. 'Sort of like stress --
good in small amounts, bad in large. He said he presented a finding at
some conference in New Orleans in 1990 or 1991. I've not heard
anything about that from any other source.

If that is true, it does complicate the issue further than Ravin
points. It's what frequency, what level, what effect.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #573
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa02282;
          20 Jul 92 23:40 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA01445
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 20 Jul 1992 21:12:13 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA10675
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 20 Jul 1992 21:12:05 -0500
Date: Mon, 20 Jul 1992 21:12:05 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #574

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 20 Jul 92 21:12:07 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 574

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: FCC Modem Tax Rumor on Compu$erve (John Higdon)
    Re: FCC Modem Tax Rumor on Compu$erve (Adrienne Voorhis)
    Re: FCC Modem Tax Rumor on Compu$erve (Phil Howard)
    Re: Personal Identification (was The Depths of Sliminess) (Alan L. Varney)
    Re: DMS-100 Peculiarity - HELP!!! (Alan L. Varney)
    Re: KTLA 45th Anniversary Broadcast (Mike Morris)
    Re: Ground Wire on Network Interface? (Hans Ridder)
    Re: Phone Tap in Murder Case Ruled Illegal (Robert J. Woodhead)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sun, 19 Jul 92 12:38 PDT
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: FCC Modem Tax Rumor on Compu$erve


On Jul 19 at 12:19, TELECOM Moderator writes:

> [Moderator's Note: Well, here we go again. Someone had better get on
> the phone to CIS and ask them if they realize the problems caused by
> the spreading of this report and their request for help ... unless it
> really is true this time around.

Hear! Hear! However, consider this: in today's climate of screwy
regulation and de-regulation it would not be surprising at all to see
the government on the one hand allowing the telcos entry into the
information providing business and on the other allowing them to jack
up rates to competitors. The telcos (RBOCs and independents) have
always had a hand-in-glove relationship with the Feds and all those
BBSes from Compu$erve on down make them just a little nervous. What
better way to "institutionalize" the information that the public
receives than to concentrate it in the hands of a highly-controllable
monopoly?

IMHO, the Bells are not the only ones that would like to see the BBSes
bite the dust. I am sure the FBI for one is just a little tired of the
chatter that goes on UNCONTROLLED every day on the thousands upon
thousands of maverick computer systems. Look what damage just a few
FAX machines did to the PR of the Chinese government. The Federal
government has a serious "problem" here, and juggling the rate
structure of the means of transmission could be a most effective tool
in keeping the citizens in line. During a recent investigation to
which I was a party, an FBI agent, after being told about USENET and
the Internet, exclaimed, "You mean anyone can say anything he wants
and there is no one controlling what goes out?"

Without minimizing or excusing any crimes that might have been
committed in the recent "MOD hacker" case, it is useful to note what a
big deal the government has made about the fact that the investigation
depended heavily upon "wiretaps" and that, fortunately in this case,
all of the circuits monitored were analog. In other words, it appears
that the inordinate hoopla surrounding this matter is designed to drum
up support for the FBI-proposed legislation governing the tapability
of digital networks.

As telecom-knowledgable citizens we need to be aware not only of the
"facts" of regulation or proposed regulation, but also of some of the
motivation. On one of the "modem tax" go-rounds of times past, many on
this and other forums offered a lot of justification why the telcos
could and should charge users of modems more for telephone service
than voice users. It was all bunk and those making such assertions
were probably naive. But this is what we need to guard against: the
playing into the hands of the manipulators. If there are massive
changes to rate structures proposed, examine every aspect. Who will
pay? Why? Who will benefit? Why? Who will be hurt the most? WHY?

Social manipulation and (I really hate to use the word) oppression
come gradually and with stealth. No one says, "We are now going to
control the information you have access to." It is done through
"well-meaning", but carefully plotted, relatively minor changes. You
can bet that when and if there ever really IS a "modem tax", the
public will have been pre-sold on its "necessity". Those not affected
will not care; those affected will have been indoctrinated with all of
the justifications.

BTW, anyone out there still want to call me a "right-wing" radical?  :-)


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

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

From: Adrienne Voorhis <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: FCC Modem Tax Rumor on Compu$erve
Date: Sun, 19 Jul 92 13:54:16 EDT

In response to the latest modem tax rumor, Pat notes:

> [Moderator's Note: Well, here we go again. Someone had better get on
> the phone to CIS and ask them if they realize the problems caused by
> the spreading of this report and their request for help ... unless it

     Gee, maybe the government really does have a long term plan to
sneak in a modem tax by repeatedly issuing modem tax rumors until no
one believes them anymore, then instituting one.  ;-)


Best Regards,

Adrienne Voorhis ([e-mail])
Albert Einstein College of Medicine
Bronx, New York  (New home to 718)
Disclaimer: Speaking personally; not for the school.

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

From: [e-mail] (Phil Howard)
Subject: Re: FCC Modem Tax Rumor on Compu$erve
Date: Mon, 20 Jul 92 04:52:36 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest)


> [Moderator's Note: Well, here we go again. Someone had better get on
> the phone to CIS and ask them if they realize the problems caused by
> the spreading of this report and their request for help ... unless it
> really is true this time around.

Given the repetition this rumor has already had for so long, I would
think the FCC probably would not be able to withstand the political
fallout of actually trying to (finally) sneak it by.


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

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

Date: Sat, 18 Jul 92 20:18:46 CDT
From: [e-mail] (Alan L Varney)
Subject: Re: Personal Identification (was The Depths of Sliminess)
Organization: AT&T Network Systems, Lisle, IL


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

> Caller-ID will tell me if a caller from a properly equipped exchange
> is at a particular number.  It does not tell me *who* at that number
> is calling.  It helps, but not much.

> It also does not cover situations where someone is calling from
> somewhere else.  It simply returns the number from wherever they are
> calling.  Once again, there is no way of knowing *who* is calling in
> particular.

> There are systems available that allow someone to give out special
> codes so that "special" people can be identified by their dialing, but
> these are not always available, ....  About the only one that
> works in any sort of universal fashion is the "distinctive ring" that
> assigns multiple numbers to one pair and rings in different fashions,
> but that is not universally available, and costs to bloody much for
> most folks tastes.

   But then they call using BOTH numbers, ya' know ...

   There is one other thing that will work (for awhile), and is cheap
and universally available.  Just inform your selected callers (once
you have Caller-ID available) that when calling from other than their
normal telephone, they should call TWICE within a short period -- your
short-term memory (or some device) will recognize the repeated number
and answer the telephone.  If that's too much trouble for the caller,
then you probably didn't want to talk to them anyway; your time's
valuable.  You'll want to tell the local police, your bank, etc. as
well.  Of course, now that this has appeared in c.d.t, the Tele-slime
know this, and will soon be calling you twice as often, even if you
don't act on this suggestion ...

> Saying that Caller-ID is the way to go is just to much of a "pat"
> answer.

   Eeeuww, a PUN in c.d.t!  Doesn't PJN have a copyright on them???


Al Varney -- just MY opinion


[Moderator's Note: Nope, I hold the copyright on this. I license it to
PJN and other moderators who pay my requested fee annually.  PAT]

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

Date: Sun, 19 Jul 92 22:37:41 CDT
From: [e-mail] (Alan L Varney)
Subject: Re: DMS-100 Peculiarity - HELP!!!
Organization: AT&T Network Systems, Lisle, IL


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

> I'm in the process of moving to a new location in rural Tucson AZ
> outskirts. ...

> Here's what really ticks me off though.  I used to be on a 1AESS and
> now I'm on a DMS-100.  My custom calling features are call-waiting**
> and speed-dial 30.  HOWEVER, I find the following peculiarities:

>    1. If there is no call waiting call coming in
>       and I flash the switchhook, I get a SECOND
>       dialtone.  However, I am unable to dial any
>       number on it since at the 4th digit I get a
>       fast busy signal.  (It won't dial 2-digit
>       speed-dialed calls either).

   While I can't speak for BNR/NTI, I believe the DMS started life as
a PBX -- at least that seems to explain a lot of non-obvious
interactions.  Anyway, a 1A ESS(tm) switch will only give dial tone
when you are allowed to make a call -- if you aren't allowed to
"flash" during a part of the call, you get non-flash timing and
treatment.  This saves switch resources (a concern back in the 60's
and 70's), and allowed all lines without "features" to act (mostly)
the way they did with X-bar/SXS switches.  Like you, customers
complained 20 years ago when that new-fangled #1 ESS acted differently
than their "old" switch.

  On the other hand, the DMS always allows you to make a call (at
least to 911, I believe), so it first handles the flash -- and then
sends invalid calls to "Reorder (fast busy)".  If you don't have
three-way calling on the DMS, almost anything is invalid after a
non-call-waiting flash.  But almost any "bug" can be a feature -- you
can dial "*70 - disable call waiting" on incoming calls, assuming you
are allowed to dial it on outgoing calls.

>    2. If I attempt to program speed dial via:
>       [dial tone] 75# [confirm tone + dial tone] nnNPA-NXXX,
>           wait then it fails (fast busy).

>       If I do the same but leave off the pound:
>       [dial tone] 75 and wait [confirm tone + dial tone]
>           nnNPA-NXXX, wait then it works!  (Number programmed)

   You might try "*75" or "1175".  The 1A ESS switch usually uses "#"
to stop timing for more digits from a non-Centrex telephone.  The DMS
is somewhat more selective, but US West might be able to change "#" to
an allowed digit after a "service code" like "75".  In fact, only a
few of the "7x" codes are grandfathered to operate without a leading
"#" or "11" -- newer feature codes conflict with speed call digits,
etc.

>    Number 2 is a nuisance, but as I rarely _program_ speed
>        calling numbers, I could live with it.  However, number 1
>        is a big hassle since I'm used to tapping the switchhook
>        and redialing a number very rapidly.  Now I have to hold
>        it down and count One-Ringy-Dingy.

   ISDN phones don't use "flash", so you get immediate dial tone.
Expensive, maybe, but we all have to trade-off cost vs. "hassles".
You could always ask US West for the areas still served by your
preferred switch ...

> **This feature ought to be mandatory for everyone I ever call ...

   Maybe -- but I almost NEVER interrupt my current call to answer it.
Do you really prefer "audible ring" to "busy tone"? Of course, the the
1A ESS "click" is a perfect excuse to end a bothersome call.  With the
DMS, callers just have to take your word that there's another call
waiting.


Al Varney -- just MY opinion

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

From: [e-mail] (Mike Morris)
Subject: Re: KTLA 45th Anniversary Broadcast
Organization: College Park Software, Altadena, CA
Date: Sun, 19 Jul 1992 18:47:05 GMT


[e-mail] (Barry Mishkind) writes:

> 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 ...

I remember seeing the 35th and 40th anniversary broadcasts on TV, but
don't have them on tape.  If anybody does, I'd be willing tp PAY for a
set of the three.  I've contacted a acquaintance at KTLA and he calims
that they've had a number of queries, but have no plans on producing a
tape, or letting anybody else do it.


Mike Morris   WA6ILQ   PO Box 1130    Arcadia, CA. 91077
818-447-7052 evenings   All opinions must be my own since nobody
pays me enough to be their mouthpiece ...

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

From: Hans Ridder <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Ground Wire on Network Interface?
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation - DECwest Engineering
Date: Sun, 19 Jul 1992 20:44:53 GMT


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

> I assume that the protector block is now part of the network
> interface.

Yes.  The network interface (NI) usually has a protector and a
demarcation point ("demarc") in it.

> What I don't understand is that there is no ground wire going in to the
> network interface box.  All my other protector blocks require a ground
> for proper operation.

There should be a ground wire going into the box somewhere.  In the
US, all "communications" type wires entering a building are required
by "code" (NEC) to have lightning protection, and that requires a
ground.

Also, code requires that all these grounds, and your electrical
service ground, *must* be electrically bonded together.  It's the
installers responsibility to intall the ground.  They can't just drive
a stake in somewhere handy and call that a ground.

> There are two screw holes on the "customer" side of the box marked "G,"
> but these are just holes and don't have any conductors (or screws) in
> them.  There is no other obvious place to put a ground wire.

> Should I connect up a ground wire somehow?

I wouldn't.  I'd get the phone company to do it.  It's their
responsibility.  The ground wire usually connects to a lug or stud on
the protector, which is hidden in the "telco" side of the NI.  It's
likely to be difficult to get at.

> Should I install my own "old-fashioned" protector block in the
> basement?

I wouldn't.  It isn't necessary, assuming the NI is properly wired.


Hans-Gabriel Ridder        Digital DECwest Engineering
[e-mail]        Bellevue, Washington, USA
{pacbell,pyramid,uunet}!rust.zso.dec.com!ridder

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

From: [e-mail] (Robert J Woodhead)
Subject: Re: Phone Tap in Murder Case Ruled Illegal
Organization: Foretune Co., Ltd.
Date: Mon, 20 Jul 1992 01:51:20 GMT


MPA15AB![e-mail] writes:

> [I can understand it being illegal to tap one's own phone, and also
> that evidence received through government (police) misconduct should
> be suppressed.  It also makes sense to me that if you illegally tap
> your phone, you shouldn't be able to profit from it, such as by using
> the tapes in a civil suit.  But if the government had no hand in
> making the tape (didn't put you up to it, etc.), then the tape should
> be usable in a criminal case. -- RCG]

I believe the intent of the exclusion of such evidence is to prevent
the old "Well, we (the government) can't tap the phone, but *nudge*
*nudge* *wink* *wink* if someone else should happen to do so, well,
that would *say no more* be a different story."  How do you prove that
the government didn't induce someone to tap?

Yes, the exclusion may hinder justice in some cases (such as, perhaps,
the above), but the question is, is the benefit worth the cost?
Should I be allowed to tap all the phones at my office (and copy all
the email), and give it to the police if I find evidence that one of
my employees is a crook?  What if he/she isn't stealing from me, but
using my premises as a base for other crimes?  Am I allowed to tell
the cops "X is a crook, but I can't explain why ... go check it out"?

Very difficult questions; how we decide to answer them will have great
effect on the shaping of our society.


Robert J. Woodhead, Biar Games / AnimEigo, Incs.  [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: Yes, you are allowed to tell the police X is a
crook. What do you think the various crime-stopper anonymous phone
lines are about?  And if X is doing something illegal on your premises
or using your equipment (phone lines, computer, etc) you are perfectly
within your rights to report it. You never are required to permit
illegal acts to take place on (or using) property you control, and in
fact may be considered an accessory if you make no effort to stop it.  PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #574
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa07016;
          21 Jul 92 1:19 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA07424
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 20 Jul 1992 23:08:42 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA17968
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 20 Jul 1992 23:08:31 -0500
Date: Mon, 20 Jul 1992 23:08:31 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #575

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 20 Jul 92 23:08:28 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 575

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Telephone Keypad Question (Erik Rauch)
    Re: Telephone Keypad Question (Jeffrey Jonas)
    Re: Suit Alleges Cellular Caused Brain Tumor (David G. Lewis)
    Re: Suit Alleges Cellular Caused Brain Tumor (Jon Mellott)
    Re: 3W vs 0.6W (Gregory Youngblood)
    Re: Telecom Fraud (was Cellular Phone Hacking) (Kevin A. Mitchell)
    Re: Telecom Fraud (was Cellular Phone Hacking) (David G. Lewis)
    Re: Telecom Fraud (was Cellular Phone Hacking) (Alan Boritz)
    Re: Calling Cards For Married Couples (Andy Sherman)
    Re: Messages Were Overflowing Again (Linc Madison)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Erik Rauch <hourglas![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Telephone Keypad Question
Date: Sun, 19 Jul 92 17:28:45 EDT


> [Moderator's Note: Telephone numbers do not usually begin with '1',
> and having the letters /ABC/ there would have effectively precluded
> them from being the starting letter in an exchange name, back when
> telco officially used words to identify central offices. In order to
> keep the zero available as a single digit way to reach the operator,
> letters were not used there either. Imagine life with no AVEnue,
> AUStin, BIShop, BOUlevard, CIRcle, CAThedral or COLumbus ... Since
> only eight digits are left, two letters had to be elimininated, with
> /QZ/ least likely to be needed. Imagine life without QUAyle ... PAT]

I have always considered phone numbers like "VIllage 2-3629" an
anachronism. Two questions: I have always seen such phone numbers with
only the first two digits serving as the mnemonic or CO identifier.
When did the phone company use three digits? And when was this
practice officially abolished?


[Moderator's Note: Prior to automatic service, telephone exchanges
were known by names, followed by one, two, three or four digits. In a
few rare cases there were five digits. The exchange names were chosen
based on several things: their geographic location, ie. Chicago's
Wabash and Franklin were on those streets; a neighborhood (Hyde Park
and Lakeview); a famous person ([Clarence] Buckingham, [Mayor Carter]
Harrison); or other factors. In small towns with one exchange, the CO
was frequently just the name of the town. The first exchange in
Chicago in 1878 was simply 'central' (as in central office), and over
the years it metamorphosed into Central, CENtral, CEntral-6, CE-6 and
for the past 30 years or so, 236.

As automatic dialing was phased in and manual service phased out (we
here began converting to dial service in 1939; the war halted further
conversion from 1942-46 and the conversion was completed in 1951), the
old familiar names were kept when possible and when there would be no
conflict in dialing (certain old exchange names collided numerically
with other exchange names, ie. [Union Stock] Yards and Warren [Boulevard]
 -- we kept YARds (now 927) and Warren became Haymarket [riots, meeting
place of strikers] (now 421). To standardize all numbers at seven
digits (for many years 'Central 1' was a private line in the mayor's
office), the first three letters of the exchange name were used and
the existing four digits. If less than four digits, then zeros were
prepended. In the above example, Central 1 became CENtral-0001
following conversion to automatic dialing. WGN Radio with its long
time number Michigan 225 became MIChigan-0225, etc. (Don't try dialing
312-642-0225 now; WGN hasn't had that number for 30+ years!)

After a few years, early 1950-ish it became obvious there were not
enough *workable, easily speakable, spellable* combinations to go
around so a conversion was made to two letters and five numbers, with
the first digit merely being what had previously been the third
letter. But this now allowed other digits to be used as well, so that
cases like GRAceland [cemetery and surroundings set on land which
belonged to Grace, the wife of an early citizen of fame] could expand
to GRaceland-7 as well as the original GRaceland-2. The same rationale
was used about 1960 in the decision to go ANC -- 'all number calling';
it allowed use of number combinations like 998, 559 and such which
prior were unpronounceable non-words. When ANC started, existing
customers were grandfathered, and new customers got all digits on the
very same prefixes. For about ten years, the directory had a mix of
both types, GR-2 and 472, ROgers Park-4 and 764, etc. In many/most
communities across the USA where conversion to dial service occurred
prior to about 1950, the original three digit exchange will map to the
first three letters in the old name. After about 1960 it was dueces
wild; no attempt was made to match numbers with names; any number
combination unused at the time was considered with some universal
exceptions: First and second digits always 2-9 (never 0 or 1) and
third digit 1-9 (never a zero). A few were held aside on purpose as
part of the long range planning at the time: 976, 555, etc.  That's
more than you wanted to know, I'm sure!  :) PAT]

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

Date: Mon, 20 Jul 92 11:04:17 -0400
From: krfiny![e-mail]
Subject: Re: Telephone Keypad Question


Pat's explanation of the letter assignments makes a lot of sense, but
recall that it used to be American Telephone and TELEGRAPH.  Telegraph
operators were super careful not to confuse '1' with 'I', '0' with
'O', so one could surmise that letters and numbers that look alike
would have been avoided on the phone keypad since it's also a
telecommunications device.  If I'm not mistaken, touch tone (DTMF)
pads were used internally to AT&T many years before it was available
to the public.

The human factors group obviously took precedent and eliminated
letters that were rarely used in order to make easy to remember
exchanges.  It was common knowledge that only the first two letters
were used (except for 'vanity' numbers), so there was apparently no
confusion.

I'm still pissed that AT&T discontinued the Teletype brand name.  Kids
today really don't know why serial ports are names 'tty'.  Telegraphs
are really in the far past.


Jeffrey Jonas      synsys![e-mail]    .. ! uunet!synsys!jeffj

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

From: [e-mail] (david.g.lewis)
Subject: Re: Suit Alleges Cellular Caused Brain Tumor
Organization: AT&T
Date: Mon, 20 Jul 1992 16:38:48 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Unix Guru-in-Training) writes:

> One of the early studies which found a correlation between childhood
> leukemia and electromagnetic field emissions was done on some suburban
> development -- nearly all the leukemia cases happened in houses that
> were immediately near the step-down transformer on the utility poles
> in the area.  For that neighborhood, the step-down transformers were
> located on the corners of street intersection.  Hence it's not a case
> of different income classes or any of the other factors suggested by
> other posters.

However, older-generation transformers often used PCBs for insulating
and cooling material, thereby giving another possible explanation -
environmental leakage of PCBs giving rise to dioxin (or whatever the
chain of events is -- I don't know this chemical stuff that well ...)

> One of the topics examined by Brodeur was a street in Connecticut
> where single family homes were located next to a high-powered
> electrical substation (we're talking complete with giant transformers
> and the like).  Leukemia and brain tumors seemed to be the order of
> the day for the residents on that street, as well as the residents
> along the lines feeding the substation.  Again, we're talking EMF
> levels orders of magnitude higher than cellular phone output.

Again, we're talking transformers, possibly PCBs and other environmental
causes other than EMF.

I'm not saying that there is no possibility that EMF can be a cause of
detrimental health effects, but rather (as has been said before) that
a lot of times people tend to confuse causation with correlation.

> I've read parts of Brodeur's series in the {New Yorker}, (the book is
> called "Currents of Death") and he does document all his sources well
> enough for any other interested parties to verify his conclusions.

A researcher with whom I am acquainted who has done an exhaustive
review of the research on EMF once referred to "Currents of Death" (in
a private conversation we had) as "the worst possible thing that could
have occurred in the field."  (I'm not claiming that's an exact quote,
which is why I'm not giving the individual's name ...)  The last thing
that a complex question of this nature needs is a sensational mass-media
"expose'".

I've diverged enough from telecom, sorry ...

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

From: [e-mail] (Jon Mellott)
Subject: Re: Suit Alleges Cellular Caused Brain Tumor
Organization: EE Dept at UF
Date: Mon, 20 Jul 92 17:00:20 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Marc T. Kaufman) writes:

[e-mail] (Unix Guru-in-Training) writes:

>> One of the early studies which found a correlation between childhood
>> leukemia and electromagnetic field emissions was done on some suburban
>> development -- nearly all the leukemia cases happened in houses that
>> were immediately near the step-down transformer on the utility poles
>> in the area.  For that neighborhood, the step-down transformers were
>> located on the corners of street intersection.  Hence it's not a case
>> of different income classes or any of the other factors suggested by
>> other posters.

Besides PCBs from the transformer oil, there could be a problem with
emissions from automobiles. Those homes located corners would
(presumably) be adjacent to more traffic than those not on the
corners. For example, the soil along many older roads is heavily
contaminated with lead from leaded gasoline.

> True, true.  I respectfully suggest that those people really concerned
> with powerline induced cancers move out to the country and disconnect
> from the electric utility.  It is also known that EMF levels INSIDE
> houses is higher than EMF levels due to powerlines, primarily because
> you are so much closer to the radiator.

Recall that for inductive fields, the magnetic field falls off as
1/r^2 whereas for radiated fields the field falls off as 1/r. At low
frequencies (such as those used in power systems) the radiated power
is very low.  On the other hand, the electric field from high voltage
lines can be substantial. The moral of the story: don't worry too much
about the magnetic field unless you are *real* close to the line (and
it is carrying a substantial amount of current). Worry more if the
line is a very high voltage because of the E field.

> I hope your next television is kerosene powered.

But then there is that field from the CRT :)


Jon Mellott

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

Subject: Re: 3W vs 0.6W
From: [e-mail] (Gregory Youngblood)
Date: Mon, 20 Jul 92 10:44:55 EST
Organization: TCS Consulting Services, Peachtree City, GA


[e-mail] (Steve Forrette) writes:

> In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail].
> harris.com (Dave Brillhart) writes:

>>1.) Are 3.0W units really going to buy me alot more compared to the
>>    compact 0.6W phones -- in regards to TX (and RX?) sound quality,
>>    battery life, max distance from the closest transceiver, or other
>>    issues I haven't thought of?

> This reminds me of a feature on some of the Motorola bag phones that I
> consider to be just a marketing gimmick: a .6W/3W switch.  The sales
> people will tell you that when you are running the bag phone off of
> batteries, it is a good idea to switch it to .6W to extend the battery
> life; when you have it plugged into the cigarette lighter in your car,
> switch it to 3W for best reception.

> Of course, astute TELECOM Digest readers will note that the phone
> doesn't always transmit at the maximum power level, but is instead
> commanded by the base station to transmit at the lowest level that's
> necessary for a good signal.  So, if you're near a cell, and only need
> 200mW to get a good signal, your phone only transmits with 200mW,
> regardless of whether you have a 600mW or 3W model (this is primarily
> so that the cell size can be scaled -- not to conserve battery
> capacity, although that is a nice side effect).  In any event, the
> only thing that the 600mW setting of the bag-phone switch accomplishes
> is cutting off your calls when they need more than 600mW to get
> through -- they don't save any battery capacity otherwise.  Since I
> can't imagine that even under battery power you'd rather have your
> calls cut off when they need more than 600mW just so you can 'save
> your batteries,' I conclude that this is just a marketing gimmick.

This technology is widely used.  But not everywhere.  Some systems,
particularly in RSAs do not run with this feature enabled.  I
personally know of about six or eight systems that I myself worked in
where the company wanted that disabled.  Full power, no power stepping
activated at all.

As far as the 'gimmick', several phones have that, including OKIs I
believe.  At least the old OKI 410 series phones had that I think.  It
has its uses, but I almost always kept the thing on high no matter
what.


Gregory S. Youngblood    The opinions expressed above are my own
TCS Consulting Services  and does not mean I'm right or that anyone
                         else agrees with me.

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

From: [e-mail] (Kevin A. Mitchell)
Subject: Re: Telecom Fraud (was Cellular Phone Hacking)
Organization: Datalogics, Inc.
Date: Mon, 20 Jul 92 15:27:20 GMT


[e-mail] (Richard Nash) writes:

> No problem! Joint credit cards could be issued with unique PINS that
> identify each user.  Thus, only a simultaneous use of the credit card
> could be from a fraudulent source.  This scheme has the added benefit
> of assisting both users of the account to identify and reconcile their
> own transactions. (The billing system records the entire credit card
> including the PIN).

I have an AT&T no-AOS type calling card. I asked for another card for
my wife and got a card with her name on it, and a _different number_
than the one on my card.


Kevin A. Mitchell    [phone]
Datalogics, Inc      Internet: [e-mail]
441 W. Huron         UUCP: ..!uunet!dlogics!kam
Chicago, IL  60610   FAX: [phone]


[Moderator's Note: You and your meaningless '266' phone number! I'd
expect a telecom enthusiast in your neighborhood to be on the
DElaware-7, SUPerior, MOHawk, or WHItehall exchange at the very
least.  :)  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (david.g.lewis)
Subject: Re: Telecom Fraud (was Cellular Phone Hacking)
Organization: AT&T
Date: Mon, 20 Jul 1992 16:22:46 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Richard
Nash) writes:

> No problem! Joint credit cards could be issued with unique PINS that
> identify each user.

Not great from a security point of view, because it cuts the
probability of randomly guessing a PIN given a known phone number in
half.  A subaccount code postpended to the PIN or some such would be
preferable.  (By extension, allowing each family member in an extended
family of ten would cut security by an order of magnitude.  Not good.)

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

Date: 20 Jul 92 17:12:55 EDT
From: Alan Boritz <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Telecom Fraud (was Cellular Phone Hacking)


[e-mail] (Steven S. Brack) writes:

> It makes me wonder why the issuing telcos couldn't detect and possibly
> block calls made on the same CC but made too far apart in distance and
> too close together in time to have been made by the same person.

 ... but not for long.  Your friend could have given his calling card
number to a friend or relative.

Cell-phone billing is generated long after the conversations are over,
however it takes money and resources to do something with the
questionable billing info after it's collected. It's much easier to
just bill everyone for the pirate's activities, and hope that most
people will just pay the bill without looking, rather than to go after
the real cause of the problem.  If these guys can't get their act
together long enough to set up a stolen ESN clearinghouse, why do you
think they'll take an active role to stop fraud before the customers
discover it?


Alan Boritz   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Andy Sherman)
Subject: Re: Calling Cards For Married Couples
Date: Mon, 20 Jul 92 00:15:54 EDT


On 19 Jul 92 05:24:51 GMT, [e-mail] said:

> They don't have to share the same number. One of them could be
> assigned a special calling card number (sometimes called a fictitious
> number) that would be billed on the same account. Some telephone
> companies and long distance carriers may be reluctant to do this
> because there are a limited number of possible fictitious numbers, and
> some residential service representatives may not have been trained how
> to set up this kind of calling card.

I called AT&T to get two of the new CIID cards.  They asked for my
wife's full name.  We got two cards, one with my name, one with hers.
They have different numbers.  I guess class tells.  :^)

> Similarly, another family member (such as a child away at university)
> could be given his or her own calling card with a separate number, but
> billed to the family telephone account.

If you get the AT&T Custom Calling Card (restricted to up to ten
numbers) it has its own number, too.

And you don't even have to tell AT&T that Nigel says its' a good idea.
And the net.cynics can't accuse me of blatent toadyism, as I don't
work there anymore. :^)  (But I ain't changing my PIC either).


Andy Sherman  (yes, the same one)
Salomon Inc  -  Unix Systems Support  -  Rutherford, NJ
[phone]  -  [e-mail] or [e-mail]
"These opinions are mine, all *MINE*.  My employer can't have them."

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

Date: Mon, 20 Jul 92 14:45:19 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Linc Madison)
Subject: Re: Messages Were Overflowing Again
Organization: University of California, Berkeley


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

> I am always gratified by the tremendous amount of traffic in this
> group ...

My, what funny things those little electrons are!  I *swear* the first
time I read that sentence, it said,

"I am always GRAFFITIED by the tremendous amount of traffic ..."


Linc Madison  ==  [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: Very clever ... but I don't consider any of my mail
to be graffiti. I read it all; I only wish I could answer it all and
use it all here in the Digest.  About 150 went unused last week. :(  PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #575
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa12835;
          21 Jul 92 3:27 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA17669
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 21 Jul 1992 00:46:38 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA06031
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 21 Jul 1992 00:46:27 -0500
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1992 00:46:27 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #576

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 21 Jul 92 00:46:28 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 576

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: GTE and CLASS/ISDN (John Higdon)
    Re: Democratic Convention (Including Telecom) (Robert J. Woodhead)
    Re: Going UP (Mike McNally)
    Re: Going UP (David G. Lewis)
    Re: Advice Needed: Dialback Management (Bill Berbenich)
    Re: Way Cool MCI Mail Binary File Handling (Bob Frankston)
    Re: My 800 Number (Dennis G. Rears)
    Re: Cracker Running Rampant! (Darren Griffiths)
    Re: Airfone System Overload (David Lesher)
    Re: House Voice/Data Wiring Question (Jonathan Edwards)
    Re: Leap Seconds and Telco Time-of-Day Accuracy (David Schachter)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 20 Jul 92 12:28 PDT
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: GTE and CLASS/ISDN


MPA15AB![e-mail] writes:

> The rep said CLID hadn't yet been approved by the PUC!  When I pointed
> out that the PUC had approved it weeks ago, and mentioned the
> front-page articles in the {L.A. Times} and other papers, she said
> they were flat wrong.

This is typical GTE. I have found that one cannot expect to get
anything resembling a straight answer on any matter (from your current
bill on up to "proposed services") on the first call to the business
office. All light and knowledge from GTE (if you can call it that)
must come from Thousand Oaks. It is amusing to note that if you do
happen to call GTE about a billing question, you are told that someone
will call you back "within five working days". The people in the
front-line business office are ALWAYS wrong and with an attitude.

> A media rep called me back from the other number, and he seemed to
> know what he was talking about, and to be quite reasonable.  (Quite a
> change from the business office types!).  He said November was the
> target date for CLASS features other than CLID, Call Trace, and Call
> Return.

Of course, Pac*Bell is offering those other services NOW. However, I
still cannot get them. Why? I have been told that Priority Ringing,
Selective Call Forwarding, and Repeat Dialing are not compatible with
Commstar, Pac*Bell's mini Centrex system for small business and
residence. If I remember correctly this has been the case in other
areas until the local telco figured out what the hell it was doing.

> He said I was the first person ever to ask him about ISDN :-(

GTE also has a great deal of trouble providing simple T1 service. In
fact, in order to discourage customers from requesting such service in
conjuction with IECs, etc., GTE has priced T1 through the roof. I have
a client who is moving out of GTE and into Pac*Bell territory. The
savings on the T1 alone will more than justify the cost of the move.

> Regarding SS7 links, he said GTE was working on them between their own
> switches.  Links to PacBell would come, but he didn't know when.

When I have mentioned GTE's lack of SS7, I have been roundly taken to
task and told that the company does indeed have such links in place.
Thank you for confirming that this is the baloney that I suspected it
was.

> On other matters, he said he was bothered by the practice of IXCs
> selling ANI data, especially when the customers turn around and use it
> for marketing and other purposes.  That surprised me, coming from a
> phone company representative.

Of course. GTE would rather be collecting some kind of revenue on this
service. But given GTE's dismal lack of engineering acumen, what the
company would really like is to collect the revenue WITHOUT providing
the service! But then it already has a little of this in place: GTE's
rates are MUCH higher than Pac*Bell's. Never let anyone tell you that
in GTE territory you get what you pay for.

> He said he wasn't aware of "block blocking" (Anonymous Call Reject).
> Didn't the PUC order it as part of CLID in California?

Not a surprise. GTE is never aware of anything outside of GTE. I am
surprised he did not just tell you that it did not exist. Block
blocking was not mentioned in the CPUC order.

> Anyway, he promised to have someone call me back with more information
> on SS7 links, CLASS availability, and ISDN.

Hopefully you will have moved outside of GTE territory by then.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Robert J Woodhead)
Subject: Re: Democratic Convention (Including Telecom)
Organization: Foretune Co., Ltd.
Date: Mon, 20 Jul 1992 01:35:48 GMT


TELECOM Moderator noted:

> [Moderator's Note: The big news today of course is that Ross Perot has
> pulled out of the campaign, and things are looking brighter for the
> Democrats than anytime in the past twelve years. This may be their
> year for victory, for only the fourth time in forty years (Kennedy,
> Johnson, Carter, (??) Clinton (??).  PAT]

Ah, statistics.  Four times in 40 years sounds awful, but fact is, it
would be four out of ten or 40%, which isn't a statistically
significant deviation from 50/50.


Robert J. Woodhead, Biar Games / AnimEigo, Incs.    [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: The catch is we've gone a full 40 years (11/52
through 11/92) with only *three* Democratic presidents. That really
makes it three out of ten. If Clinton gets elected, the statistics
will then be four out of eleven. But if you go back 64 years starting
with 11/28, it evens out with Roosevelt and Truman getting five in a
row.     Dem = 1932,1936,1940,1944,1948,1960,1964,1976 = 8
         Rep = 1928,1952,1956,1968,1972,1980,1984,1988 = 8
The Republicans stayed out longer (20 years) than the Democrats. Now
they're getting even for the 13-year reign of King Roosevelt II! :) PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Mike McNally)
Subject: Re: Going UP
Organization: DEC Palo Alto
Date: 20 Jul 92 15:19:41 GMT


[e-mail] (David Sternlight) writes:

> Second, dial-up access to video services means that far more niche
> markets can be satisfied, since there are far more channels available
> on a fiber optic pipe into one's home...

I was under the impression that the recent ruling specifically
addressed issues raised by Bellcore's recent announcement that they
could do 1.5megabit (i.e., MPEG) transmission over in-place twisted
pair copper loops.

Then again, I suppose that if the cheap experiment possible because of
the aforementioned technology proves successful and profitable, TPC
fiber-stringing crews would rapidly become common sights on
neighborhood streets.

I think that personally I hate cable companies more than phone
companies, so I'm pleased by the ruling.  I suspect that if John were
in a situation to require service from his cable company comparable to
what he needs for his telephonic endeavors, he would see that by
comparison GTE be a glittering paragon of virtue.


   Mike +  Software +  Digital Equipment +  Western Software +     mcnally@
McNally +   Laborer +        Corporation +        Laboratory +  wsl.dec.com

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

From: [e-mail] (david.g.lewis)
Subject: Re: Going UP
Organization: AT&T
Date: Mon, 20 Jul 1992 16:56:19 GMT


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

> Finally, cross subsidization can be trivially handled by the state
> PUCs with proper rules and accounting procedures. There's evidence
> this works -- look at the very low cost of Long Distance calls
> compared to local calls in many cases, due to the removal of
> cross-subsidization by the regulatory process. Thus the opponents'
> biggest propaganda objection is just plain silly, and only the
> gullible will fall for it.

'scuse??  The fact that the regulatory process could *not* handle
cross-subsidization between regulated and unregulated lines of
business was one of the motivations behind the MFJ.  As to the "very
low cost of Long Distance calls compared to local calls due to the
removal of cross-subsidization",

A. cross-subsidization of local calls has not been removed; only the
name has changed (from internal Bell System bookkeeping to the
"subscriber line charge" and carrier access charges");

B. inasmuch as cross-subsidization has been relaxed, it is due to the
corporate separation of the IXCs from the LECs; and

C. where "the regulatory process" is trying to control
cross-subsidies, e.g.  costs for intra-LATA LD, the success has been,
at best, questionable.  Ask anyone in CA who reads c.d.t. about
PacBell's intra-LATA LD costs compared to any IXC's inter-LATA prices
for comparable - or longer - distances.

(disclaimer - not speaking for AT&T, of course, just an occasional
 loose cannon ...)

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

Subject: Re: Advice Needed: Dialback Management
Date: Mon, 20 Jul 92 11:32:32 BST
From: Bill Berbenich <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]


One reason that our Moderator's plan may not work is because the
switch may take the initial hook-flash to be a rotary-dialed '1' if
there is no hacker or anyone else waiting on the line.  When I had
three-way calling, that was what would happen if I did a hook-flash
with nobody on the line yet.  It may be that either my (cheapie) phone
or my switch at that time did not adhere to the standards for
hook-flash duration and rotary pulse sensing.  Anyone know better?


Bill


[Moderator's Note: After the ADTD! pause, then you tell the modem to 'wait
for new dial tone' and abandon the attempt if it doesn't hear one.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Way Cool MCI Mail Binary File Handling
Date: Mon 20 Jul 1992 11:51 -0400


Clarifications for those interested:

X.PC is a Tymnet developed protocol that is like X.25 for dialup
terminals.  MCI does use X.PC to provide a reliable link.  One problem
with X.PC is that it does require 8 bit transparency which means it
can run into difficulties through some paths.  The newer MCI (9600bps)
lines support MNP5 for compression and error correction but the
reliability is only modem to modem and not end to end like X.PC,
though that might not be a problem because ...

MEP2 is a protocol for exchanging mail messages.  It is symmetric with
the two ends taking turns as master and slave.  The master presents an
envelope and then body parts (in the X.400 sense, not the medical
sense!) which can be binary or ASCII.  MEP2 encodes everything in
printable ASCII so that it can run over essentially any link.  It uses
simple checksums for error checking.  There is a retransmission
protocol to recover from errors but I've always felt hanging up and
retrying made a lot more sense.  Since MEP2 does error checking and
X.PC and MNP provide reliable links (end to end or modem to modem),
MEP2 rarely gets stressed.  Even without the lower level error
correction, many phone lines themselves are quite reliable.

One downside of MEP2 is that there is no header/envelope distinction
which means you can't separate the routing information from the header
and thus it is difficult to write a proper gateway between MCI and
other systems.

The new support for binary files in the INTERACTIVE sessions as well
as the encoding of attachments exchanged with the Internet does
strengthen MCI as a full mail service.  Note that the Internet
encoding is not really a function of MCI itself, but of the gateway
that translates between MEP2 and SMTP (I assume).

One advantage of MCI is that it does provide an email service for end
users with national (and some international) support.  Now, if they'd
only deal with headers ...

Disclaimer: Since I wrote much of Lotus Express, I'm not an entirely unbiased
observer.

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

Date: Mon, 20 Jul 92 16:25:25 EDT
From: Dennis G. Rears <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: My 800 Number


   Kenton A. Hoover wrote about his 800 number service from Pac Bell.
I thought I would write about the great deal that I have.

   I have a residential 800 number from Sprint.  It is a real 800
number; not one with a PIN.  I got free installation and a waiver of
all service fees for 1992.  After 1992 as long as I have $30.00 a
quarter in usage charges they will waive the monthly fee.  The charge
is 18 cents a minute payable in 6 second increments.  The number is
good in all 50 states, Mexico, and Canada.  As far as billing, I get a
list of all calls, the number called from, and the duration of the
call.

  I am able to change the number it terminates on with 24 hour notice.
Overall, I am quite satified with it.


            Dennis G. Rears
UUCP:  ...!uunet!cor5.pica.army.mil!drears
INTERNET: [e-mail]    USPS:  Box 210, Wharton, NJ 07885
Phone(home): 201.927.8757       Phone(work): 201.724.2683/(DSN) 880.2683
        Moderator:  comp.society.privacy

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

From: [e-mail] (Darren Griffiths)
Subject: Re: Cracker Running Rampant!
Organization: Open Systems Solutions Inc.
Date: Mon, 20 Jul 1992 19:36:29 GMT


[e-mail] (Roger Gonzalez) writes:

> Sounds like this system needs a complete wipe to me.  There are too
> many dark corners in Unix and SunOS in which to hide back doors.
> Trying to chase down each separate hole will take (literally) forever,
> as he will open them as quickly as you close them.  And that's probably
> what he wants.  All the suid programs are him arming himself for a
> piecewise war.  Pull the network, reinstall the OS, change every
> password, recompile every source-distributed binary.

You're correct of-course, this is a hassle, particularly if the site
in question has incompetent system administrators, which sounds like
it's the case.  There is one other thing that must be done as well,
and that's call the police.  The 'cracker' has identified himself in
the sample mail, so finding his real name should not be a problem.  If
he is out of state then call the FBI, past experience has shown me
that with a little bit of hassle they will do something, and if he is
in Australia call the CIA, they have also become involved in previous
cases if you bug them enough.

I know that it's a real pain and it should not be necessary, but
unfortunately it is.  Every user of the Internet has a responsibility
to report these kind of abuses so that adolescent twits like this one
will think twice before they touch anything more powerful than a
pocket calculator.  They do not perform any service whatsoever, in
fact they waste a lot of valuable computer resources and lot of
administrators time.


Darren Alex Griffiths         [e-mail]
Open Systems Solutions, Inc   [phone] x139
Fujitsu                       Fax: [phone]
6121 Hollis Street            Emeryville, CA 94608-2092

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

From: David Lesher <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Airfone System Overload
Date: Mon, 20 Jul 92 18:41:22 EDT
Reply-To: [e-mail]  (David Lesher)
Organization: NRK Clinic for habitual NetNews abusers - Beltway Annex


> (The cordless GTE system can have as many as eight phones in the
> cabin, and they can all connect to the ACU.  But you can still only
> have four radios -- four calls per aircraft.)

But WAIT!

Can't I call my butler back in 48F from my seat here in first class?
Why not? Before they started letting ANYONE fly, I could send the
Stew^H^H^H^H sorry Flight Attendent, back. Now *I* have go back and
summon him. How degrading to have to walk into, ahem, Economy ...

Think! You could charge big money, and never use up any RF space at
all. Then the next step will be on-board 976 service. Hey, those long
flights across the pond are *boring* Folks ...  ;_}


[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Jonathan Edwards)
Subject: Re: House Voice/Data Wiring Question
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Mon, 20 Jul 1992 22:54:43 GMT


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

> STOP.  10BASE-T is not suitable for residential use, because it emits
> a boatload of EMI.  (10BASE-T systems don't meet FCC class B.)  If you
> operate a 10BASE-T network, there's a good chance your TV will be
> useless, and your neighbors' sets might also be impacted.  FCC rules
> say that it's your responsibility to limit EMI, so you could find
> yourself forbidden to operate this network.

Gak! I am about to wire my new house under the assumption that
10BASE-T was the easiest and most flexible approach (just add some
extra twisted pairs into each room). Can anyone comment on alternative
approaches?  Use shielded twisted pair?  Add a thinwire loop (more
complex install)?  Add coax homeruns to the patch panel (in addition
to the video cables)?

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

From: [e-mail] (David Schachter)
Subject: Re: Leap Seconds and Telco Time-of-Day Accuracy
Organization: Greenwire Consulting
Date: Mon, 20 Jul 92 23:21:39 GMT


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

> All the CO's in a network are, in theory, synchronized to each other,
> with the master timing source coming from the Grand Master Of Clocks
> in Hillsboro (?), Missouri.  If anyone knows more about this Grandaddy
> of clocks, I'd be interested to hear about it.  I believe that MCI and
> the US Navy also operate similar 'Master Clocks'.

The Grand Master of Clocks is named Hubert Wollington III (it is one
of the few hereditary positions in the USA) and he doubles as the
official government standard for riboflavin.  He is usually kept in a
bell jar slightly to the left of the U.S. Consitution in Washington,
D.C.

The Wollington family is noted for its devotion to public service.
Hubert's sister, Jane Barbe, was for many years the voice of time at
WWV and WWVH (shortwave radio stations operated by the U.S.
Government); his mother, Jessye Norman, sang the 1000 and 1200 Hz
ticks and minute markers at the radio stations, and his aunt, Anne
Jones, was the official Canadian censor until she married Henry
Spencer and converted to Collyerism, a religion similar to Unitarian
Universalist, but concerned more with the exact date of the Ascension.
She devoted the rest of her life to correcting time header format
errors in the Dead Sea Scrolls.

Hubert has two sons, Ante Meridian and Postal Mail, and a daughter,
Principia Mathematica.  Like most men, he was briefly married to
Elizabeth Taylor during the 1970's.  He is currently single, cute, and
available, but poorly-paid.

Any facts in the above are unintentional and should be reported
immediate to the Brain Tumor Marketing Council.  Thank.


David Schachter   internet:    [e-mail]
uucp:   ...!{mips,decwrl,sgi}!llustig!david


[Moderator's Note: Doctor Collyer was a well-known and highly-revered
person here in Chicago in the last half of the nineteenth century. The
{Chicago Tribune} published every word he had to say on Sunday in the
Monday papers. All the upper crust of Chicago society went to Doctor
Collyer's church. When he went out of business in 1903 he sold the
church on North Dearborn Street to the Masons; today it is known as
the Scottish Rite Cathedral. It is directly across the street from
Washington Square Park (Bughouse Square) where in 1974 I addressed the
annual convention of the Brain Tumor Marketing Council and convinced
them that brain tumors are not a disease but merely a type of
lifestyle, convincing them to remove it as a category in their list of
diseases. In your discussion of the Wollington family, you neglected
to mention Hubert's famous sister Nell and her husband, Void, which is
another way of describing most of this issue of the Digest.   PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #576
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id ab14193;
          21 Jul 92 4:15 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA18646
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 21 Jul 1992 01:32:29 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA11499
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 21 Jul 1992 01:32:15 -0500
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1992 01:32:15 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #577

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 21 Jul 92 01:32:14 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 577

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    VDT Study Concerns CWA (Phillip Dampier)
    Caller*ID Device: Name Delivery System (Alan Boritz)
    Beating Hotel Calling-Card Surcharges (Stan Krieger)
    How to Use U.S. Modem in England? (John Chang)
    Don't Grab That Ladder ... (Lou Anschuetz)
    House Wiring (Steve Welch)
    ANI Information Included in Telephone Bill (Len E. Elam)
    Phone Records Are Public (David Gast)
    CDMA Technology and Multi-Media (Mitsutaka Ito)
    Help Needed Connecting With URUPAC, Uruguay (Robin Cheesman)
    FCC Email Address (Joshua Hosseinoff)
    Panasonic 12/32 - Any Experiences?  Any Advice? (Irving Wolfe)
    Federal Case Against NYNEX (David Gast)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Phillip Dampier)
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Date: Mon, 20 Jul 1992 15:13:39 -0500
Subject: VDT Study Concerns CWA


VDT STUDY EXPANDS KNOWN CAUSES OF REPETITIVE MOTION ILLNESS

WASHINGTON -- A major independent study of telecommunications workers
who use video display terminals, released today by the National
Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, shows that work
practices and organization as well as psychological factors are
significant causes of ergonomic VDT injuries.

Most prior studies have acknowledged only physical causes of
repetitive motion disorders, which affect an estimated 50 to 70
million American workers.

Three years in preperation at the joint request of the Communications
Workers of America and US West, the study identifies 22 percent of 533
participants as victims of upper body repetitive motion disorders.
This, despite the fact that NIOSH found US West in compliance with 80
percent of established physical standards for VDT workplaces, the best
record of any telecommunications company whose workers are represented
by CWA.

"This study clearly shows that how workers are treated by management
is at least as important in preventing repetitive motion injuries as
the equipment they are expected to use," said CWA President Morton
Bahr.

The NIOSH study found that psychological considerations such as job
insecurity, high productivity demands, surges in workload, lack of
control over work methods and lack of support by co-workers all
contribute to VDT illnesses.

Its report also stated that work practice variables such as wearing
bifocals or contact lenses, typing skill and frequency of arising from
the chair play an important role in developing ergonomic disorders.
It also found that work organization factors like overtime, task
variation, and frequency of breaks are significant.

With voluntary participation of 93 percent of selected employees in
five occupations at three different locations, the study represents
"the largest, most comprehensive scientific investigation of VDT
ergonomic illnesses to date," said CWA Executive Vice President M.E.
Nichols, who with David LeGrande of CWA's Office of Occupational
Safety and Health, coordinated the union's participation.

Conducted at US West's Phoenix, Denver, and Minneapolis locations, the
study found that tendon-related disorders affected 15 percent of
participants and that 12 percent manifested hand or wrist problems.
Others had arm, shoulder, neck, or back disorders.

The incidence of ergonomic VDT illness NIOSH found is broken down by
job category:

    *  Loop provisioning center workers  --  36%
    *  Recent change memory admin center employees  --  25%
    *  Directory assistance operators  --  22%
    *  Centralized mail remittance workers  --  20%
    *  Service representatives  --  6%

Concurring with numerous studies conducted with CWA over the last
decade by Dr. Michael Smith of the University of Wisconsin, the agency
found that workers experienced additional stress because of electronic
monitoring.  Those who believed that it prevented socialization,
brought on extra complaints from supervisors or increased workload
were also more prone to ergonomic problems.

NIOSH commended US West and CWA on their use of joint labor management
committees on the regional and local levels, which led to the
company's high compliance with physical VDT guidelines. The agency
encouraged the committees to continue to address the physical, work
design, and psychosocial causes of ergonomic VDT illnesses.

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

Date: 20 Jul 92 17:13:12 EDT
From: Alan Boritz <[e-mail]>
Subject: Caller*ID Device: Name Delivery System


> [Moderator's Note:...People keep talking about Caller-ID as a way to
> screen or avoid answering unwanted calls, and they base their
> complaints about Caller-ID on the shortcomings they find in their
> perception of the purpose of number delivery. If they would realize
> the primary purpose is to identify and provide recourse to the
> subscriber of the calling telephone -- the person who legally remains
> responsible for the uses made of the instrument -- and only
> secondarily as a way to avoid unwanted calls, I suspect there would be
> fewer complaints.

Also, don't forget that with the implementation of Caller-ID "privacy"
the Caller-ID service subscriber is getting something of significantly
less value than that advertised.  And wouldn't the "privacy" feature
appear to reflect the advertising campaigns, about reducing prank
calls, as deceptive marketing practices?


Alan Boritz      [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: Not really, since blocked-ID calls are noted as
such and the recipient can deal with them accordingly.  Speaking of
blocked ID, I received a neat device today from someone which goes in
series with the phone to the wall-jack. Whenever the phone goes off
hook to make a call, this gizmo dials *67 automatically. Kind of
clever if you prefer to block your ID. I'll be reviewing it in detail
here at a later date.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: Mon, 20 Jul 92 16:21:25 EDT
Subject: Beating Hotel Calling-Card Surcharges
Organization: Summit NJ


I just returned from vacation, and in two of the hotels I stayed,
there was no charge for 800 numbers but it cost 25 or 50 cents for
placing a calling card call.

To beat this charge, I simply placed my long distance calls through
800-CALL-ATT (and one of the hotel bills did show five long distance
calls of cost $0.00).  I'll see in a month if these were billed as
"normal" calling card calls and if my Reach Out America discounts are
handled properly.


Stan Krieger                     All opinions, advice, or suggestions, even
AT&T UNIX System Laboratories    if related to my employment, are my own.
Summit, NJ    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (John Chang)
Subject: How to Use U.S. Modem in England?
Date: 20 Jul 92 16:18:35 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail] (John Chang)
Organization: Prime Computervision, Bedford MA


How can I use a modem that's set up for U.S. modular jacks with phones
in Britain (London in particular)?  Are the line levels compatible?
If so, what wires go where?  In other words, how do you make a
jack-to-jack adapter?  Are the dialing tones the same, or do I need to
pulse dial?

What can I do to prepare here in the U.S. before I go, or do I need to
take a soldering iron, multimeter, wire strippers, etc. (I wonder what
airport security would have to say about *that*).

Please reply via email and I will summarize.


John Chang       [e-mail]   [phone]
114 Tremont St.  Cambridge, MA 02139

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

From: [e-mail] (Lou Anschuetz)
Subject: Don't Grab That Ladder ...
Organization: National Public Telecommunication Network
Date: Mon, 20 Jul 1992 17:04:11 GMT


Just in case your local Bell telephone repair guy isn't as much fun as
one I just worked with, I thought you might enjoy this little episode.

A company I'm associated (loosely) with has an office in an office
building.  Most of the building is owned by one company, which has a
large PBX for the building in the telephone closet.  The punchdown
block is above the PBX.

When this little company had a dedicated phone line brought in by Ohio
Bell, the installer came in with a six foot ladder.  Unfortunately,
that ladder was a little too big, thus putting him too far away from
the punchdown block.  So, instead of going back to the truck for a
shorter ladder, he figured he could manage ok if he could just find
somewhere to put his foot while he worked.  "Hmmm, top of the PBX
looks just about right -- I'll put my foot there ..."  Of course, as
soon as his whole weight shifted to the PBX it ripped free of the wall
and smashed to the concrete floor below ...

At this point Ohio Bell is into the company who owns the PBX for
$23,000 for repairs to the PBX.  It may go higher.  Ohio Bell, being a
fair minded company, wanted to just take it off the companies monthly
phone bill :-) For some reason the owner of the pbx didn't agree to
that arrangement :-O

I'd really love to have been a fly on the wall back at Ohio Bell when
the repair person came in to explain how that darn PBX just jumped off
the wall :-) :-) :-)


Lou Anschuetz, [e-mail]   [e-mail]  [e-mail]
                    and ten's of other places....

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Welch)
Subject: House Wiring
Organization: National Center for Atmospheric Research
Date: Mon, 20 Jul 1992 17:51:14 GMT


> STOP.  10BASE-T is not suitable for residential use, because it emits
> a boatload of EMI.  (10BASE-T systems don't meet FCC class B.)  If you
> operate a 10BASE-T network, there's a good chance your TV will be
> useless, and your neighbors' sets might also be impacted.  FCC rules
> say that it's your responsibility to limit EMI, so you could find
> yourself forbidden to operate this network.

I had U.S West put in six pair all over the house (cost about $1K),
intending to use extra pairs for some random twisted pair network, but
I chickened out, mostly because I was worried about phone inteference.
So I put in a short (~30m) bit of thick Ethernet, and a bunch (eight
planned) of transceiver cables.  I have no EMI problems (my wife is a
shortwave listener, so this is a pretty good test), except I get a
small amount of RFI injected into my CATV coax at 50-70Mhz from some
high-frequency electronic ballasts (!?).  It figures that with a
zillion computers in the house, I'd have problems from fluorescent
lights...

I also pulled some RG-61 coax, just in case, since I had a roll of it
from an earlier project.  When the phone guy did the wiring, I told
him what I wanted to do, and he warned me I might not be happy.  He
said some people do Appletalk with no problems, but he had heard of
inteference from 10 Mbit networks when using spare phone company
copper.  I had him go ahead and pull the six pair, figuring I could
run RS-232 or some such over it in a pinch.  One thing I did, which
was smarter than I thought, was to buy a few hundred feet of spare
wire off of him.  It's come in very handy when I found out I had
placed a few of the jacks in the wrong place, and when I finished an
office in the basement for the wife.

Oh, I ended up using four pair, anyway ...

> I figure you can't have too much copper in a house.

Amen to that.


Steve Welch    <[e-mail]>    Voice: 303-530-2661
National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, CO  USA
also: Complex Systems Research, Niwot, CO   Fax: [phone]

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

Date: Mon, 20 Jul 92 08:27:21 CDT
From: [e-mail] (Len E. Elam)
Subject: ANI Information Included in Telephone Bill


The following was included in my last phone bill:

        Southwestern Bell               Account Number 817 XXX XXXX XXX
        Telephone                       July 9, 1991
                                        Detail of Charges      PAGE 4

                       AUTOMATIC NUMBER IDENTIFICATION
When an 800 or 900 number is dialed from your telephone, your telephone
number may be transmitted to the company you have called and may be
available to that company's service representative before your call is
answered.
                           -------------

I have to wonder what prompted this.  Maybe someone at Southwestern
Bell reads this newsgroup.  Maybe not.  Could it be that someone at
Southwestern Bell is making an attempt to address customer concerns
about privacy? :)


Who Am I?: Len E. Elam      Email:     central.sun.com!gdfwc3!lelam
Disclamer: I speak only for myself.

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

Date: Mon, 20 Jul 92 17:16:31 -0700
From: [e-mail] (David Gast)
Subject: Phone Records Are Public


Whether you like or not, transactional records about phone usage can
be disseminated to any private party according to the ECPA.  According
to FCC rules IXCs *must* share transactional data with other IXCs.

And at least one user of an 800 number is upset that a certain IXC is
selling lists of people who call this 800 number to competitors.

Thus, PAT mistakenly misrepresents that calling CounseLink can be
confidential when he states: (I presume he is just repeating the
marketing blurb he saw).

> 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 fact that any individual calls CounseLink is not confidential in
any way, shape or form.  Some degree of doubt might be cast if
Telelink has many different services all using the same number.

Also, in regards to the comments about 1-800-ATF-GUNS and ANI, and
then PATs comment that other organizations "all use 800 numbers also,
with ANI, I'm sure."  (BTW, I know of at least one organization that
does not get ANI.)

It is irrelevant whether or not the organization gets ANI, because the
telco can sell the information to whomever it wants.  Thus, even if
organization goes to great length to make sure they don't know the
number a person is calling from, other organizations can purchase this
information.  (I don't know how widespread the practice is, but it is
not illegal).

If you need confidentiality, do not call from home, do not use a
telephone credit card, etc.


David


[Moderator's Note: I think telcos only have to share information on
calls where *billing information* is required ... not for any other
purpose.   PAT]

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

Subject: CDMA Technology and Multi-Media
Date: Fri, 17 Jul 92 10:27:14 +0900
From: Mitsutaka Ito <[e-mail]>


Dear Sirs,

   I am interested in application of CDMA technology to radio
multi-media communication.

   If anyone have any information on this topic, please inform me.

   Thank you in advance.


Mitsutaka Ito                E-mail: [e-mail]
NTT Software Laboratories    Tel/Fax: [phone]
1-9-1 Kohnan Minato-ku Tokyo 108 Japan

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

From: [e-mail] (Robin Cheesman)
Subject: Trying to Connect With URUPAC, Uruguay
Organization: Roskilde Universitetscenter, Danmark
Date: Mon, 20 Jul 1992 13:39:21 GMT


I am trying to connect to the Uruguayan PAD/PSI service URUPAC, but
cannot find the country code. In the list I have at hand is e.g.
Argentina with 7222, and plenty of other Latin American countries --
but not Uruguay. Can anyone help?


Robin Cheesman                                Communication Studies
Roskilde University  *  PO Box 260  *  DK-4000 Roskilde  *  Denmark
Phone: [phone]    Fax: [phone]    Internet:  [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: I assume you are asking about data network country
codes, NOT telephone country codes.   PAT]

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

Date: 19 Jul 1992 13:49:16 -0400 (EDT)
From: JOSHUA HOSSEINOFF <[e-mail]>
Subject: FCC Email Address


Here it is, send all complains, questions, and assorted flames to:

Name:         Federal Communications Commission
Organization: FEDERALCOMMCOMM
City:         Washington
State:        DC
Country:      US
E-Mail:       [e-mail]
Source:       mcimail
Ident:        442-6718
Last Updated: unknown

Just send it to [e-mail]


Joshua Hosseinoff      [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Irving_Wolfe)
Subject: Panasonic 12/32 - Any Experiences?  Any Advice?
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Happy Man Corp., Vashon Island, WA 98070-7399
Date: Mon, 20 Jul 1992 17:11:15 GMT


We've had a Panasonic 12/32 phone system here for about three years
and it is starting to fail.

Incoming DISA callers have not been able to get back out on another
line for some time, but we could live with that.

Now, unfortunately, we're having intermittent problems with general
incoming calls through DISA.  Most of the time, it still works.  But
sometimes, callers don't get the outgoing voice message.  Other times,
the system won't respond to their attempts to tone-dial an extension.
Still other times, it won't automatically transfer to operator if they
fail to dial an extension.

We're running six lines and about 26 extensions, over half of which
are standard two-wire phones or devices.  The only other thing I know
of that's wrong with the system is that one or two of the extension
jacks don't work properly, but that was no problem since we still have
more than we are using.

What's the best thing to do?  Shall I invest in another DISA card for
over $500?  Is the system really badly designed, so I should avoid
throwing good money after bad and replace it with something more
robust (and if so, what)?


Thanks!

[e-mail]      Happy Man Corp. 206/463-9399 x101
4410 SW Pt. Robinson Rd., Vashon Island, WA  98070-7399  fax x108

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

Date: Mon, 20 Jul 92 17:00:25 -0700
From: [e-mail] (David Gast)
Subject: Federal Case Against NYNEX


I saw in the paper a while back that the federal government's case
against NYNEX had started.  Has anyone heard if the case has finished
and what the result was?


David

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #577
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa14333;
          21 Jul 92 4:19 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA27545
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 21 Jul 1992 02:24:36 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA28676
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 21 Jul 1992 02:24:26 -0500
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1992 02:24:26 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #578

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 21 Jul 92 02:24:21 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 578

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Governor's Island Phones (Jack Winslade)
    Solve Three Problems (was Telecom Fraud) (David Gast)
    Cordless Headset Wanted (John Pettitt)
    Tropez Cordless - Second Thoughts (Irving Wolfe)
    Cordless Phone Not Charging (Ang Peng Hwa)
    Help Needed Expanding Cellular Phone Range (David Brightbill)
    Anyone Heard of "Remote Cable"? (Matt McConnell)
    Help With X.25; Help With UK (Paul Gauthier)
    Help Identifying Bell Systems Ringer ([e-mail])
    What Will ISDN Get Me? (Doug Sewell)
    Questions About the Motorola Bravo Pager (Marshal Perlman)
    911 Run-Around (Dave Niebuhr)
    Re: 1-800-ATF-GUNS and Anonymity (Lawrence V. Cipriani)
    Re: Telephone Keypad Question (Liron Lightwood)
    Giving a PAT Answer to Questions (Robert S. Helfman)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 20 Jul 92 09:38:58 CST
From: [e-mail] (Jack Winslade)
Subject: Governor's Island Phones
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: DRBBS Technical BBS, Omaha


In a message dated 18-JUL-92, Carl Moore writes:

> Earlier this year, I visited Ellis and Liberty Islands in the New York
> harbor, and have the following information on the phone prefixes there
> (pay phones only), in area 212:

> Liberty Island, zipcode 10004; phone prefix 825 (which I also noticed
> in phone book listings for Governors Island).

Years ago, when I was in the Coast Guard (things may have changed
since) the government phones on Governor's Island were on 212-264,
which is/was a U.S. govt. prefix with all of the FTS stuff, etc.  If I
remember correctly, the residence phones were indeed on 212-825, which
was some kind of a satellite crossbar switch of some kind at that
time.  Some of the civilian phones came out of lower Manhattan, with
some of the familiar old ones such as WHItehall (212-944) and BOWling
green (212-269) and I think Manufacturers Hanover (branch on GI) had
some lines out of a mid Manhattan Centrex.  (I remember at the time
that the only touch-tone phones on the island were at the bank.  Most
of NYC still could not get touch-tone.)


Good day.        JSW      Ybbat (DRBBS) 8.9 v. 3.14 r.1
DRBBS Technical BBS, Omaha (just say 'NOE') 402-896-3537  (1:285/666.0)

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

Date: Mon, 20 Jul 92 22:16:04 -0700
From: [e-mail] (David Gast)
Subject: Solve Three Problems (was Telecom Fraud)


In my opinion, the best way to

   reduce fraud
   keep AOSes from overcharging
   provide a convenient means for calling without leaving a paper trail

is to go to a stored value card as used by telco in most other places
around the world.  Of course, someone can manufacture counterfeit
cards, but it's more difficult to do than peer over someone's
shoulder.  Also, since it is a stored value card, other carriers would
have no incentive to honor the card (they won't get paid), so they
could try to vandalize the card or more likely just reject it. Thus,
protection from AOS overcharging.

Of course, certain federal agencies won't like number three, so
Congress will have to pass a law requiring that

  (1) each phone record its number and time of use on the card; and
  (2) that each buyer send in his/her used cards with proper identification.
      Failure to do so would result in a $10,000 fine per card.


David

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

From: starnet![e-mail] (John Pettitt)
Subject: Cordless Headset Wanted
Date: Mon, 20 Jul 92 19:46:01 PDT


    I am looking for a cordless telephone headset, either in the
either in the form of a complete phone or as a handset replacement for
an existing unit.

Any suggestions?


John Pettitt      Mail: [e-mail]    Fax: [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Irving_Wolfe)
Subject: Tropez Cordless - Second Thoughts
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Happy Man Corp., Vashon Island, WA 98070-7399
Date: Mon, 20 Jul 1992 03:43:08 GMT


Awhile ago, I praised the new UHF Tropez cordless phone here.  I still
like it, but thought I'd better pass along this problem:

When we installed a second one, the range of both went down.
Intermittently, it went way down.

We spoke with the manufacturer; it is aware of the problem and working
on it.  In other words, until further notice, don't expect to be able
to use more than one of these on a site.


[e-mail]      Happy Man Corp. 206/463-9399 x101
4410 SW Pt. Robinson Rd., Vashon Island, WA  98070-7399  fax x108


[Moderator's Note: Did the manufacturer explain *why* this happened?
Can you give any technical explanation?    PAT]

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

Date: Mon, 20 Jul 92 17:55:11 SST
From: Ang Peng Hwa <[e-mail]>
Subject: Cordless Phone Not Charging


My AT&T cordless phone is not charging and I'd appreciate any input.
It was on for 20 days while I was on vacation. I then had to unplug it
for another 20 days. When I recharged it, the thing just lit up the
Battery Low light.

I figure it must be the NiCad remembering the charge. So I've
discharged the thing twice (waited for the low light to go out). It's
still on low after three days of charging.

Should I just wait longer for the memory to disappear, or leave it on
for the thing to charge?

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

Date: Mon, 20 Jul 92 00:15:58 -0400
From: David Brightbill <[e-mail]>
Subject: Help Needed Expanding Cellular Phone Range


I live part time on an island in the Gulf of Mexico.  The island, off
the coast of Florida, is accessable only by boat or small plane, and
while we have electricity, there is no phone service on the island,
except for cellular.  The nearest big city is Tallahassee and the cell
provider of choice on the island is Centel Cellular.  Their nearest
tower is about 30 miles or so from my house on the island.  I borrowed
a phone from Centel for a few days and found that by mounting a
mag-mount antenna on a scrap of roof tin and placing it on the roof, I
was able to more-or-less reliably work the cell tower.  The "meter" on
the Motorola bag phone showed two bars.

I have two questions.  First, when I received calls on the phone,
occasionally, after a second or two of conversation, the call would
drop and be replaced with a ringing tone or a busy signal.  Since I
was in a "fringe area" and about the same distance from another B cell
system, is it possible that I was getting some sort of intermod?
Secondly, while the signal was fine most of the time, a few times it
was too scratchy to really have a conversation and I was unable to use
touch-tone devices like my answering machine at my other house.  Would
it be possible to build or buy a directional antenna aimed at the
nearest Centel tower?  Does anyone know of a source for plans?  I was
thinking that a little yagi might be the ticket.


David

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

From: Matt McConnell <[e-mail]>
Date: 20 Jul 92 20:15:49 MDT
Subject: Anyone Heard of "Remote Cable"?


I would like to know if the readers of TELECOM Digest have ever heard
of something called "remote cable".

A friend of mine asked me that a few days ago after having returned
from Kalispell,MT.  He says that a psychiatrist there was telling him
about something called "remote cable" though he's not really sure.

Something to do with: communities that have no cable, are hard to
reach, small, the government is selling licenses like with cellular ...

After having interogating him more I guessed he might be talking about
DBS (direct broadcast satellite) he seemed to agree ... though he's
not really sure.

Anyone heard of this "remote cable"?


Matt McConnell  [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Paul Gauthier)
Subject: Help With X.25; Help With UK
Organization: Math, Stats & CS, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, Canada
Date: Mon, 20 Jul 1992 18:19:55 -0300


Two related questions for you telecomers in the know ...

I am looking for a good book or electronic document on X.25 from the
point of view of a programmer going to write code to conduct
transactions over it.  Also, references to a good IBM PC based X.25
interface for dialup use are needed.

Second, this X.25 connection I am exploring is to be placed in the UK.
Some of the terms they use are not immediately obvious to me, so I am
wondering if anyone has useful comments on them. One was a service
called Mercury 5000UK which sounds to me like a packet switching
network. Is there a way in from Canada/USA/North America? The other
phrase he used was kilostream as a method of connection. Anyone??


Thanks,

Paul Gauthier / [e-mail]
Phone: [phone]    Fax: [phone]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Help Identifying Bell Systems Ringer
Organization: University of Maryland at College Park
Date: Mon, 20 Jul 1992 05:17:57 GMT


I have a phone ringer, model R-1-A and I was hoping someone can tell
me anything about it.  It is riveted shut, so I was wondering if it
was made to be explosive proof or anything of the sort.  I also have a
filter model number 720 and was wondering the same of it.


Thanks,

Dave

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

From: [e-mail] (Doug Sewell)
Subject: What Will ISDN Get Me?
Organization: Youngstown State University
Date: Mon, 20 Jul 1992 13:55:14 GMT


First, I expect the answer is 'nothing', but I'll toss the question
out anyway.

My home computer has a V.32 modem, to connect to another one at the
university.  I rarely call anything else, other than one or two 2400
baud BBSs.  In addition the computer has a nearly-unused fax-modem
(2400-baud+fax).  I'm running MSDOS, not Unix.

Most of the time I use the modem for terminal emulation, although I
have both SLIP and UUCP hookups defined for it that I use
occasionally.

Will ISDN do anything for me in this environment ?  What would have to
change before it will (assuming that first, I'll have to go beyond
MSDOS).


Doug Sewell, Tech Support, Computer Center, Youngstown State University
[e-mail]       [e-mail]    <internet>!cc.ysu.edu!doug

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

From: [e-mail] (Marshal "Airborne" Perlman)
Subject: Questions About the Motorola Bravo Pager
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: University of Denver, Dept. of Math & Comp. Sci.
Date: Sun, 19 Jul 92 20:51:15 GMT


I have three questions about the Mororola Bravo [the 'cheap/workfore']
Pager:


 ... One ...

How long does that battery (one AA) last?

 ... Two ...

What is the range of these things? [non satellite]

 ... Three ...

They don't do anything if they are off right? (i.e. you have it
off..and some one beeps you ... then you turn it on later ... it will
still be 'blank'), right?


Thanks,

Please respond to: [e-mail]
(as nyx's mail is still screwed up)
==============================  *  Marshal Perlman
=-> [e-mail] <-=  *  Huntington Beach, California
==============================  *  (Surf City, U.S.A

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

Date: Mon, 20 Jul 92 07:16:22 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Dave Niebuhr)
Subject: 911 Run-Around


In TELECOM Digest Volume 12 : Issue 571 Carl Moore (VLD/VMB)
<[e-mail]> writes:

> Some phone books do list non-emergency numbers, and I take them to be
> for matters which should get police attention but are not as urgent.

The problem with my PD (Suffolk County, NY) is that if I wanted to
make a non-emergency call but yet talk to a policeman/woman, I would
be told to call 911 in about 90% of the instances.

An example happened to me last year.  I was rummaging through a closet
and came across an old Army style ammo box with live ammunition in it
left over from the days when I went hunting.  I called the precinct,
was told to call 911 who told me to call the Emergency Services unit,
who told me to call the precinct.

I ended up going to the precinct and dropping the stuff off there.


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


[Moderator's Note: The Chicago Police are notorious in this way. I
have always understood 911 was to be used ONLY in cases of dire
emergency when police or fire fighter intervention was needed
immediatly. Don't report stolen cars or burglarized homes to 911; the
danger is long past. Use 911 when a police officer is requested right
now to stop a crime in progress ... period. All other calls should go
to the district station. And that is the way the CPD officially tells
us to do it. But you call the district station to report something
which is going on (not an emergency) or something which happened, and
you get told to 'call 911 to report it'. Once every few months or so
911 officials complain about how overloaded the system is, and why
they are sometimes unable to answer for six rings ... I wish our
police department would settle this once and for all, and make an
official policy that everyone had to stick to.   PAT]

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

Date: Mon, 20 Jul 92 10:14:57 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Lawrence V Cipriani)
Subject: Re: 1-800-ATF-GUNS and Anonymity
Organization: Ideology Busters, Inc.


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Andy
Sherman) writes:

> In article [e-mail], vk2bea![e-mail] (Michael G.
> Katzmann) writes:

>  (description of government run tip hotline deleted)

>> It says call 1-800-ATF-GUNS, YOU DON'T HAVE TO GIVE YOUR NAME.

> Do remember that *can have* ANI delivery is not the same as *has* ANI
> delivery.  Unfortunately, you can't know for sure.

In this case you can be sure, the BATF does indeed have ANI.  This is
documented in The Machine Gun Dealer's Bible."


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Liron Lightwood)
Subject: Re: Telephone Keypad Question
Organization: Telecom Research Labs, Melbourne, Australia
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1992 02:19:54 GMT


[e-mail] (Steve Forrette) writes:

> I've noticed that some phone manufacturers (seen mostly on cheaper
> models and COCOTS) now label the 1 key with "QZ".  However, many voice
> processing applications, such as Octel voicemail, tell you to "use 7
> for Q, and 9 for Z."  Considering that there are differing opinions as
> to where Q and Z should be mapped for those applications that need
> them, it seems unwise to label them at all on the keys.

Australian phones with letters as well as numbers have the 'Q' and 'Z'
on the '1' key.

Australia hasn't been a user of words in telephone numbers, but all
that will change under deregulation.

In rsponse, all new phones sold by Telecom Australia (the former
monopoly carrier) have keys labelled with letters as well as numbers.
Cheaper phones made by other manufactures have had letters for a long
time, probably because they used the same phones made for the US
market).

On the new Telecom phones, the '2'-'9' keys are labelled with the same
letters as US phones.  However, the '1' key is labelled with 'Q' and
'Z'.

Also, automatic teller machines (at least over here) which have keys
labelled with letters as well as numbers (for easier to remember
PIN's), also use the '1' key for 'Q' and 'Z'.  I believe this applies
in the USA as well.

If this is the case, the most obvious place to put the 'Q' and 'Z'
would be on the '1' button.


Liron Lightwood                     Internet : [e-mail]
Telecom Research Laboratories       Phone : [phone]
770 Blackburn Road                  Snail : P.O. Box 249 Clayton 3168 Australia
Clayton  Vic. 3168 Australia        Disclaimer : My views are not my company's

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

From: [e-mail] (Robert S. Helfman)
Subject: Giving a PAT Answer to Questions
Organization: The Aerospace Corporation, El Segundo, CA
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1992 03:57:16 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Alan L
Varney) writes:

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

>> Saying that Caller-ID is the way to go is just to much of a "pat"
>> answer.

>   Eeeuww, a PUN in c.d.t!  Doesn't PJN have a copyright on them???

> [Moderator's Note: Nope, I hold the copyright on this. I license it to
> PJN and other moderators who pay my requested fee annually.  PAT]

Sure, PAT.

My colleague, Samuel Goldstein, says that he now holds the rights to
the Patented Look and Feel of Shit. Thus, everyone will now have to
pay him royalties to look in the mirror each morning!

By now, I must owe him bigtime.


[PAT's Answer and Last Word on the Subject:  Me too! Or should I say
'I also'?  :) PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #578
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa16403;
          23 Jul 92 3:38 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA09757
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 23 Jul 1992 01:34:00 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA07815
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 23 Jul 1992 01:33:49 -0500
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 01:33:49 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #579

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 23 Jul 92 01:33:43 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 579

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    European Blue-Box Program (RISKS Digest via [e-mail])
    Minnesota Caller ID Testing (Jeffrey Comstock)
    900 Number With Fax Back Info Requested (Howard Pierpont)
    Call Waiting and Modems - a Weird Problem (Leonard Ira Kamlet)
    Bellcore Threatens 2600 Magazine With Lawsuit (Emmanuel Goldstein)
    New Ideas For Voice Mail (Jeffrey Jonas)
    Telephone Line Security (Wing Shing Djen)
    Mystery Equipment (F Farzin)
    Cellular Phone Interface (Alfredo Cotroneo)
    Phone Number Phun (Brent Byer)
    Where is +44-399? (Carl Moore)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: European Blue-Box Program
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 92 23:57:21 -0500
From: [e-mail]


Perhaps of interest to TELECOM Digest readers also:

RISKS-LIST: RISKS-FORUM Digest  Tuesday 14 July 1992  Volume 13 : Issue 64

 Date: Mon, 6 Jul 1992 21:42:49 +0200
 From: [e-mail]
 Subject: Phreaking/Blue Box program


CAPITAL, a German monthly specialized in financial aspects of economy,
had a story, in it's July edition, about a phone phreak "Kimble" who
offers an AMIGA-based program with built-in frequencies to switch your
telecom connection over more than 20 countries. In June, he
demonstrated this program in CAPITAL's office in Duesseldorf, in the
presence of some experts from a criminal agency and an IT security
experts. German Telecom was informed days ahead the presentation but
could not trace his dialling experiments which lead him from
Duesseldorf to Canada (known as normal entry of European Phreaks to
the New World), and so on. Kimble said that non-traceability be a
major new feature of this blue-boy program "Unlimited Assess
(Multi-Frequency Dialler)".

Phreaking was practiced, for some time, also in Hamburg's Chaos Club.
In last year's Chaos Congress, they once more held a seminar on
Phreaking (given by the Dutch Hac-Tic group; the German report on this
part is available, with the Chaos Congress' documentation, either from
CCC or from Virus Test Center's ftp site).  CCC and Hac-Tic freely
distributed information on blue box programs for PCs and 68000
systems. Due to this action, the price of a blue box program went down
significantly (from about 500 DM to about 100 DM), and one can upload
blue box programs together with games from ordinary BBS. But German
Telecom said that the holes which these programs exploit have been
patched.

When CAPITAL first contacted me (before the experiment), I was not
very impressed. But the the experiment continued, and some really
shocking results were reported: when German Telecom could also neither
trace nor intercept a second experiment, they reportedly asked some
Canadian experts for assistance.  When they watched and tried to close
the hole, they observed that somebody just worked in their "system" to
implant some Trojan horse (don't ask me how, because if I believe
Telecom, there is ***no connection to the outside*** When they patched
the holes in changing some frequencies, this evidently was immediately
"mediated" (path unknown) to the phreaks (organised in a group "Dope",
evidently working internationally). Unlimited Access comes with a
1-year guarantee of free updates of frequencies: this is different
from other blue-boy programs and may verify the unusual price (15,000
DM, about 10,000 $), but remember that this program excludes being
traced by Telecoms!  And the group evidently "received" the updated
frequencies immediately and distributed them to their "clients".

Just for *caution and clarification*: due to the stress of
end-of-semester, I couldnot personally observe the experiment. My
report is based on some telephone discussions (not bluebox-dialled)
with the journalist, on the assessment of a participating colleague
which I trust, as well as on some discussions which I had with Telecom
on related matters, and with some phreaks in my neighbourhood *:)


Klaus Brunnstein

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

From: uum1!kksys!brainiac![e-mail] (Jeffrey Comstock)
Subject: Minnesota Caller ID Testing?
Organization: Sewer of Source Code
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 92 08:34:48 GMT


About three months ago, I was mucking with the phone and depressed *60
on my telephone.  Then I hear a voice that says "Your selective caller
rejection service is now ON.  Please enter a command or wait for the
menu ..."  *62 gave the message "Your selective call distinctive alert
is now ON ..."  *63 was "Your selective call forwarding is now ON ...".
I guess that US WEST was testing CLID here.  I wanted to get some
hardware to see if Caller ID would work, but never got around to it.
It would have worked right ?

Oooh boy did I have fun with that.  In my calling area there are about
300 exchanges, and it was only flipped on in about 20.  I am in the
854 exchange, and I could reject and distinctive ring from 830, 831,
931 and some others, but it didnt work in any exchanges that I had
freinds or family in.  If I tried my brother for instance, the 'canned
lady' would say "We're sorry, this service is not available with that
number."  I could selectively forward a call from an activated
exchange to ANY number.

I am in an apartment with a security phone in the lobby -- you have to
call me from it to get 'buzzed into' the building.  I programmed my
phone to give me a distinctive ring if someone called from the lobby,
and it worked great. (PS: My apartment managers answering machine went
berserk from the distinctive ring when I programmed his to do it.  It
was set off to answer on the fourth ring, and the system would do
three short rings and one long one if someone called from the front
door.  I have an AT&T 1337 digital answering machine, and it was
immune from this problem.)

Well, a few day's ago they flipped it off.  I no longer have control
over it.  *60, *61, and *62 just give me a fast busy.  But guess what
 -- I still get distinctive ringing from the front lobby!  Yeah -- I
realize somebody from US WEST might read this and correct this
'problem' for me -- no biggie.  Also, I remember that I had 854-1234
programmed for selective call rejection.  Maybe I will get lucky and
that is the IRS's or some other number I don't want to bother with.
(yuk yuk).

I also heard that a guy in the 931 exchange (it was active there) was
phreaking it, and depressed *73 or something and got a message like
"The last number that called you has been traced and a $10 charge has
been added to your bill."  He called the operator to make sure that he
wouldnt get billed for it, and they insisted that no such service was
available in Minnesota.  He did'nt get the $10 charge,and mysteriously
the *73 trick ceased to work.


Jeffrey R. Comstock   INET  [e-mail]    CW   -. .-. ----- -..

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

Date: Wed, 22 Jul 92 05:32:47 PDT
From: HOWARD PIERPONT <[e-mail]>
Subject: 900 Number With Fax Back Info Requested


As part of my volunteer work with public radio, I get asked the
strangest questions.

There is a national news program that runs in the evening. There has
been a significant amount of interest expressed by business listeners
in being able to receive, by fax, a copy of one of the segments that
run during the broadcast segment. Time is critical in these requests.
[Yes you can mail for a transcript or a tape, but some people need the
information for a meeting in the morning.  They have also expressed an
interest in covering the transmission and handling costs.

As suggestion has been made that we set up a 900 number with prompts
for date/segment/etc and a spot for the fax number. The report would
be sent in short order by fax.

Is anyone doing this now? TRW has sent some end consumer information
on their system and a couple of the computer trades let you fax in and
they forward the request to the advertiser.

Any and all input welcomed and will be acknowledged.


Howard Pierpont     P.O. Box 937   Dayville, CT 06241-0937   or email.
While I work for Digital Equipment Corp., this is one of my hobbies
All standard disclaimers apply ...

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

From: [e-mail] (Leonard Ira Kamlet)
Subject: Call Waiting and Modems - a Weird Problem
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 92 16:36:20 EDT
Organization: University of Michigan Engineering, Ann Arbor


I've been having a weird problem recently, and I'm wondering if anyone
has any suggestions.  Here's the situation:

I recently moved to a new area, and got call waiting service on my
home phone.  To call into the computers I use as a student at U-M, I
can dial into either a 2400 baud number or a 1200 baud number.  When
I'm able to get through to the 2400, there are no problems at all
(it's often busy).  When I dial into the 1200 baud line, and leave the
call waiting feature on, the modem connects and then all I get is
garbage.  When I turn off call waiting(*70), the connection is fine.
This has happened daily for about 2-3 weeks, at various times
throughout the day.

   I've contacted the network I'm calling, who say there is nothing
wrong with the number I'm having problems with.  I've called Michigan
Bell, who tells me that they've checked the line and found nothing
wrong.  My belief is that *something* occurs when I turn off call
waiting, but I don't know what.

(Note: the obvious answer, "just turn it off", isn't acceptable.  One
of the reasons I have call waiting is so that people can reach me when
I use the computer for hours.)

Does anyone have experience with this, or any suggestions?  I do not
read news often, and rarely follow this group.  Please e-mail
suggestions to [e-mail] or just [e-mail] or call
me at [phone].

Thanks for the help.


Leonard Kamlet
[e-mail]
2286 Woodview Rd. #835

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

Date: Tue, 21 Jul 92 01:25:50 -0700
From: Emmanuel Goldstein <[e-mail]>
Subject: Bellcore Threatens 2600 Magazine With Lawsuit


THE FOLLOWING CERTIFIED LETTER HAS BEEN RECEIVED BY 2600 MAGAZINE.
WE WELCOME ANY COMMENTS AND/OR INTERPRETATIONS.

Leonard Charles Suchyta
General Attorney
Intellectual Property Matters

Emanuel [sic] Golstein [sic], Editor
2600 Magazine
P.O. Box 752
Middle Island, New York 11953-0752

Dear Mr. Golstein:

It has come to our attention that you have somehow obtained and published
in the 1991-1992 Winter edition of 2600 Magazine portions of certain
Bellcore proprietary internal documents.

This letter is to formally advise you that, if at any time in the future
you (or your magazine) come into possession of, publish, or otherwise
disclose any Bellcore information or documentation which either (i) you
have any reason to believe is proprietary to Bellcore or has not been
made publicly available by Bellcore or (ii) is marked "proprietary,"
"confidential," "restricted," or with any other legend denoting
Bellcore's proprietary interest therein, Bellcore will vigorously
pursue all legal remedies available to it including, but not limited
to, injunctive relief and monetary damages, against you, your magazine,
and its sources.

We trust that you fully understand Bellcore's position on this matter.

Sincerely,


LCS/sms

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

Date: Wed, 22 Jul 92 18:21:25 -0400
From: krfiny![e-mail]
Subject: New Ideas For Voice Mail


In article <[e-mail]>, francois%tollys.UUCP%
[e-mail] (F Truchon) writes:

>> The one advantage that I get from subscribing to my telco's voice mail
>> service rather then forwarding to my voice mail at work (if I could)
>> is that the dial tone changes on my phone when I have messages. This
>> is like the flashing LED on answering machines. You can quickly check
>> if you have messages by listening to the dial tone rather than having
>> to dial the voice mail number and to log in.

In Volume 12, Issue 571, Message 13 of 17, Dave Levenson replied:

> But don't forget the infinite series that results: You go off-hook to
> listen for dial-tone.  You hear steady tone for a second or two,
> indicating that at the time you went off-hook, there were no messages
> waiting.  You go back on-hook, secure in the knowlege that you don't
> have to call anybody back right now ...

> But while you were off-hook checking, somebody called, and by the time
> you were finished checking, and back on-hook, they had been forwarded
> to the telco voice mail system (because your line was busy) ...

I agree that there must be a better way to signal the subscriber that
there's a voice message waiting than to play games with the dial tone.

Now that Caller-ID can deliver text as well as digits, why not have
the voice mail ring you and send the caller-id box a message such as
"voice mail" with your phone number in the number field.  Two rings is
all it takes.

If you pick up the phone (or don't have Caller-ID), a recording will
tell you "you have voice mail, enter your id to start" (and time out
should your answering machine get the call).  Or perhaps yet another
unique ringing pattern for voice mail to get your attention.  Give two
quick rings every hour (but silent from 10PM-8AM if you choose that
option)?  Doesn't that new feature "annoy-a-call" do that (repeatedly
attempt to contact the destination with your pre-recorded message)?

There's a tradeoff between giving the service to people with their
existing equipment (no Caller-ID, no message lights) and people
willing to purchase new equipment to use the enhanced services
conveniently.  The studdering dial tone meets some of those goals.


Jeffrey Jonas    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Wing Shing Djen)
Subject: Telephone Line Security
Date: 21 Jul 92 08:52:59 GMT
Organization: U.C. Davis - Dept. of Electrical Engineering & Computer Science


I'm looking for a commercially available product that can provide
security against tapping in for the regular telephone line. I have no
idea what it is like, but I think it has some kind of data encryption
capability to jam the regular signal so that it becomes noise when
somebody wants to eavesdrop the conversation between two people.

Any input is appreciated. Thanks.

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

From: [e-mail] (F Farzin_nia)
Subject: Mystery Equipment
Reply-To: [e-mail] (F Farzin_nia)
Organization: Loughborough University, UK.
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 92 05:54:29 GMT


I have a 'I don't know what this piece of kit is' question. :-)

A friend of mine recently bought a piece of kit from an electronic
junk shop for me, thinking that it was a telephone answering machine
(you see, I had asked a lot of friends to keep an eye out for a second
hand answering machine and if they were to find a reasonable one to
purchase it on my behalf). On close inspection of this rather curious
and wonderful gadget, I realised there is a lot more to it than meets
the eye. However, I simply cannot figure out what it is. This thing is
manufactured by LANIER BUSINESS PRODUCTS, INC (Atlanta, Georgia, USA),
and it has a MODEL P-101 printed underneath it.

It resembles a telephone answering machine/dictating machine/modem. It
has a speaker but no mic. There is a small tape recorder with the
associated buttons plus a 'telephone' push button on the console. The
other switches and buttons on this machine which are located around
and underneath it are: DIC-CONF; OFF-SCAN; MIC-SPK; RECALL-1.2.3; A
headset jack socket; a record gain knob; telephone jack socket; a
TOTAL and a RESET button; three knobs that control SPEED (presumably
that of the recorder), TONE and VOLUME; and finally a SCART like
socket. Incidentally, there are some seven-segment led displays on the
console to show 'unit no.', 'complete units', 'instruction' and
'location' for DICTATE option and 'unit no.', 'total units',
'remaninig length' and 'instruction' for the TRANSCRIBE option.

If any of you have ever come across a gadget like the above please let
me know what it is (and how it operates, if possible!).


Regards,

Farzin    E-mail: [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: Have you considered contacting Lanier to get a set
of instructions and/or documentation?   PAT]

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

Date: Wed, 22 Jul 92 15:05:38 +0200
From: [e-mail] (Alfredo Cotroneo)
Subject: Cellular Phone Interface


I am remaking a request to see if some people from NOKIA Finland are
monitoring this list, and perhaps may help ...

I have just re-enquired aboute the availability of the FAX/Modem
interface for the NOKIA Cityman 200 cellular phone distributed in
Italy thru the NOKIA representative in Rome. They directed me to a
local installer in Milano who told me <his words>: "I have the
interface, but when I tested it did not work the way it should have
worked. If you want it, I can sell it, but mind that I will not accept
returns". When I asked why did it not work, he was not able to give me
more details.

When I decided to buy the NOKIA Cityman I bought it because on an
official leaflet from NOKIA it was advertised the availability of such
interface.  Otherwise I would have gone in some other direction.  Now,
after more than 1 1/2 years, NOKIA has introduced a new product, but
it seems that this interface is either not-distributed or it is not
working.

NOKIA itself in Rome would not comment, and say that we "ordinary
folks" have to go to local distributors for information. They in
return are not able to provide enough information as above.

Anybody from NOKIA to help here please?


Regards,

Alfredo E. Cotroneo, Milano, Italy
email: [e-mail] or [e-mail]

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

Date: Wed, 22 Jul 92 14:20:05 -0400
From: [e-mail] (Brent Byer)
Subject: Phone Number Phun
Organization: Textware, Cambridge, MA


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

> I have an AT&T no-AOS type calling card. I asked for another card for ...

> [Moderator's Note: You and your meaningless '266' phone number! I'd
> expect a telecom enthusiast in your neighborhood to be on the
> DElaware-7, SUPerior, MOHawk, or WHItehall exchange at the very
> least.  :)  PAT]

Actually, Pat, it is in the BOOndocks exchange.

My home phone number used to be TROTSKY , 15+ years ago.  I
occasionally run into past acquaintances of that era.  Most forgot my
name, but remembered the number.

And, in recognition of election year (feh!), my modem line is now
VOTE-JOB .  Funnier still, was when I was getting a phone number for
an off-site modem, and, after a couple of minutes of brainstorming,
the *female* telco rep found, and enciphered, ASS-WELT; I took it for
the link, but it's not my kink.


Brent Byer    Textware Intl.   (617) uni-text

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

Date: Wed, 22 Jul 92 13:35:26 EDT
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject: Where is +44-399?


I have added 399 as a city code in the UK.  But here is how I found
it: in a listing in Cardiff, Wales CF4 (UK), I found +44-222 in use
for the voice and fax numbers (each followed by 6D number), then
VoiceMail +44-399 + 6D.  Where would +44-399 be?

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #579
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa18686;
          23 Jul 92 4:42 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA30777
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 23 Jul 1992 02:38:55 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA00816
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 23 Jul 1992 02:38:45 -0500
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 02:38:45 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #580

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 23 Jul 92 02:38:47 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 580

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    AT&T Fights Fonorola's Attempts to Enter U.S. Market (David Leibold)
    List of GTE Southern California SS7 Links (Lauren Weinstein)
    Coda Call (was Teleslime etc.) (David Norman)
    How to Build a Line-in-Use Indicator (Michael A. Covington)
    CIS Modem Fee Story (Scott Loftesness, CIS via TELECOM Moderator)
    Re: FCC Modem Tax Rumor on Compu$erve (Norman Yarvin)
    Re: FCC Modem Tax Rumor on Compu$erve (Michael H. Riddle, Esq.)
    Re: FCC Modem Tax Rumor on Compu$erve (Steve Forrette)
    Re: FCC Modem Tax Rumor on Compu$erve (Fred Goldstein)
    Re: FCC Modem Tax Rumor on Compu$erve (Jeffrey Comstock)
    Re: FCC Modem Tax Rumor on Compu$erve (Tony Safina)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Thu, 23 Jul 92 02:00:17 EDT
From: David Leibold <[e-mail]>
Subject: AT&T Fights Fonorola's Attempts to Enter U.S. Market


Despite a December ruling from the FCC allowing foreign companies to
provide international communications within the U.S., AT&T is fighting
a bid by the Canadian company Fonorola to sell its services in the U.S.

Much of the dispute involves differing rules and regulations between
Canada and the U.S. Local rates are cheaper in Canada, for instance,
while it is easier in Canada to subsidise local rates from long
distance revenues. AT&T claims that Canadian companies fail a "test of
equivalency" that was required by the FCC in conjunction with opening
up international communications. Fonorola replies that American
resellers are already allowed, and is thus sifficient for the
equivalency required by the FCC.

Under free trade terms between the U.S. and Canada, there are concerns
this dispute could put requirements for local service subsidies from
long distance at risk. That is, a "level playing field" imposed on
Canada could mean skyrocketing local rates for Canadians, a situation
regulators sought to avoid when permitting long distance competition
in Canada.


[e-mail]

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

Date: Wed, 22 Jul 92 12:04:00 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Lauren Weinstein)
Subject: List of GTE Southern California SS7 Links


[e-mail] (John Higdon) wrote:

>> Regarding SS7 links, he said GTE was working on them between their own
>> switches.  Links to PacBell would come, but he didn't know when.

> When I have mentioned GTE's lack of SS7, I have been roundly taken to
> task and told that the company does indeed have such links in place.
> Thank you for confirming that this is the baloney that I suspected it
> was.

John, as I've told you before, it isn't baloney; GTE has numerous SS7
links up and running, at least in Southern California (I don't have
info, one way or another, about Northern California).  Some of the
offices with SS7 interconnects include (and these are all carrying
regular traffic, not test links):

Granada, Pacoima, San Fernando, Sylmar, Sunland, Sepulveda, Camarillo,
Oxnard, Thousand Oaks, Quartz Hills, Lancaster, Santa Barbara.

More SS7 sites are coming up on a regular basis.  The Santa Monica STP
(Santa Monica, Mar Vista, West Los Angeles, Malibu, Topanga, etc.)  is
slated for SS7 this September.

Neither Pacific nor GTE has shown much enthusiasm toward fast action
on GTE<->PacBell SS7 links.  Both seem to be more concerned with their
own offices and with connections to the long distance carriers at this
point.


 --Lauren--

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

Date: Wed, 22 Jul 92 16:14:04 NZS
From: David Norman <[e-mail]>
Subject: Coda Call (was Teleslime etc.)


Our local press here in Wellington carried a short article "Sick of
junk calls" describing a device called "Coda Call".  This requires a
three digit PIN to be appended to all incoming calls before
"connecting".  A Joseph Lutz is credited with developing the device.

Does anyone have any further details? It would seem to be an excellent
answer for eliminating telemarketer calls for example. I'd be
particularly interested in what happens to callers who have dialed the
published directory number; do they just get ring tone no reply?

Please feel free to e-mail me directly; I'll happily summarize
responses.


Dave Norman    e.mail:[e-mail]
Telecom Corporation of New Zealand


[Moderator's Note: If it works like the PrivCode device here in the
USA, it sits on the line all the time looking for changes in voltage
to indicate a call has been connected. It then seizes the line before
the phone has a chance to ring (subscriber is not disturbed with the
bell), and the PrivCode synthesized voice says 'enter your PrivCode
please'. The three digit number which follows is then dealt with.
After two or three wrong attempts, the device just drops the call. If
the code is one of several authorized, then the device itself warbles
to get the attention of the subscriber. Warbles come in different
cadences to partially indicate who is calling, based on the three
digit code entered. Certain codes are reserved with one always ringing
the answering machine plugged in, another just giving a ring back tone
to the caller (but silence to the subscriber) and eventually telling
the calling party politely 'no one is answering -- goodbye', and
other codes which will first attempt to signal the subscriber then
default to the answering machine after several rings.  PrivCode was
first available here in the early 1980's, and the patent is held by
International Mobile Machines of Bala Cynwyd, PA ... so I doubt the
newspaper was correct about the person who 'invented' it.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Michael A. Covington)
Subject: How to Build a Line-in-Use Indicator
Organization: University of Georgia, Athens
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 05:15:17 GMT


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

>      I'd like to build a devive tha detects if the phone is in use (ie. if
> someone is using the same line on a different phone) without causing any
> disturbance, and lights an indicator whenever it is.  All I want to know
> from the device is yes or no, and I want it to cause an indicator to light
> up whenever the phone line is in use, without having to turn it on, press a
> button or the like.

This is a frequent request.  Circuits to do it have been published
several times in the "Circuit Circus" column of {Popular Electronics}.

Also <drum roll> <fanfare> a reliable but simple phone-line-in-use
indicator designed by me will appear as a full-length article in an
upcoming issue of {Popular Electronics}.


Michael A. Covington, Ph.D. |  [e-mail]  |  ham radio N4TMI
Artificial Intelligence Programs | U of Georgia | Athens, GA 30602  U.S.A.


[Moderator's Note: See if the magazine will give you permission to
share it with us also; we can always use a good article about this.  PAT]

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

Date: Tue, 21 Jul 92 14:14:00 -0400
From: TELECOM Moderator ([e-mail])
Subject: CIS Modem Fee Story


The article below was in the Telecom Forum on Compuserve, and provides
a bit more background about the snit CIS is in right now, urging their
users to contact the FCC, etc. I received copies of this from several
readers as well as seeing it there myself.

PAT

 #: 18660 S2/Regulatory Affairs
     20-Jul-92  21:55:22
 Sb: #More Modem Fee Backgnd
 Fm: Scott Loftesness 76703,407
 To: All

The reason for the renewed concern about the possible return of the
modem fee is a recent public speech given by FCC Commissioner Andrew
Barrett to the Interactive Services Association.  Communications Daily
reported in its June 30th edition that Barrett, in a keynote address
to the conference, suggested "I think it will come back again.  It
ought to come back again."

Barrett was apparently recommending that reconsideration of the issue
involving Enhanced Service Provider fees should be brought back as
part of a comprehensive review of Part 69 access rules.  Barrett
declined to comment on how he would vote on the issue -- just saying
that the issue was worthy of additional examination.


Scott

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

From: [e-mail] (Norman Yarvin)
Subject: Re: FCC Modem Tax Rumor on Compu$erve
Organization: Yale Computer Science Department
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 09:46:11 GMT


I don't know whether or not a modem tax is planned by the telcos'
highest decision making level.  I do know that one current research
project at Bellcore is a circuit to automatically distinguish modem
sounds from voice sounds.  It uses neural networks, and is apparently
quite reliable.

I learned about this through conversations with people in the field of
neural networks.


Norman Yarvin    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Michael H. Riddle, Esq.)
Subject: Re: FCC Modem Tax Rumor on Compu$erve
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Michael H. Riddle, Esq.)
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 92 13:33:28 GMT


In a previous article, [e-mail] (Phil Howard) says:

> [Moderator's Note: Well, here we go again. Someone had better get on
> the phone to CIS and ask them if they realize the problems caused by
> the spreading of this report and their request for help ... unless it
> really is true this time around.

The way I read the Compuserve message in their GO FCC forum, and the
referenced discussion in GO TELECOM (not to be confused with the
TELECOM Digest), CIS is concerned about two separate issues.

First, although they fail to give the docket number, they appear to be
concerned with Docket 89-79, which had a "Final Rule" promulgated
about a year ago.  CIS appears to want their users to support the
Petition to Reconsider which has been filed by the industry group
ADAPSO, among others.

Second, CIS attributes to an unnamed FCC commissioner the thought that
some kind of a modem fee might be reasonable.  They also want to
attack that principle.

The troublesome thing about the CIS messages is that they have an
enormous lack of detail.  So much so, that I'm afraid most responses
generated will go immediately into the [e-mail].

I've left feedback to the CIS managers and hope to have more details
soon.


[e-mail]    Nebraska Inns of Court
[e-mail]    [phone] (Data/Fax)
Sysop of 1:285/27@Fidonet      V.32/V.42bis   /   G3 Fax


[Moderator's Note: Scott Loftesness, a Digest reader and one of the
sysops of the Telecom Forum on CIS put up the very message you talk
about in his forum over there recently. I've included it in another
message in this issue.   PAT]


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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: FCC Modem Tax Rumor on Compu$erve
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 19:03:15 GMT


If you read the original CompuServe message carefully, you see that
all they are really saying is something that has been mentioned in
TELECOM Digest several times in the past: that the data carriers will
not be imposed on by the "access fees" that voice carriers must pay
(the "modem tax") as long as they continue to use current access
methods and facilities.  If they want to upgrade their type of
connection into the LEC network, then they must pay the higher rate.
Whether this is fair or not, it's not really news.  It seems that
CompuServe wants to use the newer services, but not pay the higher
rates that would result, and is stirring up the "modem tax" issue to
put public pressure to change this.


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

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

Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 17:54:27 -0400
From: [e-mail] (k1io, FN42jk)
Subject: Re: FCC Modem Tax Rumor on Compu$erve


Well, Pat et al, I did see that latest incarnation of The Network
Chain Letter That Won't Die.  This is, like the flu, yet another
strain of the virus.

Offhand I think it is somebody's reaction to the FCC's ONA (Open
Network Architecture) rules, which have applied a _federal_ tariff for
ONA services, but with each telco making up its own rules and rates
for the FCC to approve.  The ONA rates are set at levels close to what
carriers pay (and that's what the "modem tax" was; making Enhanced
Service Providers pay carrier rates rather than user rates).  So CI$
et al won't be able to use ONA.

But the FCC has said that making ONA _available_ (even at ridiculous
rates) is a prerequisite for the carriers' offering their own
competitive (controvesial!) services.  So the FCC has taken this
fig-leaf of unreasonable ONA offerings and allowed it to enable the
carriers to do something _other_ than be carriers.  That's enough for
CI$ and any other right-thinking American to get upset.

But it's not a modem tax.  It has nothing to do with modems.  And it
has nothing to do with taxes.  It's a tariff dispute, and it's likely
to be settled in Congress.  (BTW, in the latest "WeldBulgermander" map
of Mass. Congressional districts, my town got moved from Kennedy (the
younger) to Markey (Mr. Telecom).  Now I'm a "constituent.")


fred

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

From: uum1!kksys!brainiac![e-mail] (Jeffrey Comstock)
Subject: Re: CompuServe: FCC May Reconsider Modem Fee
Organization: Sewer of Source Code
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 92 07:52:17 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Curtis E. Reid) writes:

> Here is a blurb I found on CompuServe.  I hope this is not another
> urban legend but CompuServe seemed very serious about it.  I called
> their 800 line and they said it must be true if it's posted in "What's
> New."

It seems to me that when this REALLY happened a long time ago, the
most vocal opponent was Compuserve.  If so, they would be keeping
close tabs on the FCC for this ...


Jeffrey R. Comstock    INET  [e-mail]   CW    -. .-. ----- -..

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

From: disk![e-mail] (tony)
Subject: Re: FCC Modem Tax Rumor on Compu$erve
Organization: Digital Information Systems of KY
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 09:18:35 GMT


[e-mail] (John Higdon) writes:

> On Jul 19 at 12:19, TELECOM Moderator notes:

>> [Moderator's Note: Well, here we go again. Someone had better get on
>> the phone to CIS and ask them if they realize the problems caused by
>> the spreading of this report and their request for help ... unless it
>> really is true this time around.

> IMHO, the Bells are not the only ones that would like to see the BBSes
> bite the dust. I am sure the FBI for one is just a little tired of the
> chatter that goes on UNCONTROLLED every day on the thousands upon
> thousands of maverick computer systems. Look what damage just a few
> FAX machines did to the PR of the Chinese government. The Federal
> government has a serious "problem" here, and juggling the rate
> structure of the means of transmission could be a most effective tool
> in keeping the citizens in line. During a recent investigation to
> which I was a party, an FBI agent, after being told about USENET and
> the Internet, exclaimed, "You mean anyone can say anything he wants
> and there is no one controlling what goes out?"

John,

    You seem to be implying that there are people in "...the land
of the free and the home of the brave..." that would like to do away
with our First Amendment right to freedom of speech.  What can members
of the bbsing community do to prevent intrusions on our most basic
rights?  Do you think continued attempts to trample our most basic
freedoms will eventually make America a socialistic state?

    On a different note, however, I might add that there ARE
departments of the government that make vital database services
available to telecommunicaters (bbsers?) at MUCH lower rates than
commercial enterprises offer the same information.  I have subscribed
to Medline for five years or so, and there is no commercial enterprise
that makes this source of medical citations available at such an
affordable price.  I might also add that until several years ago, some
of the government-operated bbses in the DC area were among the best
BBSes in the country.

Least we forget, the government also runs (or supports to a large
extent) the Internet.  I don't think we should knock the government
excessively.  I think if the government could cheaply make a service
like Dialog affordable to the masses they would be doing a major
service.  I guess I have mixed feelings about government involvement
in telecommunications because on one hand I would like to see more
government involvement, but I say this only if it is going to make
more information available to me at less cost, not less information at
more cost.

    Last, which presidential choice do you think will do the most
to help not hinder BBSING/online data retrieval in the US in the
mid-1990's in America?  I really would like to know as this will be
a definite deciding factor in my vote for president this November.

[e-mail] (Phil Howard) responds to TELECOM Moderator:

>> [Moderator's Note: Well, here we go again. Someone had better get on
>> the phone to CIS and ask them if they realize the problems caused by
>> the spreading of this report and their request for help ... unless it
>> really is true this time around.

> Given the repetition this rumor has already had for so long, I would
> think the FCC probably would not be able to withstand the political
> fallout of actually trying to (finally) sneak it by.

Possibly.  But just _how_ influential do you think bbsers/telecommunicat-
ers/modemers are in the US?  Do "we" really have as much power as "we"
might like to believe we have.  Uh, to paraphrase the Firesign Theatre,
"Just who am us, anyways?"  <grin>


Tony Safina -=- disk![e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #580
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa02210;
          24 Jul 92 2:10 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA30885
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 23 Jul 1992 23:59:02 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA03929
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 23 Jul 1992 23:58:51 -0500
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 23:58:51 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #581

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 23 Jul 92 23:58:52 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 581

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Forbes Cover Story: Phreakers (Robert L. McMillin)
    Phone Hacking Article in Forbes (David G. Cantor)
    2600 Reply to Bellcore Lawsuit Threat (Emmanuel Goldstein)
    Bell Canada Granted Right to Appeal Parts of Long Distance (David Leibold)
    Recommendations For SS7 Test Equipment (Wynn Quon)
    About That TPC Monopoly ... (Robert L. Ullmann)
    CID on CAMPUS (Marshal Perlman)
    Ratepayer Funding (John Higdon)
    California PUC Orders $57.6m PacBell Refund (Herb Jellinek)
    Concord 224 Modem (Gene Prall)
    Standards, Standards, Who's Got the Standard? (Andrew M. Boardman)
    Lung Power (Randy Gellens)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Thu, 23 Jul 92 06:38:44 -0700
From: rlm@ms_aspen.hac.com (Robert L. McMillin)
Subject: Forbes Cover Story: Phreakers


This week's issue of {Forbes} has as its cover story an excellent
article about phraud and phreaking.  The synopsis: if you haven't been
nailed by phreakers, you will be.  Phraud in the United States
accounts for $4 billion a year in toll charges.

The article discusses "shoulder-surfers", the slimebags with video
cameras, binoculars, or keen vision lurking in airports and other
likely spots, who record your phone card number as you dial it,
"call-sellers", the people who take these numbers and stand on
streetcorners in areas with large immigrant populations selling phone
calls home for $10-$30, and the linkage between phreakers,
"shoulder-surfers", and drug dealers.

Also, it talks about the inherent dangers of DISA well-known to
readers of TELECOM Digest, as well as what some telecom firms are
doing to combat phraud. (Example: NYT, Sprint, MCI, and AT&T no longer
accept international calling-card calls from payphones in some parts
of New York.)  All in all, a highly recommended piece.


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

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

Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Phone Hacking Article in Forbes
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 92 15:31:35 -0700
From: David G. Cantor <[e-mail]>


The latest (August 3, 1992) issue of {Forbes Magazine} features an
article headlined "Crime on the Line -- If you haven't been a victim
of toll fraud, you probably will be".  The article is entitled "For
Whom the Bells Toll".

A direct quote: "Who are the culprits?  Organized crime and drug
dealers are the big-league crooks."  My question: Are these the type
of persons who have been arrested in the various well-publicized
phone-phreak busts?

Judging by what it states others are publishing and getting away with,
the publishers of {2600} have nothing to worry about.


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

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

Date: Thu, 23 Jul 92 15:37:56 -0700
From: Emmanuel Goldstein <[e-mail]>
Subject: 2600 Reply to Bellcore Lawsuit Threat


The following reply has been sent to Bellcore. Since we believe they
have received it by now, we are making it public.


Emmanuel Goldstein
Editor, 2600 Magazine
PO Box 752
Middle Island, NY 11953


July 20, 1992


Leonard Charles Suchyta
LCC 2E-311
290 W. Mt. Pleasant Avenue
Livingston, NJ 07039


Dear Mr. Suchyta:


We are sorry that the information published in the Winter 1991-92
issue of 2600 disturbs you. Since you do not specify which article you
take exception to, we must assume that you're referring to our
revelation of built-in privacy holes in the telephone infrastructure
which appeared on Page 42. In that piece, we quoted from an internal
Bellcore memo as well as Bell Operating Company documents. This is not
the first time we have done this. It will not be the last.

We recognize that it must be troubling to you when a journal like ours
publishes potentially embarrassing information of the sort described
above. But as journalists, we have a certain obligation that cannot be
cast aside every time a large and powerful entity gets annoyed. That
obligation compels us to report the facts as we know them to our
readers, who have a keen interest in this subject matter. If, as is
often the case, documents, memoranda, and/or bits of information in
other forms are leaked to us, we have every right to report on the
contents therein. If you find fault with this logic, your argument
lies not with us, but with the general concept of a free press.

And, as a lawyer specializing in intellectual property law, you know
that you cannot in good faith claim that merely stamping "proprietary"
or "secret" on a document establishes that document as a trade secret
or as proprietary information. In the absence of a specific
explanation to the contrary, we must assume that information about the
publicly supported telephone system and infrastructure is of public
importance, and that Bellcore will have difficulty establishing in
court that any information in our magazine can benefit Bellcore's
competitors, if indeed Bellcore has any competitors.

If in fact you choose to challenge our First Amendment rights to
disseminate important information about the telephone infrastructure,
we will be compelled to respond by seeking all legal remedies against
you, which may include sanctions provided for in Federal and state
statutes and rules of civil procedure. We will also be compelled to
publicize your use of lawsuits and the threat of legal action to
harass and intimidate.


Sincerely,

Emmanuel Goldstein

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

Date: Thu, 23 Jul 92 18:45:22 EDT
From: David Leibold <[e-mail]>
Subject: Bell Canada Granted Right to Appeal Parts of Long Distance


Bell Canada went to court to seek "leave to appeal" the competition
decision handed down by the CRTC last month. The court ruled that the
appeal could proceed, possibly in the fall. Bell wants to change some
of the terms of the decision to allow long distance competitors access
to Bell's network, particularly the 70% share of the initial
interconnection costs that are to be borne by Bell, with only 30%
borne by competitors. Unitel claims that a delay of six months getting
to the marketplace would cost them about CAD$588 million. Bell Canada
and other existing Canadian telcos consider the CRTC decision to be
"expropriation" of Bell's assets without adequate compensation.

The decision requires Bell to allow for test facilities to be set up
for competitors, though the actual interconnection has to wait until
the appeal is finished.

The legal wrangling is no doubt part of the competitive process, as
are advertisements shot by one party and another. Unitel recently
placed an ad featuring two babies, one dialing a toy telephone with
the other bawling away at the idea of the other having the phone.
Unitel's ad quipped that it was not easy being the only child
(referring to Bell, et al) for so long, and touting the benefits of
competition.


[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Wynn Quon)
Subject: Recommendations Wanted For SS7 Test Equipment
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 15:31:18 -0400
Organization: Mitel. Kanata (Ontario). Canada.


    I'm looking for SS7 test equipment to test out a new SSP that
we're developing.  Anyone have any recommendations on easy-to-use,
powerful test platforms that can simulate STP, SSP and perhaps SCP
nodes?  (It should be able to handle national variants of SS7).  What
features have you found most helpful in any SS7 test equipment that
you've used?  Any comments (favorable or unfavorable) about the
Tekelec MGTS?

    I'll summarize the e-mail responses for everyone's information.


Wynn Quon   Mitel Corp.  Kanata, Ontario

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

From: [e-mail] (Robert L Ullmann)
Subject: About That TPC Monopoly ...
Organization: The World in Boston
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1992 02:01:40 GMT


Hi,

About all the discussion of 'phone companies being  allowed into video
delivery, and  already being allowed  into information  providing, and
demonstrably using their clout to squelch competition, and so on ...

At the IETF last week I said to several people, to much amusement:

    Voice is An Application Layer Protocol

which was especially poignant in light of the successful IETF
audiocast on the Internet.

I will make a prediction on the record:

    Voice (and Video) on Internet packet technology is going
    to utterly destroy the competitiveness of *all* of TPC's
    current technology in the next 5 years.

Unless they get their packet switching act together, they will find
that all they are doing is leasing circuits to people running TCP/IP
(v4 or v7 :-) with all the interesting stuff being run on top.

ISDN packet mode might be useful if they actually provide it, ISDN
circuit mode will be useful in some cases. (In both modes, the use is
to carry internet packets.) But if they don't get it right, including
pricing it at something comparable to real cost, they will be bypassed
by *everyone*.

All I need is bandwidth to my local Internet service provider; once I
get there, it is all packets. I don't have to pay $2.58 for Call
Waiting, $2.57 for Forwarding, $4.12 for 30-Number Speed Calling (all
real NYNEX rates, from Boston directory, Sept 91). I can have any
feature I can program into my PC, or get it for the cost of a
shareware program. (call waiting; 42-way calling; calling-address-or-
whatever-I-damn-please-dependent forwarding; as many speed codes as I
care to remember ... :-)

    During the IETF audiocast (which was apparently 'on' 24 hours
    a day, but only used for presentations during daytime in
    Boston's time zone), one observer noted a couple of people,
    both in Australia, using the "Internet Citizen's Band" to
    discuss some unrelated issue. When asked why they were using
    it: "It's cheaper than a 'phone call." And so it is.

    And there was a videocast too.

I pay NYNEX about $24.00 a month for a copper loop that can do 14.4
full duplex if I push it. Boston Cablevision delivers 106 channels for
$60.00 month (counting, but not paying for, some PPV). That is what?
Maybe 20GB? More?

Who do you think I am going to buy packets from? With eight orders of
magnitude difference? (NYNEX is about US$1.5/KByte/sec/month, the
cable company about US$0.0000003/Kbyte/sec/month) Yes, I understand
the difference between the value-added of the switching; but the cable
company could (for example) provide a complete usenet feed with a
vanishingly small fraction of its bandwidth; most processed
information flow (measured in receiver*time) is _inward_, i.e. from 1
person to N people for _very_ large values of N.

In short:

    Once the available bandwidth is converted to unregulated
    packets (Democratic Packets :-), all regulated service
    providers will either compete or get blown away.

    And this is happening NOW, and will reach critical mass
    very quickly.

Seen a vinyl record lately? Tried to buy one? Um, and did you *have* a
CD player ten years ago? You probably have a PC now ...

    Once the technology to go digital/packet is available,
    it is inevitable, and imperative, and immediate.


With My Best Regards for all TELECOM readers,

Robert Ullmann
home/evenings        [e-mail]    [phone]
work/weekday/daytime    [e-mail]    [phone] x226

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

From: [e-mail] (Marshal "Airborne" Perlman)
Subject: CID on CAMPUS
Organization: University of Denver, Dept. of Math & Comp. Sci.
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 92 03:06:55 GMT


This fall I am moving from California to Florida to attend college
at the Florida Institute of Technology and I understand Florida
has CID. Now comes the complex part. FIT has all their phones
running off a PBX of sorts (don't quote me on this) but they are
not regular 'dial out phones'. {i.e. if you dial a number without
'9', its gonna be to another extention, just like a hotel}.

HOW does CID work in this enviroment?

==============================  *  Marshal Perlman
=-> [e-mail] <-=  *  Huntington Beach, California
==============================  *  (Surf City, U.S.A)


[Moderator's Note: It is not quite clear to me from your message what
type of phones 'they have at FIT', but usually with a PBX Caller-ID
shows the call coming from the main listed or directory number for the
PBX. There are exceptions.   PAT]

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

Date: Thu, 23 Jul 92 12:09 PDT
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Ratepayer Funding


Yesterday, the California Public Utilities Commission ordered Pacific
Bell to refund approximately 57.6 million dollars and reduce its rates
by 19 million to ratepayers. The Division of Ratepayer Advocates
determined that Pac*Bell has been using regulated revenues to support
competitive services since January of 1990.

A service is considered competitive if it can be supplied by other
vendors. The CPUC says that Pac*Bell services such as Voicemail, PC
Connection, California Call Management, and Smart Desktop were all
subsidized by regulated ratepayers when they should have been financed
by shareholders.

Need I say more? Yes. Those who naively believe that regulation of
cross-subsidization is a trivial matter should consider this: yes, the
PUC caught Pac*Bell with hands in the cookie jar. But how many VM
providers, IPs, and other independent businesses did Pac*Bell drive
out of business before this discovery? (I know of several ...)

Please, can we finally see that RBOCs have NO BUSINESS getting into
competitive business. And particularly, they have no business getting
into competitive business that depends upon use of the LEC network.
There is not enough PUC horsepower in the world to supervise this
madness. The RBOCs are masters of this game and will ALWAYS win. All
of this push to allow them into information and other competitive
services is terribly wrong thinking. RBOCs do NOT have the public's
best interests at heart; they hold their stockholders' interests
paramount.  And that is the way it should be. So let us at least not
just bend over.


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

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

From: Herb Jellinek <[e-mail]>
Subject: California PUC Prders $57.6m PacBell Refund
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 15:44:38 PDT


According to UPI, today the California Public Utilities Commission
ordered Pacific Bell to refund approximately $57.6 million to
consumers, and to reduce rates by a further $19 million.  The PUC
found that PacBell had used ratepayer money to fund competitive
services like its Message Center voicemail system, when shareholders'
monies should have been used instead.

The average residential refund will be approximately $0.20/month for 1
year, combined with a rate reduction of about $0.07/month.  [Don't
spend it all in one place!]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Concord 224 Modem
Organization: Armstrong State College, Savannah, GA
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 20:00:59 GMT


Does anyone have any information about Concord Data System? I need an
address, email address or a phone number.

I have a Concord 224 modem, and I need some info on it ... like
everything.


Gene Prall    [e-mail]

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

Date: Thu, 23 Jul 92 17:28:31 EDT
From: andrew m. boardman <[e-mail]>
Subject: Standards, Standards, Who's Got the Standard?


I need to wire a bunch RJ-14 boxes for new service here at Columbia,
and have run into an interesting problem.  The NTI people (it's an SL1
coming in) insist that, for the secondary pair, yellow is ring and
black is tip.  A rather fuzzy memory on my part says that it's the
other way around (black is tip, and yellow is ring), and my
"Subscriber Loop Signalling and Transmission Handbook" also agrees
with me.  The possibilities I can see ...

* The NTI rep is plain wrong.
* The "standard" differs from industry practice.
* The book is wrong.  (In several places, no less!)

I'm interested not only what's common practice, but in any popular
devices that don't conform to it.  (i.e., splitters, two line phones
(If there are any that are actually polatiry sensetive!), et
cetera...)  Many of the phones will be old 2500 sets, so polarity
*will* matter ...

Thanks for any clues!


andrew    [e-mail]

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

From: MPA15AB![e-mail]
Date: 19 JUL 92 22:30
Subject: Lung Power


Happened to see _Shadow_of_a_Doubt_ (an Alfred Hitchcock classic) on
TV the other night.  In an early scene, the mother phones the
telegraph office to hear a telegram, and shouts her end of the
conversation.  Her younger daughter says "No need to yell" and
comments in an aside "Mother makes no allowence for science -- she
thinks she has to cover the entire distance with sheer lung power!"


Randy Gellens            [e-mail]
>>>>>>> If mail bounces, forward to [e-mail] <<<<<<<<
Opinions are personal; facts are suspect; I speak only for myself

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #581
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa06253;
          24 Jul 92 3:55 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA24784
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 24 Jul 1992 01:50:26 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA07790
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 24 Jul 1992 01:50:16 -0500
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1992 01:50:16 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #582

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 24 Jul 92 01:50:00 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 582

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Telephone Keypad Question (Carl Moore)
    Re: Telephone Keypad Question (Herman R. Silbiger)
    Re: Telephone Keypad Question (Erik Rauch)
    Re: Telephone Keypad Question (Brendan Jones)
    Re: FCC Modem Tax Rumor on Compu$erve (Floyd Davidson)
    Re: FCC Modem Tax Rumor on Compu$erve (John Higdon)
    Re: Beating Hotel Calling-Card Surcharges (Bob Frankston)
    Re: Beating Hotel Calling-Card Surcharges (Scott Scheingold)
    Re: 911 Run-Around (Dave Niebuhr)
    Re: 911 Run-Around (Ron Natalie)
    Re: Phone Tap in Murder Case Ruled Illegal (Wolf Paul)
    Re: What Will ISDN Get Me? (Sean N. Welch)
    Re: Panasonic 12/32 - Any Experiences? Any Advice? (John Higdon)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Thu, 23 Jul 92 12:43:45 EDT
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Telephone Keypad Question


Dropping of letters from telephone numbers varied from place to place.
In Wilmington, Delaware, the directory released in October 1966 was
the first there NOT to have the exchange names, although since about
1960(?)  some exchanges had been created which never had names (737 in
Newark, Del., for example).  POrter 2 & 4 (now 762 and 764) in
Wilmington had been created in 1957 (had to read this because I am too
young to remember it).

But the 1976 Philadelphia directory was still using exchange names.
As in the Wilmington case, these were the two letter + five number
type; the cases (cited in the Digest) of three letters and four
numbers are too far back for me to remember.


[Moderator's Note: The only times I've seen 3L + 4D was in reviewing
old issues of the IBT and (its predecessor) Chicago Telephone Company
directories on microfilm.  The Chicago Public Library keeps them on
microfilm from 1878 to the present. PAT]

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

Date: Thu, 23 Jul 92 19:46:54 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Herman R Silbiger)
Subject: Re: Telephone Keypad Question
Organization: AT&T


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Liron Lightwood) writes:

> On the new Telecom phones, the '2'-'9' keys are labelled with the same
> letters as US phones.  However, the '1' key is labelled with 'Q' and
> 'Z'.

> Also, automatic teller machines (at least over here) which have keys
> labelled with letters as well as numbers (for easier to remember
> PIN's), also use the '1' key for 'Q' and 'Z'.  I believe this applies
> in the USA as well.

> If this is the case, the most obvious place to put the 'Q' and 'Z'
> would be on the '1' button.

This subject has been under discussion in both ISO and CCITT.
Agreement has been reached on where 24 of the 26 letters will go, but
the Q and Z location is not yet agreed.

The holdout is AUSTRALIA.

Several human factors studies have shown that users expect the Q to
follow the P, and the Z to follow the Y.  There are thousands of voice
mail systems and directory access systems that use this convention.

While I was in Australia I want into a shop that sold telephone sets,
and saw sveral sets that had letters on the keypad.  None had Q and Z
on the "1".


Herman Silbiger

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

From: Erik Rauch <hourglas![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Telephone Keypad Question
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 92 21:27:19 EDT


Erik Rauch ([e-mail]):

> When did the phone company use three digits? And when was this
> practice officially abolished?

Pat Townson:

> The old familiar names were kept when possible and when there would be
> no conflict in dialing (certain old exchange names collided
> numerically with other exchange names, ie. [Union Stock] Yards and
> Warren [Boulevard]
> -- we kept YARds (now 927) and Warren became Haymarket [riots, meeting
> place of strikers] (now 421).

So you're saying that the words used to identify CO's originally had
no number associated with them? When did they start being associated
with numbers? I bet this was around the time when letters started
appearing on rotary dials.

> After about 1960 it was dueces wild; no attempt was made to match
> numbers with names; any number combination unused at the time was
> considered with some universal exceptions: First and second digits
> always 2-9 (never 0 or 1) and third digit 1-9 (never a zero).

What were the xx0 exchanges being kept for?


[Moderator's Note: From the beginning until the early 1920's when
dialing began there was no real concern in the matter. The operators
understood the different words; that was all that mattered. To their
credit, Chicago Telephone Company made a point of skipping names which
would be 'numerically ambiguous' beginning sometime in the 1920's in
anticipation of it making a difference several years later. But those
which were in use stayed that way until the first of the two (I do not
know of any instance where there were three) converted to dial. It
then got a new name which would not be ambiguous to the equipment. In
the beginning, people who wanted to know the weather outside lifted
the receiver and asked the operator what the temperature and
conditions were. Eventually this became a specialized task, but the
subscribers still asked the operator for WEATHER and were plugged in
to the place where it was recited continuously. Among the first
conversions to dial in 1939 was W-E-A-T-H-E-R, but that was short-lived
for some reason with a change to WEather-4-(anything, with 1212 the
official number) and a new CO called WEbster-9 showing up downtown.
WEather-4 went away in favor of 934, then 936, and finally (free) 976
followed by (pay) 976.  Webster could have become WEBster but for some
reason it became WEbster-9 instead. I can't divine their thinking from
that long ago.

Instead of happening overnight as in a small town, the conversion from
manual to dial service went on for years here, and led to lots of
confusion by subscribers. Dial customers dialed each other; manual
customers asked the operator for connections to each other or the dial
customers; dial customers calling manual exchanges sometimes could
dial them (!) but other times had to dial 911 and wait for an operator
to answer and pass the request. When I was a child I stayed up late
the night our CO converted to dial, making a manual call at about 1:59
AM, and a dial call a minute or two later. My friend's phone did not
convert for another year; I dialed 911, waited for an operator to
answer and gave his number; to call me he just gave the operator my
number. 911 (?) ... I see your eyebrows raise ... the police were
called via POLice-1313; a fire was reported at FIRe-1313.  Emergency
use of 911 started in the late 1970's here.  During the manual to dial
conversion 511, 711, and 911 were dialed to reach operators in
unconverted manual exchanges around the city. The '0' operator was not
to be contacted for those calls. 511, 711 and 911 just 'dropped into'
the manual offices and showed up on the operators switchboards. Each
time you gave your number to anyone they'd always ask "Are you getting
converted soon? Get to keep the same number? ..."  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Telephone Keypad Question
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 92 18:06:51 +1000


I have seen many variations on the letter groupings on telephone keypads.
The most common appears to be:

    0    -        5    JKL
    1    -        6    MNO
    2    ABC        7    PRS
    3    DEF        8    TUV
    4    GHI        9    WXY

The missing letters (Q and Z) are sometimes put on the 0 or (more
commonly) the 1 key.  However, I have also seen one labelled thus:

    0    -        5    MNO
    1    ABC        6    PQR
    2    DEF        7    STU
    3    GHI        8    VWX
    4    JKL        9    YZ

And even one labelled thus:

    0    O        5    KLM
    1    I        6    NPQ
    2    ABC        7    RST
    3    DEF        8    UVW
    4    GHJ        9    XYZ

All of this highlights one thing - absolutely no keypad lettering
standardization.  In fact, the future use of vanity numbers is
something that concerns the CCITT, as vanity number use may become
more prevalent rather than less and will transcend national
boundaries.

I believe that the CCITT is currently looking at this issue (perhaps
someone in the know can confirm or deny) with a view to creating a
recommendation on keypad letter groupings and hence for the first time
an international standard.

Also, the CCITT won't necessarily adopt what is most common, but would
adopt what would appear to be most sensible and useful.  We may even
get a type of QWERTY layout to evenly spread out the commonly used
letters :-)

Of all the letter permutations I have seen, the last one (IMHO) is the
best.  It eliminates any possible confusion between 0 and O, and 1 and
I, and the rest of the letters neatly fit.  Its shortcomings include
the effective wiping out of vanity words beginning with O or I, and
the letter frequency spread is not that good (9 would get used little,
but 7 would get used often).

Can anyone suggest a loyout that has a roughly even letter-frequency
spread and minimises potential 0/O, 1/I, 2/Z confusion?


Brendan Jones    ACSnet:  [e-mail]
R&D Contractor    UUCP:  {uunet,mcvax}!otc.otca.oz.au!brendan
Services R&D    Phone:  [phone]   Fax:  (02)287-FAXX
|||| OTC ||    Snail:  GPO Box 7000, Sydney  2001, AUSTRALIA

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

From: [e-mail] (Floyd Davidson)
Subject: Re: FCC Modem Tax Rumor on Compu$erve
Organization: University of Alaska Institute of Marine Science
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 12:08:02 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Norman
Yarvin) writes:

> I don't know whether or not a modem tax is planned by the telcos'
> highest decision making level.  I do know that one current research
> project at Bellcore is a circuit to automatically distinguish modem
> sounds from voice sounds.  It uses neural networks, and is apparently
> quite reliable.

While such development might seem to obviously have applications in
billing decisions ... and all the horrors that involves, I doubt the
two are actually related.

One of the more significant developing technologies is real time data
compression for, among other things, telco digital transmission
systems.  But one really serious problem is that compressing a bit
stream being used by a modem causes serious degrading of the
modem-to-modem data link.  Hence the research to distinguish non-voice
sounds is very much needed in order to provide compression equipment
that will still work for modem users (by switching off the compression
for non-voice users).


Floyd

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

Date: Thu, 23 Jul 92 10:23 PDT
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: FCC Modem Tax Rumor on Compu$erve


[e-mail] (Norman Yarvin) writes:

> I do know that one current research project at Bellcore is a circuit
> to automatically distinguish modem sounds from voice sounds.  It uses
> neural networks, and is apparently quite reliable.

Well, this ought to tell people something. If it takes neural network
technology to determine mechanically that a modem rather than a voice
is using a telephone line, then there cannot be much justification on
technical grounds for higher charges!


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

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Beating Hotel Calling-Card Surcharges
Date: Thu 23 Jul 1992 11:57 -0400


I just stayed at a Regency Hyatt.  It is nice to know that 800 number
surcharges are going away.  But the hotel does make a special case of
800 numbers used to access LD carriers.

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

From: [e-mail] (Scott Scheingold)
Subject: Re: Beating Hotel Calling-Card Surcharges
Organization: Ians' Playhouse
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 11:00:13 GMT


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

> To beat this charge, I simply placed my long distance calls through
> 800-CALL-ATT (and one of the hotel bills did show five long distance
> calls of cost $0.00).  I'll see in a month if these were billed as
> "normal" calling card calls and if my Reach Out America discounts are
> handled properly.

I hate to say this but I have called 800 numbers from hotels and been
charged for local calls. From $.25 to $.75 a call.


Scott Scheingold sysadmin   Voice   1-215-546-9959
UUCP     ...!{widener|dsinc}!jabber!phlpa!scott  or [e-mail]
Compuserve [e-mail]

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

Date: Thu, 23 Jul 92 08:57:32 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Dave Niebuhr)
Subject: Re: 911 Run-Around


In TELECOM Digest Volume 12 : Issue 578 I wrote:

> In TELECOM Digest Volume 12 : Issue 571 Carl Moore (VLD/VMB)
> <[e-mail]> writes:

>> Some phone books do list non-emergency numbers, and I take them to be
>> for matters which should get police attention but are not as urgent.

> The problem with my PD (Suffolk County, NY) is that if I wanted to
> make a non-emergency call but yet talk to a policeman/woman, I would
> be told to call 911 in about 90% of the instances.

[ ... An example I gave was deleted ...]

[ ... Moderator's  confirmation that this is not unique to one police
department deleted ...]

> Once every few months or so 911 officials complain about how
overloaded the system is, and why they are sometimes unable to answer
for six rings ... I wish our police department would settle this once
and for all, and make an official policy that everyone had to stick
to.  PAT]

My son-in-law is a dispather for the SCPD and this is one of his
biggest gripes.  He told me one day that his workload would be cut by
at least 50% if the precincts would handle the non-emergency calls
directly instead of referring the callers to 911.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Ron Natalie)
Subject: Re: 911 Run-Around
Date: 23 Jul 92 19:13:51 GMT
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.


> The problem with my PD (Suffolk County, NY) is that if I wanted to
> make a non-emergency call but yet talk to a policeman/woman, I would
> be told to call 911 in about 90% of the instances.

Where I used to be, they wanted you to call 911 for nearly everything
for two reasons:

    1.  Some people's idea of what constitutes an emergency is
more than others.  Better the trained dispatches at 911 identify the
call than to lose valuable time while someone worked through the
switchboard at the local precinct house or had the phone ring off
the hook at the volunteer fire statoin.

    2.  All there fancy ANI/ALI/"who do we relay this call to"
stuff only works if you dial into 911.  If you call in on the regular
phone, they have to get your address and go ahead and type it into the
computer anyway so they know who to send out (even in a non-emergency).

Of course, each juristiction runs it's own 911 and some are more
coordinated than others.  I still feeel a little odd calling 911 to
report stuff in the road and look up the non-emergecy number (in the
Gumn't pages of the phone book, it isn't on the inside cover like the
emergency numbers).


Ron

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

From: [e-mail] (Wolf Paul)
Subject: Re: Phone Tap in Murder Case Ruled Illegal
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Wolf N. Paul)
Organization: Alcatel Austria - Elin Research Center, Vienna
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1992 08:27:00 GMT


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

> Should I be allowed to tap all the phones at my office (and copy all
> the email), and give it to the police if I find evidence that one of
> my employees is a crook?  What if he/she isn't stealing from me, but
> using my premises as a base for other crimes?  Am I allowed to tell
> the cops "X is a crook, but I can't explain why ... go check it out"?

Not too much relation to Telecom anymore, but:

You are even allowed to explain why, and hand over such tapes, BUT the
police are not allowed to use them as evidence in the trial (if it
comes to that). They will have to PROVE your employee's guilt by other
means, but that does not mean that they cannot use such tapes etc to
aid them in their investigation.


Wolf N. Paul, Computer Center   [e-mail]
Alcatel-Elin Research Center    [phone] (w)
Ruthnergasse 1-7                [phone] (fax)
ELIN RESEARCH   A-1210 Vienna-Austria/Europe      [phone] (h)

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

From: [e-mail] (Sean N. Welch)
Subject: Re: What Will ISDN Get Me?
Date: 24 Jul 1992 01:29:02 GMT
Organization: Experimental Computing Facility, U.C. Berkeley


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Doug
Sewell) writes:

> First, I expect the answer is 'nothing', but I'll toss the question
> out anyway.

> Will ISDN do anything for me in this environment ?

There are cards available now for PC's that support ISDN, such that
you could have the campus network extended to your home.  You would
need a line, a line on campus, and two such cards.  There are also
stand alone terminal adapters that look very much like high speed
modems in the conventional dial-in paradigm.  Additionally, there are
boxes available that take ISDN basic rate in one side and give you
ethernet out the other.  You can get up to 128Kbps from a PC card
(using both B channels on a Basic Rate Interface).  Terminal adapters
generally go to 38.4Kbps through a serial interface.  The ISDN <->
ethernet boxes I've seen go 128Kbps.

>What would have tochange before it will (assuming that first, I'll
have to go beyond MSDOS).

You can run the above equipment under DOS.  Since I don't know
anything about PC's, I can't really say what this buys you.  (I'm sure
you can use it for something -- I just have no experience with DOS at
all.)  For a Unix box at home, you can have a real network connection
over ethernet (as far as the machine is concerned), or you can run
SLIP or PPP at a more reasonable speed.


Sean N. Welch          [e-mail]
Experimental Computing Facility  University of California, Berkeley

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

Date: Wed, 23 Jul 92 02:49 PDT
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: Panasonic 12/32 - Any Experiences? Any Advice?


[e-mail] (Irving_Wolfe) writes:

> What's the best thing to do?  Shall I invest in another DISA card for
> over $500?  Is the system really badly designed, so I should avoid
> throwing good money after bad and replace it with something more
> robust (and if so, what)?

Have you thought about having it repaired? You know Matsushita has an
extensive repair center network nationwide and they have very
reasonable "flat" repair rates. As far as the system design is
concerned, it is one of the best. I am shocked that you feel that
money spent on the system was "bad" and quite frankly of the many,
many such systems with which I am personally familiar (including my
own), none has experienced as much trouble as you describe.

I suggest you do a bit of shopping and then ask about replacing it
again. You will not find a more feature-laden system at anywhere near
the price. If yours were mine (and I was too lazy to get repair
service on it), I would replace any defective cards in a heartbeat.

But then, if you have more (MUCH more) money than sense, you might go
out and look at a Merlin :-(


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

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #582
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa08845;
          25 Jul 92 18:29 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA26247
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 25 Jul 1992 16:41:10 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA10803
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 25 Jul 1992 16:41:01 -0500
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 1992 16:41:01 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #583

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 25 Jul 92 16:41:03 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 583

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Cracker Running Rampant! (Cliff Stoll)
    Re: Cracker Running Rampant! (Rop Gonggrijp)
    Re: Cracker Running Rampant! (Darren Alex Griffiths)
    Re: Cordless Phone Not Charging (Herman R. Silbiger)
    Re: Cordless Phone Not Charging (Eli Mantel)
    Re: Cordless Phone Not Charging (Joe Konstan)
    Re: Cordless Phone Not Charging (Ron Natalie)
    Re: Telephone Keypad Question (Dale Miller)
    Re: Telephone Keypad Question (Carl Moore)
    Re: Telephone Keypad Question (Leonard Erickson)
    Re: Telephone Keypad Question (Mark Brader)
    Re: Advice Needed: Dialback Management (Paul Cook)
    Re: Ground Wire on Network Interface? (Dick Rawson)
    Re: House Wiring (Bill Nickless)
    Re: House Wiring (Ron Natalie)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Cliff Stoll)
Subject: Re: Cracker Running Rampant!
Date: 25 Jul 1992 18:59:54 GMT
Organization: U. C. Berkeley Open Computing Facility


Someone's breaking into a system and thumbing his nose at the system
managers.  They're apparently incompetent, which makes patching up the
damage difficult.

Roger Gonzalez says to completely wipe the system -- since the guy has
introduced new holes into the OS, everything has to be rebuilt from
scratch.

Darren Griffiths ([e-mail]) sez that's not enough: you've
got to call the police, perhaps the FBI and CERT.

Sadly, I agree.  Those with neither ethics nor responsibility
undermine the trust of our Internet community.


Cliff Stoll


[Moderator's Note: Well Cliff, the Internet community had a lot of
trust between people for many years until the BBS'er/malicious hacker
type person found out about it and began abusing the trust. It reminds
me of how ham radio *used* to be until the CB'ers started moving in.  PAT]

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

Subject: Re: Cracker Running Rampant!
From: [e-mail] (Rop Gonggrijp)
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 92 13:40:36 WET/D
Organization: Hack-Tic Magazine


[e-mail] (Darren Griffiths) writes:

> You're correct of-course, this is a hassle, particularly if the site
> in question has incompetent system administrators, which sounds like
> it's the case.  There is one other thing that must be done as well,
> and that's call the police.  The 'cracker' has identified himself in
> the sample mail, so finding his real name should not be a problem.  If
> he is out of state then call the FBI, past experience has shown me
> that with a little bit of hassle they will do something, and if he is
> in Australia call the CIA, they have also become involved in previous
                        ^^^
> cases if you bug them enough.

You mean the CIA is in the business of chasing kids that play with
someone else's SUN? That is absurd!  Aren't they supposed to be
killing union leaders, and mining foreign harbors?

More seriously: Do you have any documented cases of the CIA getting
involved in the chase of a hacker (that is not also spying for
countries other than the U.S.)?

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

Subject: Re: Cracker Running Rampant!
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 92 12:36:18 PDT
From: [e-mail]


> "if he is in Australia call the CIA, they have also become
> involved in previous cases if you bug them enough."

> Can you name a case in which they have done so?  Acting on criminal
> matters is not within the CIA's charter.  Read "The Cuckoo's Egg" for a
> detailed history of a case in which a computer at Berkeley was cracked
> by a person in Germany.

The CIA did manage to get involved in the case at Lawrence Berkeley
Labs, and in fact the author of "The Cuckoo's Egg" has given numerous
talks for the CIA and received commendations from them, although I'm
not sure he is proud about the commendations.  The trick is to annoy
them enough so they think that it would be easier to help than to keep
getting messages from you.  It is true, I believe, that other agencies
helped more in this case, although no-one thought that it was
important enough to volunteer their services.

It's funny that you should mention "The Cuckoo's Egg", I worked at LBL
for a number of years, included part of the time chronicled by Cliff
in the book.  During that time, and since, I've learned more about
computer security issues than I've ever wanted to.  You will find my
name scattered around in the book, although the part where Cliff
mentions that I enjoy listening to the band U2 is completely
slanderous and I'm still considering legal action unless a public
apology is forthcoming (are you paying attention Cliff?)


Cheers,

Darren Alex Griffiths         [e-mail]
Open Systems Solutions, Inc   [phone] x139
Fujitsu                       Fax: [phone]
6121 Hollis Street            Emeryville, CA 94608-2092

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

Date: Sat, 25 Jul 92 09:38:38 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Herman R Silbiger)
Subject: Re: Cordless Phone Not Charging
Organization: AT&T


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Ang
Peng Hwa) writes:

> My AT&T cordless phone is not charging and I'd appreciate any input.
> It was on for 20 days while I was on vacation. I then had to unplug it
> for another 20 days. When I recharged it, the thing just lit up the
> Battery Low light.

> I figure it must be the NiCad remembering the charge. So I've
> discharged the thing twice (waited for the low light to go out). It's
> still on low after three days of charging.

> Should I just wait longer for the memory to disappear, or leave it on
> for the thing to charge?

NiCads are capable of a finite number of charge-discharge cycles.
Your NiCad may be due for replacement.  Go to your nearest AT&T Phone
Center and buy a new one.  Unless you have a very old model, the
batteries are user replaceable.


Herman Silbiger

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

From: [e-mail] (Eli Mantel)
Subject: Re: Cordless Phone Not Charging
Organization: Extended Bulletin Board Service
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 1992 07:09:05 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Ang
Peng Hwa) writes:

> My AT&T cordless phone is not charging and I'd appreciate any input.
> It was on for 20 days while I was on vacation. I then had to unplug it
> for another 20 days. When I recharged it, the thing just lit up the
> Battery Low light.

I have a several-year-old Uniden phone which exhibits similar
properties.  If I allow it to discharge fully, it will not recharge.
It seems that there is one cell which will not recharge while in
series with the other cells.  If I recharge that cell independently
(identified by its lack of voltage) then I can recharge the whole
battery pack successfully.


Eli Mantel ([e-mail])

   The opinions expressed are not necessarily those of the University of
     North Carolina at Chapel Hill, the Campus Office for Information
        Technology, or the Experimental Bulletin Board Service.
           internet:  bbs.oit.unc.edu or 152.2.22.80

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

Date: Sat, 25 Jul 92 12:20:48 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Joe Konstan)
Subject: Re: Cordless Phone Not Charging


In TELECOM Digest V12 #578, Ang Peng Hwa writes:

> My AT&T cordless phone is not charging and I'd appreciate any input.

The most common problem I have with AT&T cordless phones (love my
5500) is that the contacts on the phone and charger get dirty.  If the
model you have has a "Charging" light, check to see if it stays on
when the phone is in the base.  If not, get steel wool (can use other
scrubbers, but steel wool works best) and clean off all of the
contacts.  In general, I've needed to do this every two or three
months after owning the phone for about a year.

If that isn't it, and you really trashed the battery, I'd just go and
buy a new NiCad either from AT&T (more expensive) or any electronics
dealer.


Joe Konstan     [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Ron Natalie)
Subject: Re: Cordless Phone Not Charging
Date: 25 Jul 92 19:31:06 GMT
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.


The last thing you want to do to a NiCad battery is to run it
completly dry.  You run the risk of destroying one of the cells which
sounds like you may have done.  All is not lost however, there are
commercial battery houses that sell replacement batteries and they
aren't that hard to replace.  You will have to disassemble the handset
and this may involve soldering/unsoldering.


Ron

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

Subject: Re: Telephone Keypad Question
From: [e-mail]
Date: 25 Jul 92 09:03:57 GMT
Organization: University of Arkansas at Little Rock


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

[interesting number origin deleted]

> After about 1960 it was dueces wild; no attempt was made to match
numbers with names; any number combination unused at the time was
considered with some universal exceptions: First and second digits
always 2-9 (never 0 or 1) and third digit 1-9 (never a zero).

In 501 there are at least the 370, 660, and 670 exchanges.  When did
the third digit change to allow zeros?


Dale Miller - University of Arkansas at Little Rock   [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: We've got lots of NN0 and N0N type prefixes now. We
started getting NN0 about ten years ago; we started getting N0N at the
time of the 312/708 split a couple years ago.   PAT]

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

Date: Sat, 25 Jul 92 9:25:52 EDT
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Telephone Keypad Question


You mention 911 in the Moderator's Note, apparently in reference to
Chicago.  When did it go away?  (Not to be confused with the
911-for-emergency-service; when did that come to Chicago?)


[Moderator's Note: All the special three digit N11 codes used for
connection of dial subscribers to the (still) manual exchanges went
away once the conversion was finished. After 1951 I don't think we had
any until about 1955 when a couple places in northern Indiana which
were in the Chicago local calling area were converted to dial; then
people on the far south side of Chicago who had been dial for a few
years were told to use 911 to reach the manual exchange in Whiting,
Indiana for a few months. (Previously everyone dialed the operator to
ask for a Whiting number; we kept doing that, but the southern end of
the city and a couple suburbs out there suddenly were told use 911,
and use 711 for East Chicago, IN (which cut to dial about a month
before Whiting, and about a year after Hammond. All three of those
towns are in the local calling area for Chicago-Mitchell and Chicago-
Pullman.)  From about 1942 - 1946 we had 811 for 'priority long
distance calling'. If you were of sufficient military rank you used
that as a way to get the operator to take a circuit from someone
else and give it to you if needed. From 1946 to about 1980, the use of
811 was for 'hotel time and charges' type long distance calls.  We got
911 (as in police) about 1975-76, a few exchanges at a time, with the
unconverted continuing to dial POlice-5-1313 until their conversion
was made. By 1977 everyone here had 911 except one lousy exchange
which was still an old panel office. I remember the first year of the
almost complete conversion: The phone book devoted a couple pages to
big, garish cartoons and bold face digits '911' to advertise it, with
only a tiny mention near the bottom of the page: "Subscribers on the
LOngbeach-1 exchange should dial the operator and tell her about the
emergency." Good old 312-561 cut over maybe six months later.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Telephone Keypad Question
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: SCN Research/Qic Laboratories of Tigard, Oregon.
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 1992 15:37:09 GMT


[e-mail] writes:

> Of all the letter permutations I have seen, the last one (IMHO) is the
> best.  It eliminates any possible confusion between 0 and O, and 1 and
> I, and the rest of the letters neatly fit.  Its shortcomings include
> the effective wiping out of vanity words beginning with O or I, and
> the letter frequency spread is not that good (9 would get used little,
> but 7 would get used often).

> Can anyone suggest a loyout that has a roughly even letter-frequency
> spread and minimises potential 0/O, 1/I, 2/Z confusion?

Well, you have another problem. Letter frequencies vary by *language*.
I don't have my references handy, but from my reading in cryptology, i
can tell you that the variations are quite marked. So *which* language
do you optimize for?

Oh yes, if you are dealing with written "numbers" you have at least
one other possible confusion. Europeans put a horizontal bar on the
"7" so that it doesn't get confused with a "1" (which they draw as a
vertical stroke with a *quite* pronounced angled stroke attached to
the top:

         *
       * *
      *  *
         *
         *
         *

as you can see this is easily confused with a 7 by Americans ...)


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

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

Date: Sat, 25 Jul 1992 12:16:00 -0400
From: [e-mail] (Mark Brader)
Subject: Re: Telephone Keypad Question


> But the 1976 Philadelphia directory was still using exchange names.
> As in the Wilmington case, these were the two letter + five number
> type; the cases (cited in the Digest) of three letters and four
> numbers are too far back for me to remember.

While I've never investigated it systematically, my impression from
the places where I've seen old numbers is that here in Toronto we
never had three letters and four digits (3L+4D).  Instead, it appears
that we went from 2L + 4D to 2L + 5D.  (And later to 7D, of course.)


Mark Brader, SoftQuad Inc., Toronto, utzoo!sq!msb, [e-mail]

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

Date: Sat, 25 Jul 92 17:37 GMT
From: Proctor & Associates <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Advice Needed: Dialback Management


[e-mail] (Peter Alexander Merel) writes:

> We know about dialback modems, but it seems they are not as secure as
> we'd like. I'm sure something like I describe must exist, but we don't
> know what it is called or where to get it. Please help.

I don't have a virtual solution, but I do have a very flexible
programmable hardware one.

The reason that dialback modems are sometimes not secure is that a
cracker can call into the modem and wait for the modem to hang up, and
then remain on the line, playing dialtone back to the modem.  The
modem "thinks" it is dialing on the network, but instead it reaches
the bad guy's modem.

This is possible because many central offices will keep the circuit up
for up to about 22 seconds if the calling party remains off-hook after
the called party goes on-hook.  This is a long enough window for the
dialback modem to re-seize the line and start dialing.

You can attach an external security device, such as the Proctor
46300F2 Secured System Access Line.  It answers a ringing line, then
expects a security code (up to 14 digits) before ringing into the
modem.  This should be enough security, unless of course someone finds
out what the security code is.

When performing dialback, it can call different dialback numbers
linked to different security codes.  To prevent the problem mentioned
above, it can be programmed to wait for a CPC pulse on the line before
initiating dialback, or it can perform the dialback on one of several
separate ports.  Since the dialback can be done on a separate line,
there is no way for a cracker to get through with the dialtone trick.

This product can also be used as a secure DISA adaptor (a device that
allows one to dial in and seize another line for outgoing service,
such as a PBX extension), and is available with an internal voice
frequency repeater.

Contact Proctor & Associates via one of the email, fax, telephone or
snailmail addresses below for more information.


Paul Cook                       206-881-7000
Proctor & Associates       MCI Mail 399-1080
15050 NE 36th St.          fax: [phone]
Redmond, WA  98052-5317  [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Dick Rawson)
Subject: Re: Ground Wire on Network Interface?
Date: 25 Jul 92 18:13:03 GMT
Organization: BT North America (Tymnet)


> In the US, all "communications" type wires entering a building are
> required by "code" (NEC) to have lightning protection, and that
> requires a ground.

> Also, code requires that all these grounds, and your electrical
> service ground, *must* be electrically bonded together.

A quibble, but the NEC is a model code, not a law, and has effect only
when a local jurisdiction adopts it by law.  A jurisdiction frequently
adopts most of a model code, but with some local changes.  There are
multiple competing codes for fire, building, life safety, and so on;
they generally differ somewhat.  I don't know if the NEC has a
competitor.


Dick

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

From: [e-mail] (Bill Nickless)
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 92 13:21:12 -0500
Subject: Re: House Wiring Question


If you can't wire your new house with 10BaseT Ethernet, you'll be
gratified to know that the new FDDI-over-copper stuff *is* FCC Class B
compilant.  So it's illegal to run 10Mbits over copper, but legal to
run 100Mbits over copper in a residential area.

Of course, if you're going to do 100Mbit speeds anyway, why not just
pull fiber?  :)


Bill Nickless

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

From: [e-mail] (Ron Natalie)
Subject: Re: House Wiring
Date: 25 Jul 92 19:22:45 GMT
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.


When moved into my house in NJ, the house was sporadically wired for
two lines (some wall jacks had wires behind them for both pairs, some
only one).  Having five computer programmers living there we had
already ordered ten lines (oddly enough the phone company finally
caught on and stopped offering "teen" lines for $4.00 additional a
month).  I pulled 25-pair cable into the major rooms (my office, Liz's
office, the hack room, and Rehmi's bedroom) as well to the laundry
room (the other side of the exterior wall from where the NI was).
Everything was cross connected on 66 blocks in the garage.  I also
pulled thin ethernet.  We ran the ten lines everywhere and used the
remaining pairs for things like RS-232 lines.

One day, about half the lines stopped working.  I called the phone
company and they came out and decided the problem was with the
internal wiring (they hadn't been inside yet, they were still at the
NI).  I had noticed that we were paying 30 cents a month or something
for wire maintenance (not my idea, I didn't place the order when we
moved), so I told him to have at it.  The installer was sure suprised
when I showed him where the wires went after the demarc.  After about
20 minutes of puttering around with an ohmmeter he calls me over and
says that he's identified which run of the 25 pair is bad.  We head to
Liz's office.  The 66 block here is not attached to the wall but is
sitting on the floor (no closet in her office, I was going to screw it
to the underside of the built-in desk).  We pulled it out a bit.
"Can't you smell it I say?"  The phone installer can't tell, but some
cat has pissed into the 66 block (we had new kittens).  We finally
agree that he will provide me a few 66 blocks and other miscellanious
parts (bridge clips) and I'll take care of repuncing that block.


Ron

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #583
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa10899;
          25 Jul 92 19:27 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA22717
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 25 Jul 1992 17:41:22 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA19676
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 25 Jul 1992 17:41:13 -0500
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 1992 17:41:13 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #584

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 25 Jul 92 17:41:09 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 584

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: 911 Run-Around (Dale Miller)
    Re: 911 Run-Around (Robert S. Helfman)
    911 Nightmare (Martin McCormick)
    Re: Solve Three Problems (was Telecom Fraud) (Koos van den Hout)
    Re: Solve Three Problems (was Telecom Fraud) (Mark Phaedrus)
    Re: GTE and CLASS/ISDN (Jon Baker)
    Re: GTE and CLASS/ISDN (Jeff Sicherman)
    Re: How to Use U.S. Modem in England? (Herman R. Silbiger)
    Re: St. Pierre and Miquelon (Herman R. Silbiger)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Re: 911 Run-Around
From: [e-mail]
Date: 25 Jul 92 09:30:30 GMT
Organization: University of Arkansas at Little Rock


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Dave
Niebuhr) writes:

> In TELECOM Digest Volume 12 : Issue 571 Carl Moore (VLD/VMB)
> <[e-mail]> writes:

>> Some phone books do list non-emergency numbers, and I take them to be
>> for matters which should get police attention but are not as urgent.

Yes, when you can find them.  For instance, the Little Rock phone book
used to dedicate the first page to all the numbers of the police,
fire, etc.  departments in central Arkansas.  This now has been
reduced to a listing for all major services of 911 (in big print).
Referring to the "helpful numbers" section in the "blue pages" gives
police in most communities as 911.  Only looking under city government
can one find the actual police numbers.  Even there though, the fire
department only gives a central number, not station numbers.

I have no problem with pushing 911.  But when > 50% of the first page
of the directory is now blank, why not publish the direct numbers too?


Dale Miller - University of Arkansas at Little Rock
(but not an official voice)  [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Robert S. Helfman)
Subject: Re: 911 Run-Around
Organization: The Aerospace Corporation, El Segundo, CA
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 1992 17:16:22 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Dave
Niebuhr) writes:

In TELECOM Digest Volume 12 : Issue 578 I wrote:

>> In TELECOM Digest Volume 12 : Issue 571 Carl Moore (VLD/VMB)
>> <[e-mail]> writes:

>>> Some phone books do list non-emergency numbers, and I take them to be
>>> for matters which should get police attention but are not as urgent.

>> The problem with my PD (Suffolk County, NY) is that if I wanted to
>> make a non-emergency call but yet talk to a policeman/woman, I would
>> be told to call 911 in about 90% of the instances.

In the city of Los Angeles, there are non-emergency numbers for the
LAPD dispatchers which do not pass through 911. I use them to call
regarding loud parties, gangbanger conventions, etc. They usually
result in a wait -- often zero-time, but more typically a minute or
two, occasionally 20 minutes. They DO dispatch for this stuff, believe
it or not.

One night I was awakened at 2 AM to the sound of rap. I went to the
window to see where it was coming from, and it was from the rear of a
medical building about 800 feet from my house and maybe 15 stories
down the hill. With binoculars, I looked to see what was going on and
saw that a couple of guys had a mom-and-pop-type business cleaning and
checking the oil on airport shuttle buses. They would do this stuff
all night and have the vans ready for their first runs in the morning.
(The site is on Stocker St., a standard shuttle route from downtown
L.A. to the airport).

The guys had one van door open with the stereo blasting, and because
of the late hour and the altitude of my house, I could hear it
perfectly, in violation of the LA Noise Abatement Laws, which specify
that no amplified music system may be heard more than 150 off the
property, whether public or private.

I called the LAPD non-emergency number, they dispatched in about 10
minutes (I saw the car arrive and read those guys big-time), and I
never heard those guys again, despite their continuing to use the site
for that business for another year afterward.

If you called 911 for something like this in L.A., you'd be laughed
into humiliation. 911 is for the real stuff -- life and/or property in
immediate danger. (Incidentally, during the riots, it typically took
5-10 minutes to get DIAL TONE, and another 20 to get to 911. It made
me realize that when the Big One arrives, we are going to be in deep
doodoo.)

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

Subject: 911 Nightmare
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 92 15:32:10 -0500
From: [e-mail]


According to a report on Tulsa's KTUL television, gridlock in the
telephone system may have contributed to the death of a lady on
Saturday, July 18.  On that morning, tickets to a Garth Brooks concert
went on sale and there was much congestion as people tried to place
orders.  A Dr. Hardy, of Tulsa, observed his wife was having a heart
attack and, after starting CPR, tried to call 911 to summon an
ambulance.  What he heard was a busy signal.  Dr. Hardy said that he
repeated dialing 911 seven or eight times before finally getting
through.

     He said that he really didn't know how much difference the delay
caused in the outcome of the event, but valuable time was lost.

     A spokesman for Southwestern Bell explained the dilemma of the
economics of providing enough capacity to handle large loads as
opposed to normal activity.

     It seems to me that a sensible remedy to this and similar
problems around the country would be to program the system to start
dropping calls, if necessary to free up access to 911.  Would this
make people mad?  You bet it would, but it is still better than trying
to dial the standard emergency number, only to get a busy signal.  The
algorithm, here is simple.  John Q. Public just dialed 911.  Are all
circuits busy? Knock off the first one that isn't from or to an
emergency service.


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


[Moderator's Note: The problem is *NOT* in deciding how to handle a
911 emergency call *once you have identified the call and know it is
to go to the police.*  The problem comes up in first identifying the
call. Let's say ten phones on my desk are ringing at one time. One is
my brother telling me the building is on fire and to flee for my life
with the cats, etc. Another phone call is from a friend inviting me
over for pizza and beer. When I get the 'house on fire' call, I know
what to do with no further delay. The question is how do I know which
ringing line to answer *first*? Should I hire ten people to stay there
and answer calls in the event ten come at one time just so I'll be
immediatly notified that the house is on fire?

Phone systems are the same way. How many calls should be dealt with at
the same instant in order to prevent the possibility that an emergency
call will receive delayed handling?  What happens if I have the
ability to deal with that many then I get that many plus one more?
Typically the ability to deal with 10-12 percent of the subscribers at
any one time is more than adequate -- and that is during the busy
times of the day. Maybe five percent of the subscribers (big maybe)
want to use the service at the same time during off hours. How much
should telco spend (and you the subscriber pay) to have the essence of
a 'non-blocking' switch, if there is such a thing?

The modern CO does not know the difference between one off-hook and
another *until it finds time to go and get the caller's request.* At
least one advantage of the old manual phone system was that a steadily
flashing lamp on the switchboard meant a routine call; a rapid off/on
flashing (because the subscriber was tapping the hook rapidly) would
usually catch the eye of an operator who would then go to that one
next *presuming it to be an emergecy*, and giving hell to the
subscriber for flashing like that if it was not. (A rapid blink-blink-
blink of a light on the board was universally accepted to mean 'oper-
ator, talk to me now this is urgent.').  PAT]

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

Subject: Solve Three Problems (was Telecom Fraud)
From: [e-mail] (Koos van den Hout)
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 92 15:20:40 MET
Organization: Koos z'n Doos (BBS)


[e-mail] (David Gast) writes:

>    reduce fraud
>    keep AOSes from overcharging
>    provide a convenient means for calling without leaving a paper trail
> is to go to a stored value card as used by telco in most other places
> around the world.

Here in Holland (and in a number of European countries around here)
this system is used.

> Of course, someone can manufacture counterfeit cards,

That is VERY difficult. The 'value' is 'stored' in a bar of a material
with a certain refractive index for infrared light. 'Nickels' are
removed from the card by simply burning the appropiate pieces of the
bar.

In the bar is also a countrycode so you can't take the card to another
country.

I like this system. A high number of telephone boots here in Holland
accept them (esp. on stations), they are easy to purchase (at
'telephone shops', stations and so) and they fit easily into a wallet
(creditcard size).

And you're anonymous when calling. But in Holland you're always
anonymous since the (one) phonecompany we have is some years behind
(already one (1!)  added service : *21) so Caller-Id is just discussed
a little and far from operational.


Koos van den Hout ([e-mail])
BBS Koos z'n Doos : [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Mark Phaedrus)
Subject: Re: Solve Three Problems (was Telecom Fraud)
Organization: University of Washington Computer Science
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 92 19:33:52 GMT


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

[he proposes a stored-value card as a solution to fraud ...]

     There's one major problem I can see with this solution.  Most
telephones in this country are still not capable of magnetically
"reading" even the current calling cards.  So unless you plan on
replacing most of the telephones in the nation, or making the
stored-value cards unusable on any phone without a card reader, the
protection against fraud largely goes out the window; there's still
going to have to be a number on the card for people to punch into
older phones, and "shoulder-surfing" will still work just like it does
now.  In fact, I would wager that your protection from fraud would
actually *decrease* under these circumstances.  Under the currnt
system, if someone steals your card number and rings up fraudulent
calls, you can generally get the charges reversed; with fraud on a
stored-value card, the providers would probably adopt the same policy
that many providers of debit cards do now ("if your card or number
gets stolen and all the money in your card gets drained, well, sorry
about that").

     Also, unless you want to further modify every phone in the
country so that they're capable of *writing* to the cards too, the
privacy advantage is going to be eliminated as well; since the phones
won't be capable of recording usage onto the cards, the cards' value
will have to be stored in some centralized database somewhere; and
since that database is going to have to be provided with at least some
information about where you're calling from and to in order to
calculate the billing info, it will be capable of keeping records just
as detailed as those kept now (where you're calling from and to, when
you're calling, for how long, etc.).  I suppose the phone company
could be legally required not to record this information for
stored-value-card calls, but that would completely blow away your
protection against fraud.  ("Well, since we have no way of knowing
when or where those calls were made, we have no way of knowing whether
they're fraudulent or not, so we'll just have to let the charges
stand.")

     One other personal problem I have with stored-value cards: they
require payment in advance, which may be okay for those who use the
cards regularly, but is a pain for those like me who only carry a card
in case of emergency or running out of change.  Why should I give my
long-distance carrier an extra $5 or $10 of my money to take care of,
on the off-chance I need to make a calling card call someday?

> Also, since it is a stored value card, other carriers would
> have no incentive to honor the card (they won't get paid), so they
> could try to vandalize the card or more likely just reject it. Thus,
> protection from AOS overcharging.

     This is about the most Pyrrhic form of "protection from AOS
overcharging" I've seen in a while.  Are you saying that you'd rather
have a phone try to erase your $50 worth of stored value than to
overcharge you for the call?  As long as we're updating every phone in
America to deal with these cards, why not just encode the carrier
choice into the card?  You would pick up the phone, insert your card,
and then dial the number; the phone would read the carrier code from
the card and automatically select the proper carrier, without any of
this 10XXX nonsense.

> Of course, certain federal agencies won't like [privacy], so
> Congress will have to pass a law requiring that

>  (1) each phone record its number and time of use on the card; and
>  (2) that each buyer send in his/her used cards with proper identification.
>      Failure to do so would result in a $10,000 fine per card.

     If you're going to joke, try to at least joke plausibly. :) "Oh,
someone stole your wallet and your $100 stored-value card?  Gee,
that's a shame.  Well you're out that $100, and since you won't be
properly returning that card, you're out another $10,000 too."
Besides, unless you really do intend on replacing every phone in the
nation, I don't think the government will have any problem getting
that information, since as I described above, the "stored value" will
probably wind up implemented in a central database rather than on the
card itself.


Mark Phaedrus, Computer Science Major, Univ. of  Washington, Seattle, WA
Work: [e-mail]   Play: [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Jon Baker)
Subject: Re: GTE and CLASS/ISDN
Organization: AG Communication Systems, Phoenix, Arizona
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 1992 19:38:12 GMT


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

>> Regarding SS7 links, he said GTE was working on them between their own
>> switches.  Links to PacBell would come, but he didn't know when.

> When I have mentioned GTE's lack of SS7, I have been roundly taken to
> task and told that the company does indeed have such links in place.
> Thank you for confirming that this is the baloney that I suspected it
> was.

Apparent evidence that, as I suspected, Mr. Higdon was never really
listening when he was roundly taken to task.

The GTD5 has offered SS7 and CLASS services for about 4 years now.
All of the GTD5's in GTE West are, most definitely, without a doubt,
100% certain, capable of providing SS7 and CLASS features.

When, and if, these services are deployed in your area is dependent on
the local telephone company (in this case, GTE West).

Mr. Higdon has never been taken to task over the issue of whether or
not GTE West has actually deployed SS7 or CLASS, or the extent of that
deployment.  He has been taken to task over his unfounded claims that
the GTD5 is not capable of supporting SS7/CLASS.  Neither I nor any
other person has ever claimed that GTE West has 100% SS7 trunking.
The statement 'GTE was working on them between their own switches' is
entirely accurate.  Their deployment is somewhere between 0% and 100%,
and it is increasing.

At no time has Mr. Higdon been fed any baloney, or any other meat
by-product, by me or any other member of this staff.


J.Baker    enuucp!gtephx!bakerj
I am not an official representative of AG Communication Systems.

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

Date: Sat, 25 Jul 92 20:18:58 -0700
From: Jeff Sicherman <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: GTE and CLASS/ISDN
Organization: Cal State Long Beach


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

> MPA15AB![e-mail] writes:

>> The rep said CLID hadn't yet been approved by the PUC!  When I pointed
>> out that the PUC had approved it weeks ago, and mentioned the
>> front-page articles in the {L.A. Times} and other papers, she said
>> they were flat wrong.

> This is typical GTE. I have found that one cannot expect to get
> anything resembling a straight answer on any matter (from your current
> bill on up to "proposed services") on the first call to the business
> office. All light and knowledge from GTE (if you can call it that)
> must come from Thousand Oaks. It is amusing to note that if you do
> happen to call GTE about a billing question, you are told that someone
> will call you back "within five working days". The people in the
> front-line business office are ALWAYS wrong and with an attitude.

  Trust me, I'm currently living and working in Thousand Oaks (and
calling my account via a state-wide network via a local port) and
there is no knowledge and very little light around here. What there
is, definitely is not coming from the GTE HQ which I pass every day -
twice.


Jeff Sicherman

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

Date: Sat, 25 Jul 92 19:57:50 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Herman R Silbiger)
Subject: Re: How to Use U.S. Modem in England?
Organization: AT&T


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

> How can I use a modem that's set up for U.S. modular jacks with phones
> in Britain (London in particular)?  Are the line levels compatible?
> If so, what wires go where?  In other words, how do you make a
> jack-to-jack adapter?  Are the dialing tones the same, or do I need to
> pulse dial?

The DTMF tones are the same the world over.  Unfortunately, the RJ-11
wiring patterns are not.

On a 4-lead RJ-11, in the US pins 2 and 3 are used for tip and ring.
In the UK pins 1 and 4 are used.  You will therefore have to make up a
line cord with leads 2 and 3 at the modem end going to pins 1 and 4 at
the wall jack end.


Herman Silbiger

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

Date: Sat, 25 Jul 92 00:10:32 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Herman R Silbiger)
Subject: Re: St.Pierre and Miquelon
Organization: AT&T


>> From Guadelope, numbers in St.Barthelems and St. Martin (both French
>> and Dutch parts) of the form 3##### can be dialed direct.

> The Information that I have says that Guadeloupe, St. Barthelemy, and
> St. Martin have the same country code +590.  To call St. Maarten
> (Dutch part, country code +599-5) from +590 land you simply dial 3.

St. Maarten has the country code 5995.  St. Martin has the country
code 596.


Herman Silbiger

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #584
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa14807;
          25 Jul 92 22:18 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA30626
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 25 Jul 1992 20:30:08 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA18389
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 25 Jul 1992 20:29:58 -0500
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 1992 20:29:58 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #585

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 25 Jul 92 20:29:53 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 585

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Ameritech Testing Digital Cellular Phones (Andrew C. Greene)
    AT&T Doesn't Like MCI's Ads (Washington Times via Paul Robinson)
    CPSR Recommends NREN Privacy Principles (Dave Banisar)
    New Subscriber Solicitations - MCI (Tony Safina)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1992 12:18:15 CDT
From: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Ameritech Testing Digital Cellular Phones


(Disclaimer: Please note that I am not a telecom professional, so bear
with me if I inadvertently get my terminology mangled in the following.
Details were gleaned from a phone conversation with Mr. Tay Kim of
Ameritech, who added that extra volunteers were welcome -- see
restrictions below. I have no connection to Ameritech.)

I've been offered a chance to participate in a long-term test of
Ameritech's Personal Communication Services, which is essentially a
cellular-phone type of network, but uses digital-transmission radio
frequencies between the user's portable phone and local transceivers.
I'm taking the liberty of calling it a "cellular" phone network to
save explanations, though they themselves do not use the term.

Ameritech, one of the Chicago area cellular providers, is conducting
an 18-month test of various prototype telephones with several hundred
people in the area of downtown Chicago, the Lincoln Park area of the
city on the north side, and the suburb of Arlington Heights, to the
northwest beyond O'Hare Airport.

The Personal Communication Service, or PCS, consists of a very small
handset resembling a typical cellular phone, though without the large
battery pack, cord, etc. A short antenna of about 5" is used, with the
flip-type handset having a pivoting cover holding the microphone,
closing over the keypad. The phone transmits a digital signal with
10mW of power to a radio transceiver located on some nearby (two or
three city blocks or approx. 1/4 mile) building or other high point,
where it connects to the normal telephone system. The phones generate
true DTMF for operating voice mail systems, etc., at the called
number. The test areas have been populated with small transceivers
consisting mainly of a box with a 12" antenna connected to AC power
and a phone line.

Ameritech is now rolling out various prototype telephones to test this
system over the next 18 months in the area I described. They're
recruiting people for the test in various ways (I assume); I was
approached at the Arlington Heights train station on my way to work.
You're asked to fill out a short questionnaire on your daily
activities and phone usage, and mail it in. The results are tabulated
in a database, and people fitting the profile (mainly by living and
working in the test service area) will be given the phones to use.
The first month of local calls will be completely free; following
months will be charged approximately 25 cents per call or less (one
portion of the test is apparently on varying fee scales!). Long
distance calls will be handled by Sprint at their normal billing
rates; alternative LD carriers may not be selected.

LIMITATIONS: I was told that these phones are intended primarily for
people on foot, or otherwise NOT traveling rapidly from one area to
another. Using the PCS in a car or steel-framed building may or may
not work; however, if it does work in your car, you're advised to pull
over and stop, since the handoffs cannot keep up with car speeds.
Walking-speed handoffs are intended, and you will receive an
out-of-range warning before you lose a call by blundering out of the
test area. Due to present technical limitations, the phones cannot
take incoming calls.

The prototype phones will be configured in different ways, most
notably that some will permit hand-off from one transceiver to the
next, but others will not. I was told that this is an effort to
determine whether the hand-off capability is really necessary as a
standard feature, since these phones are intended primarily for foot
traffic.

The only charges billed to the user will be for calls made after the
first month (and any long-distance calls made IN the first month).
Ameritech gets the phones back at the end of the test period, and will
issue refunds for lost calls or poor quality connections if you have
difficulty.

IF YOU WANT TO JOIN IN THE TEST: You must live in Arlington Heights,
the Lincoln Park area of Chicago, or downtown Chicago, and you MUST
NOT be a member of a telecommunications company (unless it's
Ameritech, I'll bet :-). Call Mr. Tay Kim or one of his associates at
[phone] for details. He told me that they are a small group in
charge of running the whole test; in fact I discovered that he was the
one who'd handed me the brochure at the train station, after which
he'd rushed back to his office to field calls at the 800 number, plus
he appeared in the glossy brochure handout posing as a commuter at the
train station. A small group indeed!

All told, this sounds pretty interesting, despite the current
limitations. Biggest danger I can think of is adding to the number of
bozos who babble into portable phones at the top of their voice in
crowded areas when others are trying to concentrate, causing others to
search around for large heavy objects to throw, but I think I can
behave myself. If there's sufficient interest (and they deign to issue
me a PCS phone), I can post a progress report as things develop.

Disclaimer #2: Speaking only for myself, not Datalogics or Ameritech.


Andrew C. Green
Datalogics, Inc.      Internet: [e-mail]
441 W. Huron          UUCP: ..!uunet!dlogics!acg
Chicago, IL  60610    FAX: [phone]


[Moderator's Note: Please do let us have a follow up on this.  PAT]

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

Date: Fri, 24 Jul 92 17:20 GMT
From: "Tansin A. Darcos & Company" <[e-mail]>
Subject: AT&T Doesn't Like MCI's Ads


New Ads Heat up AT&T-MCI Rivalry
By Kent Gibbons
The Washington (DC) Times (July 21, 1992-Pg C1)

   AT&T and MCI's war of words is getting personal.

   The newest TV commercials for AT&T's long distance rates attack the
ethics behind MCI's recent spots promoting a new international calling
plan.

   American Telephone & Telegraph Co. says MCI used unfair comparisons
to claim savings of 45 percent or more off AT&T's rates.  MCI
Communications Corp matched its "Around the World" discount rates
against AT&T's basic rates, rather than its cheaper "Reach Out World"
discount plan for international calls.

   "Blatantly deceptive," said AT&T spokesman Jim McGann on behalf of
the nation's biggest long-distance company.

   "Fair," countered Debra Shriver of Washington-based MCI, the No. 2
carrier.

   Most AT&T customers make their international calls on the company's
basic plan, not "Reach Out World," Ms. Shriver insisted.  Besides, she
said, most of AT&T's advertised discounts compare with AT&T's basic
rates.

   "If they've been comparing their own rates to [basic] dial-1 rates,
why can't we do it?" she said.

   "How can that be fair?" Mr. McGann said of the MCI ads.  "You've
got to compare comparable plan to comparable plan.  If someone makes a
lot of international calls, it would make sense for them to sign up
for 'Reach Out World'.

   For example, an MCI spot claims a call to France on its new plan
would save 57 percent against AT&T's basic rate.  Part of that savings
comes from designating one foreign number as part of MCI's "Friends &
Family" plan.

   For any other numbers in France, AT&T says, the savings against its
international discount plan would be 1.6 percent.

   Stoking the fires, Mr. McGann called reporters yesterday about his
company's ads, which first aired over the weekend.  AT&T also provided
videotapes and transcripts.

   AT&T and MCI have never hidden their mutual dislike.  MCI helped
hasten the breakup of the telephone monopoly with antitrust lawsuits
in the 1970s.  And in 1989 the two companies sued each other with
claims of unfair advertising.  They settled out of court.

   MCI has always compared its rates with AT&T's, even erecting
electronic toteboards to show the supposed savings MCI's customers
have enjoyed over AT&T users.  The latter's commercials have jabbed at
MCI's popular "Friends & Family" plan, in which MCI callers get extra
savings if they sign up other customers.  Sprint, No. 3 in the
long-distance market, has taken on both rivals.

   But the new AT&T ads aim squarely at MCI's credibility.

   "Do you judge a company's ethics by their advertising?" an
off-camera voice asks a man in an antique restoration shop in one
spot.  Answering more questions, the man says the MCI ads promise 50
percent savings through "Friends Around the World" but says he did not
realize the savings wer off AT&T's basic rate.

   Why doesn't the MCI advertising compare discount plans?  "I think
the answer is obvious," the man replies.

   In another commercial, a woman says the advertising would change her
opinion about the advertiser.

   Ms. Shriver said MCI stands by its ads and has no plans to change
them or lob an attack back at AT&T.

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

Paul Robinson      [e-mail] or [e-mail]

By the way, I have two phone lines at home, one is on MCI and the
other is on AT&T.  The only thing I notice is that the bill is too
expensive ...

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

Organization: CPSR, Washington Office
From: Dave Banisar <[e-mail]>
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1992 17:26:09 EDT
Subject:  CPSR Recommends NREN Privacy Principles



PRESS RELEASE
July 24, 1992

CPSR Recommends NREN Privacy Principles


   WASHINGTON, DC -- Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility
(CPSR), a national public interest organization, has recommended
privacy guidelines for the nation's computer network.

   At a hearing this week before the National Commission on Library
and Information Science, CPSR recommended a privacy policy for the
National Research and Education Network or "NREN."  Marc Rotenberg,
Washington Director of CPSR, said "We hope this proposal will get the
ball rolling.  The failure to develop a good policy for the computer
network could be very costly in the long term."

   The National Commission is currently reviewing comments for a
report to the Office of Science and Technology Policy on the future of
the NREN.

   Mr. Rotenberg said there are several reasons that the Commission
should address the privacy issue.  "First, the move toward
commercialization of the network is certain to exacerbate privacy
concerns.  Second, current law does not do a very good job of
protecting computer messages.  Third, technology won't solve all the
problems."

   The CPSR principles are (1) protect confidentiality, (2) identify
privacy implications in new services, (3) limit collection of personal
data, (4) restrict transfer of personal information,(5) do not charge
for routine privacy protection, (6) incorporate technical safeguards,
(7) develop appropriate security policies, and (8) create an
enforcement mechanism.

   Professor David Flaherty, an expert in telecommunications privacy
law, said "The CPSR principles fit squarely in the middle of similar
efforts in other countries to promote network services.  This looks
like a good approach."

   Evan Hendricks, the chair of the United States Privacy Council and
editor of Privacy Times, said that the United States is "behind the
curve" on privacy and needs to catch up with other countries who are
already developing privacy guidelines.  "The Europeans are racing
forward, and we've been left with dust on our face."

   The CPSR privacy guidelines are similar to a set of principles
developed almost 20 years ago called The Code of Fair Information
practices.  The Code was developed by a government task force that
included policy makers, privacy experts, and computer scientists.  The
Code later became the basis of the United States Privacy Act.

   Dr. Ronni Rosenberg, who has studied the role of computer
scientists in public policy, said that "Computer professionals have an
important role to play in privacy policy. The CPSR privacy guidelines
are another example of how scientists can contribute to public
policy."

   CPSR is a membership organization of 2500 professionals in the
technology field. For more information about the Privacy Policies and
how to join CPSR, contact CPSR, P.O. Box 717, Palo Alto CA 94302.
415/322-3778 (tel) and 415/322-3798 (fax).
Email at [e-mail].

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

From: disk![e-mail] (tony)
Subject: New subscriber solicitations - MCI
Organization: Digital Information Systems of KY
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 1992 00:40:25 GMT


        About six weeks ago a woman from MCI called and said a fellow
by the name of Bob Parsons gave my name as a referral and so MCI
called to solicit my business after they got this "referral."  I never
heard of a Bob Parsons -- if I do know someone by that name I
certainly don't remember them, so I can't see how such a person would
think they know me well enough to give my name as a referral.

    Well, I talked with the woman from MCI and she led me to
believe I would be getting a much better deal with MCI than I'm
getting with AT&T.  She said I didn't have to sign anything, they
would switch my service as soon as I got off the phone.  Oh, one thing
that did annoy me -- they asked whose name my service was in -- it's
in my wife's name.  The woman said they would have to put my new MCI
service in her name too.

    Right off ... two strikes against them: they probably pulled
the name "Bob Parsons" out of a hat.  Second, the talked to me on the
phone 20 minutes and then they want to put the service in my wife's
name.  It didn't matter to them that I'm the one who brings home the
paycheck.

    Well, the clincher, the last straw ... about two weeks after I
told the woman from MCI that I would switch even if the service
wouldn't be in my name, a package from MCI arrived in the mail.
Enclosed was a "MCI Long Distance Certificate."  It said, "Pay to the
order of MCI or the Telephone Company $5.00 and 00 cents."  It said,
"Sign and enclose this Long Distance Savings Certificate with your
long distance bill."

    As you might guess, this was the heart of the scam.  The woman
from MCI said I wouldn't have to sign anything to effect the
changeover from AT&T to MCI.  Well, if my wife had opened the mail
that day I would probably be an MCI customer now.  Fortunately she
asked me to open the mail and when I looked on the back side of that
"MCI Long Distance Savings Certificate" I read this paragraph which
looked and read much like a contract.  It said:

         "This is to confirm that I want MCI to provide
    my long distance service and I authorize MCI to not-
    ify my local telephone company of this choice for
    the telephone number(s) listed on this form.  I under-
    stand that I may choose only one long distance company
    for each telephone number.  I also understand that the
    local phone company may charge a fee for this and any
    later change.

    Well, I called MCI today and told them I decided not to make
the change.  They actually asked if I was "signed-up."  They asked
this after telling me I wouldn't have to sign anything.  I said, "No,
I didn't sign anything -- I had the "MCI Long Distance Certificate" in
my hand as I spoke.  She said something to the effect that if that was
true, then I wasn't signed up.  She also said something to the effect
that if I "disregarded the form" I would never be "signed-up."

    I think my point is that if this company taught their phone
solicitors to be HONEST, if they told them to tell would-be new
subscribers that, yes, they will need to sign a changeover form to
effect the change, I (I mean, my wife) would presently be a new MCI
customer today.

    I just want to relay one other observation which may help the
folks at MCI make a better impression on their customers.  When I
called today and got their electronic operator, it said to press #1 if
I was an MCI customer, to press #2 if I wanted to establish a new
account with MCI, and to stay on the line if I was calling from a
rotary phone.  Well, choices one and two didn't apply so I stayed on
the line.  I stayed on the line about four minutes and no one answered.
I hung up and called back.  I pressed choice #2, for would-be new
subscribers.  Someone answered on the first ring.  My point is that it
appears to me that if they think you may be calling to establish a new
account they want to talk to you right away.  If they aren't sure if
you want to start a new account, or if you are poor (poor people are
probably the only ones who still have rotary phones), they take their
sweet ol' time and they appear not to care whether they talk to you or
not.

    Well, if the "solicitation" had been handled differently, if
they said something like, "Mr. Safina, we are calling long distance
users in your area today to let them know what MCI has to offer. Blah,
blah, blah, blah, blah.  Yes, we would be happy to put the new long
distance service in your name.  Yes, you will have to sign a form
authorizing us to make switch you from AT&T to MCI," ... then I would
have made the switch and would be an MCI customer today.  I may be a
little weird, but I think credibility is an im- portant issue.  I
think the facts should be laid out in black & white and every question
should be answered with 100% honesty.

        I might add that I did call the Kentucky Consumer Protection
agency today to register a complaint, but writing this message has
given me enough of an opportunity to express my discouragement, so I
will probably use the complaint forms they are send- ing me to protest
the incessant "computer solicitations" we get here on a daily basis.
On that note ... today I had the phone company put a block on our
account so no one will be able to call any 900 or 976 numbers from our
house.  Some of the prizes some of these companies offer sound so
HONEST that some family member may be tempted to inquire one day
without asking for my approval.  Well, thankfully big business still
empowers the "little people" to some small extent.  I was able to make
that choice, to block calls to any 900/976 numbers.

    Well, I guess I left this long post just to see if anyone else
has been "solicited" in the same manner as I was and whether or not
they thought there was anything obectionable about how the
solicitation took place.


Tony Safina -=- disk![e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #585
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa00620;
          26 Jul 92 15:33 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA02709
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 26 Jul 1992 13:38:24 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA11947
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 26 Jul 1992 13:38:15 -0500
Date: Sun, 26 Jul 1992 13:38:15 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #586

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 26 Jul 92 13:38:17 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 586

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Telkom's Problems With 087 Service (RSA) (Mark J. Elkins)
    Digital Video-on-Demand in Dallas? (Bruce Klopfenstein)
    Phone Call Limiting Device (Allan Griefer)
    Unitel Presses on With Some Alternative Long Distance (David Leibold)
    Two Experiences With BellSouth (Patton M. Turner)
    Product Review: Kittyhawk Personal Storage Module (Leroy Donnelly)
    Country Code 37 Now Discontinued (Use 49) (Thomas Diessel)
    Should I Keep My Cellphone Off When Not Using it? (Stephen Friedl)
    NN0 Prefixes (was Telephone Keypad Question) (Carl Moore)
    What is DSO? (Dave Niebuhr)
    AT&T System 75: Need Terminal Emulator (David Neal)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Mark J Elkins)
Subject: Telkom's Problems With 087 Service (RSA)
Date: 26 Jul 92 00:17:44 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Mark J Elkins)
Organization: Mark's Machine (Working for Olivetti Africa)


This appeared in {The Pretoria News} Thursday July 23, 1992:

The '087' service is like the 900 service in the USA -- mainly sleezy
numbers for lonely people ...

One of beleagured Telkom's main problems appears to be a lack of the
high technology needed to support the controversial 087 service,.
Consumers, faced with ever increasing phone bills, continue to demand
detailed billing in order to establish exact charges on their bills.
The discontinuation of a subscriber's telephone service due to
non-payment of the 087 charges is also a bone of contention.

There is legislation in the US preventing telephone companies from
disconnecting a customer's basic telephone service for failure to pay
087 service charges.  However, South African consumers are not so
lucky.  Telkom, at this stage, lacks the ability to separate 087 calls
and other telephone charges.

This means if a consumer disputes charges on a telephone bill, he does
not have the option of paying only for normal telephone calls without
losing his telephone line.

Neither do comsumers have the right to dispute charges for 087 calls
and to have these charges removed from the telephone bill.  Telkom
also pays 087 service providers before collecting from the consumers,
so Telkom carries all bad debt arising if consumers fail to pay high
telehone bills.

Testimony in a Senate Committee hearing in the US last year again
indicated there was almost universal support for the requirement that
consumers have the right to block 087 services (in the USA = 900).
This service is provided free of charge at least once on request.
South Africans will soon be able to block 087 calls on their service
 -- but at a price.  It will cost people on an electro-mechanical
exchange R20 (about $8) to block the service.  A Telkom spokesman said
the older electro-mechanical exchanges were not capable of recording
details of calls made.  Furthermore, the computer network needed for
detailed billing was not available.

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

From: [e-mail] (Bruce Klopfenstein)
Subject: Digital Video-on-Demand in Dallas?
Organization: Bowling Green State University B.G., Oh.
Date: Sun, 26 Jul 1992 10:54:38 GMT


According to the 13 July 1992 issue of {Television Digest}, USA Video
wants to test a video-on-demand service this fall "using one of
Southwestern Bell's two fiber testbed communities outside Dallas."
The technology was tested in SW Bell's lab in St. Louis in June.  A
compressed movie can be delivered to the home in 3 1/2 minutes using
the "equivalent of less than ten standard video channels for rapid
delivery."

USA Video has a research operation in Dallas.  I'd like to learn more
about this venture including what SW Bell's "fiber testbed
communities" are.  In addition, I'd like to create a current list of
such projects nationally and will be glad to share the results with
comp.dcom.telecom readers.

Please feel free to send email directly to me.  The Dallas project is
of special personal interest as I may be able to take a sabbatical
there in 1993.

Thanks very much.


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]

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

Subject: Phone Call Limiting Device
Organization: IBM Almaden Research Center
Date: Sun, 26 Jul 92 13:32:46 -0800
From: Allan Griefer <[e-mail]>


Does anyone know of a device to limit phone calls to a certain time
limit?  I'd like to find something that would limit all inbound and
outbound calls to 15 minutes.

(Obviously, I have multiple teenagers in the house.;-) )


Opinions are strictly my own,
Allan D. Griefer,       IBM Almaden Research Center, San Jose, CA
VNET/BITNET: GRIEFER at ALMADEN                Fax: [phone]
Internet: [e-mail]               mcimail: 398-8024

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

Date: Sun, 26 Jul 92 09:36:40 EDT
From: David Leibold <[e-mail]>
Subject: Unitel Presses on With Some Alternative Long Distance


While Unitel is shut out of the main long distance market in Canada
pending the current appeal, and while Unitel has held off on $2.5
billion (CAD) of investment and 4700 new jobs, there are plans to
launch something of an alternate long distance service for consumers
in the fall. The appeal did not block off all avenues of competition
and access, so it appears that the service to be provided in the fall
will be something of an FG-A type service (ie. dial a local or 800
access number, get Unitel tone, dial the Unitel account number then
the destination phone number) and Unitel promises a 15% discount over
Bell Canada/Stentor service. The service is expected to be provided in
all provinces for which long distance competition was permitted
(according to CRTC Telecom Decision 92-12, the landmark decision made
last month).

Meanwhile, 13th October 1992 is a tentative date when the appeal court
(Federal Court of Appeal) will hear the arguments of Bell Canada, BC
Tel, and other telcos against the details of the competitive access.
Unitel warned that it may not remain in the public long distance
market if the appeal results in unfavourable conditions for Unitel,
though a further appeal through the Supreme Court of Canada is
possible (the loser of this fall's appeal could take the next step in
the appeal process).

Sources: {Globe and Mail}, {The Toronto Star}


[e-mail]

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

Date: Sun, 26 Jul 92 02:01:14 CDT
From: Patton M. Turner <[e-mail]>
Subject: Two Experiences With BellSouth


A friend of mine recentaly bought a house in Atlanta (Tucker GA
actually).  She only had three phone jacks in the house and they were
wired with a hodge-podge of wiring, and connected to the old (123?)
style demarc which was hanging loose from the side of the house.  I
decided to scrap the old wiring and replace it with twisted pair.  I
called the repair service and asked then to replace the demarc.  The
rep asked me if the phone were working, I said yes, but could they
change the demark anyway.  She said sure and that it would be cleared
by Thursday night (less than 48 hours later).

Thursday PM a very competant craftsperson showed up.  Not only did he
replace the demarc but even installed RFI filters at my request.  He
even installed a RFI filter on the second line when I told him it
would be connected soon.  (I will be using one of the rooms as an
office when I am in Atlanta).  He also gave me the loops specs when I
asked him. Though he had not heard of ISDN when I told him
unfortunataly the loop was to long (23.6 kfeet), he volunteered that
there was a SLC that we could be served off of if that would work.  I
was impressed for a residental installer.

     I then put her jacks wherever she wanted them and wired the back
to a 66 punchdown block (AT&T four pair cable and PDS jacks).  From here
I ran a single line back to the network interface and punched jumpers
down as necessary (tring to keep the antenna system to a minimum as a
AM station was faintaly audiable in the background before).  The ends
of the old wire were disconnected from the network interface coiled
up, tywraped, and left laying in the crawlspace (the old wire wasn't
stapled, but just laying on the ground)

     This worked fine for over a month until her phones went dead.  SB
sent a repairperson out who said my wiring was shorted and a piece of
crap anyway.  He also said he would have to disconnect it as I had
used "Twisted Pair" wiring which was also crap and they were told to
disconnect it since it didn't meet spec.  He said I should go back to
school and learn how wiring should be done.  The cause of the problem
was the coil of wire in the crawlspace that wasn't connected to any
thing, plus I had probally shot a few staples through the wire. (Any
one who has ever used a T17/T25 or even a T75 knows that is a virtual
impossability).  He refused to believe her when she told him the
wiring had worked for several weeks, and he assured her that whether
she knew it or not I had worked on the wiring that day.  (I was
several hundred miles away).

     I've stopped by my house, picked up my megger and am heading to
Atlanta in the morning.  If there is a problem with my wiring, I will
apologize to the net, but right now I have a very low opinion of
opinion of SCB.

     GTE is often called Graft, Tape and Extort; Gross Telephones
Everywhere; Great Telephone Experiment; Contel, the sunshine phone
company... as long as the sun shines, the phones work fine; REA sub'd
companies, Ripoff Enhancement Artists.  John calls PacBell PacHell.
Now what could I call Bellsouth ... what matches the initials BS ... :)
In all fairness, as Pat often says, any company is no better than it's
front line personnel, but I will have to give Bellsouth credit for
having quite a few good ones.

     If anyone is looking for a Telebit, I bought one from the Questor
Project.  (As Seen On CDT!!!) While it took a few weeks, I saved quite
a bit (Thanks Steve!!)


Pat Turner    KB4GRZ  [e-mail] <= I think this is correct

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

Date: Sat, 25 Jul 92 19:11:28 CST
From: [e-mail] (Leroy Donnelly)
Subject: Product Review: Kittyhawk Personal Storage Module
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: DRBBS Technical BBS, Omaha


 From the July 27, 1992 issue of {Radio Communications Report}:

PALO ALTO, Calif. -- Hewlett-Packard Co. said it has introduced a disk
drive the size of a small matchbox that can be used in portable
computers, cellular phones and other wireless technologies.

    The HP Kittyhawk Personal Storage Module combines miniaturization
with the cost benefits of conventional disk-drive technology,
according to Hewlett-Packard.  The PSM can be used in a number of
applications, including cellular and other communications products,
palmtop, pen-based and sub-notebook computers, printers, facsimile
machines, medical equipment and digital-imaging devices.

    "Practically any product that uses a microprocessor becomes a
candidate for the Kittyhawk storage module," said Bruce Spenner,
general manager of HP's Disk Memory Division.  The Kittyhawk can store
the equivalent of more than 14,000 typed pages, Hewlett-Packard noted.

    For the cellular industry, the disk drive will be able to store
text messages once cellular phones become more advanced, said Randi
Braunwaler, a marketing communications representative at Hewlett-
Packard.  "We're thinking real futuristic here."

    The disk drive also could be used to receive voice mail in
traveling salespeople's personal computers, Braunwaler added.

    The disk drive -- touted as the world's smallest -- measures 0.4
inches by 2 inches by 1.44 inches, and weighs about one ounce.  It was
designed with HP's calculators in mind.  The unit can withstand an
operating shock ten times that of larger 1.8-inch and 2.5-inch disk
drives, the company said.

    "Today's 2.5-inch and 1.8-inch drives are limited as storage
solutions for new generations of mobile computing devices because they
are too big and too sensitive to shock Spenner said.

    Evaluation units of the Kittyhawk are available for $450,
Braunwaler said.  When mass production begins this fall, the volume
OEM price is expected to be $250.


Ybbat (DRBBS) 8.9 v. 3.14 r.1
DRBBS Technical BBS, Omaha  402-896-3537  (1:285/666.0)

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

From: [e-mail] (Thomas Diessel)
Subject: Country Code 37 Now Discontinued (Use 49)
Date: Sun, 26 Jul 92 9:04:55 MET DST


Effective July 22, 1992 phones in the western and the EASTERN part of
Germany are only be reachable using the country code 49. The full
cutover follows a transition period since April 15, 1992. The country
code 37 for the area of the former DDR (GDR) will not longer be valid.
All areas in the eastern part of Germany already use new area codes
starting with 3 for calls from West to East and for international
calls.  For calls within the eastern part of Germany the new area
codes will be introduced between July, 1992 and the end of 1993. This
will complete the reunification of the German phone network.

By the way, when would the country code 37 be available again (e.g.
for the new countries in Eastern Europe)? Is there a waiting period
before 'reuse' of a country code?


Thomas Diessel
Federal Armed Forces University, Munich  -  Computer Science Department
Werner-Heisenberg-Weg 39  -  W-8014 Neubiberg  Germany

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

Subject: Should I Keep My Cellphone Off When Not Using it?
Date: 26 Jul 92 01:46:46 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Stephen Friedl)


Hi telecom.folks,

     I use a carphone from PacTel Cellular here in southern CA, and it
turns out that I *never* receive calls.  Rather than give out my
cellphone number, I give my customers my pager number (which they need
anyway), and when they page me while on the road I make an outgoing
call.  I have no idea what my phone's ringer sounds like :-)

     Anyway, a friend of mine says that cellphones engage in sporadic
"here I am" conversations with the local cell sites, presumably to
limit how many cells have to light up on an incoming call.  Since I
will never receive a call, am I "wasting" resources in the cellular
system by keeping my phone on when I am not using it?  Would I be
doing them a favor by keeping my phone powered off until I need to
make a call?  Note that my phone is wired into my car, so battery
usage is not an issue like it would be with a handheld.


Thanks much,

Stephen J Friedl | Software Consultant | Tustin, CA |     [phone]
3b2-kind-of-guy  | I speak for me ONLY |   KA8CMY   | uunet!mtndew!friedl

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

Date: Sun, 26 Jul 92 9:48:37 EDT
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject: NN0 Prefixes (was Telephone Keypad Question)


In some areas, NN0 prefixes might not be used until the area gets
rather full.  This is beyond the scope of what history.of.area.splits
covers (it is limited to the implementation of N0X/N1X and to splits).
For example, before N0X/N1X came to the DC area (also affecting the
calling instructions throughout 301/703 before the 301/410 split), I
saw several NN0 prefixes in the Maryland and Virginia suburbs.  Until
October 1990, there was seven-digit local calling among DC/MD
suburbs/VA suburbs, so if you needed a new suburban prefix, you had to
consider your own area code (301 or 703) along with a bit chunk of
prefixes in DC and in suburbs beyond the Potomac.

The history.of.area.splits includes the suggestion (NOT originating
with me) that some sparsely-populated area codes could, when area
codes become NXX form, hang on to 1 + 7D intra-NPA long-distance by
disallowing NN0 prefixes, since the first batch of NNX area codes are
to be of form NN0.

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

Date: Sun, 26 Jul 92 12:02:57 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Dave Niebuhr)
Subject: What is DSO?


I know that DMS (tm), the ESS(tm) series and AXE(tm) acronyms are for
types of swithces in the COs, but I've come across the term DSO used
when I've dialed NNX-9901 to determine the location of a particular
exchange or group of them.

Today, NYTel had a notification in {Newsday} that the company was
offering Enterprise DSO which carries both analog and digital signals
over fiber but no explanation was given as to what DSO was/is/does.

Is it the hardware or software parts of the switch or a protocol of
some kind?  I'm stumped and hope someone can answer, preferably direct
to either address below.


Thanks in advance,


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

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

Date: Sun, 26 Jul 1992 10:45:24 EDT
From: David Neal <[e-mail]>
Subject: AT&T System 75: Need Terminal Emullation


I've recently been crowned Telephone Administrator by my employer so
that makes me responsible for a System 75 with about 200 stations and
Audix voice mail.  These things are naturally in a separate building
from the one what contains my office so I need to run a remote
terminal.  The terminals supported are the 513, 4410, and 4425.  I
have the AT&T 513 emulation program but it doesn't like the MCGA
graphics on my Model 30.  It works fine on PCs with any other type of
graphics though.  Can anyone help me find a terminal emulator that
supports one of the three types I need.  Commercial, shareware, or
free -- it's OK with me.


david neal  [e-mail]   Elk and Kanawha Rivers  Appalachia

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #586
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa22896;
          27 Jul 92 2:52 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA05551
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 27 Jul 1992 01:02:07 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA01774
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 27 Jul 1992 01:01:57 -0500
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 01:01:57 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #587

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 27 Jul 92 00:46:02 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 587

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Voice Disguising Telephone? (Kim Fosbe)
    Pac*Bell CLASS Features (Neal Goldsmith)
    Mitel SX-20 Switch (Bryan Lockwood)
    AT&T Strikes Again (Ed Greenberg)
    VarTec Telecom (Douglas Hedges)
    Ham Radio Operators Running Rampant! (Paul W. Schleck)
    About MCI's LINCS ATC System (Washington Times via Paul Robinson)
    Looking For List of Area Codes (Scott Colbath)
    Region CG1 in British Columbia (Carl Moore)
    800 Numbers: Which Provider is Best? (Robert J. Woodhead)
    Strange PBX (Linc Madison)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 22 Jul 92 02:07:18 GMT
From: [e-mail] (Kim Fosbe)
Subject: Voice Disguising Telephone?
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: DRBBS Technical BBS, Omaha


For those who don't know me, I'm a junk-mail junkie. I'm on about
every mailing list you've heard of and then some. I just got one of
those gift catalogs from Hanover House, Hanover, PA and I saw this.
I've never heard of this, but I thought I would ask here since I'm
sure some of you guys have heard of this.

I'll copy right out of the catalog:

VOICE-DISGUISING TELEPHONE!

Enjoy new-found privacy and added security because it lets you screen
who to talk to - answer phone in a different voice at the touch of a
button and say you're not there. Lets children, single women living
alone answer phone in adult voice. Plugs into standard jack; no
batteries or wiring.  FCC registered; comes with instructions.
G516161 - Multi-Voice Phone was $19.99; SALE $16.88

Now for a couple questions. Is this as good as it sounds or is this
just one big gyp? For $16.88 it's almost worth the risk to find out.
Has anybody ever used these? How come these aren't on sale everywhere
if they're so good? Can these really make my voice sound deep and
gruff, and not like me trying to disguise it? Or does it sound like
the TV interviews where they disguise the voice and it sounds like
calling from Mars. Full of questions, aren't I?

I've been getting a bit paranoid about the phone lately since I've
been getting these calls where they hang up a couple seconds after I
say "hello". I'm not too worried, cause it's still listed in my
ex-roomate's name with no address, but still it's spooky when it
happens.

I'm tempted just to order it just to see if it works. I mean at worst
I can use it for a spare phone for the bathroom.


Ybbat (DRBBS) 8.9 v. 3.14 r.1
DRBBS Technical BBS, Omaha (just say 'NOE') 402-896-3537  (1:285/666.0)


[Moderator's Note: Those phones *are* on sale in various catalogs. So
far as I can tell it is strictly a mail order item. The price you
quoted is about the same everywhere else I have seen it. We covered
this here in the Digest a few months ago; it works, but you get what
you pay for.  PAT]

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

From: mtxinu!sybase!pokey![e-mail] (Neal Goldsmith)
Subject: Pac*Bell CLASS Features
Date: 27 Jul 92 23:32:27 GMT


I ordered the three new features (Repeat Dialing, Select Call
Forwarding, and Priority Ringing). The features only work within my
LATA.

I can understand them not working for numbers that are not on SS7
equiped switches, but isn't the CLASS information passed on even
through toll switches? If not will it ever be?

I would like to add numbers in LA to my Priority Ringing list.

Also it seems that repeat dialing works by attempting to retry the
call every 45 seconds. I would think that this should work even
through toll switches.

When I asked about CLID I was told that Pac*Bell didn't have the
technology yet. I didn't have the time or desire to explain to the
person at Pac*Bell that it's the same stuff and they are already ready
to provide it, they just don't want to right now.


Neal E. Goldsmith                                Sybase, Inc.
[e-mail]                                 1650 65th Street
What I sez is my opinion and not my employers.   Emeryville, CA  94608
                                                 [phone]

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

Subject: Mitel SX-20 Switch
From: [e-mail] (Bryan Lockwood)
Date: Sun, 26 Jul 92 23:54:20 PDT
Organization: The Generation Gap


I do the maintenance for a small school located in northern Alaska. I
don't know a lot about telephony, but where I live, we can't bring in
experts, so I learn what I need to to fix problems as they occur. And
hopefully avoid more later.

We have a small MITEL SX-20 switch (PBX? I don't know the proper
terminology) which services our 20 or so extensions. MITEL no longer
sells this equipment or makes replacement parts for it, and it's a
real bear to get ahold of a real human at MITEL- they have a voice
mail system that has to be heard to be beleived. I still see red.

Anyhow, the remote operator display is on the fritz. This is a small
display unit, approximately 8" x 8" x 1.5", with red LEDs to show
number dialed, extension status, etc. It is meant to be located at the
prime extension.

I followed the troubleshooting instructions in the MITEL book, and the
display unit appeared to be dead. So I ordered another one. MITEL said
they would have to wait until someone sold them one or traded one in
on a new system, refurbish it, and send it to me. Eight months and
$200 (not to mention probably another $100 spent on long-distance hold
or bouncing around in that voicemail system) later, I now have the new
display unit and it appears to be as dead as the first one. It does
sport a "refurbished and tested" sticker.

I suspect the motherboard is bad ... possibly the place where the
remote display plugs in. Yet I am loathe to go through the long
process of obtaining yet another part from MITEL.

Does anyone out there have any experience with the MITEL SX-20 switch,
and if so, can you be persuaded to comment on this problem? I really
need that remote display, since it is how I program the system. Some
upcoming changes will force me to need programmability.

Thanks for listening!


Author: Bryan Lockwood ([e-mail])
Coldbox=  Usenet: [e-mail] | WWIVnet: system@501

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

From: [e-mail] (Ed Greenberg)
Subject: AT&T Strikes Again
Date: Sun, 26 Jul 92 7:58:49 PDT


Well, I called AT&T this morning (at 800-222-0300, press 2) to change
from Any Hour Saver to Reach Out America.  I want this for the month
of August, since I'll get discounted calling card calling on my
sabbatical trip.

I spoke to "Eleanor" who wouldn't identify herself further.

Eleanor told me the terms of the plan:

* $10.70/month including 1 hour calling between 10 and 8, and all day
saturday, and till five on sunday.

* 25% discount on rates during the evening hours.

* 10% discount on rates during day hours.

I then asked her about the calling card surcharge.  Surprise, she told
me that the calling card surcharge was 100% absolutely waived for all
calls while you are on ROA.  I questioned this.  I posed examples in
the day and evening periods.  She was insistant.

Finally, not believing a word of it, and knowing I'd never get it in
writing, (:-) I had her go check.  Sure enough, during your 1 hour of
midnight calling, the surcharge is waived.  Other than that, it's just
discounted.

Boy, I wish I had conducted this negotiation by fax and had a written
record of it :-)

If anyone has any good suggestions for avoiding the calling card
surcharge, or LD services that will waive that surcharge, I'd
appreciate hearing from you.


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] (Douglas Hedges)
Subject: VarTec Telecom
Date: 27 Jul 92 05:03:00 GMT
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.


I got a flyer in the mail about VarTec Telecom.  Long distance
carrier, no subscription, just dial their access # before making your
calls.  Supposedly cheaper than the usual suspects.  Any comments or
experiences with this company and the quality and cost of this
service?

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

From: [e-mail] (Paul W Schleck KD3FU)
Subject: Ham Radio Operators Running Rampant!
Organization: University of Nebraska at Omaha
Date: Sun, 26 Jul 1992 23:12:01 GMT


In a response to a post by Cliff Stoll (whose views I support), our
esteemed Moderator (whom I otherwise admire) blithers the following:

> [Moderator's Note: Well Cliff, the Internet community had a lot of
> trust between people for many years until the BBS'er/malicious hacker
> type person found out about it and began abusing the trust. It reminds
> me of how ham radio *used* to be until the CB'ers started moving in.  PAT]
        ^^^ ^^^ ^^^^^ ^^^^^^ ^^ ^^ ^^^^^ ^^^ ^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^ ^^

Well, I guess it had to happen.  Pat's insulted just about every other
loyal sub-culture of Digest readers, now he goes after us (I wonder if
Pat realized the irony in the fact that Cliff is also a ham, K7TA).
Since "P Towson" isn't in the callbook, I wonder where you've gotten
this second or third-hand knowledge of how much the hobby has
"deterioriated" particularly due to the invasion of "CB operators."

While I'm not going to say something stupid like, "you owe the net an
apology," your non-specific attacks are ignorant at best, and
insulting at worst.

Amateur radio may have its problems, among them:

 - gradual aging of the ham population

 - anachronistic Morse Code requirements (only recently remedied)

 - loss of interest among younger techie-types in favor of other
   distractions like computers

we are clearly far from dead yet.  The contributions of people like
Phil Karn, KA9Q (NOS TCP/IP software package), those in the Amateur
Satellite Corporation, and the ham astronauts who flew in recent SAREX
(Shuttle Amateur Radio Experiment) missions, are testimony to this.

In the two metropolitan communities I have lived in (Washington, DC
and Omaha, Nebraska), the amateur radio operators I have met (and the
organizations they are members of) have been enthusiastic proponents
of the hobby, leading by their excellent examples.  Everyone involved
in the hobby that I know of has been extremely friendly, helpful, and
technically competent.  If "CB'ers" have overrun the hobby, then more
power to them, because the subtle peer pressure of the ham community
has molded them into model amateurs. (Maybe they were chased off of CB
due to their distaste for the radio anarchy that can be found in that
service.).

Perhaps Mr. Towson would like to step out from behind his moderated
enclave and more specifically enumerate what he dislikes about our
hobby.


Paul W. Schleck, KD3FU  [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: Your message really amazes me. You must have read
it as well as you read my name in each issue ... Towson, indeed. If I
were to say "I really used to like going to the forest until the
lumber company cut down a lot of the trees and careless campers set
fire to the rest ..." would you ask me what I have against nature and
the beauty of the forest?  I have nothing against ham radio operators.
Nothing at all. They are intelligent people and good citizens. What I
do dislike is the way some parts of the the ham radio spectrum have
been usurped by unlicensed, uncaring people who (judging from their
conversations, tone of voice and phraseology) were CB 'enthusiasts' in
the past. I mean, I do listen to my radios. I hear them here in
Chicago doing foolish and inconsiderate things: going up into 40
meters and sitting there tuning up. They haven't even the courtesy to
use a dummy load. They sit there keyed up, playing music and acting
like jackasses. My complaints are with the people who cut down the
trees and burned the forest.  NOW do you understand?  Geeze, of all
the letters I get ... :(   PAT]

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

Date: Sun, 26 Jul 92 00:58 GMT
From: Tansin A. Darcos & Company <[e-mail]>
Subject: About MCI's LINCS ATC System


MCI's LINCS to Connect Air-Traffic-Control System
By David Field    The Washington (DC) Times   (July 22, 1992-Page C1)

   MCI yesterday unveiled the nuts and bolts or, rather, the fiber
optics and multiplexers, of a communications system for air-traffic
controllers that the company is providing under its largest contract
ever.

   The Federal Aviation Administration project will be worth $1 billion
to MCI Communications Corp.  over the next decade, MCI's president and
chief operating officer, Daniel F. Akerson, said yesterday.

   Some 50 MCI employees in the Tysons Corner [Virginia] area will
work on the project, and the Washington-based company will award
subcontracts to local firms, MCI's vice president for government
systems, Jerry A, Edgerton, told a reporter.

   The project is called LINCS, for Leased Interfacility National
Airspace Communications System.  It is designed to prevent emergencies
such as the September 1991 interruption to air-traffic control caused
by a telephone problem in New York City.

   It will link 156 air-traffic control units -- ranging from major
regional command centers to individual airport towers -- to flight
service stations that give private pilots flight information.

   The LINCS lines will also get air-traffic controllers' voice
commands to airplanes, carrying them over phone lines to remote radio
transmitters, which then send them to planes.

   A phone outage on Sept. 17 -- caused, as it turned out, by a gener-
ator failure -- forced the FAA to cancel 500 flights, stranding 37,000
passengers nationally and capping a long dispute over earlier phone
failures.

   The FAA, the Transportation Department unit that runs air-traffic
control, insisted that any company winning the contract would have to
design a system with 99.999 percent reliability.

   That, Mr. Akerson said, was equivalent to one loss by the
Washington Redskins in 5,000 seasons (counting pre-season games).

   MCI won the FAA contract to design a new system, besting American
Telephone & Telegraph and Sprint Corp.

   In case of a major outage, LINCS will restore service in an average
of 20 seconds, the company said.

   The LINCS system, to be installed in the Washington area by early
1995, will replace the FAA's existing collection of telephone
contracts with a single system with backup or redundancy capacity.

   All the phone lines to be used by the FAA -- 4.5 million circuit
miles -- represent about 3.2 percent of MCI's total capacity.

   MCI won the contract with an initial $558 million, three-year award
in March, but a protest by Sprint, a Kansas-based competitor, delayed
the start of work.

   Mr. Akerson said the system will be in operation in the Seattle
region by early next year, and LINCS will be installed in Southern
California in 1993.

   FAA spokesman Richard Stafford said that LINCS for the Washington
area, which is under control of a Leesburg air-traffic-control center,
would be operational by the first quarter of 1995.


Paul Robinson
[e-mail] or [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Scott Colbath)
Subject: Looking For List of Area Codes
Date: 27 Jul 92 00:13:45 GMT


Where can I get the latest and greatest list of area codes? I thought
I remembered a thread on this a while back where someone was compiling
a new list.


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


[Moderator's Note: There is such a list in the Telecom Archives. Now
and again I update it as time permits; I have a bunch of files waiting
to be put in the archives as soon as I get a couple hours to spare.
The archives is accessible using anonymous ftp:  lcs.mit.edu    PAT]

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

Date: Mon, 27 Jul 92 00:36:43 EDT
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject: Region CG1 in British Columbia


 From a call to British Columbia: "The number you have reached is not
in service.  This is a recording from region CG1."  The number I
called was apparently a Vancouver prefix.

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

From: [e-mail] (Robert J Woodhead)
Subject: 800 Numbers: Which Provider is Best?
Organization: Foretune Co., Ltd.
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 02:30:27 GMT


I am considering having our US office set up an 800 number.  I'd
appreciate any information about the various provider's plans (cost,
monthly charges) etc.

In particular, there are several mnemonic numbers we'd prefer to get;
does anyone have a list of the number spaces each provider has?

If you email, I'll summarize and post to the group.

Thanks in advance.


Robert J. Woodhead, Biar Games / AnimEigo, Incs.    [e-mail] |


[Moderator's Note: We have such a list in the Telecom Archives.  PAT]

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

Date: Mon, 27 Jul 92 00:40:44 GMT
From: [e-mail] (Linc Madison)
Subject: Strange PBX


Well, I've finally graduated (and lo, the heavens parted and down upon
a beam of light descended The Diploma ...) and am now doing gruntwork
on that ever-popular 8-to-5 basis.  (Yes, I'm up past my bedtime.)

The company I'm working for has a PBX with a mix of DID and non-DID
lines.  It's a "Meridian Mail" system, which seems to be Northern
Telecom hardware with a Pac*Bell sticker on it, although that
evaluation comes from a less-than-exhaustive analysis of the box on my
desk.  This company has an office in Switzerland (which wins my prize
for most repetitive phone number -- country code 41, city code 41,
phone numbers 41-XX-XX).  Anyway, up until "recently" (some time
before I arrived, but I've heard this from several different people),
to dial an international call, you had to dial:

 9 + 1 + 011 + country + city + number

The less-than-Digest-level-telecom-literate people I've talked to were
of the impression that Pacific Bell required the "1" before the "011"
until recently.  I assured them that it has never been PERMITTED, but
they insist that this was how it was done, and have tales of
reprogramming fax autodial lists to back up the story.

The only thing I can figure is that it was something analogous to
hotels where you dial "9" for a local call but "8" for long distance
 -- the PBX ate the "91" as indicating "grab a toll trunk," and then
dialed the rest into the PSTN.  Since the "1" has only recently been
required for domestic long distance, it would at least be
semi-coherent.

Seeing the braindead stuff they do with much of the phone/computer
system there, I wouldn't put such silliness past them.  They also have
some "secure" phones with some sort of encryption, I guess, for
calling government people, but I haven't tried dialing 710, and only
used "the black phone" once when I needed to call my answering
machine.  (The regular phones do the "blip" outdialing instead of
matching my finger timing.  Very annoying.)


Linc Madison  ==  [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #587
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa24978;
          27 Jul 92 3:52 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA23217
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 27 Jul 1992 01:49:47 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA13814
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 27 Jul 1992 01:49:37 -0500
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 01:49:37 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #588

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 27 Jul 92 01:49:20 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 588

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Administrivia: Problem With Issue 587 (TELECOM Moderator)
    A Very Strange Experience When Calling LD (Brad Allen)
    Caller-ID, FAX, Soon VoiceMail in a Modem (Steve Pershing)
    Thrills of Long Distance (Cliff Stoll)
    CLASS/ISDN (Mark Rudholm)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: TELECOM Moderator ([e-mail])
Subject: Administrivia: Problem With Issue 587
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 00:50:00 CDT


In error issue 587 got released tagged as 586. I caught it after only
a few minutes so I killed the sendmail and after editing, sent it out
again. A few people may have received two copies of 587, one of which
was numbered 586. The first mailing should be disgarded, but don't
throw away the real 586 in the process. I think the messages in that
issue also got out twice to comp.dcom.telecom with different reference
numbers.  Sorry.


PAT

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

Date: Sun, 26 Jul 92 02:11 GMT
From: Brad Allen <[e-mail]>
Subject: A Very Strange Experience When Calling LD


I was playing with my touchtone phone in the 1 415 621 prefix, dialing
the various 00xy numbers to see what I could find, and got lazy and
found 0020 which goes whooooop real loud.  I found the same tone on
other prefixes in the local area (e.g. 882, the voicemail # I have,)
so I wondered if the pitch was the same as the pitch of the tone one
sometimes hears at the transition of long distance telephone calls.  I
decided to do so in glamor, and dialed the shortest possible pulse
phone # I know, in pulse mode, just for the heck of it: 1 212 221
1111, and then it started to ring.  I hit the click button on the
handset to hang up the phone, but I must have hit it not quite long
enough but long enough to evoke a reaction.  What my ears heard from a
distance as I was about to figure out what to do next was beyond
description as I could not believe it, and brought to my eardrum I
realized that it was quite within description, for now I could believe
it, and I had to check to make sure I haven't been taking any drugs
recently or be dreaming.  Well, I am a pretty drug free person, hadn't
defied that statistic recently, and I sure wasn't dreaming.  What was
I hearing?

About, I'd say, 2^3 to 2^5 conversations going on at once!  (Yes, I
think in binary, so I'm sorry.)  It was wild.  I heard phones ringing
(even some international puvvvvvvv--puvvvvvvv type rings,) people
answering the phone in various languages, mostly american english, and
wonderful voices from all over!  It was definately an invasion of
privacy, but since I could make out nothing but a few Hellos? and How
are you doing!s, plus lots of nonenglish language, it was hardly
invading anyone since I don't know them or don't know that I know
them.  The total amplitude of the connection was ever so slightly less
than normal.  T

The quality of the mix of conversations was fairly good -- some were
slightly louder than others, but not by much; usually conversations
just starting (ring, ring, click Hello?) were louder than ones that
had gone on for a while, but I was remarking on the absense of extra
noises or hiss or blips or anything when of course a modem came on
line (it was only on line for about 15 seconds -- presumably a FAX
answering sequence or a quick credit check.)  I heard some automated
recordings, some business secretaries answering the phone, and I was
quite amazed.  I stayed on to be amazed at this wonderful occurrence,
and then I stayed on to try to determine where the voices were
characteristic of.  I could not tell, other than there was a
predominance of non-western, and more blandish eastern-US type voices.

I know very little about the workings of the telephone system, but
correct me if I'm wrong: I think I hit a bug in a digital D-A
converter which decided to pick up conversations from ALL the channels
attached to its multi-channel digit pipe, presumably not really caring
that the D-A converter was giving me this interesting information
because it thought I wasn't really connected or had a bug which
thought that whatever I was doing was appropriate.  Well, it was fun!

Is this an oft occurrence, or did I hit a once in a life time thing?

Quite amazing! Happened just half an hour ago.

Oh, I'm not sure but I think the guy I'm houssitting for has AT&T as
his main carrier.  Actually, something I dialed recently gave me an
AT&T recording, so that's a pretty good chance; can't always be
certain though (I was playing with international #s just a few days
ago.)


Brad Allen   [e-mail]

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

Subject: Caller-ID, FAX, Soon VoiceMail in a Modem
From: [e-mail] (Steve Pershing)
Date: Sun, 26 Jul 92 14:01:38 PDT
Organization: Questor|Free Usenet News|Vancouver, BC: [phone]


I have in front of me a ZyXEL U-1496S modem.  This is the sort of
state-of-the-art-modem I would have had my group design were I still
working in modem research at Gandalf Data.

It has a two line by 20 character LCD display, menu-tree programming
from the screen via four pushbuttons, and implements a whole bunch of
CCITT protocols up to 14,400 v.32bis/v.42.bis, and v.17 FAX. Needless
to say, it does both sync and async, and even has modes for use with
cellular and satellite.

(Presently, the operation modes are: v.33; v.32bis; v.32; v.29;
v.27ter; v.22bis; v.22; BELL 212A; G3 FAX according to T30, v.17, v.29
and v.27ter; and most variants.)

What does the display do besides allow you to program all the
registers?  Well, you can not only see the incoming connect speed, but
also things like:

        - Signal-to-noise ratio
        - Received Carrier Power Level
        - Phase Jitter (p-p degrees with .1 deg resolution)
        - Frequency offset between TX and RX freqs (in .1 Hz res)
        - Round-trip echo delay in (1/2400 sec)

          ... and a whole lot more.

After your communication session has finished, you can even call up
(by an AT-command) a "Link Status Report" which will give you:

        - Chars sent; Chars rcvd; Octets sent; Octets Rcvd
        - Blocks sent; Blocks rcvd; Blocks re-sent;
        - Max Outstanding; Max Block Size;
        - Retrain requests; Retrains granted; Link duration;
        - T401 timeouts; T402 Timeouts; FCS Errors;
        - Round-trip delay; Xmtr under-run; Rcvr Over-run
        - Reason for disconnect.

With the latest ROM revisions, it handles Caller ID, 4 different
ringing codes, and the maximum speed is 16,800 baud.  (They are
working, I believe on 19,200 baud, as well as VoiceMail.)

Finally, for the technically minded, it can even be supplied with X-
and Y-axis outputs for a scope, so that you can see "eye" or
"constellation" diagrams.

There are three telephone receptacles for telco line connexions: One
for a local phone; one for 2/4-wire leased-line, and one for 2-wire
dial-up line.  (The dial-up line even supports telco 1A-key system A-
leads for lamp status control.)

Lots of features have been left out of this little blurb to try to
keep it as reasonably short as I can.

Upgrades?  Well, they are via a couple of 27C010-15 (1Mb) ROMs, and
the binaries are usually posted on their BBS, or available via FTP or
mail- server from various sources (including here).  So, if you have
access to a ROM-burner, you can do the upgrades yourself.

Just had to let you know about this great little modem, in case you
hadn't already heard.

Anyhow, having said all of that, you can get most info (including
TIFF- image files at 300dpi) from my mail-server.  To save space, the
files have been compressed with ZOO, which is available for most O/S
from DOS to UNIX.  (ZOO version 2.10 for DOS and for UNIX is available
via mail- server from this site.)

To get started, send e-mail to:

        [e-mail]

and in the body of the text, enter the following at the left margin,
with nothing else in the body:

HELP
INFO
INFO INDEX
INFO FILINDX

Warm regards to all.


Steve Pershing, System Administrator, The QUESTOR Project
POST: 1027 Davie St., Box 486, Vancouver, B.C., Canada  V6E 4L2
Fones: (+1 604)  Data: 681-0670  FAX: [phone]  Voice: 682-6659

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

From: [e-mail] (Cliff Stoll)
Subject: Thrills of Long Distance
Date: 27 Jul 1992 02:59:12 GMT
Organization: U. C. Berkeley Open Computing Facility


Pat compared the Usenet to Ham Radio.  Got me thinking.

You know, in every technical medium, things start out pure and sweet
and exciting; as they become cheaper and better and more popular, they
lose their purity; their excitement too.

In 1956, nobody called long distance across the Atlantic.  Anyone
older than 40 remembers their first long distance phone call -- with
an eye on the second hand of the clock, you spoke fast.  That one
phone call was cherished and packed with information.  Not the same
thrill today; not the same information content, either.

And Ham Radio: When you could only communicate over morse code,
messages were terse and more hams knew each other.  Equipment was
homebrew, or at least built from kits.  Along with every other ham,
you knew:

  - Morse code
  - soldering skills
  - basic electronics
  - message protocols
  - basic communications etiquette

And each ham knew this in order to communicate, not just to pass a
test.  Intentional QRM and interference were rare.

Today, you might need to know some of this in order to pass a test,
but most hams get along quite well without.

Result: oldtimers claim that the quality of ham radio has dropped.
You hear of malicious hams interfering with others, anonymous
kachunkers on repeaters, and private repeaters closed to outsiders.

Other technological areas are the same way as well.  Used to be that
you froze when you went observing at a mountaintop telescope.  You
wasted no time on a clear night -- every minute was precious.  You
carefully developed a few glass plates, and delicately analyzed these,
often under a microscope.

Now, your astronomical data comes on a magtape, cdrom, or over a
network.  You might never look through an eyepiece ... especially if
you use the Hubble Space Telescope, or any of the other astronomical
spacecraft.  You have more data, and better data too.  But the thrill
just ain't the same.

Is the same thing is happening on the Usenet/Internet?  When you had
to know the TCP/IP suite and there were a few hundred nodes on the
network, we mostly knew each other.  It was a kicker to just get mail
across the network or to ping another node.  There were fewer flames
and nastygrams.

With today's million node network, it's a rare Usenet group without
flamewars.  You might recognize a few posting people, but how many
have you met?  Malicious intruders break into computers.  Many
postings have zero content.

The thrill of receiving junk e-mail from Australia isn't quite the
same as hearing a warbly CW signal on 20 meters which just might be a
DX station.  A telephone solicitor calling from 1000 kilometers away
is just an annoyance -- yet thirty years ago, you'd be happy with a
noisy connection from two counties away.

Something's happening here.  I'm not sure what, but BB King comes to
mind: Thrill is gone.


73's     Cliff    K7TA    [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: You hit the nail squarely on the head. The thrill
is gone -- it isn't *fun* any longer. And yes, Usenet is the same way.
Most of the net is rapidly becoming unmanageable. Consider this Digest:
When I took over, there were enough messages coming in to put out a
Digest every two days. When Jon Solomon first started the Digest back
in 1981, he would put out two or three issues per week most weeks. For
the past year, messages have flooded in here at the rate of at least
100 per day and sometimes 200 per day -- this group alone. You may
recall the CB radiio 'rage' -- when it was the latest thing back in
the 1975-85 period. Millions of them out there, and finally so many
people got so totally turned off, disgusted with the way it was so
crowded and so full of junk they just quit. Even the FCC gave up any
pretense of monitoring or trying to control 11 meters. Now the band is
very quiet around Chicago by comparison. Only the real twirps are
still out there at it. Watch Usenet and see if the same thing will
happen in the next few years: A rapid increase in sites and traffic
(even more than now!) then suddenly a lot of places just pulling the
plug, at least on net news when they get tired of it.   PAT]

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

Date: Sun, 26 Jul 92 15:09:48 PDT
From: aimla!ruby![e-mail] (Mark Rudholm)
Subject: Re: CLASS/ISDN


In article <telecom V12 I584 M6> Jon Baker of AG Communications
Systems responds to J. Higdon's discussion of the lack of CLASS/ISDN
offerings from the GTE LEC:

> The GTD5 has offered SS7 and CLASS services for about 4 years now.
> All of the GTD5's in GTE West are, most definitely, without a doubt,
> 100% certain, capable of providing SS7 and CLASS features.

> When, and if, these services are deployed in your area is dependent on
> the local telephone company (in this case, GTE West).
                                             ^^^^^^^^
Mr. Higdon lives in California, as do I.  The last time I checked, the
GTE company that is a pathetic excuse for a LEC in California was
called "GTE California," not "GTE West."  I won't go into the details
of the kind of "service" they offered me (NO CANCEL CALL-WAITING,
3-WAY THAT SOUNDED LIKE 7448, MASSIVE OVERCHARGES, INCOMPETENCE AT
EVERY LEVEL) because I think we all know.  When I was "served" by GTE
CA, I was on a DMS100.  I know that this is a very good switch because
I've been on one that was in use by Pacific Bell and it worked
beautifully.  I'm also convinced that the product made by Mr. Baker's
company (the GTD5) is an excellent one as well, I just don't think GTE
CA sets them up properly.

Now that I'm safely back in Pacific Bell's territory, I have some news
on the CLASS features that they started to make available last week.

I ordered all three that are available: Distinctive Ringing, Selective
Call Forwarding, and Last Call Recall.  All of them are limited to
work with SS7 equiped INTRA-LATA switches (NO GTE CA).

Last call recall simply notifies you, via a distinctive ring, when a
busy phone you want to call becomes available.  It also works as a
"redial" for calls that were successful.  Distinctive Ringing and
Selective Call Forwarding allow you to maintain a list of ten phone
numbers that ring your phone distinctively or are selectively
forwarded.  An interesting feature of the editing utility used to
maintain these two lists is that you can add to your list the last
person who called you.

Of course, when you review the contents of your list, the entry is
just labeled "private" so there is no way to learn the number of the
person who called you.  But, if you try to explicity add a number to
the list that is already in a "private" entry, you are told that the
number is already on the list and all future references to the once
private entry become the normal, non-private.  So if someone calls you
and you have a pretty good idea who it was but want to be sure, you
just go into the list editor and add the last number that called you
and then attempt to explicitly add the number you suspect called and
you can learn if that was in fact the person who called or not.  In
fact, you can verify as many numbers as you care to key in.  It's
certainly not CALLER-ID but it isn't without its usefulness.

Speaking of CALLER-ID, I really think that Pacific Bell and GTECA have
the wrong idea.  I do not think that universally available blocking
will severly reduce the attractiveness of this service.  The LECs seem
to think that if blocking is available, it will neccessarily always be
used by callers.  Think about it, not ALL calls are harassment calls.
Think about the calls you make, how many of them do you want to make
anonymously?  Personally, I can't think of any.  When I call my
friends, I WANT them to know it's me.  When I call businesses, I
usually end up giving them my phone number anyway verbally, which is,
mind you less reliable data transfer.  Also, when I call friends that
I speak with frequently, I wouldn't have to leave a message on their
answering machine at all, I could just let it capture my number.  Not
only would that be just as good as the message "Hi, it's me, gimme a
call," but it would be FREE.

It seems as if ALL the CLASS features have been installed on my switch
(1AESS 213 WEbster 0)but are just not active because I get a seconday
dial-tone when I dial *67. Also, when I dial *69, *57 etc. I get "the
service you are requesting is not available on this line" rather than
the "we're sorry you call cannot be completed as dailed" that I get on
all the unused *NN codes.  It is for this reason that I am quite
convinced that Pacific Bell's rhetoric about "studying the financial
feasability of offering Caller-ID before we decide to offer it" is
just a ruse to get the CPUC to change the blocking requirements.  I
hope the CPUC calls Pacific Bell's bluf by just saying "Fine, don't
offer it, lose a potential $5.95 per line."

If the CPUC did that, Pacific Bell would find Caller-ID quite
financially feasable regardless of blocking requirements rather
quickly I'm sure.  I know a lot of people's initial response to
Caller-ID is "oh no, that's terrible, I'm just going to prepend all my
calls with *67," my initial response was the same, but then I gave it
some thought.  Too bad Pacific Bell and GTE California refuse to do
the same.


Mark D. Rudholm   [e-mail]   Philips Interactive Media

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #588
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa11533;
          28 Jul 92 0:05 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA06993
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 27 Jul 1992 22:12:22 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA10285
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 27 Jul 1992 22:12:10 -0500
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 22:12:10 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #589

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 27 Jul 92 22:12:06 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 589

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    GTE and/or ALLNET Pull a Fast One (Matt Holdrege)
    Is Not 100% SS7 Needed For 1-800 and the Like? (H. Shrikumar)
    Wires of Mystery (David Brightbill)
    ISDN Phone Sets Needed (David E. Martin)
    Desktop Videoconferencing on the Internet (Thomas K. Hinders)
    Northern Switches and 9+1011 (Ed Greenberg)
    An Open Letter to PAT and John Higdon (Andrew C. Green)
    Uploading Speed-Dial Numbers (Ted Hadley)
    Different Automated/Live Services? (Carl Moore)
    Panel Still in Use? (Jim Rees)
    How Use Answering Machine in Argentina? (A. Michaels)
    Named Prefixes (Kevin Mitchell)
    Miscellaneous Ramblings (Rob Bailey)
    9-1-1 in Chicago (Nigel Allen)
    Traces and Scramblers (Steve Grant)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 27 Jul 92 19:19 GMT
From: HOLDREGE_MP <[e-mail]>
Subject: GTE and/or ALLNET Pull a Fast One


I have been a residential customer of GTE for about six months now and
I have had no complaints other than the high intra-lata rates. I
thought that the GTE horror stories were bad things that happened to
other people. Well I just got a taste of how bad it can be.

GTE switched my long-distance carrier from AT&T to ALLNET. I have
never heard of ALLNET and I am sure that I did not authorize this. I
am deeply grateful to AT&T for immediately sending me a notice that
this had happened. I had just received my GTE bill so I would not have
noticed the change until a month later. Then I would have found that
all my LD calls were billed at an exhorbitant rate by ALLNET. Pretty
sneaky if you ask me.

But thanks to AT&T's letter I found out only a few days after the
change. I made a couple of LD calls before then and I won't find out
how much they billed me until next months bill. I authorized AT&T to
change me back. AT&T said that GTE would bill me about $4 for the
switch but AT&T would give me coupons for reimbursement.

I read the letter from AT&T at 6pm Friday evening. Since GTE is closed
on weekends I had to stew till Monday morning to vent my fury. When I
finally got through to GTE's order center (over 10 minutes on hold)
they said that I had been switched to ALLNET but they could not say
why. They said that they could investigate this and I urged them to do
so. They also said that ALLNET sends them magtapes with changes
created by their "Automated Calling Program" which calls people and
registers their answer as acceptance or denial. I never accepted
anything and I always hang up on automated telemarketing systems. I
thought that they were illegal now anyway.

GTE said that they would waive the surcharge for switching me back to
AT&T (how nice) and that I could call them next month to complain
about the ALLNET charges. They said that it would take five business
days for the change to take place. I guess that I will have to dial
102281 till then.


Matt Holdrege  [e-mail]  [e-mail]

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

Date: Mon, 27 Jul 92 22:48:02 GMT
From: [e-mail] (H. Shrikumar)
Subject: Is Not 100% SS7 Needed For 1-800 and the Like?


Hi,

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

>> Regarding SS7 links, he said GTE was working on them between their own
>> switches.  Links to PacBell would come, but he didn't know when.

  Please correct me, if I am wrong ... no scratch that, reading the
above, it *does* seem that I *am* wrong ...

  I was under the impression that 1-800 like services could not be
implemented really well without the something like SS7. Are we reading
in the above that there is not yet 100% SS7 interconnects in the US.

  IS it that 1-800, ANI and caller-ID are being done by someother
means (I'd have to do some learning here then.) or is it that the LD
carrier do use SS7, and only that some local links are not yet ?


shrikumar ( [e-mail] )

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

Date: Mon, 27 Jul 92 09:54:18 -0400
From: David Brightbill <[e-mail]>
Subject: Wires of Mystery


Every time I drive from my home in the swamps of North Florida to
Georgia, I wonder about a wire that runs for a few miles along the
road.  This is a little used back road which was reportedly once
popular with the moonshine crowd.  The road is so isolated that there
aren't even power lines or indications of burried cables running along
side most of it.  The line in question starts in Florida where the
power line ends.  It is two bare copper lines hanging on glass
insulators.

When I first noticed it, several years ago, I assumed that it was an
old and disused line and made a mental note to check for insulators
around any downed poles.  But over the years, I've seen some of the
old square cypress poles replaced with modern penta treated pine poles
so it's being maintained.  It terminates in Florida on a pole with a
metal drum the size and shape of a large juice can.  The wires go into
the can and two standard insulated drop wires emerge which cross the
road and head off toward a fancy plantation house behind a locked
gate.  The line follows the road for about five miles into Georgia.  It
then takes off into the woods where it seems to head toward a cluster
of buildings.

I assume that it's some sort of private line.  The poles are separate
from the power poles which sit along side them for a short part of the
route.  The entire route may belong to the same owner but I doubt it
as the line passes several homes on it's way to Georgia.

OK ... now we can go back to discussing ISDN and digital celluar and
such.


[Moderator's Note: It is possible you saw an antenna for an ELF radio
station. The length of an antenna is set by the frequency: the higher
the frequency the shorter the antenna, and vice-versa. That's why
police transmitting on UHF have little stubs for antennas on the back
of their car and cell phone users have little ones also. On the other
hand, a radio station like WGN, 720 AM needs a few hundred feet to get
a good half-wave antenna, and WIND, 560 AM has four big towers over in
Gary, IN for theirs. <E>xtremely <L>ow <F>requency transmitters are
good for use with submarines in the ocean ... very few radio waves can
travel under water or through the earth. ELF waves can though ... but
the trade-off is an antenna which stretches for miles at a time along
the highway on telephone poles, etc. If what you saw is an ELF antenna
it is probably a military thing, like the one in Wisconsin.  PAT]

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

Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 11:31:39 -0500
From: David E. Martin <[e-mail]>
Subject: ISDN Phone Sets Needed
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization:  Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory,  Batavia, IL,  USA


I need to get about 6 ISDN phone sets for use in an experiment I am
setting up.  They should work with the 5ESS and have a LCD screen for
internal Caller-ID.  AT&T wants about $600 for their sets, which is
out of mu budget range.  Does anyone have a suggestion for some more
reasonably prices sets?


David E. Martin
National HEPnet Management                     Phone: [phone]
Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory          FAX: [phone]
P.O. Box 500, MS 234; Batavia, IL 60510  USA   E-Mail: [e-mail]

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

Date: 27 Jul 92 11:46:10-0900
From: /PN=Thomas.K.Hinders/OU=CCMAIL/O=CHAN.IS/PRMD=MMC/ADMD=TELEMAIL/C=US/@sprint.com
Subject: Desktop Videoconferencing on the Internet


I heard that the Internet tested voice and video to the desktop over
the net using Suns.  Does anyone have any further details.  If enough
responses come back I'll summarize and post.


Thomas K Hinders   Martin Marietta Computing Standards
4795 Meadow Wood Lane       Chantilly, VA 22021
703.802.5593 (v) 703.802.5027 (f)


[Moderator's Note: I have a lengthy message in the queue about this
now and will try to get it out yet tonight. It is a long message.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Ed Greenberg)
Subject: Northern Switches and 9+1011
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 92 10:28:40 PDT


[e-mail] questions why his office PBX requires that
he dial 9 + 1011 + instead of 9 + 011 + for international calls.  Our
office REQUESTS this, so I asked our telecom lady about it.

This is a common problem with Northern Telecom switches.  Least cost
routing is done from left to right.  Consider these three
combinations:

1.    9 + 0  + <area code and number>
2.    9 + 011 + <int'l number>
3.    9 + 1 + <area code&number>
4.    9 + 1 + 011 + <int'l number>

The problem is that the local lines are presubscribed to one LD
company, and there is a dedicated trunk to another.  Since domestic
operator assisted calls (example 1) must be given to the local telco,
9 + 0 must go to the local telco.  Int'l calls are best handled (for
quality) on the dedicated LD circuit, but the PBX doesn't have the
capability in software to parse far enough into the number to make the
distinction between sent-paid international and operator assisted
domestic.  The workaround is to have the subscriber dial 9 + 1 + 011
for sent-paid international.  Apparently it's a common enough
workaround that Northern pushes people to do it.

That's the answer I came up with.


Ed Greenberg         | Home: [phone] | [e-mail]
P. O. Box 28618        | Work: [phone] | DoD#: 0357
San Jose, CA  95159    | Fax:  [phone] | KM6CG (ex WB2GOH)

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

Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 12:14:26 CDT
From: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: An Open Letter to PAT and John Higdon


As regular readers of the TELECOM Digest, we, the undersigned, have
followed for some time now the lengthy pronouncements of two
contributors in particular who seem to have many years of experience
in, and knowledge of, the telecommunications business.  These
contributors are:

1) You, PAT, our Esteemed Moderator, and

2) John Higdon, of Green Hills and Cows fame.

We were wondering if the two of you would take a few minutes from
your busy schedules of doing whatever it is you do, and tell us
all about whatever it is you do. Please add whatever biographical
details of interest you feel like throwing in to let us know how
you got where you are today, as most people would say that their
earlier jobs were infinitely more interesting than what they're
doing right now!


Thanks,

Andrew C. Green
Dave Mausner
Kevin A. Mitchell

Datalogics, Inc.       (312) COMputer 4444
441 W. Huron
Chicago, IL  60610     FAX: (312) COMputer 4473


[Moderator's Note: Interesting idea. John, will you go first?   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Ted Hadley)
Subject: Uploading Speed-Dial Numbers
Organization: Cylink Corp.
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 92 17:09:39 GMT


(Hopefully) simple question:

Is it possible to upload (i.e., extract) speed-dial numbers from a
telephone over the telephone wires? (I don't really care how, just if
it is possible).

We have mostly Panasonic EASA-PHONEs, model KX-T2355 and similar. Are
there any models/types of telephones to avoid because uploading is
possible? I prefer E-Mail on this subject to be sent to me directly.


Ted A. Hadley   [e-mail]   [phone]
Cylink Corporation, 310 N. Mary Ave., Sunnyvale, CA 94086  USA
All opinions expressed are my own, and probably not liked by my employer.

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

Date: Mon, 27 Jul 92 10:31:21 EDT
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject: Different Automated/Live Services?


In Gap, Pa. (Lancaster County), I found a pay phone by Pennsylvania
Pay Telephone (PPT).  For the long distance carrier notice, it said:

Calls provided by:
PPT
P.O.Box 1721
Allentown, PA 18105

Live operator calls by:
IOS
2155 Chenault #410
Carrollton, TX 75006

It also said "Dial 211" just after the PPT Allentown address.

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

From: [e-mail] (Jim Rees)
Subject: Panel Still in Use?
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: University of Michigan IFS Project
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 21:13:48 GMT


Seeing Pat's comment about the LOngbeach-1 exchange made me wonder.
Are there any panel offices left in the US?  I know there is still
plenty of step-by-step, but it seems to me that panel was never that
popular, in spite of its imposing physical appearance and amusing
technical quirks.


[Moderator's Note: Any panel left? Step-by-step?  God help us ...
I would hope all that crap is long gone. I think back to the old days
and it was all very interesting ... but so was manual service, which
by the way was (under normal conditions) extremely fast and usually
very accurate. Connections were usually established in ten seconds or
less if the other end answered right away. And if the other end was
busy instead of a buzz-buzz the operator told you the line was busy. A
wait of ten seconds for an operator was rare.  I was talking to an
operator once who had a heart attack (or maybe a stroke) while she was
looking up a number for me.   :(  PAT]

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

Date: 27 Jul 92 09:53:00 EDT
From: Arlen (A.) Michaels <[e-mail]>
Subject: How Use Answering Machine in Argentina?


Can anyone advise if it's practical to use a North American answering
machine in Argentina?  What differences (power, signalling, connec-
tors, etc?)  would cause problems?


Thanks,

Arlen

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

Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 10:29:40 CDT
From: "Kevin Mitchell, x4485, 708-452-9585" <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Named Prefixes
Summary: 266 Really Stands For Something


Pat:

We design computer typesetting software here. 266 really stands for
COMputer. So, my number is COMputer-4485 :).


Kevin A. Mitchell     [phone]
Datalogics, Inc       Internet: [e-mail]
441 W. Huron          UUCP: ..!uunet!dlogics!kam
Chicago, IL  60610    FAX: [phone]


[Moderator's Note: A clever takeoff on this is a gay bar on Halsted
Street in Chicago which has commandeered 312-871 and renamed it
"TRick-1" ... maybe someday I will COMe by your office to visit.  PAT]

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

Date: 27 Jul 92 02:00:15 EDT
From: Rob Bailey <[e-mail]>
Subject: Miscellaneous Ramblings


Miscellaneous ramblings about miscellaneous ramblings:

(1) if you sent me an SASE for the Caller*ID->RS-232 schematic, don't
get discouraged: I had to track down the XR2211 datasheets again --
they'll be forthcoming. If, however, two weeks goes by and you still
want them and don't mind wasting $0.58, try me again. And please send
a big SASE (requirement) - this "packet" is pretty thick and I've had
trouble stuffing regular (#10?) envelopes.

(2) I noticed -- like someone else here in c.d.t. -- that my local
COCOT keypad tones do not correspond to the standard DTMF pairs.  Well
... let me rephrase that ... I have perfect-pitch so I know the
frequencies are correct, but they're sort of "out of order", e.g., if
I press "2222222" each press gives me a seemingly random but still
valid (just not necessarily "2") DTMF pair. I'm gonna take my
electronic DTMF box over to confirm what my ear's telling me.

The question: Why? Is this some sort of fraud-prevention mechanism
that I don't understand? Hmmm ...

(3) A random note on Repeat*Call here in West Virginia: when I camp on
a number that's inside my CO (I'm on a 5E) but that has been off hook
long enough for the switch to remove battery voltage, instead of
getting the desired behavior (i.e., call me back when they go back on
hook) or a valid recording (e.g., the phone you're calling is off the
hook and we're not going to waste our time queuing on it), I get
something like "The feature you are trying to activate cannot be
activated because the number is not in your local calling area" -- the
message you get when you really do try to queue a call out of the
area. More interesting: when I try to camp on a number two miles away
but in the DMS-100 switch's area, I get trunk reorder. A telco
employee (who was curious but slightly suspicious when I revealed
knowledge that DMS-100 was a NT product and not AT&T) said she'd
report them as bugs.

(4) One of my customer's had a rash of the "answering machines calling
people" syndrome which I rather quickly figured out: person "A" calls
person "B". "B" is on the phone, so "A" queues a Repeat*Call on "B"s
extension. At 4:00, "B" hangs up and immediately leaves the office for
home. By this time, "A" has left for home, too. When the PABX finally
comes through and does the triple-ring cadence on "A"s line to let
them know "B" has gone, "A"s answering machine picks up, causing the
PABX to ring "B", whose answering machine also picks up. Result: when
"A" gets in in the morning, "B"s OGM is on his machine, and when "B"
gets in, "A"s OGM is on his machine. People actually thought (PhD
chemists -- mind you) that this was something sorta supernatural going
on!

More to follow later ...


 ...de Rob WM8S      [e-mail]

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

From: Nigel Allen <[e-mail]>
Date: Sun, 26 Jul 1992 20:00:00 -0400
Subject: 9-1-1 in Chicago
Organization: Echo Beach


 From a discussion in the RelayNet PHONES conference.

 Thomas Mahnke wrote:

TM> Like all the tollways, various "wheel taxes" imposed by local
TM> communities, and .14 cent an hour electricity, I'd say $1.25 is
TM> about right in the Chicago area for 911 service.

TM> $0.25 to provide the service, and $1.00 to "grease the right palms".

  Max Moen replied:

     How could you think that about beautiful Crook (whoops, I mean)
Cook County, Illinois?  The cost is so high, because Chicago has it's
own hybrid 911 system meaning those communities will have to pool
their money and their 911 system, it won't be patched into ours.

     It's also a fact that Chicago doesn't use the "Metro Area"
formula that's popular everywhere else, so most of the suburbs hate
our guts anyway.

TM> They'll probably even charge message units to call 911.  <smirk>

     Good thinking Tom, I'll bring that up at the next meeting <G>.


Canada Remote Systems  - Toronto, Ontario/Detroit, MI
World's Largest PCBOARD System - 416-629-7000/629-7044

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

Subject: Traces and Scramblers
From: [e-mail] (Steve Grant)
Organization: Kappa Crucis Unix BBS, Auckland, New Zealand
Date: 27 Jul 92 21:04:03 GMT


Does anyone have plans for either of these items or information on how
to do it, particularly the scrambler?  Also is it possible to trace
calls from home, not the exchange?


Thanks,

Steve

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #589
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa12879;
          28 Jul 92 0:46 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA02691
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 27 Jul 1992 22:55:49 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA28081
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 27 Jul 1992 22:55:40 -0500
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 22:55:40 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #590

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 27 Jul 92 22:55:41 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 590

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Thrills of Long Distance (Donald E. Eastlake)
    Re: Cordless Phone Not Charging (John Adams)
    Re: Cordless Phone Not Charging (Laurentiv Rauchwerger)
    Re: Cordless Phone Not Charging (Jim Rees)
    Re: 911 Nightmare (Mike Coleman)
    Re: 911 Nightmare (Robert K. Ricketts)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail], III <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Thrills of Long Distance
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 14:34:19 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> Cliff Stoll,
[e-mail] writes:

> Pat compared the Usenet to Ham Radio.  Got me thinking.

> You know, in every technical medium, things start out pure and sweet
> and exciting; as they become cheaper and better and more popular, they
> lose their purity; their excitement too.

> Is the same thing is happening on the Usenet/Internet?  When you had
> to know the TCP/IP suite and there were a few hundred nodes on the
> network, we mostly knew each other.  It was a kicker to just get mail
> across the network or to ping another node.  There were fewer flames
> and nastygrams.

> With today's million node network, it's a rare Usenet group without
> flamewars.  You might recognize a few posting people, but how many
> have you met?  Malicious intruders break into computers.  Many
> postings have zero content.

Then again, there is usually something new coming along:

 From:    US1RMC::"[e-mail]" "Steve Deering"  18-JUL-1992
 Subj:    IETF Teleconference

Steve Casner and I would like to thank all the people who helped to
pull off the 2nd IETF teleconference.  Bob Clements, Ron Frederick,
and Paul Milazzo spent long days operating the vat and dvc consoles
and the video cameras, a generous donation of their time for which we
are enormously grateful.  The excellent local networking facilities
were organized by John Curran and Jeff Schiller, and the on-site
sparcstations were provided by Chuck Davin and Paul Milazzo.  Van
Jacobson and Paul Milazzo (there he is again!) stayed up late to
generate new versions of vat and dvc in response to the new demands of
such a large conference.

Many people around the global Internet provided multicast tunnel
machines to build the largest IP multicast topology to date -- at one
point during the week, the multicast routing table included 90
separate subnets (i.e., LANs and point-to-point links, NOT including
all of the subnets traversed by the tunnels), in 10 different
countries.  (I will post a map of the topology in a couple weeks,
after I get back from vacation.)  And many more tuned in to the audio
and video -- there were proabably over 100 sites that showed up in the
vat window over the course of the week (I hope someone else was
keeping count!).

To those of you who suffered less-than-acceptable audio/video
reception, or who couldn't be heard when you tried to talk back, or
who didn't manage to get hooked into the conference due to lack of
software for your machines or unexplained failure of the packets to
reach you or lack of response to your email queries, we offer our
apologies and the excuse that we only had finite time and resources,
at least some of which had to be devoted to other tasks (you know,
like chairing working groups and sleeping).  I hope you will all be
able to participate next time.

(Next time??  Oh no!  Well, plans are already underway for bigger and
better things at the November IETF, and many of the people who
provided tunnel machines have expressed an interest in keeping the
multicast topology up from now on, not just for IETFs.  Stay tuned to
the ietf list for further information.)

Steve Deering

 From:    US1RMC::"[e-mail]"  19-JUL-1992
 Subj:    Re: IETF teleconference

My opinions...

  >Date: Sat, 18 Jul 1992 08:00:27 -0700 (PDT)
  >From: Terry Gray <[e-mail]>
  >Subject: Re: IETF teleconference

> I, too, was very impressed with the audio/video distribution of the
> IETF, and consider it extremely important work -- perhaps even the
> "silver bullet" that will help prevent IETF meetings from collapsing
> under their >own (scaling) weight.

> I don't think so.  While the IETF multicast was great to see, we have
> no hopes of multicasting every working group (there are 80?  90?  of
> them now) or the one-shot BOFs.  Also physical attendees still have a
> lot of advantages during question and answer time, and in meetings in
> the halls.

> Come to the Internet -- no longer just in the *text* form of IRC -- has
> not a technology been deployed which is in advance of the sociological
> and resource capacities of the Internet?  (I'm not suggesting the
> experiments.

Yes, absolutely.  We already melted some routers this time around.
We'll be taking steps to ease that problem, but from now on we will
occasionally be pushing the networks to their limits.

> 1. How legible were the overhead slides?

Looked okay to me, although you had to squint for some.

> 2. For sending semi-static info such as slides, how does multicast
> packet video compare with redistribution of an X window, or perhaps
> even sending a MIME message every time a new slide is put up (oops,
> there we go using mail as a layer 3 transport again!)

If we can get everyone to prepare slides in advance, and to use the
same format, and to know how to draw the impromptu ones with a mouse,
then this would be possible -- but that is highly unlikely.  I guess
the "next slide" function could include feeding a slide into a scanner
which would then multicast it.

You get into transport reliability issues here.

> 3. How important is it to see the jerky stick-like figures and
> talking heads?  Is this just for "ambience" or does it really make a
> difference?

I've found it really makes a difference.  I like being able to see
people smile and wave their hands.  The video will most definitely be
getting better, also.

    Scott

 From:    US1RMC::"[e-mail]" "Van Jacobson"    18-JUL-1992 10:17
 Subj:    Re: IETF teleconference

> there were proabably over 100 sites that showed up in the vat
> window over the course of the week

Actually, I think you're underestimating by at least a factor of two.
I had to go out of town for a couple of days and, of course, my vat
monitor crashed so I don't have a total count.  But, thanks to a
memory leak in vat and a core dump gratiously provided by Steve Pink,
I know that an hour before the start of the Thursday plenary there
were 118 sites active (a list is attached).  I suspect that by the
start of the plenary another 50 or so sites showed up (vat crashed
trying to add six new sites) and on various screen dumps taken during
the Monday and Tuesday sessions I see 40-50 names that aren't on this
list.  So I'd say 200 sites for the week is a conservative lower
bound.

Having a live, Internet `chat line' that literally spanned the globe
was a unique experience.  For example, I was hacking alone in my
office with the speaker on around 4am when someone in Hawaii suddenly
said "Anyone here?" and, before I could even unmute my mike to reply,
people in Melbourne, Toronto, Stockholm and London came back with "Yes,
we're all here."  A week of talking to people on the other side of the
planet as casually as if they were just next door has left me with an
incredible feeling of community and a whole new sense of how connected
our world has become.

The audiocast was great work Steve and Steve!  Thanks for putting it
all together.

 - Van


13.1.100.22       [e-mail]
13.1.100.238      [e-mail]
13.1.100.30       Mark Verber (PARC)
13.1.101.240      PARC 32kbps gateway
13.1.248.2        [e-mail]
13.1.68.2         Lixia (PARC)
13.2.116.128      [e-mail]
13.2.116.33       [e-mail]
13.2.116.38       [e-mail]
13.2.116.62       Ron Frederick
13.2.116.9        [e-mail]
18.79.0.101       IETF Multimedia Multicast
18.79.0.102       IETF Terminal Room
18.79.0.103       IETF Listener
36.103.0.28       Mark J. Steiglitz ([e-mail])
36.53.0.38        Networking Systems @ Stanford
128.100.102.11    Eric Carroll, University of Toronto, Canada
128.100.102.14    John Roth, University of Toronto
128.100.102.15    Canadian Rate Adaptation Gateway
128.100.15.7      [e-mail]
128.100.15.8      [e-mail]
128.100.2.20      Edwin Allum, University of Toronto, Canada
128.100.2.24      [e-mail]
128.100.2.25      [e-mail]
128.100.2.27      Dave Galloway [e-mail]
128.100.8.201     [e-mail]
128.102.32.22     Milo Medin (NASA)
128.102.32.23     Dan McKernan (NASA Science Internet)
128.102.32.24     Warren Van Camp (NASA Science Internet)
128.102.32.25     [e-mail]
128.102.32.32     [e-mail]
128.102.32.42     Robert Gutierrez (NSI Network Ops)
128.109.178.98    [e-mail]
128.112.128.209   Ira Fuchs (Princeton)
128.112.64.142    CIT Systems Group (Princeton)
128.112.64.75     Larry Rogers (Princeton)
128.113.24.31     [e-mail]
128.119.40.203    [e-mail]
128.125.53.162    [e-mail]
128.159.177.9     root@fddi_tx.ksc.nasa.gov
128.16.8.28       [e-mail]
128.16.8.35       Ian Wakeman (UCL)
128.16.8.42       [e-mail]
128.16.8.60       Saleem Bhatti (UCL)
128.16.8.62       Shaw Chuang, UCL
128.16.8.67       Jon Crowcroft@UC London
128.16.8.75       [e-mail]
128.16.8.82       Mark Handley, UC London
128.16.8.83       [e-mail]
128.165.114.1     Phil Wood (Los Alamos National Laboratory)
128.237.3.192     [e-mail]
128.253.205.16    [e-mail]
128.253.205.25    Jeffrey C Honig (Cornell University)
128.3.112.15      [e-mail]
128.3.112.35      Sally Floyd (LBL)
128.49.17.180     Ron Broersma (NOSC, San Diego)
128.89.4.97       BBN 6/315
128.89.5.196      [e-mail]
128.89.5.203      [e-mail]
128.89.6.87       [e-mail]
128.9.160.49      ISI, Los Angeles, CA
128.9.160.99      ISI, Los Angeles, CA
129.127.128.20    Simon Coppins ([e-mail])
129.132.4.7       Adam Feigin, ETH Zuerich
129.215.200.48    Graeme Wood (EUCS, Univ. of Edinburgh)
129.22.8.109      Dan Brown CWRU
129.22.8.110      Dan Brown CWRU
129.22.8.136      [e-mail]
129.240.2.203     Geir Pedersen, Univ of Oslo, Norway
130.15.48.20      Andy Hooper, Queen's U, Canada
130.153.128.31    [e-mail]
130.43.2.13       Erik Fair (Apple Computer)
131.108.62.192    Paul Traina ([e-mail])
131.108.62.60     Paul Traina (cisco Systems)
131.123.2.37      [e-mail]
131.123.2.60      Jeff Bailey (Kent State Univ)
131.187.1.136     Kannan (OARnet)
131.187.1.144     John - OARnet
132.146.15.7      Ian Tracey@BT Labs,UK.
132.146.15.9      Stuart @ BT Labs. 32kbit/s
132.160.3.9       [e-mail]
132.236.213.102   [e-mail]
132.249.20.39     [e-mail]
132.249.21.240    Auditorium @ San Diego Supercomputer Center
132.249.22.23     Tom Hutton (San Diego Supercomputer Center)
132.249.23.242    [e-mail]
133.194.10.98     [e-mail]
134.207.7.51      John Shirron (NRL)
137.111.222.12    [e-mail]
137.82.61.82      John Demco, UBC, Vancouver, Canada
137.82.8.23       John Demco, UBC, Vancouver, Canada
138.96.24.78      [e-mail]
138.96.24.86      [e-mail]
138.96.48.45      [e-mail]
139.130.204.2     Peter Elford (AARNet, Australia)
139.130.204.7     Mark Turner (Australian National University)
140.173.160.3     [e-mail]
141.211.128.10    [e-mail]
141.211.128.171   CITI at Univ of Michigan
144.110.64.18     [e-mail]
192.1.37.3        CLynn (BBN) Boston Ma USA
192.136.153.20    John Deuel @ Rice U.
192.136.153.23    Listening in @ Rice U.
192.16.123.103    Bengt Ahlgren, SICS
192.16.123.104    Anders Klemets, SICS, Sweden
192.16.123.104    Tommy Wallo (SICS)
192.16.123.212    [e-mail]
192.16.123.243    Patrik Ernberg (SICS, Sweden)
192.16.123.251    Tommy Wallo (SICS)
192.41.112.145    Andie Ness (CSTR, Edinburgh)
192.43.207.12     [e-mail]
192.47.242.60     Maryann et al (MITRE, VA)
192.47.242.60     Maryann et al (MITRE, VA)
192.5.146.123     [e-mail]
192.52.71.21      [e-mail]
192.71.100.4      Steve Pink, SICS Sweden
192.71.100.8      SICS Multimedia lab
192.87.45.3       [e-mail]

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

From: vixen![e-mail] (26070-adams)
Subject: Re: Cordless Phone Not Charging
Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 92 13:21:48 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail].
berkeley.edu (Joe Konstan) writes:

> In TELECOM Digest V12 #578, Ang Peng Hwa writes:

> > My AT&T cordless phone is not charging and I'd appreciate any input.

> The most common problem I have with AT&T cordless phones (love my
> 5500) is that the contacts on the phone and charger get dirty.  If the
> model you have has a "Charging" light, check to see if it stays on
> when the phone is in the base.  If not, get steel wool (can use other
> scrubbers, but steel wool works best) and clean off all of the
> contacts.      ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ 8^{  NOT!

General rule around all types of electrical equipment ...do not use
steel wool or emery cloth for cleaning contacts...The residue
(slivers, shiners, call them what you will) are conductive and might
cause more damage than they fix!  One of the cheapest (and most
readily available contact cleaners known to man is the common pencil
top eraser. No shorts, no contamination and it does a yeoman job of
removing films and light corrosion.


Jack (John) Adams       Bellcore RRC 4B-259 (Until 9/1)
[phone] {Voice}       [phone] {Facsimile}
[e-mail]  [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Laurentiv Rauchwerger)
Subject: Re: Cordless Phone Not Charging
Organization: UIUC Center for Supercomputing Research and Development
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 92 16:16:20 GMT


I want to buy a good cordless phone and I need some reccomandations
Is autoscanning an important feature? Are the extra $40 worth an ATT5500
vs a Panasonic KXT 3910?  Why is the new KXT9000 so expensive ($400)
and is worth it ?


Thanks,

Lawrence Rauchwerger   CSRD - Univ. of Illinois

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

From: [e-mail] (Jim Rees)
Subject: Re: Cordless Phone Not Charging
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: University of Michigan IFS Project
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 21:05:41 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>,  [e-mail].
berkeley.edu (Joe Konstan) writes:

> If not, get steel wool (can use other
> scrubbers, but steel wool works best) and clean off all of the
> contacts.

Steel wool is a bad idea, because pieces of it can come off and short
things out.  The pros often use a pencil eraser.  This is particularly
important if you're cleaning something like a switchhook contact.

> If that isn't it, and you really trashed the battery, I'd just go and
> buy a new NiCad either from AT&T (more expensive) or any electronics
> dealer.

He reversed one or more of his cells when he left the thing on after
the low battery light came on.  The best thing for the battery (but
not usually the most convenient for you) is to run the phone until the
'low' light comes on, then turn it off and completely recharge it.

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

From: [e-mail] (Mike Coleman)
Subject: Re: 911 Nightmare
Organization: Twin Sun, Inc
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 20:44:13 GMT


> [Moderator's Note: The problem is *NOT* in deciding how to handle a
> 911 emergency call *once you have identified the call and know it is
> to go to the police.*  The problem comes up in first identifying the
> call ...

I'm confused by this comment.  The original writer said that the
caller tried to call 911 and got a busy signal.  I thought that a
"local switch overloaded" condition would have resulted in no (or
delayed) dial tone in this case.  If the caller got a dial tone,
dialed 911, and then got a busy signal, it seems to me that the local
switch's message is "I hear you.  I acknowledge that you're dialing
911.  I have no more circuits and I'm not going to boot anyone.
Please call later, or drop dead, or whatever."

Have I got this wrong?


[Moderator's Note: No, in the above scenario you do not have it wrong.
But consider whether or not it was a busy signal or a no-circuit
condition or whatever .. not all users are sophisticated enough to
know which is which. If 911 returned the busy signal, there is nothing
telco can do about it ... cut off one emergency call in order to put
through another?  If it was a no-circuit condition, was the CO saying
it had no paths open to whatever CO the 911 operates out of, or was it
 from some other circustance?  I think far more often the problem is
just not getting dial tone.  Any stats available on where congestion
occurs the most -- at what phase of call handling?   PAT]

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

Date: 27 Jul 92 22:20:38 EDT
From: Robert K. Ricketts <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: 911 Nightmare


Our Esteemed Moderator replies to a post:

> The modern CO does not know the difference between one off-hook and
> another *until it finds time to go and get the caller's request.* At

But it depends on what point during call setup that the busy was
issued.  If the subscriber dialing 911 encountered busy going off-hook
instead of dial tone then I agree.

But if a DTMF receiver was available to the 911 caller giving dial
tone, then I see no reason why the originating CO cannot be programmed
to initiate call setup ahead of all other call requests.  If this
means seizing the very next trunk to come available or even seizing an
active trunk carrying a non-emergency call (as indicated by the call
request being 911), then so be it.

This reminds me of an incident years ago in Houston that I'm sure most
long-time Houston telecom-types will recall: Sometime in the late
seventies, a major blood collection agency (Houston Blood Bank or
maybe the Red Cross) staged a telethon on *all* local television
stations -- network, local-only, and PBS -- to call in and pledge to
donate blood.  It was billed in the local media as "The only show in
town".  An appointment time and location to donate was scheduled
during the call.  For the one hour that the telethon aired plus
another thirty minutes or so afterwards, it was nearly impossible to
place a call to/from any CO in the entire city.  It was a major league
gridlock.  This was before the days of 911.  Imagine needing emergency
care during that 90 minute blackout.  The blood center has yet to
repeat that episode.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #590
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa11058;
          29 Jul 92 3:26 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA04245
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 29 Jul 1992 01:30:38 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA13810
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 29 Jul 1992 01:30:26 -0500
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 01:30:26 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #591

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 29 Jul 92 01:30:24 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 591

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Ham Radio Operators Running Rampant! (Paul W. Schleck)
    Amateur Radio and Our Moderator (Jim Graham)
    Re: Advice Needed: Dialback Management (Richard Nash)
    Re: FCC Modem Tax Rumor on Compu$erve (Tony Safina)
    Re: House Wiring Question (Macy Hallock)
    Re: 800 Numbers: Which Provider is Best? (John Higdon)
    Re: New Subscriber Solicitations - MCI (Hasnain Khan)
    Re: Ground Wire on Network Interface? (Hans Ridder)
    Re: GTE and CLASS/ISDN (David G. Lewis)
    Re: AT&T System 75: Need Terminal Emulation (Bob Prehn)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Paul W Schleck KD3FU)
Subject: Re: Ham Radio Operators Running Rampant!
Organization: University of Nebraska at Omaha
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 01:45:31 GMT


[e-mail] (Paul W Schleck KD3FU) writes:

> In a response to a post by Cliff Stoll (whose views I support), our
> esteemed Moderator (whom I otherwise admire) blithers the following:

>> [Moderator's Note: Well Cliff, the Internet community had a lot of
>> trust between people for many years until the BBS'er/malicious hacker
>> type person found out about it and began abusing the trust. It reminds
>> me of how ham radio *used* to be until the CB'ers started moving in.  PAT]
>        ^^^ ^^^ ^^^^^ ^^^^^^ ^^ ^^ ^^^^^ ^^^ ^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^ ^^

> Well, I guess it had to happen.  Pat's insulted just about every other
> loyal sub-culture of Digest readers, now he goes after us (I wonder if
> Pat realized the irony in the fact that Cliff is also a ham, K7TA).
> Since "P Towson" isn't in the callbook, I wonder where you've gotten
> this second or third-hand knowledge of how much the hobby has
> "deterioriated" particularly due to the invasion of "CB operators."

> [Moderator's Note: Your message really amazes me. You must have read
> it as well as you read my name in each issue ... Towson, indeed. If I

All right, "P Townson" isn't in the callbook either :-).  And your
name isn't in every issue on the Usenet side of things, so I relied on
my memory (which sometimes fails me).  Apologies for the misspelling
(I should be more sensitive to this, considering the spelling of MY
name).

Spelling flames aside, let's return to the meat of the matter.

> were to say "I really used to like going to the forest until the
> lumber company cut down a lot of the trees and careless campers set
> fire to the rest ..." would you ask me what I have against nature and
> the beauty of the forest?  I have nothing against ham radio operators.
> Nothing at all. They are intelligent people and good citizens. What I
> do dislike is the way some parts of the the ham radio spectrum have
> been usurped by unlicensed, uncaring people who (judging from their
> conversations, tone of voice and phraseology) were CB 'enthusiasts' in
> the past. I mean, I do listen to my radios. I hear them here in

OK Pat, that's a bit more specific.  You didn't say "some parts of ham
radio" or "some operators," you said "ham radio."  You're doing a
Perot-style backpeddling on the matter reminiscent (to quote an
extreme analogy) of middle-eastern terrorists who say that they really
like the Americans that they kill, it's just the institutions that
they dislike.  Well, just as Americans are inseparable from their
institutions, hams and ham radio are one in the same.  We are the
hobby, insult the hobby in a sweeping way and you insult all hams.

> Chicago doing foolish and inconsiderate things: going up into 40
> meters and sitting there tuning up. They haven't even the courtesy to
> use a dummy load. They sit there keyed up, playing music and acting
> like jackasses. My complaints are with the people who cut down the
> trees and burned the forest.  NOW do you understand?  Geeze, of all
> the letters I get ... :(   PAT]

I agree with this specific assessment, but are you sure they are all
hams?  In attacking the cutters and burners, you nicked some of the
park rangers with your axe.  Let's save the "some of my best friends
are (insert expletive here)" for the presidential candidates, OK?


Paul W. Schleck, KD3FU  [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: By strict definition they are not hams, because
hams have tickets. They are nonetheless polluters.  PAT]

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

Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 20:19:25 CST
From: Jim Graham <[e-mail]>
Subject: Amateur Radio and Our Moderator


Interesting, how our Moderator changes his tune when suddenly faced
with the fact that he shoved his foot in his mouth (err, keyboard).

Here's what he originally said:

> [Moderator's Note: Well Cliff, the Internet community had a lot of
> trust between people for many years until the BBS'er/malicious hacker
> type person found out about it and began abusing the trust. It reminds
> me of how ham radio *used* to be until the CB'ers started moving in.  PAT]

and after probably getting a flood of replies/flames, thanks to the
ongoing discussion he indirectly caused in rec.radio.amateur.misc, he
tries to point out how badly people read what he wrote, and what he
REALLY said in his previous post:

> [Moderator's Note: Your message really amazes me. You must have read
> it as well as you read my name in each issue ...

[lots of attempting to backtrack and make everyone else look bad deleted]

> NOW do you understand?  Geeze, of all the letters I get ... :( PAT]

But you must see that what you originally wrote does not match what
you're saying here. You made a blanket statement to the effect that
Amateur Radio is no longer a good thing and that the CBers have ruined
it.  You didn't say they've messed up some portions of some of the
phone segments of the ham bands ... you said they've hosed up Amateur
Radio, period.

Get your facts straight, Pat, and don't make such blind, blanket
statements.  Otherwise, don't complain when you get a flood of flames
about it --- you deserve them, IMHO.

Any bets on whether or not this gets posted?  :-)


73 DE N5IAL (/9)
INTERNET: [e-mail] | [e-mail] | [e-mail]
UUCP:  gagme!n5ial![e-mail]
AMATEUR RADIO: n5ial@n9hsi (Chicago.IL.US.Earth)


[Moderator's Note: Why shouldn't your note get posted? I try not to
operate like my competitor Kay Graham with her two rags {The
Washington Post} and {News Weak}. You'll never see anything in her
publications she finds disagreeable. I only quit posting at 3 AM on
Monday after putting out ten issues over the weekend and falling
asleep at the keyboard. And why should I bother getting my facts
straight? Neither Kay nor Arthur O. Sulzberg feel that is a major
consideration, and look how much more they charge than I do. The
'flood of flames' I got consisted of three letters; yours and Paul's,
and he wrote twice.   PAT]

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

Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 00:49:39
From: [e-mail] (Richard Nash)
Subject: Re: Advice Needed: Dialback Management


[e-mail] (Peter Alexander Merel) writes:

>> We know about dialback modems, but it seems they are not as secure as
>> we'd like. I'm sure something like I describe must exist, but we don't
>> know what it is called or where to get it. Please help.

> I don't have a virtual solution, but I do have a very flexible
> programmable hardware one.

> The reason that dialback modems are sometimes not secure is that a
> cracker can call into the modem and wait for the modem to hang up, and
> then remain on the line, playing dialtone back to the modem.  The
> modem "thinks" it is dialing on the network, but instead it reaches
> the bad guy's modem.

> This is possible because many central offices will keep the circuit up
> for up to about 22 seconds if the calling party remains off-hook after
> the called party goes on-hook.  This is a long enough window for the
> dialback modem to re-seize the line and start dialing.

To eliminate that type of hacking possibility, it is mandatory that
the dialback portion of the modem call is originated from a different
line.  Therefore, if you have 'n' number of phone lines to be used for
dialback, you require n+1 lines.  It is required that the host system
performs the dialback procedure in order to determine the correct line
to use.  It also has the added benefit in that system administration
of the modem pool can be centrally administered by the system
adminstration folks.

> When performing dialback, it can call different dialback numbers
> linked to different security codes.  To prevent the problem mentioned
> above, it can be programmed to wait for a CPC pulse on the line before
> initiating dialback, or it can perform the dialback on one of several
> separate ports.  Since the dialback can be done on a separate line,
> there is no way for a cracker to get through with the dialtone trick.

What is a CPC pulse? (Counter EMF from the line relay?)

Why waste money on widgets, when your operating system **should** have
this counter-hacking support integrated into it?


Richard Nash           Edmonton, Alberta Canada T6K 0E8
UUCP:                  trickie![e-mail]
Amatuer Radio Packet:  VE6BON @ VE6MC.AB.CAN.NA
                       VE6BON.ampr.org [44.135.147.206]


[Moderator's Note: A much easier solution is to simply have three way
calling on the modem lines and on all outgoing calls have the dialing
string begin with a switchhook flash. That'll leave the phreaks out in
left field every time.   PAT]

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

From: disk![e-mail] (tony)
Subject: Re: FCC Modem Tax Rumor on Compu$erve
Organization: Digital Information Systems of KY
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 00:11:33 GMT


[e-mail] (Steve Forrette) writes:

> If you read the original CompuServe message carefully, you see that
> all they are really saying is something that has been mentioned in
> TELECOM Digest several times in the past: that the data carriers will
> not be imposed on by the "access fees" that voice carriers must pay
> (the "modem tax") as long as they continue to use current access
> methods and facilities.  If they want to upgrade their type of
> connection into the LEC network, then they must pay the higher rate.
> Whether this is fair or not, it's not really news.  It seems that
> CompuServe wants to use the newer services, but not pay the higher
> rates that would result, and is stirring up the "modem tax" issue to
> put public pressure to change this.

    I see, said the blind man.  I also think I smell a rat.
Crafty li'l weasels at CI$, aren't they.  My recent post indicates too
well that I fell for their little trick.  It sure got my blood
boiling.  I pay $27 per month for a no-frills voice line; 3/4 of my
phone use is BBS'ing.  Just because I choose to send modem signals
rather than voice shouldn't justify penalizing me for my choice.

    What you have said though indicates they aren't interested in
"soaking" me.  Thanks!  I'll sleep better tonight.

[e-mail] (Norman Yarvin) writes:

> I don't know whether or not a modem tax is planned by the telcos'
> highest decision making level.  I do know that one current research
> project at Bellcore is a circuit to automatically distinguish modem
> sounds from voice sounds.  It uses neural networks, and is apparently
> quite reliable.

    `Sounds like the _next_ project should be ... how to make modem
sounds _sound like_ voice sounds, eh?  <grin>


Tony Safina -=- disk![e-mail]

P.S.  Of course Bell probably wouldn't undertake this one.  ;)

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

Date: Wed, 29 Jul 92 00:41 EDT
From: fmsys![e-mail] (Macy Hallock)
Subject: Re: House Wiring Question
Organization: The Matrix


Concerning the 10BaseT EMI emmission in residential applications
discussion that has been going on for a while:

Although 10BaseT was intended for use on Unshielded Twisted Pair (UTP)
with fairly uniform impedance characteristics, it can be, and is used
with Shielded Twisted Pair (STP) successfully.

AT&T makes a decent STP cable for use with their Premises Distribution
System.  Its intended for RS-232 and can be used for Token Ring, too.
Others make a similar cable, including Belden and Columbia.  I have
not taken the time to carefully compare and match published
specifications.  AT&T's cable people told me that 10BaseT over STP is
not uncommon.

I have also run 10BaseT over STP that was originally for RS-422 use.
Never thought it would work, but it works just fine.  Ahh ... but we
cheated:

Bear in mind that I test the cable with a Microtest scanner prior to
installation in order to confirm its ability to operate
satisfactorily.  In most cases, I have observed reliable operation of
many type of STP at distances of 70 to 100 feet.  If the cable does
not have a good uniform twist in the pairs, then it fails every time.
As does "quad" type (red-green-yellow-black) JK non-paired old style
station cable.

This attests to the robust functionality of the signalling format and
today's 10BaseT equipment.  I'm very partial to using STP or UTP over
RG-58 coax.  (But then again, I'm a 20 year veteran telecom engineer,
what do you expect?)

Note that the silver satin base cords (telephone type) used with
10BaseT Network Interface cards all to often to connect with the wall
jack are not sheilded or twisted pair.  They radiate and attenuate
like heck, too.  Use a twisted pair type base cord if you can.
Non-UTP base cords will run 10BaseT 14 to 25 feet, FYI.  UTP base
cords have nearly the same characteristics of Level 3 (good qualty)
UTP voice station wire, which will do 300 feet plus.

Good UTP base cords are made by Homaco and Orrtronics, among others.
Also: very few people know that EIA-468 compliant jacks and
wiring/color code practice needs to be observed.

If you need a catalog, Homaco has a nice catalog with 10BaseT stuff in
it (they are in Chicago, and most telecom supply houses carry their
stuff) AT&T, Orrtronics, Krone, Nevada-Western, Hubbell, Leviton,
Suttle, Seimon and others all have good catalogs and suitable
products, too.

I use Homaco, Orrtronics, Hubbell and Leviton here.  AT&T, too, but
its a little more pricey.  Why do I use these brands?  I like the
products, they are carried by several of the suppliers I deal with and
they seem to be priced competively.  Also, no one has been willing to
offer me a large bribe to change brands...  [grin].

I'd put in STP in a residence without hesitation.  I'd also test the
cable first. Either a Homaco patch panel or AT&T 110 type patch blocks
would be in the wiring area.  Perhaps termination of the 10BaseT cable
directly in crimp-on RJ-45 plugs (to allow them to plug directly into
the 10BaseT hub) would work, but I tend to associate that practice
with "cheap and dirty" work, something I see all too often.  Seems as
though computer stores do not know how to install cable neatly ... I
have to fix a lot of their installations.

This advice is worth exactly what you paid for it ... be careful and
you will be rewarded with a working installation, but you must do the
homework.


Macy M Hallock Jr N8OBG 216.725.4764 [e-mail]
[e-mail] [No disclaimer, but I have no real idea what
I'm saying or why I'm telling you]

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

Date: Wed, 29 Jul 92 01:42 GMT
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: 800 Numbers: Which Provider is Best?


[e-mail] (Robert J Woodhead) writes:

> In particular, there are several mnemonic numbers we'd prefer to get;
> does anyone have a list of the number spaces each provider has?

This will all become moot soon. In what is called the "shared
database", routing to proper carriers will be based upon the entire
seven-digit 800 number. In other words, all carriers will be able to
offer all prefixes.

This should have been on line already, but as usual certain unnamed
particpants have been dragging feet. However, it really is "just
around the corner", so I would suggest making your carrier selection
on the basis of merits and then get the phone number of your dreams
when the shared database takes effect. I have clients who are
"suffering" along with a temporary number until they can get the one
they want.


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

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

From: acf5![e-mail] (Hasnain Khan)
Subject: Re: New Subscriber Solicitations - MCI
Date: 29 Jul 92 00:21:30 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: New York University


Well I called MCI, Sprint, and AT&T to get comparative rates for LD
calls.  I wanted them to find out what they would charge on my parents
line to various numbers. (I use MCI, I called for them to hopefully
shave their bills).

I didn't in anyway indicate that I wanted to switch, and explicitly
said "No".

Lo, Behold, they switched my parents, and billed with my name
(mispelled of course).


Hasnain Khan    [e-mail]

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

From: Hans Ridder <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Ground Wire on Network Interface?
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation - DECwest Engineering
Date: Mon, 29 Jul 1992 00:37:08 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Dick Rawson) writes:

>> In the US, all "communications" type wires entering a building are
>> required by "code" (NEC) to have lightning protection, and that
>> requires a ground.

>> Also, code requires that all these grounds, and your electrical
>> service ground, *must* be electrically bonded together.

> A quibble, but the NEC is a model code, not a law, and has effect only
> when a local jurisdiction adopts it by law.  A jurisdiction frequently
> adopts most of a model code, but with some local changes.  There are
> multiple competing codes for fire, building, life safety, and so on;
> they generally differ somewhat.

You're right that the NEC is just a model, as are most "national"
codes (such as the Uniform Building Code.)

It isn't likely that a local polititions would have the knowledge or
time to research and develop better electrical/safety code, unlike a
code which specified say, the number of outlets required per room, or
attic ventilation requirements, etc.


Hans-Gabriel Ridder      Digital DECwest Engineering
[e-mail]      Bellevue, Washington, USA
{pacbell,pyramid,uunet}!rust.zso.dec.com!ridder

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

From: [e-mail] (david.g.lewis)
Subject: Re: GTE and CLASS/ISDN
Organization: AT&T
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 04:32:36 GMT


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

> The statement 'GTE was working on them between their own switches' is
> entirely accurate.  Their deployment is somewhere between 0% and 100%,
> and it is increasing.

Just to throw a little more gasoline on the fire... quoting from "The
Race to Deploy SS7", by Karen Archer Perry, in the July 20, 1992 issue
of {Telephony}:

"GTE has used its national presence to establish a nationwide SS7
network.  Currently, 26% of its access lines are equipped with SS7.
That number will increase to 41% by the end of 1993 and to 65% by the
end of 1995."

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

From: [e-mail] (Bob Prehn)
Subject: Re: AT&T System 75: Need Terminal Emulation
Date: 29 Jul 92 00:12:25 GMT
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories - Denver


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

> I've recently been crowned Telephone Administrator by my employer so
> that makes me responsible for a System 75 with about 200 stations and
> Audix voice mail.  These things are naturally in a separate building
> from the one what contains my office so I need to run a remote
> terminal.  The terminals supported are the 513, 4410, and 4425.  I
> have the AT&T 513 emulation program but it doesn't like the MCGA
> graphics on my Model 30.  It works fine on PCs with any other type of
> graphics though.  Can anyone help me find a terminal emulator that
> supports one of the three types I need.  Commercial, shareware, or
> free -- it's OK with me.

AT&T Terranova has terminal emulators that do AT&T 4410, 605 and DEC
vt52, 100,220 emulations.  Versions are available for DOS, Windows,
and networks.  They also have a PBX report generator.  These emulators
do file transfer, script processing (with learn feature), print
spooling, central software administration, remote commands, telephone
directory and more.

Call 1-800-462-8146 or FAX [phone]

Tom Reingold (attmail!treingold) provided me with this info last year.
You may be able to get other information from him via email.


Robert Prehn   AT&T Bell Labs  Room 1F50
11900 North Pecos  Denver, Co  80234   drutx!rlp   [phone]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #591
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa13906;
          29 Jul 92 5:01 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA02492
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 29 Jul 1992 03:01:48 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA13830
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 29 Jul 1992 03:01:34 -0500
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 03:01:34 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #592

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 29 Jul 92 03:01:36 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 592

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Pac*Bell CLASS Features (John Higdon)
    Re: Pac*Bell CLASS Features (David G. Lewis)
    Re: Pac*Bell CLASS Features (Henry Mensch)
    Re: 911 Nightmare (Alan L. Varney)
    Re: 911 Nightmare (Martin McCormick)
    Re: Telephone Keypad Question (Jack Winslade)
    Re: Telephone Keypad Question (Dave Levenson)
    Re: Telephone Keypad Question (David Norman)
    Re: Country Code 37 Now Discontinued (Use 49) (Roy Smith)
    Re: Country Code 37 Now Discontinued (Use 49) (Richard Cox)
    Re: Ameritech Testing Digital Cellular Phones (David Lemson)
    Re: AT&T Strikes Again (Andy Sherman)
    Re: A Very Strange Experience When Calling LD (Russell Kroll)
    Re: An Open Letter to PAT and John Higdon (Jeff Sicherman)
    Re: Ham Radio Operators Running Rampant! (Allen Gwinn)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wed, 29 Jul 92 01:51 GMT
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: Pac*Bell CLASS Features


mtxinu!sybase!pokey![e-mail] (Neal Goldsmith) writes:

> When I asked about CLID I was told that Pac*Bell didn't have the
> technology yet. I didn't have the time or desire to explain to the
> person at Pac*Bell that it's the same stuff and they are already ready
> to provide it, they just don't want to right now.

It is a bit more complex than "they just don't want to right now".
Even when Pac*Bell decides that it will go ahead with CLID there are
some conditions that the CPUC has imposed. The most significant of
which is the requirement to "educate" the public concerning the
ramifications of the service to all customers. This will require
approximately a six-month media campaign to be completed before the
first of the service is activated.

As you know, GTE has decided not to play at all and will not be
offering CLID now or in the future. It is also questionable whether
the company will even offer any of the other features.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (david.g.lewis)
Subject: Re: Pac*Bell CLASS Features
Organization: AT&T
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 05:39:43 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> mtxinu!sybase!pokey!nealg@
ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (Neal Goldsmith) writes:

> I ordered the three new features (Repeat Dialing, Select Call
> Forwarding, and Priority Ringing). The features only work within my
> LATA.

> I can understand them not working for numbers that are not on SS7
> equipped switches, but isn't the CLASS information passed on even
> through toll switches? If not will it ever be?

> I would like to add numbers in LA to my Priority Ringing list.

CLASS (SM) features require end-to-end SS7 connectivity.  End-to-end
SS7 connectivity means that every trunk over which the call passes
uses SS7 signaling.  The path from the originating end office to the
IXC point of presence; the LEC/IXC interface in the originating LATA;
the path through the IXC network; the IXC/LEC interface in the
terminating LATA; and the path from the IXC point of presence to the
terminating end office must all be SS7-signaled trunks.

Currently, the LEC/IXC interfaces are virtually all MF-signaled, not
SS7.  Note that for CLASS (SM) features to work on an interLATA call,
both the originating *and* terminating interfaces must be SS7.

SS7 interconnections between LECs and IXCs are slowly being deployed;
I've seen in the last couple of issues of {CommWeek} a Southwestern
Bell legal notice of tariff filing of SS7 access arrangements, and I
know I've seen other LEC notices in the past.  It's getting there.

> Also it seems that repeat dialing works by attempting to retry the
> call every 45 seconds. I would think that this should work even
> through toll switches.

Repeat call, or whatever name the LEC has given it, doesn't retry the
call; it requests the terminating switch to monitor the status of the
called line, and when the line transitions from "busy" to "idle", the
terminating switch sends a SS7 message to the originating switch.  The
originating switch then rings the calling phone (if idle), and when
you pick up, re-originates the call.  This requires end-to-end SS7
also.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Henry Mensch)
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 92 00:50:29 -0700
Subject: Re: Pac*Bell CLASS Features
Reply-To: [e-mail]


mtxinu!sybase!pokey![e-mail] (Neal Goldsmith) wrote:

> I ordered the three new features (Repeat Dialing, Select Call
> Forwarding, and Priority Ringing). The features only work within my
> LATA.

> I can understand them not working for numbers that are not on SS7
> equipped switches, but isn't the CLASS information passed on even
> through toll switches? If not will it ever be?

I just found this out, too. It almost seems pointless ... why bother
when it only works with numbers in your neighborhood?


 # henry mensch / booz, allen & hamilton, inc.  / <[e-mail]>

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

Date: Tue, 28 Jul 92 00:08:37 CDT
From: [e-mail] (Alan L Varney)
Subject: Re: 911 Nightmare
Organization: AT&T Network Systems, Lisle, IL


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Robert K. Ricketts) writes:

> Our Esteemed Moderator replies to a post:

>> The modern CO does not know the difference between one off-hook and
>> another *until it finds time to go and get the caller's request.* At

> But it depends on what point during call setup that the busy was
> issued.  If the subscriber dialing 911 encountered busy going off-hook
> instead of dial tone then I agree.

   "Busy" going off-hook instead of dial tone is usually just lack of
dial tone, right?

> But if a DTMF receiver was available to the 911 caller giving dial
> tone, then I see no reason why the originating CO cannot be programmed
> to initiate call setup ahead of all other call requests.  If this
> means seizing the very next trunk to come available or even seizing an
> active trunk carrying a non-emergency call (as indicated by the call
> request being 911), then so be it.

   Most (but not all) 911 systems use dedicated trunks from out-lying
COs to a central tandem, in order to get ANI or be able to prevent
disconnect.  If you get "all circuits busy" or "regular busy", then
you called during a burst of 911 calls.  The system cannot tell how
important your 911 call is (pressure sensitive keypads??), and will
not drop another until an attendant ends a call.  One could always
argue that more dedicated trunks or attendants are needed, but would
you really want to pay for it??

   As I've mentioned before, the real 911 problem from the "Garth
Brooks" mass ticket sale is not lack of trunks.  It's lack of quick
dial tone.


Al Varney - just MY opinion.

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

Subject: Re: 911 Nightmare
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 92 10:17:55 -0500
From: [e-mail]


During the recent incident in Tulsa in which a woman died of a heart
attack and her husband was unable to get through to 911 due to a
clogged phone system, there were a couple of facts which were not
totally clear from the news account.  While nobody actually came out
and said as much, I believe that people trying to call 911 did get a
dial-tone from their exchange.  The trouble occurred when they dialed.

The reporter gave an example of a busy signal, but it is not
known precisely whether the sound was recorded from an actual attempt
at dialing 911, that morning, or was simply a recording of a busy
signal used as an example of what one sounds like.  The thought even
occurs to me that the caller might have even heard a reorder signal
since many people call that a busy signal.  My idea of a system to
shed non-emergency calls in order to free circuits for 911 is based on
at least getting a dial-tone.  It is quite true that if there is no
dial-tone, the switch doesn't really know that you are there, yet.

Most of the exchanges in Tulsa are now electronic and it would seem
possible that they could be programmed to make room for 911 calls,
assuming that they, themselves, weren't so overloaded that they were
no longer capable of giving dial-tone.


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

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

Date: Wed, 29 Jul 92 00:28:06 CST
From: [e-mail] (Jack Winslade)
Subject: Re: Telephone Keypad Question
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: DRBBS Technical BBS, Omaha


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

[interesting number origin deleted]

> After about 1960 it was dueces wild; no attempt was made to match
> numbers with names; any number combination unused at the time was
> considered with some universal exceptions: First and second digits
> always 2-9 (never 0 or 1) and third digit 1-9 (never a zero).

In NYC in the mid 60s, there was an attempt to make lettered prefixes
which had no spoken name.  The number I remember the best (I think it
was a TV or radio station, probably WABC) was LT1-7777, pronounced
'ell-tee-one ...'  I also remember one with two x's, XXsomething.

When they got the intercept announcers to repeat the number that was
dialed, I remember that they would announce the number in either the
letter format or the all-number format, which ever was officially
assigned to the disconnected line.  For example, 856-9900 might return
'.. the nummmmberrr you have reaccc{scratch}hed, eight-five-six
nine-nine-oh-oh' while 856-9901 might return instead '.. the
{click-buzz} numberrrr you have reaaaached, you-ell-six
nine-nine-oh-one ...'

I don't remember if there were any cases where the third letter would
be pronounced, that is if SPRing 9901 would be pronounced as '...
ess-pee-are' or 'ess-pee-seven'.


Good day.          JSW

Ybbat (DRBBS) 8.9 v. 3.14 r.1
DRBBS Technical BBS, Omaha (just say 'NOE') 402-896-3537  (1:285/666.0)

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

From: [e-mail] (Dave Levenson)
Subject: Re: Telephone Keypad Question
Organization: Westmark, Inc.
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 03:09:11 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (VLD/VMB)
writes:

> You mention 911 in the Moderator's Note, apparently in reference to
> Chicago.  When did it go away?  (Not to be confused with the
> 911-for-emergency-service; when did that come to Chicago?)

I seem to recall that in Chicago, one used to dial 0 for the local
operator, and 211 for the "long distance" operator.  I wondered about
this, when I visited the area.  In the East, we used 0 for any
operator.


Dave Levenson        Internet: [e-mail]
Westmark, Inc.        UUCP: {uunet | rutgers | att}!westmark!dave
Warren, NJ, USA        Voice: 908 647 0900  Fax: [phone]


[Moderator's Note: We dialed 0 for local operator assistance, and 211
for Long Distance. Or you could dial 0 and ask for Long Distance; but
it was not the same operator. We also had 811 (originally) for what
was called 'Priority Long Distance' during the Second War. Afterward,
811 flagged the Long Distance operator that you were a hotel, university
or hospital operator (to name three) needing time and charges quoted
either by voice when the call was finished or sent to your teletype
machine (usually every thirty minutes all LD calls were reported back
to the PBX operator.) Smaller switchboards had to dial 811, wait for an
answer and say (something like) "UC Operator 13, Extension 2384, TC
please", then leave the line. Bigger boards had actual tie-lines on
the board direct to Long Distance. The PBX operator simply plugged in
and jiggled the ringing key a couple times. When LD came on, all the
PBX operator had to do was pass the extension number of the caller
then leave the line. When Time and Charges were quoted, the LD
operator would go through all the calls from that switchboard in about
a minute giving PBX extension, where called, the time the ticket
was stamped in and out on the little timeclock at each position, the
charges and an exchange of ticket serial or reference numbers.
("This.is.Kenwood.see-oh.with.charges.say.when ... " ["Go"]
"Extension.2345.East.Podunk.6089.up.at.2345.08.August.down.0012.next.day
09.August.charges.five.dollars.ninety.five.cents.I.am.08915.you.are?"
["I am 3276"] ..."Extension.5936.West.Podunk.3615.up.at.0001.09.August.
.down.0005.09.August.charges.two.dollars.ten.cents.I.am.62134.you.are?"
["I am 3277"] ... maybe a half dozen of these. In the CO itself,
clerks went around to each operator position every few minutes with a
little wire basket collecting hand-written LD charge slips written on
paper forms.    PAT]

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

Date: Tue, 28 Jul 92 16:31:31 NZS
From: David Norman <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Telephone Keypad Question


In article <[e-mail]>, Herman Silbiger writes:

> The holdout is AUSTRALIA.

Not so!  New Zealand has already adopted QZ on 1 for alpha-numeric
keypads.  A major reason for this approach was that this layout is an
ANSI (yes, that's AMERICAN National Standards Institution) standard
(ANSI X3.118-1984) for financial services, and it was felt that
alignment with banking practice was highly desirable to avoid
confusion by the public (check-out your local ATM - here QZ are on 1)

There are many other reasons for our "position" on this. We're
particularly interested in Z (as in NZ!) for incorporation into easily
remembered "numbers" for customers like Air New Zealand. As Herman has
pointed out, only the position of QZ remains to be decided within the
CCITT (Recommendation E.161). I believe it's almost inevitable that a
dual standard will evolve. We shall see.~

BTW, my Mitel Superset 7 on my desk here has QZ above the * (star)
key!!!!!!


Dave Norman

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

Date: Wed, 29 Jul 92 00:47:53 EDT
From: Roy Smith <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Country Code 37 Now Discontinued (Use 49)
Organization: Public Health Research Institute (New York)


In article <[e-mail]> is written:

> By the way, when would the country code 37 be available again (e.g.
> for the new countries in Eastern Europe)? Is there a waiting period
> before 'reuse' of a country code?

I can see it now ...

"The country you have dialed is no longer in service.  Please check
the evening news to see if it still exists and try again."


[e-mail] (Roy Smith)
Public Health Research Institute
455 First Avenue, New York, NY 10016, USA


[Moderator's Note: A friend of mine visited in Cuba in 1955 and while
there tried to call back to the USA. The international circuit rang
many times (Miami overseas operators must have been very busy) and
finally the Cuban operator said "Sorry, the United States is not
answering right now."  :)  !!    PAT]

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

Date: Wed, 29 Jul 92 00:40 GMT
From: Richard Cox <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Country Code 37 Now Discontinued (Use 49)
Reply-To: [e-mail]


CCITT will not be reissuing Country Code 37 (was East Germany).

Instead they will issue the ten codes 370-379.  CCITT have said that
they will not issue any more one or two digit country codes.


Richard Cox

Mandarin Technology, Cardiff Business Park, Llanishen, CARDIFF, Wales CF4 5WF
Voice: [phone]      Fax: [phone]      VoiceMail: [phone]
E-mail: [e-mail]

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

From: David Lemson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Ameritech Testing Digital Cellular Phones
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 00:03:45 GMT


[e-mail] writes:

> IF YOU WANT TO JOIN IN THE TEST: You must live in Arlington Heights,
> the Lincoln Park area of Chicago, or downtown Chicago, and you MUST
> NOT be a member of a telecommunications company (unless it's
> Ameritech, I'll bet :-). Call Mr. Tay Kim or one of his associates at
> [phone] for details. He told me that they are a small group in

I was told by the Ameritech guy at SuperComm/ICC who demonstrated the
phone for us that they had way more than enough people to test the
system.  He said "I can't even get one!"  Maybe they're onto the next
phase and have more openings?  Or maybe because I was with my dad who
works for a telecommunications company ... (and whose nametag showed
it) :-)


David Lemson                                                 [phone]
University of Illinois NeXT Campus Consultant  / CCSO NeXT Lab System Admin
Internet : [e-mail]                 UUCP :...!uiucuxc!uiucux1!lemson
NeXTMail accepted                                   BITNET : LEMSON@UIUCVMD

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

From: [e-mail] (Andy Sherman)
Subject: Re: AT&T Strikes Again
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 92 00:41:37 EDT


On 26 Jul 92 14:58:49 GMT, [e-mail] (Ed Greenberg) said:

   (with reference to the ROA calling card option)

> Sure enough, during your 1 hour of midnight calling, the surcharge
> is waived.  Other than that, it's just discounted.

Close, but not quite right.  Calling Card calls are billed at plan
rates.  Plan rates for day and evening calls are a percentage discount
from whatever the call would ordinarily cost.  That means that you pay
the calling card surcharge but it (and the call) are discounted.

For calls during the 10-8 and weekend period, calling card calls are
also billed at plan rates.  This means that the first 60 minutes go
towards the hour included in the monthly charge.  Anything else is
billed at $0.11 per minute, with no surcharge.  It is not just the
first hour that is free of surcharge, as implied in your post (by you
or Eleanor).


Andy Sherman
Salomon Inc  -  Unix Systems Support  -  Rutherford, NJ
[phone]  -  [e-mail] or [e-mail]
"These opinions are mine, all *MINE*.  My employer can't have them."

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

Subject: Re: A Very Strange Experience When Calling LD
From: unkaphaed![e-mail] (Russell Kroll)
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 92 00:00:43 GMT
Organization: Unka Phaed's UUCP Thingy


> About, I'd say, 2^3 to 2^5 conversations going on at once!  (Yes, I
> think in binary, so I'm sorry.)  It was wild.  I heard phones ringing
> (even some international puvvvvvvv--puvvvvvvv type rings,) people
> answering the phone in various languages, mostly american english, and
> wonderful voices from all over!  It was definately an invasion of

The same thing happened to me when calling the 609-897 prefix in
Arizona.  The modem wasn't connecting, so I picked up the phone. Oddly
enough, it sounded like a huge party line! Unfortunately, I got
clicked off about ten seconds later. By the way, I'm also using AT&T.


[e-mail] (Russell Kroll)
Unka Phaed's UUCP Thingy, [phone]
1200/2400/9600/14400 v.32bis/v.42bis

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

Date: Tue, 28 Jul 92 00:32:24 -0700
From: Jeff Sicherman <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: An Open Letter to PAT and John Higdon
Organization: Cal State Long Beach


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

> 1) You, PAT, our Esteemed Moderator, and
> 2) John Higdon, of Green Hills and Cows fame.

> We were wondering if the two of you would take a few minutes from
> your busy schedules of doing whatever it is you do, and tell us
> all about whatever it is you do. Please add whatever biographical
> details of interest you feel like throwing in to let us know how
> you got where you are today, as most people would say that their
> earlier jobs were infinitely more interesting than what they're
> doing right now!

  You mean BESIDES run their virtual mouths at the slightest
provocation? I thought that was their jobs ...


Jeff Sicherman

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

Date: Tue, 28 Jul 92 07:26 CDT
From: [e-mail] (Allen Gwinn)
Subject: Re: Ham Radio Operators Running Rampant!
Organization: sulaco


Geez, guy!  Calm down!  Pat is essentially correct with his statement.
Have you ever listened to 2 meters in California?  How about 10 meters
in West Texas?  There has been a migration of idiots from 11M to other
"more desirable" bands (without licenses of course) for as long as I
can remember.

Other things I'd like to know include what Radio Shack's 10M rig has
done to the band.  :-)


Allen, N5CKP


[Moderator's Note: Two meters (144-148 megs) is a mess here sometimes.
The guys just don't seem to care any longer. And most Radio Shack
transcievers are as dirty as they come. Talk about slopping all over
the band and then some. Cobra made much better units; and not that I
would transmit illegally, but you could get 200 more channels (in
addition to the regular 40) out of the chips they used. With a little
effort they could even be fixed to oscillate way up into ten meters as
well as CB. So many guys were doing those mods the FCC finally raised
hell with Motorola; they had to quit making that chip.  PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #592
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa24522;
          30 Jul 92 1:27 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA02064
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 29 Jul 1992 23:33:10 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA04288
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 29 Jul 1992 23:32:59 -0500
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 23:32:59 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #593

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 29 Jul 92 23:33:00 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 593

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Is Not 100% SS7 Needed For 1-800 and the Like? (Jack Adams)
    Re: Is Not 100% SS7 Needed For 1-800 and the Like? (Andy Sherman)
    Re: Is Not 100% SS7 Needed For 1-800 and the Like? (Alan L. Varney)
    Re: Is Not 100% SS7 Needed For 1-800 and the Like? (David G. Lewis)
    Re: Pac*Bell CLASS Features (John Higdon)
    Re: Pac*Bell CLASS Features (Nancy J. Airey)
    Re: Pac*Bell CLASS Features (Jon Baker)
    Re: Pac*Bell CLASS Features (Dave Levenson)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: vixen![e-mail] (26070-adams)
Subject: Re: Is Not 100% SS7 Needed For 1-800 and the Like?
Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 92 14:37:00 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (H.
Shrikumar) writes:

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

> >> Regarding SS7 links, he said GTE was working on them between their own
> >> switches.  Links to PacBell would come, but he didn't know when.

> Please correct me, if I am wrong ... no scratch that, reading the
> above, it *does* seem that I *am* wrong ...

> I was under the impression that 1-800 like services could not be
> implemented really well without the something like SS7.
> IS it that 1-800, ANI and caller-ID are being done by someother
> means (I'd have to do some learning here then.) or is it that the LD
> carrier do use SS7, and only that some local links are not yet ?

While full SS7 deployment will enhance the performance of 800 and
similar intelligent network services, it is not a requirement.  MF
trunking and FGD interfaces work fairly well.  As far as who (read
this as IXCs and LECs) is fully deployed and who isn't, the score card
changes almost daily.  My information (A little less than real time
accuracy) is that most of the dominant IXCs are fully SS7, while the
LECs run all the way from hardly any SS7 to well over 90% of their
signalling on SS7.  The internetworking of IXCs and LECs SS7
signalling is one of the current major tasks before the industry in
the US.  The FCCs 86-10 docket plays a major role in expediting SS7
deployment.  Can (obvious proprietary issues here) anyone share
current SS7 deployment stats?


Jack (John) Adams        Bellcore RRC 4B-259
[phone] {Voice}        [phone] {Facsimile}
[e-mail]   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Andy Sherman)
Subject: Re: Is Not 100% SS7 Needed For 1-800 and the Like?
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 92 16:28:41 EDT


On 27 Jul 92 22:48:02 GMT, [e-mail] (H. Shrikumar) said:

> I was under the impression that 1-800 like services could not be
> implemented really well without the something like SS7. Are we reading
> in the above that there is not yet 100% SS7 interconnects in the US.

> IS it that 1-800, ANI and caller-ID are being done by someother
> means (I'd have to do some learning here then.) or is it that the LD
> carrier do use SS7, and only that some local links are not yet ?

As you suspected, your impression was wrong.  :^).  There are several
ways other than SS7 for sending ANI information from a local exchange
carrier (LEC) to an interexchange carrier (IXC).  There has to be.
SS7 is relatively new, yet IXC's have been billing for long distance
without it.  In order to return ANI to an 800 customer, then, the IXC
only needs the billing number it got from the LEC.

Caller ID, the residential service, *does* require SS7 as implemented.


Andy Sherman
Salomon Inc  -  Unix Systems Support  -  Rutherford, NJ
[phone]  -  [e-mail] or [e-mail]
"These opinions are mine, all *MINE*.  My employer can't have them."

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

Date: Wed, 29 Jul 92 03:43:17 CDT
From: [e-mail] (Alan L Varney)
Subject: Re: Is Not 100% SS7 Needed For 1-800 and the Like?
Organization: AT&T Network Systems, Lisle, IL


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (H.
Shrikumar) writes:

> Please correct me, if I am wrong ... no scratch that, reading the
> above, it *does* seem that I *am* wrong ...

> I was under the impression that 1-800 like services could not be
> implemented really well without the something like SS7.

   Jee, I don't know; I thought 1-800 worked "really well" before SS7
existed ... :) In the beginning, 800 was implemented by setting up
lots of switch translators -- the final destination was usually a
number like NPA-015-2345, for Band 5 calls.  Then CCIS 6 made possible
the 800 database, and AT&T started using it to both screen for Band
violations and to derive the destination number.  This worked well
until divestiture, when everyone (LEC and IXC) wanted 800 numbers and
their own databases.  The current scheme pre-allots 800 NXXs to
carriers, and sends the calls to them with FG-D signaling (ANI, etc.).
Each carrier has their own database(s) and scheme for accessing
it/them.

   As a long-term objective of divestiture, the "industry" was to
develop a means for assigning 800 numbers to carriers on a 10-digit
basis, and provide a means to change that association.  Bellcore's
scheme for this is described in TR-TSY-000024, called "800 Number
Services".  In general, this uses SS7 from an End Office (EO) to query
a database that will return an associated carrier and (possibly) a
destination number.  Where the EO does not have the feature, either
FG-D MF or SS7 or ... can be used to reach a Tandem switch that can
then query the database.  If a non-LEC carrier is associated with the
number, the carrier can be reached using FG-D or SS7 signaling.

   Much of the push for SS7 interconnection now is to reduce the
"post-dial delay" associated with the FG-D signaling scheme combined
with the use of a Tandem to do the query.  For example, today's 800
call could go direct to an IXC from an end office, using about 22 MF
digits.  With TR-24 and a Tandem, there's 28 digits to the Tandem (in
two stages), a query/response delay, then 22 digits to the IXC.
That's roughly 3.5 seconds added delay in delivery.  SS7 can cut that
delay by querying directly from the EO, or using SS7 to the Tandem, or
using SS7 to the IXC from either the EO or the Tandem.  The current
version of the FCC 86-10 ruling is designed to reduce the delay in two
stages, while speeding up the availability of "portable" 800 numbers.

> ... Are we reading in the above that there is not yet 100% SS7
> interconnects in the US?

   Yes and no.  Calls in general will not use SS7 between the LEC and
IXC TODAY.  But most are interconnected with SS7 in some fashion in
order to verify Calling Card numbers, line restrictions, etc.  This
was needed in order to comply with an earlier timetable for removing
LEC access to AT&T's old line databases (CCIS 6 access).

> IS it that 1-800, ANI and caller-ID are being done by some other
> means (I'd have to do some learning here then.) or is it that the LD
> carrier do use SS7, and only that some local links are not yet ?

   Caller-ID today is primarily restricted to intra-LATA SS7
connections (but CCIS 6 was used for some early trials).  The current
NXX-based 800 access scheme and ANI are available with MF signaling,
but are also supported with SS7.  Where did you get your information??


Al Varney - just MY opinion.
This information IS available from the FCC and other sources.

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

From: [e-mail] (david.g.lewis)
Subject: Re: Is Not 100% SS7 Needed For 1-800 and the Like?
Organization: AT&T
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 13:20:21 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (H.
Shrikumar) writes:

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

>>> Regarding SS7 links, he said GTE was working on them between their own
>>> switches.  Links to PacBell would come, but he didn't know when.

>  Please correct me, if I am wrong ... no scratch that, reading the
> above, it *does* seem that I *am* wrong ...

> I was under the impression that 1-800 like services could not be
> implemented really well without the something like SS7. Are we reading
> in the above that there is not yet 100% SS7 interconnects in the US.

"Really well" being a loaded phrase, I'm going to avoid using it ...
800 services can be and are implemented without SS7 network
interconnect between LECs and IXCs (and between BOCs and other LECs);
in fact, 1992 being the 25th anniversary of 800 service, it is obvious
that 800 service worked fine before the world even heard of SS7.

What I suspect you're thinking of is twofold:

1. Current 800 service implements carrier selection by the "NXX"
method, a.k.a. six digit translation in the originating LEC network.
Each 800 NXX prefix is assigned to a single 800 service provider.  The
originating LEC end office or access tandem performs a six digit
translation on the dialed 800-NXX number and uses that to route to the
appropriate carrier (IXC if an IXC NXX, performs a database dip if the
LEC's own NXX, reorder or announcement if some other LEC's NXX).

FCC docket something-or-other orders what's commonly known as "800
number portability", wherein the 800 numbering space will be
partitioned amond service providers on a seven digit basis instead of
a three digit basis.  This requires that the originating LEC network
route on ten digits instead of six.  Because this amount of
information can't be stored in a switch, the originating LEC switch
will (in most cases) route the 800 call to its access tandem, which
will query a database (800 Service Control Point) to determine the
carrier to which to route the 800 call.

2. Because an additional database query is being used in the
originating LEC network, call setup delay will increase by a
non-trivial amount.  The FCC, in the same docket, therefore imposed
fairly strict performance requirements (which are, I believe, a median
time for calls to be delivered to the terminating LEC of less than 2.5
seconds by sometime in 1993, and a 95%ile time for calls to be
delivered to the terminating LEC of less than five seconds by sometime in
1995).

To meet these performance requirements calls for a fairly high level
of SS7 implementation, both in the LEC networks and LEC/IXC network
interconnections.  (The IXCs internally are almost, if not completely,
100% SS7.)  Therefore, to implement "800 number portability" requires
high (although not 100%) SS7 implementation.

> IS it that 1-800, ANI and caller-ID are being done by some other
> means (I'd have to do some learning here then.) or is it that the LD
> carrier do use SS7, and only that some local links are not yet ?

Both.  800 calls are sent from originating LEC to IXC to terminating
LEC via whatever signaling method happens to be in place.  Wherever
the 800 database query occurs, some kind of out-of-band signaling has
to be available (SS7 in almost all cases today; historically, AT&T
used CCIS - SS6 - for queries before SS7 was around).  ANI delivers
the Billing Number from the originating LEC to the IXC via equal acces
MF signaling; this can then be carried through the IXC network if the
network supports it, such as in the SS7 Charge Number parameter.  It
can then be delivered to customers which are directly connected to the
IXC network (via T1 carrying either ISDN Q.931 signaling, or MF/DTMF
which has been modified to deliver the billing number in a way similar
to equal access MF).  There is currently, short of SS7 network
interconnect, no way to deliver calling party number or billing number
from the IXC to the terminating LEC.

Hope that answered your questions.


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

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

Date: Wed, 29 Jul 92 03:46 PDT
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: Pac*Bell CLASS Features


[e-mail] (Henry Mensch) writes:

> I just found this out, too. It almost seems pointless ... why bother
> when it only works with numbers in your neighborhood?

I fail to see the stretch that equates "LATA" with "neighborhood". In
our case, the CLASS features will not even cover the entire LATA
(excluding the 707 area) initially. But what amounts to the
nine-county Bay Area is quite a chunk of real estate. An area
consisting of several thousand square miles is not my idea of a
"neighborhood".

But as I was reading the phone book in the hotel room yesterday
morning in Reno, I was once again reminded that the whole world is not
California. The book described "Custom Calling 2000" which is the
entire litany of CLASS features. Yes, Nevada Bell (a Pacific Telesis
company) offers Caller ID and no per-line blocking. Of course, it is
Nevada, not California. For some strange reason, the state of Nevada
does not find it necessary to pass laws that cover every single action
one can perform in his wakeful condition.

I saw people riding motorcycles without helmets (I would never do
that, but it is nice to have the choice), people riding without
seatbelts, and Caller ID. California, in its infinite wisdom, has
decided that these things (as well as thousands of others) are not
allowed. So a state that cannot even pass a budget on time (or at all
so far this fiscal year) as required by law, can still dictate to its
residents all of the things that they cannot have or do (for their own
good, of course). Yes, I know that PUC rules and laws passed by Willie
Brown and his friends are two different animals, but the effect is the
same.

Oh, the size of the LATA involved? Try half the state. Pretty good
sized neighborhood if you ask me.


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

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

Date: Wed, 29 Jul 92 08:46:04 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Nancy J Airey)
Subject: Re: Pac*Bell CLASS Features
Organization: AT&T


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(david.g.lewis) writes:

> Repeat call, or whatever name the LEC has given it, doesn't retry the
> call; it requests the terminating switch to monitor the status of the
> called line, and when the line transitions from "busy" to "idle", the
> terminating switch sends a SS7 message to the originating switch.  The
> originating switch then rings the calling phone (if idle), and when
> you pick up, re-originates the call.  This requires end-to-end SS7
> also.

Actually, (at least according to our experiments here in our ISDN lab)
the called party's phone doesn't ring until you pick up on a "stutter
ring" generated at your phone.  Something that makes sense if you want
to be sure that the caller is still around to "make" the call.


att!hrcce!jean

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

From: [e-mail] (Jon Baker)
Subject: Re: Pac*Bell CLASS Features
Organization: AG Communication Systems, Phoenix, Arizona
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 17:22:55 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, mtxinu!sybase!pokey!nealg@
ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (Neal Goldsmith) writes:

> Also it seems that repeat dialing works by attempting to retry the
> call every 45 seconds. I would think that this should work even
> through toll switches.

The call is not actually retried every 45 seconds.  For origination
queueing, your CO is sending a message via the SS7 network
periodically to query the status of the target line.  If it is busy,
nothing happens, and it queries again a bit later.  If it is idle,
your line is rung; when you answer, the target line is rung and the
call is considered complete.

Thus, since SS7 messages are used to query the line status, this
feature will not work unless there is SS7 connectivity between you and
the target line.


J.Baker     enuucp!gtephx!bakerj
I am not an official representative of AG Communication Systems.

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

From: [e-mail] (Dave Levenson)
Subject: Re: Pac*Bell CLASS Features
Organization: Westmark, Inc.
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 02:48:10 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, mtxinu!sybase!pokey!nealg@
ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (Neal Goldsmith) writes:

> I ordered the three new features (Repeat Dialing, Select Call
> Forwarding, and Priority Ringing). The features only work within my
> LATA.

> I can understand them not working for numbers that are not on SS7
> equiped switches, but isn't the CLASS information passed on even
> through toll switches? If not will it ever be?

Yes, it is planned.  How soon?  That depends upon which toll carrier
you're talking about.  Some of them will probably start carrying SS7
before others do.

> Also it seems that repeat dialing works by attempting to retry the
> call every 45 seconds. I would think that this should work even
> through toll switches.

It doesn't work by repeat dialing at all.  It sends a message to the
destination CO, via the SS-7 network, requesting notification when the
called line becomes available.  If the destination is not SS-7
equipped, or if the destination number is part of a DID group, even if
the office is SS-7 equipped, then your request for 'repeat dial' is
rejected.


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 #593
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa25889;
          30 Jul 92 2:03 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA21279
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 30 Jul 1992 00:00:10 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA10189
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 29 Jul 1992 23:59:59 -0500
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 23:59:59 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #594

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 30 Jul 92 00:00:05 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 594

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: What is DSO? (Alan L. Varney)
    Re: Personal Identification (was The Depths of Sliminess) (Bennett E. Todd)
    Re: Should I Keep My Cellphone Off When Not Using it? (Bill Mayhew)
    Re: FCC Modem Tax Rumor on Compu$erve (Alex Martelli)
    Re: Traces and Scramblers (Michael Salmon)
    Re: DMS-100 Peculiarity - HELP!!! (Henry W. Troup)
    Re: How Use Answering Machine in Argentina? (Cristobal P. Martin)
    Re: Cordless Phone Not Charging (Andrew C. Green)
    Re: Solve Three Problems (was Telecom Fraud) ([e-mail])
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wed, 29 Jul 92 12:01:25 CDT
From: [e-mail] (Alan L Varney)
Subject: Re: What is DSO?
Organization: AT&T Network Systems, Lisle, IL


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Dave
Niebuhr) writes:

> I know that DMS (tm), the ESS(tm) series and AXE(tm) acronyms are for
> types of switches in the COs, but I've come across the term DSO used
> when I've dialed NNX-9901 to determine the location of a particular
> exchange or group of them.

   For switches, the term DSO usually means Digital Switching Office
(or maybe Digital Serving Office).  This is sort of a generic name for
such offices, of which the DMS- and digital ESS switches are specific
instances.

   In the CLLI(tm) ("silly") code of Bellcore, COs are identified by
City, State, Building and the "building subdivision" -- the latter is
a code that identifies the "type" of switch and the specific instance
within the building.  For example, "Toll" switches are usually
identified by "04T", where "T" is Toll Tandem and "04" means the 4th
such switch in the building ("01" through "03" may have been retired
long ago).

   The code "DS0" (not "DSO") is commonly used to label the first
digital CO in a building.  Bellcore has a whole list of rules for
choosing the identifiers for switches and for all sorts of equipment.
Analog ESS switches are subdivided by type; the No. 1/1A ESS switches
are "CGn", with "C" specific to those switches.  A "D" was for the
4-wire version of those switches, and "E" was for No. 2 ESS.  There
are so many digital switch vendors that Bellcore just uses the "DSn"
for all DSOs.

> Today, NYTel had a notification in {Newsday} that the company was
> offering Enterprise DSO which carries both analog and digital signals
> over fiber but no explanation was given as to what DSO was/is/does.

   Obviously, NYTel can use the "DSO" to mean anything it wants ...
But are you sure it wasn't "DS-0", a common term for a 56/64Kbps
channel within a DS-1 1.544Mbps "T1" line.  DS-0 would typically be
the slowest rate of "digital" interface to a fiber circuit.


Al Varney -- just MY opinion

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

From: [e-mail] (Bennett E. Todd)
Subject: Re: Personal Identification (was The Depths of Sliminess)
Date: 28 Jul 92 00:37:23 GMT
Organization: Salomon Brothers, Inc


There's another solution: a call screening box. I bought one for $59;
it plugs between the wall and my phone. I get to set a 4-digit code.
When someone calls in, the phone doesn't ring; instead, this box picks
up and prompts for an additional security code. If the additional code
is entered, the box warbles. If not, it hangs up --- with no audible
indication on my end that anything has happened.

The only thing I can think of that would make it nicer, would be if
instead of having the box warble, it actually generated real ring
voltage on its output jack. It isn't line-powered, after all. Then you
could put other telephony appliances downstream of the screening box.
Still, I like it just as it is.


Bennett     [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Bill Mayhew)
Subject: Re: Should I Keep My Cellphone Off When Not Using it?
Organization: Northeastern Ohio Universities College of Medicine
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 03:30:53 GMT


I've noticed that my Uniden cell phone sends out some sort of inquiry
a few seconds after being swtiched on.  That inquiry is something in
addition to sensing of SERVICE AVAILABLE condition.  Detaching the
antenna makes the SERVICE indicator turn off immediately.  Reattaching
the antenna makes the SERVICE indicator turn on immediately.

I have Cellular One as a carrier.  In this area, Celluar One is an A
service "wireline" system, I believe.  The system seems to keep track
of the last location of mobile sets until midnight of the current day.
For instance, if you have automatic follow roaming turned on, it is
cancelled each midnight.  Ringing seems to go out to all cells in the
last known serice area of the unit, as it is perfectly possible that
the unit might have crossed cell boundaries since the last contact
with the unit.

You are correct that the mobile unit does periodically talk to the
system.  My unit makes some sore of inquiry every five minutes while
it is switched on.

The sytem doesn't waste too much bandwidth attempting to contact a
mobile unit.  When I dial my switched-off cellular phone, the system
will generate approximately four ring-back tones before it switches
over to an intercept recording saying, "The Cellular One phone you are
calling is either switched off or out of the area."

I'm not sure what the period inquiry is doing.  The manual says that
the phone will try to re-establish service every five minutes.
Apparently, the phone expects to get an answerback from the system in
addition to sufficient signal quality.  If the phone has gotten an
answerback from the a correct A or B system and signal level is
maintained, it must presume it is still in the service area.  The
uniden phone I have also automatically adjusts its transmitter power
between a few mW and three watts depending on the strength of the
signal coming from the cell.  The results of this can be interesting
in marginal conditions because the phone will go to a full three watts
when it can't hear the cell in the middle of a call.  The cell,
apparently having a much better reciever continues to hear the phone.
I've had a number of calls where I can not hear the person I'm
calling, but the person can hear me.

All in all, I'd switch off the phone when you don't need it.  This
will keep you from getting junk calls and wrong numbers.  The system
probably has to ring all the cells, or least some number, starting in
your last known position anyway.

As a side issue, I've noticed that my cellular phone has yet to
receive any sort of junk telemarketing call.  I presume that cellular
prefixes must be some magic taboo for telemarketers -- or it could be
that since most cellular users switch off phones while out of the car,
etc., that the hit rate is low enough that sequentially calling in
cellular prefixes is a waste of time.

My pager, on the other hand, recieves a lot of wrong numbers.  My
number xxx-5225, must be close to that of some local drug dealer.  I
get a lot of xxx-xxxx-911 displays on my pager.  Usually about
23:00-00:00.  The prefix is often in the downtown area.  I've
occasionally called those numbers out of curiosity.  They've all been
older women with noticable ethnic accent ... or they might be old
ladies trolling pagers just to get a human with which to talk; naah.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Alex Martelli)
Subject: Re: FCC Modem Tax Rumor on Compu$erve
Organization: CAD.LAB S.p.A., Bologna, Italia
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 08:24:51 GMT


disk![e-mail] (tony) writes:

> service.  I guess I have mixed feelings about government involvement
> in telecommunications because on one hand I would like to see more
> government involvement, but I say this only if it is going to make
> more information available to me at less cost, not less information at
> more cost.

You should also be thinking about WHAT information will be made
available, rather than just "how much" of it.  A monopolist provider
of information will be able to select, and let flow, only that info
which supports/does not hinder its purposes; but if there are many,
independent suppliers in free competition, you WILL be able to get
access to much more variety (not necessarily cheaply, if information
of a given sort is costly to produce/gather and only has few
customers; but the mechanisms determining this will be more economic
than political).


Email: [e-mail]                   Phone: ++39 (51) 6130360
CAD.LAB s.p.a., v. Ronzani 7/29, Casalecchio, Italia   Fax: ++39 (51) 6130294

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

From: [e-mail] (Michael Salmon)
Subject: Re: Traces and Scramblers
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Michael Salmon)
Organization: Ericsson Telecom AB
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 07:26:06 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Steve Grant) writes:

> Does anyone have plans for either of these items or information on how
> to do it, particularly the scrambler?  Also is it possible to trace
> calls from home, not the exchange?

Scramblers of course vary but a common technique is frequency
inversion, if we presume that the telepone bandwidth is 300 - 3300 Hz
(mainly because I'm lazy) then 300 Hz is translated 3300, 3300 to 300
and 1800 stays the same. The technique is to ssb usb modulate the
speech with e.g. 100 Khz giving us 100.3 to 103.3 KHz then ssb lsb
demodulate with 103.6 giving us 3300 to 300 Hz. I'm told that this
technique is only effective against casual listeners. Another
technique is to encode digitized speech, CDMA is an example though for
different reasons.  Needless to say that these techniques require
digital tarnsmission for reliability.

Tracing from the home is not strictly possible, in the USA there are
these newfangled caller ID devices. I have heard that NZ Telecom is
now controlled from the USA so perhaps you'll get them soon. Ericsson
market a facility in their AXE exchanges that allows the subscriber to
indicate that they have received a call that they want traced and a
printout is generated in the exchange. The effectiveness of this
technique depends to an extent upon where the caller calls from but it
is a very usefull facility. As it is exchange based however it is only
useful for official type tracing, not casual curiosity. I would guess
that most (if not all) exchange types have a similar facility.


Michael Salmon    #include <standard.disclaimer>
Ericsson Telecom AB    Stockholm

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

Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 09:30:00 +0000
From: "Henry (H.W.) Troup" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: DMS-100 Peculiarity - HELP!!!


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Ehud Gavron 602-570-2000 x. 2546) writes:

> 1. If there is no call waiting call coming in and I flash the
> switchhook, I get a SECOND dialtone.  However, I am unable to dial any

This is so you can dial the cancel call waiting sequence. (*70, usually).


Henry Troup - [e-mail] (Canada) - BNR owns but does not share my opinions

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: How Use Answering Machine in Argentina?
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 92 11:08:42 EDT
Reply-To: [e-mail]


Regarding (vol. 12, issue 589, message 11):

> Can anyone advise if it's practical to use a North American answering
> machine in Argentina?  What differences (power, signalling, connec-
> tors, etc?)  would cause problems?

The answer is a qualified yes.  You need to adapt connectors and power
supply.  I've looked at prices for this kind of things when I was
there last March and you will be well advised to take not only your
machine but your favorite telephone along.  The cheap phone that sells
for $15 in the US costs above $50 there.

Household electrical mains is 220V/50Hz (as opposed to 110V/60Hz in
USA- Canada).  You can buy a 220V/110V transformer to put between line
and your machine's plug (frequency shouldn't be a problem; most
machines convert line power to DC).  If your AM's power supply is one
of the external, plug in, you are better off buying a power supply
that does 220V-whatever (e.g.  9V DC) directly.  Either the 220/110 or
the power supply you can buy easily in Buenos Aires and other major
cities in Argentina (and you are sure to be getting the appropriate
plugs, which are skinnier than some european 220 plugs).

Connectors are not very homogeneous. If you are just a bit inclined to
do this yourself, I'd suggest that you buy here a couple of wall
plates and screw-on modular connectors, and install them wherever you
want to put your telephone instruments (as my RBOC calls them).  These
usually are ridiculously expensive there.  Or you can just strip one
of the ends of your modular cable and put one of the horrible, bulky
connectors that don't require special tools to assemble.

Signals et al.: some switches have the annoying habit of returning a
fast busy quickly after your caller hangs up. That may induce your
machine to keep on rolling and not hang up for a while.  This is taken
care of by setting the CPC switch appropriately or putting the machine
in a fixed recording time (as opposed to voice actuated, "vox").

Miscellaneous:

 - dialing is pulse only, no DTMF.  Which means no touch-tone only
phones, and if you have a "remote-less" remote-controlled machine
you may want to buy one of those pocket tone diallers.

 - short power outages are frequent. If your machine stores the
outgoing message on a chip, make sure it can retrieve it from
tape after a powerdown.

 - long distance calls are very expensive, compared to the US *and*
Canada's.  Find out about plans like USA-Direct (available dialing
001-800-200-1111) from many phones before you leave.

 - some (many) COs still don't have direct dialing abroad. This
includes otherwise desirable residential areas, so inquire. The above
001 ... number is not accessible in those areas either.


Hope this helps ...


Cristobal Pedregal Martin     [e-mail] (internet)
Computer Science Department   UMass / Amherst, MA 01003

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

Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 10:00:40 CDT
From: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Cordless Phone Not Charging


[e-mail] (Joe Konstan) writes:

> In TELECOM Digest V12 #578, Ang Peng Hwa writes:

>> My AT&T cordless phone is not charging and I'd appreciate any input.

> If the model you have has a "Charging" light, check to see if it
> stays on when the phone is in the base.  If not, get steel wool
> (can use other scrubbers, but steel wool works best) and clean off
> all of the contacts.

I suggest that instead of steel wool, you use a pencil eraser. This is
a little less traumatic on the metal contacts, and any residual debris
left behind won't be electrically conductive and threaten to cause
short-circuits in any electronics that might be nearby.


Andrew C. Green
Datalogics, Inc.      Internet: [e-mail]
441 W. Huron          UUCP: ..!uunet!dlogics!acg
Chicago, IL  60610    FAX: [phone]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Solve Three Problems (was Telecom Fraud)
Organization: Delft University of Technology, Dept. of Electrical Engineering
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 15:35:54 GMT


[e-mail] (Mark Phaedrus) writes:

It is amazing how people misread/misunderstand the properties of a
stored value card. I will try to make things more clear.

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

> There's one major problem I can see with this solution.  Most
> telephones in this country are still not capable of magnetically
> "reading" even the current calling cards.

Yes, you will have to upgrade every public phone that is to use a
stored value card.

> So unless you plan on replacing most of the telephones in the
nation, or making the stored-value cards unusable on any phone without
a card reader, the protection against fraud largely goes out the
window; there's still going to have to be a number on the card for
people to punch into older phones, and "shoulder-surfing" will still
work just like it does now.

A stored value card does not have a number, anywhere, whatsoever.  It
contains a hologram that is destroyed one milimeter at a time by the
phone as the value is used up.

> In fact, I would wager that your protection from fraud would
> actually *decrease* under these circumstances.  Under the currnt
> system, if someone steals your card number and rings up fraudulent
> calls, you can generally get the charges reversed; with fraud on a
> stored-value card, the providers would probably adopt the same policy
> that many providers of debit cards do now ("if your card or number
> gets stolen and all the money in your card gets drained, well, sorry
> about that").

Correct! The maximum value of a stored value phonecard is (in the
Netherlands at least) about US $ 14.--.  Really, that is much less
than I usually carry around in cash. Cards are available in much
smaller values too.

A stored value card is much easier than using coins, because:

 - I don't always carry sufficient coins of the right type.

 - The phone has a much higher probability of not getting broken into,
   because there is no cash inside, therefore the stored value card
   phones more often work.

> Also, unless you want to further modify every phone in the
> country so that they're capable of *writing* to the cards too, the
> privacy advantage is going to be eliminated as well; since the phones
> won't be capable of recording usage onto the cards,

The phones can ERASE the card, not write on it, they don't have to.

> the cards' value will have to be stored in some centralized database
> somewhere;

No, no, no. The phone can recognize that a valid card is inserted and
reduce the value by erasing part of the card. No central database (or
any other type of database) needs to be involved. The phone cannot
distinguish two cards of the same purchase value if they happen have
the same number of remaining "units".

> One other personal problem I have with stored-value cards: they
> require payment in advance, which may be okay for those who use the
> cards regularly, but is a pain for those like me who only carry a card
> in case of emergency or running out of change.  Why should I give my
> long-distance carrier an extra $5 or $10 of my money to take care of,
> on the off-chance I need to make a calling card call someday?

The lowest value phonecard here costs about US $ 0.60; good for four
local calls. It does not last very long on long distance calls
though ...

>> Also, since it is a stored value card, other carriers would
>> have no incentive to honor the card (they won't get paid), so they
>> could try to vandalize the card or more likely just reject it. Thus,
>> protection from AOS overcharging.

> This is about the most Pyrrhic form of "protection from AOS
> overcharging" I've seen in a while.  Are you saying that you'd rather
> have a phone try to erase your $50 worth of stored value than to
> overcharge you for the call?  As long as we're updating every phone in
> America to deal with these cards, why not just encode the carrier
> choice into the card?  You would pick up the phone, insert your card,
> and then dial the number; the phone would read the carrier code from
> the card and automatically select the proper carrier, without any of
> this 10XXX nonsense.

Indeed, this could be done. But having several providers of phonecard
phones does create a nontrivial problem. The phones must be able to
recognize several brands of phonecards and -- in some secure and
indisputable way -- record how many units they have burned of each
type.  The owner of the phone must charge the issuer of the card for
that number of units.

I believe that this can be done.


Delft University of Technology, The Netherlands, [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #594
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa28369;
          30 Jul 92 3:19 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA14981
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 30 Jul 1992 00:50:41 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA11971
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 30 Jul 1992 00:50:29 -0500
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 00:50:29 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #595

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 30 Jul 92 00:50:31 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 595

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Panel Still in Use? (Kenny Adams)
    Re: Panel Still in Use? (Dave Levenson)
    Re: What is DSO? (Bill Garfield)
    Re: Advice Needed: Dialback Management (Bill Garfield)
    Re: How to Use U.S. Modem in England? (Todd Inch)
    Re: CLASS/ISDN (Jon Baker)
    Re: Wires of Mystery (John Higdon)
    Re: Advice Needed: Dialback Management (John Zambito)
    Re: FCC Modem Tax Rumor on Compu$erve (Terence Cross)
    Re: A Very Strange Experience When Calling LD (Lazlo Nibble)
    Re: Amateur Radio and Our Moderator (Harold Hallikainen)
    Re: Mitel SX-20 Switch (Bill Garfield)
    Re: CID on Campus (Paul Knupke Jr.)
    Update: Fixed Call Forwarding ([e-mail])
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Kenny Adams)
Subject: Re: Panel Still in Use?
Organization: University of Prince Edward Island
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 22:52:23 GMT


    In New Brunswick, Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island the
normal situation is to replace the crossbar and other slightly newer
offices with digital ones (usually DMS100).  Most of the step by step
offices are still in use although new customers are usually put on the
DMS. I guess the step offices are more reliable than the middle aged
technology and require less maintenance.


Regards,

kenny adams    [e-mail]  these ramblings are my own......

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

From: [e-mail] (Dave Levenson)
Subject: Re: Panel Still in Use?
Organization: Westmark, Inc.
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 03:18:33 GMT


I remember reading that the last panel dial office in the US was
retired from service in Newark, NJ, in the early 1980's.  I don't know
how many step-by-step switches are still in service, but I think some
rural areas with very small telephone populations still use them.


Dave Levenson      Internet: [e-mail]
Westmark, Inc.      UUCP: {uunet | rutgers | att}!westmark!dave
Warren, NJ, USA      Voice: 908 647 0900  Fax: [phone]

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

Subject: What is DSO?
From: [e-mail] (Bill Garfield)
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 92 15:16:00 -0600
Organization: Ye Olde Bailey BBS - Houston, TX - 713-520-1569
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Bill Garfield)


> Today, NYTel had a notification in {Newsday} that the company was
> offering Enterprise DSO which carries both analog and digital signals
> over fiber but no explanation was given as to what DSO was/is/does.

My knowledge of the term suggests DS "zero" and not DS "oh".

As such, DS0 would be the analog input/output, or voice channel before
being digitized.  DS1 of course then is a T-1 span of 24 digitized
DS0s, DS2 then meaning four DS1s (96 DS0s) and DS3=28 DS1s (672 DS0s)
etc, etc.

Running DS0 over fiber sure seems to me like a terrible waste of
bandwidth ... IMHO.

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

Subject: Re: Advice Needed: Dialback Management
From: [e-mail] (Bill Garfield)
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 92 15:16:00 -0600
Organization: Ye Olde Bailey BBS - Houston, TX - 713-520-1569
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Bill Garfield)


[e-mail] (Peter Alexander Merel) writes:

> We know about dialback modems, but it seems they are not as secure as
> we'd like. I'm sure something like I describe must exist, but we don't
> know what it is called or where to get it. Please help.

MultiTech Systems, Inc. (1-800-328-9717) makes an excellent hardware
dialback modem with 30-user password security which will call
different dialback numbers depending on the security code entered to
the modem.  Also to further thwart fraudulent attemps, the MultiTech
modems wait approximately 45 seconds before attempting the dialback
process.

With the MultiTech (I have several in use) there is no need for *any*
external security devices.

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

From: [e-mail] (Todd Inch)
Subject: Re: How to Use U.S. Modem in England?
Organization: Maverick International Inc.
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 92 21:58:11 GMT


For one-time and emergency situations, I have always had good luck
doing this: Make a modular cord with alligator clips on the red and
green wires and plug it into the modem.  Unscrew the microphone from
the telephone and clip onto the contacts for the microphone.

Caveats:

  - Phone must have a carbon microphone.  Most that unscrew are.
    Most fancy new phones with lots of buttons aren't.

  - Modem probably cannot be line powered, although I have used
    cheap line-powered speakerphones like this on our old digital
    key system at work.

  - The modem cannot answer or pickup/hangup the phone, so this is
    somewhat manual involving taking the handset off/on the cradle.

  - If the phone system accepts only pulse dialing, you'll have to
    dial via the phone.  Even though most modems can pulse dial when
    connected directly to the line, they can't with this arrangement.
    Tone dialling should work if the equipment on the other end is
    compatible.

This works well with payphones, hotel/motel phones, etc.  Is it legal?
Don't know.  In many European countries it's apparently illegal to
connect anything to a phone line, even via a jack.  I disclaim all
responsibility for everything.  This probably won't hurt anything even
if it doesn't work, but don't blame me!

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

From: [e-mail] (Jon Baker)
Subject: Re: CLASS/ISDN
Organization: AG Communication Systems, Phoenix, Arizona
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 16:51:44 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, aimla!ruby!rudholm@uunet.
UU.NET (Mark Rudholm) writes:

> Mr. Higdon lives in California, as do I.  The last time I checked, the
> GTE company that is a pathetic excuse for a LEC in California was
> called "GTE California," not "GTE West."

There was a re-organization several years ago of the GTE telephone
companies.  The regional GTE telcos were consolidated into four
entities -- GTE South, GTE West, GTE North, and GTE Central.  GTE West
includes the old GTECA, HawTel, Contel, and some northwestern
operations.

> When I was "served" by GTE CA, I was on a DMS100.  I know that this
> is a very good switch because I've been on one that was in use by
> Pacific Bell and it worked beautifully.

Yes, from all I've heard and seen, Northern Telecom produces a fine
product.  And not just their DMS; they're PBX's have gotten good
reviews (and personal testimonial) as well.  GTE seems to be buying an
increasing number of the DMS100's.

> I'm also convinced that the product made by Mr. Baker's company (the
> GTD5) is an excellent one as well,

Thanks!

> I just don't think GTE CA sets them up properly.

We're just a phone call away, if they need any help ...


J.Baker    enuucp!gtephx!bakerj
I am not an official representative of AG Communication Systems.

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

Date: Wed, 29 Jul 92 01:18 PDT
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: Wires of Mystery


David Brightbill <[e-mail]> writes:

> Every time I drive from my home in the swamps of North Florida to
> Georgia, I wonder about a wire that runs for a few miles along the
> road.  This is a little used back road which was reportedly once
> popular with the moonshine crowd.  The road is so isolated that there
> aren't even power lines or indications of burried cables running along
> side most of it.  The line in question starts in Florida where the
> power line ends.  It is two bare copper lines hanging on glass
> insulators.

I don't know about your wires, but you might be amused at a typical
practice of GTE. A number of years ago, the cable that follows a road
to one of my mountain top sites was damaged. It failed during some
major flooding and earth movement about a decade ago. GTE's
"temporary" repair was to literally string some fifty-pair IW along
the roadway and lay it in the bushes. No temporary poles, no
protection of any kind, not even the use of outdoor service cable.

This lashup hack job sat around for nearly the past ten years. Within
the last year, GTE decided to bury a permanent cable. Did it dig a
nice neat little trench at the side of the narrow road? Of course not.
It tore up a trench right down the middle of the road, buried the
cable, and then did a wretchedly poor job of filling it in. Since I
have to drive this road regularly, it is a constant reminder of GTE's
wonderful way of tending to business.

Isn't there a GTE in Florida?


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

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

From: [e-mail] (John Zambito)
Subject: Re: Advice Needed: Dialback Management
Organization: Performance Technologies, Incorporated
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 13:19:10 GMT


In article blah, blah, blah Paul Cook writes:

> ...  To prevent the problem mentioned above (where the line is not
> released), it can be programmed to wait for a CPC pulse on the line

Could you elaborate on this CPC pulse?


John Zambito, Performance Technologies Incorporated    [e-mail]
315 Science Parkway, Rochester, New York 14620    uupsi!ptsys1!jvz

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

Date: Wed, 29 Jul 92 14:48:33 BST
From: [e-mail] (Terence Cross)
Subject: Re: FCC Modem Tax Rumor on Compu$erve


Modems are currently detected by a 2100Hz tone.  This indicates that
echo cancellers, which can corrupt data, are to be disabled and that
no temporary disconnection/reconnection, which can cause a click on
the line, is to take place.  It may also turn off compression devices.

Without this 2100Hz data can be corrupted.  So why, as suugested by a
previous posting, the need for a expensive neural net to detect
modems.

Wouldn't it be alot cheaper to corrupt any data (not voice) on a line
that didn't signal itself to be a modem, thus forcing modems to
identify themselves?


Regards,

Terence Cross.

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

From: [e-mail] (Lazlo Nibble)
Subject: Re: A Very Strange Experience When Calling LD
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 92 22:55:43 GMT
Organization: Sporadic and incomplete


unkaphaed![e-mail] (Russell Kroll) writes:

>> About, I'd say, 2^3 to 2^5 conversations going on at once!  (Yes, I
>> think in binary, so I'm sorry.)  It was wild.

> The same thing happened to me when calling the 609-897 prefix in
> Arizona.  The modem wasn't connecting, so I picked up the phone. Oddly
> enough, it sounded like a huge party line!

There have been a few times recently when both my roommate and I (we
each have our own phone line -- 505 884 xxxx and 505 881 xxxx) would
pick up to make a call and get a lot of confused-sounding people
("Hello?" "What's going on?" "Who is this?") instead of dialtone.
After a couple of hangups and pickups, we'd get dialtone again.
Sounds like some Stupid Switch Tricks going on down at US West.


Lazlo ([e-mail])

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

From: [e-mail] (Harold Hallikainen)
Subject: Re: Amateur Radio and Our Moderator
Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 19:11:12 GMT


Seems like amateur radio operators (I'm one of them, but not real
active ... my radio broke) should be setting up high speed digital
radio links town to town, then hand over the links to the fidonet
people, combining two great talented groups of people.  The amateur
packet stuff is pretty neat, but it could be much more (another
internet?).


Harold

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

Subject: Re: Mitel SX-20 Switch
From: [e-mail] (Bill Garfield)
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 92 15:16:00 -0600
Organization: Ye Olde Bailey BBS - Houston, TX - 713-520-1569
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Bill Garfield)


> Does anyone out there have any experience with the MITEL SX-20 switch,
> and if so, can you be persuaded to comment on this problem? I really
> need that remote display, since it is how I program the system. Some
> upcoming changes will force me to need programmability.

I think a call to DEAN TECHNOLOGIES at 1-800-545-9754 will result in a
smile on your face.  (303-693-6189)

Dean Technologies is a second source MITEL repair facility located in
Englewood, Colorado.  According to their 1992 price sheet, the cost to
repair your Remote Call Status Display is but a paltry $69.00!

They also SELL most parts for the SX-20 as well as the SX-10, SX-5,
SX-50, SX100/200/200 digital, and SX2000 at reasonable prices.

I'm an SX-2000 man myself and have no experience with the SX-20.  I
have a network of (currently) eight SX2000's, comprised of five "SG"s
and three "S"s with six of those machines here in Houston.  Two of the
three-cabinet "SG"s stand side-by-side across the room from me right
now.

I began using Dean Technologies on the recommendation of a fellow
classmate I met three years ago in Mitel school down in Boca Raton, FL
(before they closed it up).  I was getting frustrated by what I
considered to be shoddy repairs of my E&M trunk cards, high repair
costs, poor repair warranty and full charge for a repair when no
trouble was found!  When I'd send Supersets in for repairs, MITEL
would fix 'em but send 'em back still dirty with frayed cords, etc.
When I complained, I was told that "refurbishment costs extra."

At Dean Technologies, instrument repair is not only less expensive,
but INCLUDES refurbishment.  Circuit boards come back within 10-14
CALENDAR days FIXED, upgraded to latest firmware revisions, and with a
full two-year warranty on ALL repairs.  They also do not charge for
"no trouble found" repairs, just return shipping.

I've been very pleased, and think you might be too.

 ... and just on the chance that someone from MITEL is reading this,
let me say that I'm most pleased with every piece of my MITEL
equipment.  However, IMHO, their Ogdensburg repair facility could sure
take some lessons from the folks at Dean Technologies.


Bill Garfield <[e-mail]>| Standard Disclaimer Applies.
PBX/Communications Specialist              | Opinions are my own.  I
Panhandle Eastern Corporation              | speak for no one.
Corporate Hdqs - Houston, TX  Voice 713.627.5228    FAX [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Paul Knupke Jr.)
Subject: Re: CID on Campus
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 92 00:44:00 EDT
Organization: FidoNet node 1:3603/750 - FTC Mail System, Largo Fl


On 25 Jul 92 05:50, Marshal "Airborne" Perlman wrote:

> This fall I am moving from California to Florida to attend college
> at the Florida Institute of Technology and I understand Florida
> has CID. Now comes the complex part. FIT has all their phones
> running off a PBX of sorts (don't quote me on this) but they are
> not regular 'dial out phones'. {i.e. if you dial a number without
> '9', its gonna be to another extention, just like a hotel}.

As a former student of Florida Tech I'll attempt to answer this one.

Some background on the Florida Tech phone system ...

FIT has all on campus phones, including student housing on a PBX.  The
number is 1-407-768-8000.  When you dial it you will be greated with
the message: "Thank you for calling the Florida Institute of
Technology, if you are calling from a touch tone phone please enter
the exchange you wish to dial, otherwise please wait for assistance."
Students are not charged for local service which includes the Cocoa,
Cocoa Beach, Eau Gallie, Melbourne and Sebastian exchanges.

All extensions are four digits, and all housing are in the range
8200-8600.

In the spring of 90, they began offering a package of call waiting,
three way calling and call forward (on campus only.)

There is also voice mail for each extension.  Very primative, but
workable.

Long distance service is limited to FIT's outbound WATS.  You cannot
select your own LD carrier.  The provided carrier pricing is fair at
best.  If I had returned for a second year I would have lived off
campus, I couldn't stand the phone system.

Simply put ... the phone system royally stinks IMHO.

> HOW does CID work in this enviroment?

As far as I know, Southern Bell does not offer CID in the Melbourne
area yet.


Internet: [e-mail]
UUCP: ...!myrddin!tct!psycho!750!Paul.Knupke.Jr.

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

Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 13:56 EST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Update: Fixed Call Forwarding


Thanks to several Digest readers, I now have Fixed Call Forwarding,
otherwise known as Call Forward Busy / Call Forward No Answer.  After
my home phone rings three (my choice) times with no answer, or when my
home phone is in use, a call is transferred to my office phone.  (I
could have chosen to have forwarding only on one of Busy and No
Answer.)  Either I pick up there, or ASPEN voice mail takes the call
(after one more ring).  It's pretty much like having Call Answer or
Message Center but without the stutter dial tone indicating a message.
The down side is that I have to check my voice mail at work more
often, but I could set it up to notify me of messages (though not on
the phone that's forwarded, or Ms. ASPEN will spend a lot of time
talking to herself).

The quirkiest thing about it that I've found so far is what the caller
hears, at least when the call is local (R=ring, .=silence):

RRRRRR......RRRRRR......RRRRRR......RRR.........RRRRRR
                                    ^^^         office phone rings here
                                    |||
                    This half ring and long three-second
                    pause which follows could throw
                    a caller.  I'll see what people say.

It took several calls to New Jersey Bell to find someone who knew that
FCF was available without Answer Call, but Denise in the business
office there was the consummate knowledgable professional.  Comments I
got from Digest readers encouraged me to pursue the issue.  The hook-
up fee is waived during the Call Answer promo, so it's $0 to get
started and $2/month for me to get all my messages in one place.


Steve Kass/Math&CS/Drew U/Madison NJ 07940/201-514-1187  [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: Oddly enough, Illinois Bell only offers this in
conjuction with voicemail -or- to some other phone line on your
premises or within the same CO. No where else.    PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #595
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa28613;
          30 Jul 92 3:28 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA17223
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 30 Jul 1992 01:39:55 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA24432
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 30 Jul 1992 01:39:46 -0500
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 01:39:46 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #596

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 30 Jul 92 01:39:45 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 596

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Sprint Announces a Commercial Data Internet Service (Monty Solomon)
    Area Code 512 Split (Chris Petrilli)
    Economist Telecom Articles (John Pettitt)
    Connecting a Workstation to a Phoneline (Jack Jansen)
    Ericsson MD110 PBX Intelligent Network (Bruce Carter)
    Help Needed With Development of a Gateways Fee Scheme (Robert Williams)
    TRT/FTC MultiSpeed-Telepak Store and Forward Service (Horacio Stolovitzky)
    Summary of Cordless Phone Battery Replies (Ang Peng Hwa)
    Questions About Fax Tones vs. Voice (Chris Schmandt)
    1-900 Number For Internet Access (Kevin W. Mullet)
    Information Wanted About Radish Communications Systems (David Wuertele)
    More Rings Wanted Before Fax Answers (Alfredo Cotroneo)
    COMKEY Information Wanted (Tom Mahoney)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 18:21:15 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <[e-mail]>
Subject: Sprint Announces a Commercial Data Internet Service


Contacts:  Janis Langley, (O) 202-828-7427; (H) 703-533-3322
           Vince Hovanec, (O) 202-828-7423; (H) 202-387-1496


     SPRINT ANNOUNCES A COMMERCIAL DATA INTERNET SERVICE

     WASHINGTON, D.C., July 22, 1992 -- Sprint today announced
commercial availability of SprintLink(sm), the first commercial
Transmission Control Protocol/Internet Protocol (TCP/IP)-based data
transmission service offered by a national long distance carrier.
SprintLink is a router-based network supporting the TCP/IP protocol
suite for data communications.

         SprintLink is part of the company's expanding service to the
business, scientific and research communities.  It complements
Sprint's frame relay and SprintNet(R) (X.25) services for computer and
local area network (LAN) interconnection.  SprintLink also provides
access to the Internet, a group of about 8,000 interconnected data
networks in more than 80 countries serving government, academic and
research organizations.

         "SprintLink demonstrates the benefits of technological
collaboration between government and industry," said Chris Rooney,
president, Government Systems Division.  "The extension of this new
service will generate commercial applications and will help American
business and government be more productive and creative."

         SprintLink grew from Sprint's expertise in TCP/IP and
international networking.  In early 1991, Sprint began providing and
managing a network to link the National Science Foundation's U.S.
computer communications network (NSFnet) with the French scientific
and research network, INRIA, at Sophia-Antipoles in southern France,
and the Scandinavian scientific and research network, NORDUNet, in
Stockholm.

         Sprint has since added to its NSFnet interconnections links
to Japan and the United Kingdom.  Additional connections are currently
planned to South Africa and to numerous Latin American and Caribbean
countries.

         In February, Sprint introduced SprintLink to government
agencies.  Since that introduction, SprintLink has attracted more than
a half-dozen major customers.

         During the next year, Sprint plans to add gateways to
Sprint's X.25 public data network, SprintNet, to allow SprintNet users
to access SprintLink, both nationally and internationally.  Sprint
will also connect its frame relay service to SprintLink thus allowing
Sprint's frame relay customers access to the global Internet and to
enable management of routers connected to Sprint's frame relay in an
integrated manner.  Sprint plans to offer SprintLink on a dial-up
basis.

         SprintLink is accessible via dedicated lines from all of the
company's 270-plus domestic points-of-presence.  Customers can access
the service at speeds ranging from 9.6 kbps to T1 (1.5 mbps).
Customers also can maximize use of a T1 line by combining multiple
voice and data services, including SprintLink, on that line, a feature
available only through Sprint.  SprintLink is priced at a flat monthly
rate according to port speed for each location.

         Sprint is a member of the board of directors of the
Commercial Internet Exchange (CIX) Association, a cooperative effort
among public data internetwork (PDI) service providers to promote the
fair, open and competitive operations of IP-based networking.  Other
members include General Atomics, which operates CERFnet; Performance
Systems International, Inc., which operates PSINet; and UUNET
Technologies, Inc., which operates AlterNET.

         Sprint is a diversified international telecommunications
company with $8.9 billion in annual revenues and the United States'
only nationwide all-digital, fiber-optic network.  Its divisions
provide global long distance voice, data and video products and
services, and local telephone services to more than 4 million
subscriber lines in 17 states.


[Moderator's Note: It is amazing and inspring to think about the short
history of Sprint over the past dozen years, going back to their early
days as the <S>outhern <P>acific <R>ailroad <I>nternal <N>etwork <T>elecom
department.  A true American success story.  PAT]

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

From: Chris Petrilli <[e-mail]>
Subject: Area Code 512 Split
Organization: Department of Redundency Department
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 22:08:56 GMT


I just received the official announcement of the 512 area code split
in the phone bill today.  I thought everyone might be interested.
Unfortunately SWBT found it in their power not to give a map or
anything so that we know what exactly is changing (other than I know
what is below).  This is what the bill said:

                  NEW AREA CODE TO SERVE SOUTH TEXAS

We are changing: Beginning November 1, 1992, a new 210 area code will
be serving 152 comunities in the San Antonio and Rio Grande Valley
areas.


Chris Petrilli   [e-mail]   I don't even speak for myself.

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

From: starnet![e-mail] (John Pettitt)
Subject: Economist Telecom Articles
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 92 19:22:41 PDT


There are two interesting articles in this week's {Economist} on the
telecom front.

1) The cable TV companies in the UK want to carry phone traffic as
well.  The article (p69 in the US edition) talks about who owns the
cable companies in the UK (US West, Bell Canada, Nynex, Southwestern
Bell, Pacific Telesis).  Interesting in the light of FCC allowing the
RBOC's to carry TV (announced July 16th).

2) AT&T is using a new voice recognition system to replace operators
(p79 in the US edition).

All in all the {Economist} coverage of telecom issues is very good,
and appears acurate (more than can be said for a lot of main stream
media).  Three weeks ago they did special on global data networking
with references to USENET, the Internet and Bitnet amongst others.
They correctly identified each -- a major event in a world where some
of the players confuse the networks!

[ no connection with them other than as a reader ]

Now if I can only talk them into an email address for the letters
page ...


John Pettitt    Mail: [e-mail]   Fax: [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Jack Jansen)
Subject: Connecting a Workstation to a Phoneline
Date: 29 Jul 92 14:39:32 GMT
Organization: CWI, Amsterdam


About six weeks ago I asked for schematics or products that would
allow me to connect the audio in/out of a workstation to a phone line.

Most people answered that what I want is a "DAA box". Unfortunately,
the Dutch PTT was pretty sure that such a device was never presented
to them for registration, and US registered devices are not
automatically allowed in Holland. So, this was no solution to me.

Here are two firms in the US that manufacture such devices, anyway:

    Suncoast Systems, Pensacola, Fl. 904-478-6477
    Cermatek, Sunnyvale, 408-752-5000

Another tip I got was to look at Ciarcia's columns in old (81-85)
issues of {Byte} or at the 1991 issue of the ARRL handbook.

Finally, I got a circuit diagram from somone, but it came by fax. So,
I am not able to reproduce it here. If someone is very interested,
however, I can fax it to them.

Thanks to all the people who responded,


Jack Jansen      [e-mail]   uunet!cwi.nl!jack
G=Jack;S=Jansen;O=cwi;PRMD=surf;ADMD=400net;C=nl

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

From: [e-mail] (Bruce Carter)
Subject: Ericsson MD110 PBX Intelligent Network
Organization: Boise State University - CBI Product Development
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 16:09:36 GMT


Greetings all,

Well, installation and cutover of our new digital phone system
(Ericsson MD110 Intelligent Network) is essentially "complete".
Basically, that means that the equipment is in and Ericsson has
left ... *heh*.

Anyway, people are getting used to the little strangenesses, like no
touch tone tone feedback, and are enjoying the new features,
especially voice mail.  The one problem that seems to be universal is
that nobody can get the TAU 2620's (Terminal Adapter Units, these
essentially replaced desktop modems) to work reliably with the 9600bps
modem bank that was installed with the switch.  Sometimes they work ok
for dialing out, sometimes not, and there doesn't seem to be a way to
find out what is going on (ie. you can't listen in for carrier and so
on).  Also, we are having a heck of a time dialing in to TAU's that
have been assigned DID numbers for connection from outside the
university.

Does anyone out there have any experience with this.  PLEASE don't
tell me to have analog lines put in, the administration has pretty
much declared that is not an option.  Thanks for any help!


Bruce Carter, CBI Product Development            [e-mail]
Simplot/Micron Instructional Technology Center   amccarte@idbsu (Bitnet)
Boise State University, Boise, ID  83725         [phone]@phone

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

From: [e-mail] (Robert Williams)
Subject: Help Needed With Development of a Gateways Fee Scheme
Organization: UofT Mechanical Engineering
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 16:12:35 GMT


A friend of mine has been asked to develop a fee structure for
accessors of a companies information resources.  She writes as
follows,

I need help on the following: I need to know how certain organizations
charge for use of their network gateways (gateways join two
systems/networks together, usually at the midrange or mainframe level
e.g. at the Front-end Processor). For instance, do they charge by the
number of sessions a client signs up for, by the number of sessions
the client actually used, do they have a one-time membership fee with
a smaller monthly maintenance fee which allows users a large but
undefined number of sessions, do they not charge at all and if so then
what is their justification? All these questions ask: HOW is the
gateway charged. But I also need to know, if possible, WHAT the charge
is based on: what cost items do they include in maintenance of the
gateway and what percentage of these cost items is used. Cost items
include: human resources, CPU time, memory, software development, and
other overhead items.

Any ideas from anyone who is familiar with this area would be
appreciated.  Any information on books or papers covering this topic,
or firms doing similar work, would also be appreciated.

Please send all responses to the email address below.  If there is
enough interest, I will post a summary on the net.


Thanks in advance.

Robert Williams    U of T, CIMLab   Toronto, Canada
Email: [e-mail]

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

Subject: TRT/FTC MultiSpeed-Telepak Store and Forward Service
From: [e-mail] (Postmaster)
Date: 28 Jul 92 01:10:00 GMT
Organization: SatLink Communications (Buenos Aires - ARGENTINA)
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Postmaster)


Does anybody know how to use the TRT/FTC store and forward service
called Multispeed or Telepak?  TRT people don't give me any kind of
information/documentation and I must "discover" the commands!!  They
only gave me the way to connect and nothing else!!

Many thanks in advance for any kind of help.


Horacio Stolovitzky    Buenos Aires, ARGENTINA
E-Mail: [e-mail]

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

Date: Wed, 29 Jul 92 19:04:06 SST
From: Ang Peng Hwa <[e-mail]>
Subject: Summary of Cordless Phone Battery Replies


My thanks to all who responded to my request for information about the
cordless phone problem. There are some interesting differences of
opinions.

The general theory is that by charging for 20 days without a single
second of discharge while on vacation, I shorted the batteries. There
were some, however, who said that by *discharging* it for the next 20
days completely, I had damaged the battery. Sort of giving it
apermanent memory. :)

Someone said that one of the cells would not charge in series and that
if I could just charge that, everything else would be fine.

Alas, that was too late. I had bought a replacement and junked the
"bad" pack.

For those who asked why I didn't go out to just buy a replacement as
the batteries are cheap, just remember: there are some people who are
cheaper.  :)


Regards, Peng Hwa.

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

From: [e-mail] (Chris Schmandt)
Subject: Questions About Fax Tones vs. Voice
Organization: MIT Media Laboratory
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 02:34:21 GMT


In a nutshell: I'm looking for a fax machine that can receive faxes in
the middle of the night without ringing my phone and waking me up.

For enlightenment: I see faxes advertise that talk about "voice vs.
fax" calls, and a lot of provision (jacks?) for answering machines.
How do these things work?  I presume the incoming fax is detected,
after answering, by the funny beep <pause> beep tones from the
orginating fax machine.  But to then listen for a while and pass the
call on to a conventional answering machine, you'd have to re-generate
the ring voltage.  Is this how these things (and the "voice/fax/modem"
switches) work?

If so, it would seem that if I disable the phone ring built into the
fax machine and plugged my normal telephone into the answering machine
jack I'd have exactly what I wanted.  Or, do I misunderstand the whole
thing?


chris

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

From: [e-mail] (Kevin W. Mullet)
Subject: 1-900 Number For Internet Access
Organization: University of North Texas
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 03:25:31 GMT


I've got a couple of questions:

1: Is it possible to get a 1-900 number that allows you to bill the
caller a flat rate per month (say, $30-35) regardless of the time used
instead of on a per-minute basis?

2: What's wrong (and/or right) with the idea of offering commercial
Internet access through a 1-900 number that charges a range of fees on
a per-month (not per-minute) basis and has a range of services based
from plain vanilla host access with a userid, news, mail, etc to SLIP
or PPP access.

I know there are yet-to-be-navigated issues of appropriate use with
regard to selling access to the Internet (or are there?)  Also, I know
a little about what outfits like uunet are doing, but I'm curious
about the feasability of the flat-fee-per-month route.

Please reply through mail, not news.  If I get many replies, I'll
summarize to the net.


Kevin


[Moderator's Note: Yes, there are 900 numbers set up to charge flat
rate for calls regardless of length, but the length is typically very
short.  And regards the commercial resale of Internet service, this is
a very controversial topic. I am grateful you asked for replies in
email -- your email that is, not mine!  But do summarize later.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (David Wuertele)
Subject: Information Wanted About Radish Communications Systems
Organization: Institute of Industrial Science, University of tokyo.
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 04:00:49 GMT


Has anyone heard of Radish Communications Systems and what they do?


David Wuertele, Yasuda Lab, Electronic Engineering,
Institute of Industrial Science, University of Tokyo.
[e-mail]

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

Date: Wed, 29 Jul 92 09:01:58 +0200
From: [e-mail] (Alfredo Cotroneo)
Subject: More Rings Wanted Before Fax Answers


Hi there from Milano, Italy.

A friend of mine is the proud owner of a brand new integrated fax +
phone + answering machine made by Panasonic (I do not know the model).
He has also other three phones connected in parallel to the same phone
line. The Panasonic is set so that if no human answers the phone(s)
after the first four rings, the machine picks up the call and after
determining if te call is voice or fax it either switches the fax or
the built in answering machine accordingly.

Often when he is in the garden or in some other remote parts of the
house, four rings are too much of a short time to pick up the phone
before the fax/answering machine automatically answers. Since the
maximum number of rings which may be set on the Panasonic (as with
other similiar systems) before it answers the line automatically is
four, we are wondering whether some simple device exists or can be
built in order to increase this number of rings.

Pleas email any suggestion directly to me, and I will be glad to
summarize if there is interest. Thanks.


Alfredo E. Cotroneo, Milano, Italy
email: [e-mail] or [e-mail]
CSI: 100020,1013

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

Date: 29 Jul 1992 14:11:46 -0500
From: [e-mail] (Tom Mahoney - Network Tech.)
Subject: COMKEY Information Wanted


Can anyone steer me to a manual/schematics/other info on a COMKEY
system?  I recently moved a system and added two remote units.  Now
the line indicators don't light.  Also, the IC part of the system
never worked, and the client would like me to see if I can resurect
it.

Please respond directly as I'm not subscribed to the list.


Thanks.

FRANKLIN & MARSHALL COLLEGE            COMPUTER SERVICES - TECH. SUPPORT
     Thomas C. Mahoney, Computer Electronics Technician - Networks
PO Box 3003                                              [phone]
Lancaster, PA  17604      BITNET:TOM@FANDM/INTERNET:[e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #596
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa14700;
          31 Jul 92 1:40 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA24643
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 31 Jul 1992 00:02:15 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA21256
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 31 Jul 1992 00:01:50 -0500
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1992 00:01:50 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: My Face is Red! Wednesday/Thursday Messages Lost in Accident


One of the last things I typed and sent out was the comment to the
person who was angry that MCI had not processed his change of service
order. I noted, 'there may have been a computer glitch ...'

Then I went to look for my waiting queue ... somehow I dumped it in
error -- I'll be honest and not blame it on the soft/hardware here: I
somehow managed to move another file on top of it and wipe it out.  :(

Lost were messages sent Wednesday and Thursday ** which you have not
already seen during the day and evening Thursday **. In total, it was
about 25-30 messages lost. So if you wrote the Digest Wednesday or
Thursday and your article did NOT appear in the last 50 or so to cross
your screen, then send it again, and please accept my apologies.

Maybe I need to go to bed early tonight for a change, and having wiped
out my queue of work for overnight, why not?

Patrick Townson
TELECOM Moderator










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa15215;
          31 Jul 92 1:52 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA15025
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 31 Jul 1992 00:07:16 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA03381
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 31 Jul 1992 00:07:06 -0500
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1992 00:07:06 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #597

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 31 Jul 92 00:07:00 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 597

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Pac*Bell CLASS Features (Andy Sherman)
    Re: Pac*Bell CLASS Features (Terry Kennedy)
    Re: Pac*Bell CLASS Features (Randy Gellens)
    Re: Wires of Mystery (Floyd Davidson)
    Re: Wires of Mystery (David Brightbill)
    Re: Is Not 100% SS7 Needed For 1-800 and the Like? (Richard Nash)
    Re: Is Not 100% SS7 Needed For 1-800 and the Like? (Alan L. Varney)
    Re: A Very Strange Experience When Calling LD (Macy Hallock)
    Re: Cordless Phone Not Charging (Kenneth A. Becker)
    Re: New Subscriber Solicitations - MCI (James Joseph)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Andy Sherman)
Subject: Re: Pac*Bell CLASS Features
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 92 09:01:05 EDT


mtxinu!sybase!pokey![e-mail] (Neal Goldsmith) wrote:

> I ordered the three new features (Repeat Dialing, Select Call
> Forwarding, and Priority Ringing). The features only work within my
> LATA.

> I can understand them not working for numbers that are not on SS7
> equipped switches, but isn't the CLASS information passed on even
> through toll switches? If not will it ever be?

[e-mail] (Henry Mensch) said:

> I just found this out, too. It almost seems pointless ... why bother
> when it only works with numbers in your neighborhood?

A LATA is a lot bigger than your neighborhood.  It is usually much of
your state.  The problem with inter-LATA CLASS is that the IXC-LEC
interface for SS7 is not yet deployed, and may not even be official.
(People at Bell Labs, Bellcore, and/or the other IXCs can chime in on
the truth of that statement) And the SS7 information must be carried
by an IXC for interLATA calls, even if the LEC (or its parent company)
is the same on both ends of the call.  Remember that with few
exceptions (like Northern NJ <-> NYC) only an IXC can carry inter-LATA
traffic, *including SS7 signalling*.


Andy Sherman    Salomon Inc - Unix Systems Support -
Rutherford, NJ [phone] - [e-mail]  or [e-mail]
"These opinions are mine, all *MINE*.  My employer can't have them."

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

From: [e-mail] (Terry Kennedy)
Subject: Re: Pac*Bell CLASS Features
Date: 30 Jul 92 09:33:14 EDT
Organization: St. Peter's College, US


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Dave
Levenson) writes:

> It doesn't work by repeat dialing at all.  It sends a message to the
> destination CO, via the SS-7 network, requesting notification when the
> called line becomes available.  If the destination is not SS-7
> equipped, or if the destination number is part of a DID group, even if
> the office is SS-7 equipped, then your request for 'repeat dial' is
> rejected.

And it has some problems, at least from my point of view. Here in NJ
Bell land, you can presubscribe this feature or pay $.75 per usage.
Well, my cable TV was out and I needed to call them for a status
update. Their repair number (201-915) was busy, so I used this feature
from my home phone (201- 451). Both of these prefixes are on the same
switch, a 1AESS (primary ex- change 201-332). When I got the ringback
and picked up the phone, I got a "per-chunk" (louder than the call
waiting one) followed by "We are sorry.  Your call cannot be completed
because the number became busy again". I'd think that it would seize
the destination number while attempting to notify me.

  I'm also interested in seeing if I got billed the per-use fee for
this non-feature 8-).


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


[Moderator's Note: For an interesting experiment, I tried dialing my
own number (it was busy), then setting it up on auto redial.  I got
the recording saying the line is busy but the network will continue
trying to connect. I hung up and waited. In a few seconds I got the
special ring, and when I went off hook after a few seconds I heard an
announcement that '... the number you are trying to call was free, but
it has become busy again ...' !  :) Of course this went on for up
to 30 minutes which is how long our switch is configured to do it.  PAT]

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

From: MPA15AB![e-mail]
Date: 29 JUL 92 20:03
Subject: Re: Pac*Bell CLASS Features


In Telecom 12.592, John Higdon <[e-mail]> writes:

> As you know, GTE has decided not to play at all and will not be
> offering CLID now or in the future. It is also questionable whether
> the company will even offer any of the other features.

GTE has had at least two CLASS features available for some time:
distinctive ringing (ringmate) and busy number redial.  I have had BNR
for over a year.  I believe it does BNR by terminator queueing.  Of
course, only numbers in my switch can be used.

GTE has a target date of November 1992 for offering the rest of CLASS,
except for CLID, Call Trace, and Call Return.  Call Trace should be
available later, after the public education program.

I have been told by GTE that they are adding SS7 links by "market
clusters" -- they group nearby switches into clusters and implement
SS7 between them.  Then they link the clusters to each other via SS7.
I've also been told the target date for SS7 links to PacBell is late
1993.  My switch is in the Laguna Beach/ Huntington Beach/Westminster
"market group" and is scheduled to have SS7 links to the others by
November 1, 1992.


Randy Gellens            [e-mail]
>>>>>>> If mail bounces, forward to [e-mail] <<<<<<<<
Opinions are personal; facts are suspect; I speak only for myself.

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

From: [e-mail] (Floyd Davidson)
Subject: Re: Wires of Mystery
Organization: University of Alaska Institute of Marine Science
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 07:45:38 GMT


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

> This lashup hack job sat around for nearly the past ten years. Within
> the last year, GTE decided to bury a permanent cable. Did it dig a
> nice neat little trench at the side of the narrow road? Of course not.
> It tore up a trench right down the middle of the road, buried the
> cable, and then did a wretchedly poor job of filling it in. Since I
> have to drive this road regularly, it is a constant reminder of GTE's
> wonderful way of tending to business.

It is possible that trenching in the middle of rural gravel roads is a
standard practice.  I've seen it done in other places where the old
Bell System engineers did the design (in the 1950's).

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

From: [e-mail] (David Brightbill)
Subject: Re: Wires of Mystery
Organization: Florida State University
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 92 16:09:48 GMT


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

> David Brightbill <[e-mail]> writes:

>> Every time I drive from my home in the swamps of North Florida to
    ........stuff deleted.......
>> side most of it.  The line in question starts in Florida where the
>> power line ends.  It is two bare copper lines hanging on glass
>> insulators.

> I don't know about your wires, but you might be amused at a typical
> practice of GTE. A number of years ago, the cable that follows a road
> to one of my mountain top sites was damaged. It failed during some
> major flooding and earth movement about a decade ago. GTE's
> "temporary" repair was to literally string some fifty-pair IW along
> the roadway and lay it in the bushes. No temporary poles, no
> protection of any kind, not even the use of outdoor service cable.

> Isn't there a GTE in Florida?

Yup ... GTE has parts of florida.  This part is owned by Centel/
Sprintel.  Since the line goes across a state line and from Centel's
territory into whoever has that part of Georgia (Southern Bell, I
think), I doubt if it is any sort of a normal line.  Perhaps some sort
of an FX line but I think that those kind of things would run over
regular lines and go through central offices.  I like Pat's suggestion
about them perhaps being a disguised ELF antenna.  There is a large
federal communications facility about six or so miles away from the
end of the line in Georgia.  I suspect though that it's some sort of
private circuit between a plantation office and one of their outposts.

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

Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 21:29:00 +0100
From: [e-mail] (Richard Nash)
Subject: Re: Is Not 100% SS7 Needed For 1-800 and the Like?


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

>>> Regarding SS7 links, he said GTE was working on them between their own
>>> switches.  Links to PacBell would come, but he didn't know when.

> Please correct me, if I am wrong ... no scratch that, reading the
> above, it *does* seem that I *am* wrong ...

> I was under the impression that 1-800 like services could not be
> implemented really well without the something like SS7. Are we reading
> in the above that there is not yet 100% SS7 interconnects in the US.

> IS it that 1-800, ANI and caller-ID are being done by someother
> means (I'd have to do some learning here then.) or is it that the LD
> carrier do use SS7, and only that some local links are not yet ?

The 1-800 service does not require 100% SS7.  For this service, only a
SS7 link from the switch that is required to translate the 800 number
back into a regular phone number, to a database is required.  This
translation is performed at a switch that will record billing info.
This link can be used to interconnect to other switches for other
purposes also.  Physically, the link from the switch connects to a
messaging relay switch called a Signal Transfer Point (STP).  The STP
will decide where to route the message.  Even though the switch your
phone connects into may not have SS7, the 1-800 route will connect
into a switch that can service these types of calls. They are called
Service Switching Points (SSP).


Richard Nash         Edmonton, Alberta Canada T6K 0E8
UUCP:                   trickie![e-mail]
Amatuer Radio Packet:   VE6BON @ VE6MC.AB.CAN.NA
            VE6BON.ampr.org [44.135.147.206]

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

Date: Thu, 30 Jul 92 14:41:22 CDT
From: [e-mail] (Alan L Varney)
Subject: Re: Is Not 100% SS7 Needed For 1-800 and the Like?
Organization: AT&T Network Systems, Lisle, IL


In article <[e-mail]> vixen![e-mail]
(26070-adams) writes:

> While full SS7 deployment will enhance the performance of 800 and
> similar intelligent network services, it is not a requirement.

> ... while the LECs run all the way from hardly any SS7 to well over
> 90% of their signalling on SS7....

> The FCCs 86-10 docket plays a major role in expediting SS7
> deployment.  Can (obvious proprietary issues here) anyone share
> current SS7 deployment stats?

   Hi Jack -- nice summary.  The following stats are from {Telephony},
July 20, 1992, from an article called "The race to deploy SS7", by
AT&T's own Karen Archer Perry.  I'm leaving out some good stuff, so
you'll be encouraged to subscribe :)

                  SS7 deployment
  RHC/LEC       (% of access lines)    Future Plans
  -------       -------------------    ------------
  Bell Atlantic 90% ; 85% CLASS(sm)
  BellSouth     80% ; 60% CLASS
  Ameritech     41%                    60% by 1994
  SW Bell       21% (1991)             66% by 1994
  NYNEX         13% (mid-1991)         89% by 1994
  Pacific Bell  50%
  U S West      30%                    54% by 1994
  GTE           26%                    41% by '93, 65% by '95
  Other independents are also mentioned.

    {Telephony} seems to be doing a pretty fair job of covering SS7
issues lately.  The July 13, 1992, issue covers the TRIP '92 National
ISDN demonstration project and the North American ISDN Users' Forum
(NIUF) involvement in ISDN.  They will soon have a catalog with
details of the top 17 ISDN applications from NIUF members.  See
'Telephony' for details.


Al Varney - just MY opinion.

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

Date: Wed, 29 Jul 92 20:39 EDT
From: fmsys![e-mail] (Macy Hallock)
Subject: Re: A Very Strange Experience When Calling LD
Organization: The Matrix


In article <[e-mail]>:

> I was playing with my touchtone phone in the 1 415 621 prefix...
> [ended up hearing] I'd say, 2^3 to 2^5 conversations going on at once!
> What was I hearing?

Sounds to me like you got John (Mr. Conference Bridge) Higdon's home
phone ...


Macy M Hallock Jr N8OBG 216.725.4764 [e-mail] [e-mail]
[No disclaimer, but I have no real idea what I'm saying or why I'm telling you]

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

Date: Thu, 30 Jul 92 07:51:56 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Kenneth A Becker)
Subject: Re: Cordless Phone Not Charging
Organization: AT&T


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

> [e-mail] (Joe Konstan) writes:

>> In TELECOM Digest V12 #578, Ang Peng Hwa writes:

>>> My AT&T cordless phone is not charging and I'd appreciate any input.

>> If the model you have has a "Charging" light, check to see if it
>> stays on when the phone is in the base.  If not, get steel wool
>> (can use other scrubbers, but steel wool works best) and clean off
>> all of the contacts.

> I suggest that instead of steel wool, you use a pencil eraser. This is
> a little less traumatic on the metal contacts, and any residual debris
> left behind won't be electrically conductive and threaten to cause
> short-circuits in any electronics that might be nearby.

    I would suggest that you don't use a pencil eraser.  As one my
previous jobs, I worked as a technician on some 1 MW peak radar
systems.  The filament voltage for the final tube in this thing (no,
it wasn't a magnetron) needed 1.5 V at 900 Amps.  The connections
consisted of a metal blocks with thick copper braids that were clamped
directly to a similiar blocks on the tube in question.  As can be
imagined, there were over current, under current, overvoltage and
under voltage sensors all around this thing so that any increase in
resistance in the contacts would shut down the system.  Therefore, us
techs who worked on this thing were very interested in keeping the
contact resistance down for as long as possible.

    As it happens, most pencil erasers have some sulfer in them;
so, while one could use the eraser to get rid of the surface corrosion
and temporarily make better contact, the sulfer traces left behind by
a pencil eraser would react with water in the air, making sulfuric
acid that would corrode the metal.  A little extra fine emery
clock/steel wool is therefore better than the pencil eraser; a dose of
denatured alcohol afterwards can get rid of the particles.  While we
didn't use any at the time (this was a looong time ago), a little
conductive grease to exclude air at the point of contact might be in
order; this stuff can be found at any reasonable electronic parts
store.


Ken Becker      Opinions?  I got no steeking opinions!

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

Date: Thu, 30 Jul 92 10:38:06 -0400
From: [e-mail] (James Joseph)
Subject: Re: New Subscriber Solicitations - MCI


acf5![e-mail] (HasnainKhan) writes:

> I didn't in anyway indicate that I wanted to switch, and explicitly
> said "No".

> Lo, Behold, they switched my parents, and billed with my name
> (mispelled of course).

I had exactly the opposite experience.  I called MCI and wanted to
sign up for "Friends and Family", and "Reach Out World" (or whatever
is the MCI eqivalent of it).  The person I talked to got a list of my
Friends and Family, and all other information and told me that I will
be receiving a "Welcome to MCI" package within two weeks, and that the
dial-1 carrier will be switched sometime around the same period of
time.

That was on June 5th -- about two months back.  I am yet to receive
the welcome kit, and ATT is still my dial-1 carrier.  May be I should
call New York Telephone and instruct them not to switch me to MCI if
they asked them to.  How can I expect any reasonable service from a
company who cannot even sign up a willing potential customer?


james joseph    [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: You may be over-reacting a little. I'd suggest
calling again and see if there is some problem. It could be through
human error or a computer glitch that your order got lost. I've seen
it happen at AT&T also.

And just as I typed the above, somehow I accidentally wiped out the
queue of waiting messages for Friday morning. About 30 messages were
lost. I refer you to the special message I sent out a few minutes ago,
and ask for anything not in this issue or earlier issues Thursday to
be resubmitted with my apologies.   PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #597
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa19667;
          31 Jul 92 3:45 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA29859
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 31 Jul 1992 02:01:45 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA14015
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 31 Jul 1992 02:01:21 -0500
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1992 02:01:21 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Exploring the Telecom Archives: Index to Archives, 7-31-92


I've attached to this file a current copy of the Telecom Archives main
directory, as well as one of the sub-directories dealing with security
issues. You'll note there are various sub-directories in the archives
covering dozens of topics.

Almost every issue of TELECOM Digest is available in the first several
sub-directories, broken down by year. Within each of those directories
one will find the back issues in groups of fifty issues each. There
are exceptions to this with the very, very old issues; and a few of the
oldest issues are missing, but most that were missing have been found at
one site or another and put in order here.

All the areacode files have been updated in recent weeks by Carl Moore
to reflect the several changes since these files were first installed
back in 1989-1990. In addition, Carl has recently updated the 'history.
of.area.splits' file.

We have several glossary files including a new one uploaded to the
archives just a couple weeks ago which was found at a naval FTP site.

Among the various index files is one which is an accelerated index to
subject and authors in Volumes 9-10-11 of TELECOM Digest, covering the
years 1989, 1990 and 1991. This will be updated at the end of this
year to include subjects and authors for 1992 in Volume 12. The way
you use the accelerated index is by taking it back to your site and
first uncompressing it. It is *very large* (as are many of the
archives files as you will see), so it is recommended you have lots of
spare room to store it. After it has been uncompressed (it is many
thousands of lines in length), you then use grep to seek out phrases,
author names, volume and issue numbers, etc. The file is in strict
alphabetical order ignoring the 'Re:' which appears at the start of
many messages. Where two or more articles are identical in title, then
the sort continues by the author's first name and last name, i.e. John
Higdon would come before Robert Adams. Due to some irregularities and
inconsistencies in the use of upper/lower case and the occassional
typographical error it is suggested you use the most liberal
instructions you can with grep; for example ignoring case, using
wildcards when possible, etc. Please note that being too liberal in
your search criteria will result in a huge number of things you do
*not* wish to see ... and being too specific in your search may cause
you to miss something. Experiment around for the best results. Read
the several lines at the top of this file which provide additional
help in locating what you want.

The 'telecom-recent' file contains the most recent batch of fifty
issues of the Digest. This file is flushed on the fiftieth and
hundredth issues, with x01 - x50 (or x51 - x00) moved to permanent
storage in the sub-directories at the top of the list as soon as I can
after distribution. You can pick up recent missing issues from this
file.

How to get there from here:

    Use anonymous FTP:    ftp lcs.mit.edu
    Login anonymous, and use your name@site as password.
    When logged in, 'cd telecom-archives'.

On your first visit, you may wish to simply pull the various index
files and take them back to your site for review.

Anonymous FTP is limited of course to Internet sites, and that is a
pity since so many readers of the Digest and comp.dcom.telecom are at
UUCP sites or entirely different networks. Those folks will need to
use an email <==> ftp server ... and although we've had these around
from time to time, I don't know the address of any at present.

==  Can anyone provide us with a good reliable email <==> ftp link?  ==
If so, you'd be doing a big favor for all the Compuserve, MCI/ATT Mail,
and UUCP sites reading the Digest ... please write me with details.

Here is the main directory of the Telecom Archives, updated as of
July 31, 1992:

total 5323
drwxrwxr-x 14 telecom  telecom      5632 Jul 31 01:49 ./
drwxrwxr-x 24 root     wheel        1024 Jul 31 01:04 ../
dr-xr-xr-x  2 ptownson telecom       512 Mar  2  1991 1981-86.volumes.1-5/
dr-xr-xr-x  2 ptownson telecom       512 Mar  2  1991 1987.volumes.6-7/
dr-xr-xr-x  2 ptownson telecom       512 Mar  2  1991 1988.volume.8/
dr-xr-xr-x  2 ptownson telecom       512 Oct 27  1991 1989.volume.9/
dr-xr-xr-x  2 ptownson telecom      1024 Oct 27  1991 1990.volume.10/
dr-xr-xr-x  2 ptownson telecom      1024 Jan  1  1992 1991.volume.11/
drwxr-xr-x  2 ptownson telecom       512 Jul 15 01:40 1992.volume.12/
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom       663 Jan 27  1991 READ.ME.FIRST
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     25799 Sep 12  1990 abernathy.internet.story
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     14124 Mar 24 21:15 air.fone.frequencies
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     13983 Apr 19 12:12 alascom.story
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     68508 Mar 14  1991 aos-new.fcc.proposals
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     68224 Nov 20  1990 aos-rules.procedures
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     60505 Feb 24  1991 apple.data.pcs.petition
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     18238 Nov  9  1990 area.214-903.split.tx
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     34805 Jul 30  1991 area.301-410.split.md
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     41444 May 19 03:07 area.404-706.split.ga
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     34819 Jul 31 01:19 areacode.guide
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom      7295 Jul 31 01:35 areacode.history
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     10384 Jul 31 01:20 areacode.program.in.c
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     21370 Jul 31 01:20 areacode.script
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom      8734 Dec 13  1991 att-reach.out-calculator
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom       474 Feb 11  1990 att.service.outage.1-90
-rw-rw-r--  1 telecom  telecom     18937 Aug  1  1989 auto.coin.collection
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     18962 Jun 20 10:19 autovon.instructions
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom      4788 Jun 10  1990 books.about.phones
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     21206 Nov 18  1991 breaux.bill.call.blocking
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     61504 Jul 30  1990 caller-id-legal-decision
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom      4569 Feb  2 13:07 caller-id-specs.bellcore
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom      6807 Feb  2 13:04 caller.id.specs
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     39449 Dec 14  1990 cellular.carrier.codes
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     16188 Mar 14  1991 cellular.fraud.abernathy
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom      2755 Mar 14  1991 cellular.fraud.prevention
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     17016 Aug  5  1990 cellular.phones-iridium
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     24455 Feb  6  1991 cellular.program-motorola
-rw-rw-r--  1 telecom  telecom     15141 Aug  1  1989 cellular.sieve
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom       298 May 31  1990 cellular.west.germany
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     16292 Mar 18  1990 class.ss7.features
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     15023 Sep 30  1990 cocot-in-violation-label
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     38981 Oct 12  1990 cocot.complaint.sticker
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     70477 Sep  5  1990 computer.bbs.and.the.law
-rw-rw-r--  1 telecom  telecom     23944 Aug  1  1989 computer.state
drwxr-xr-x  2 ptownson telecom       512 Jul 12 03:37 country.codes/
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     11267 Feb 25  1990 cpid-ani.developments
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom       436 Mar 16  1991 deaf.communicate.on.tdd
-rw-r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     86136 May 19 03:11 deregulated.telecom.mkt
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     15877 Sep  1  1990 dial.tone.monopoly
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     28296 Sep 29  1990 dialup.access.in.uk
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     29980 Oct 29  1991 docket.87-215
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     13622 Aug 18  1991 e-mail.system.survey
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     16367 Sep  1  1990 e-series.recommendations
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom      3422 Jan 20  1990 early.digital.ESS
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     62602 Aug  1  1989 ecpa.1986
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     97987 Aug  4  1990 ecpa.1986.federal.laws
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     39956 Jul 14  1990 elec.frontier.foundation
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom      5922 Feb 22  1991 email.middle-east.troops
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     20660 Sep  5  1990 email.privacy
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom      8504 Jan 27  1990 enterprise-funny-numbers
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom      8234 Sep 26  1991 exploring.950-1288
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     19836 Nov 20  1990 fax.products.for.pc
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     24706 Oct 29  1991 fcc.modem.tax.action
-rw-rw-r--  1 telecom  telecom     33239 Aug  1  1989 fcc.policy
-rw-rw-r--  1 telecom  telecom     19378 Aug  1  1989 fcc.threat
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom       484 Jan 14  1990 fcc.vrs.aos-ruling
-rw-rw-r--  1 telecom  telecom      9052 Aug  1  1989 find.pair
-rw-rw-r--  1 telecom  telecom     47203 Aug  1  1989 fire.in.chgo.5-88
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom      1998 Jan 27  1990 fire.in.st-louis.1-90
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom       377 Jan 27  1990 fires.elsewhere.in.past
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom      1247 Feb 10  1990 first.issue.cover
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     48850 Jan 19  1992 frequently.asked.question
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     14105 Nov 24  1990 genie.star-service
-rw-r--r--  1 map      telecom    118330 Jun 17 16:20 glossary.acronyms
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     43101 Jan 27  1991 glossary.isdn.terms-kluge
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom    115757 Jul 31 01:24 glossary.naval.telecom
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     42188 Jan 14  1990 glossary.phrack.acronyms
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     67113 Jan 14  1990 glossary.txt
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     68804 Feb  2  1990 hi.perf.computing.net
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom      7295 Jul 31 01:19 history.of.area.splits
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom      2337 Jan 27  1990 history.of.digest
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     17129 Jan  5  1992 history.of.stock.ticker
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     27984 Nov 23  1991 history.of.teletype
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     30996 Feb 26 00:46 history.of.western.union
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     53628 Dec  6  1991 house.of.reps.bill.3515
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     32625 Mar 29  1990 how.numbers.are.assigned
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     31520 Aug 11  1991 how.phones.work
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     15302 Jan 20  1991 how.to.post.msgs.here
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     54041 Dec 13  1991 hr.3515.federal.law
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom      1616 Nov 20  1990 index-canada.npa.files
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom       411 Nov 20  1990 index-minitel.files
-rw-r--r--  1 ptownson telecom         0 Jul 31 01:49 index-telecom.archives
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom      1861 Sep 20  1991 index-telecom.security
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom       343 Jan 20  1991 index-tymnet.info
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom    568541 Jan  1  1992 index-vol.9-10-11.subj.Z
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom       936 Mar  3  1991 intro.to.archives
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     12896 Nov 20  1990 isdn.pc.adapter-hayes
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     10590 Aug 11  1991 lata.names-numbers.table
-rw-rw-r--  1 telecom  telecom      4816 Aug  1  1989 lauren.song
-rw-rw-r--  1 telecom  telecom       801 Aug  1  1989 ldisc.txt
-rw-rw-r--  1 telecom  telecom      2271 Aug  1  1989 ldnotes.txt
-rw-rw-r--  1 telecom  telecom     13675 Aug  1  1989 ldrates.txt
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     12961 Aug 18  1991 lightning.surge.protect
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     12260 Jan 20  1990 london.ac.script
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     12069 Mar  5  1990 london.codes.script
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     15604 Aug  1  1989 mass.lines
-rw-rw-r--  1 telecom  telecom       463 Aug  1  1989 measured-service
dr-xr-xr-x  2 ptownson telecom       512 Nov 20  1990 minitel.info/
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     36641 Aug  1  1989 mnp.protocol
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom    103336 Jan 28  1992 modem.tutorial
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom      2450 Jan 20  1990 modems.and.call-waiting
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     30981 Feb  9 21:49 modems.and.hotel.phones
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     29973 Aug 11  1991 monitor.soviet.xmissions
-rw-r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     23449 Jan 18  1992 motorola.programming
-rw-rw-r--  1 telecom  telecom      7597 Feb 10  1990 named.exchanges
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     16590 Oct 21  1990 net.mail.guide
-rw-rw-r--  1 telecom  telecom      3014 Jan 27  1990 newuser.letter
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     32815 Mar 25  1990 nine.hundred.service
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom      2795 Aug  3  1991 npa.510.sed.script
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     45105 Mar  2  1991 npa.800-carriers.assigned
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     17618 Feb  2 13:01 npa.800.carrier.list
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     13779 Sep 19  1990 npa.800.prefixes
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     45109 Mar  2  1991 npa.800.revised
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     35934 Dec 13  1991 npa.809.prefixes
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     15488 Nov 20  1990 npa.900-carriers.assigned
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     15099 Mar  8  1991 npa.900.how.assigned
dr-xr-xr-x  2 ptownson telecom      1024 Jan  5  1992 npa.exchange.list-canada/
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     16534 Feb 11  1990 nsa.original.charter-1952
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom      9886 Jan 23  1990 occ.10xxx.access.codes
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom      6847 Mar  2  1991 occ.10xxx.list.updated
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom      7714 Jul 23  1991 occ.10xxx.new.revision
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom      8593 May  5  1990 occ.10xxx.notes.updates
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     14354 Aug 12  1990 octothorpe.gets.its.name
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     85802 Apr 19 12:27 ohio.decree.on.caller-id
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom      8504 Jan 27  1990 old.fashioned.coinphones
-rw-rw-r--  1 telecom  telecom      2756 Jan 27  1990 old.hello.msg
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     60707 Aug 18  1991 pager.bin.uqx
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     13079 Aug 22  1991 pager.ixo.example
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     70153 Aug  1  1989 pc.pursuit
-rw-rw-r--  1 telecom  telecom      5492 Aug  1  1989 pearl.harbor.phones
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     41112 Jun 20 10:33 phone.hardware.you.build
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     11489 Sep 29  1991 phone.home-usa
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     28922 Aug 11  1991 phone.patches
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     38772 Aug  1  1989 pizza.auto.nmbr.id
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     14189 May  6  1991 radio-phone.interfere.1
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     11696 May  6  1991 radio-phone.interfere.2
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom      8452 May  6  1991 radio-phone.interfere.3
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     17950 Jan 14  1990 rotenberg.privacy.speech
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom      4184 Jul 27  1991 sprint.long-dist.rates
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     20526 Jun 11  1991 st.louis.phone.outage
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom      9764 Jan 20  1990 starline.features
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     46738 Jan 18  1990 starlink.vrs.pcp
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom    103069 Apr 26  1990 sysops.libel.liability
-rw-rw-r--  1 telecom  telecom      3857 Aug  1  1989 tat-8.fiber.optic
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     27533 Feb  9  1990 telco.name.list.formatted
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     31487 Jan 28  1990 telco.name.listing
-rw-rw-r--  1 ptownson telecom    913156 Jul 31 01:41 telecom-recent
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom       610 Sep  5  1991 telecom-recent.read.first
drwxr-xr-x  2 ptownson telecom      1024 May 24 20:02 telecom.security.issues/
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     32160 Feb 26 00:16 telex.from.internet
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     21831 Jan 20  1991 telsat-canada-report
-rw-rw-r--  1 telecom  telecom     11752 Aug  1  1989 telstar.txt
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     14429 Jan 18  1992 test.numbers
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     18138 Sep 29  1991 toll-free.tolled.list
dr-xr-xr-x  2 ptownson telecom       512 Dec 10  1990 tymnet.information/
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     26614 May 29  1990 unitel-canada.ld.service
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom       427 Sep 20  1991 usa.direct.service
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom       116 Oct 22  1990 white.pages
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     37947 Aug  1  1989 wire-it-yourself
-rw-rw-r--  1 telecom  telecom      4101 Aug  1  1989 wiring.diagram
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     24541 Aug  1  1989 zum.debate

And here is the index to one of the sub-directories dealing with
telecom security issues:

total 1025
drwxr-xr-x  2 ptownson telecom      1024 Sep 20 23:15 ./
drwxrwxr-x 12 telecom  telecom      5632 Sep 20 23:14 ../
-rw-r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     24515 Sep  3 02:06 atm-bank.fraud
-rw-r--r--  1 ptownson telecom      6144 Mar 14  1991 cellular.fraud.abernathy
-rw-r--r--  1 ptownson telecom      2755 Mar 14  1991 cellular.fraud.prevention
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     13343 Feb 25  1990 computer.fraud.abuse.act
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     27395 Jun 23  1990 craig.neidorf.indictment
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom      9354 Jul 30  1990 craig.not.guilty
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     67190 Jun 23  1990 crime.and.puzzlement
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     62602 Aug 12  1990 ecpa.1986
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     97987 Aug 12  1990 ecpa.1986.federal.laws
-rw-r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     21918 Dec  2  1990 illinois.computer.laws
-rw-r--r--  1 ptownson telecom         0 Sep 20 23:15 index-telecom.security
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     28935 May 19  1990 jolnet-2600.magazine.art
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     30751 Mar  7  1990 jolnet-attctc.crackers
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     43365 Jan 28  1990 kevin.polsen
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     35612 Apr  1  1990 legion.of.doom
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     20703 Aug 12  1990 len.rose-legion.of.doom
-rw-r--r--  1 ptownson telecom      2516 Jun 14 01:03 len.rose.in.prison
-rw-r--r--  1 ptownson telecom    184494 Jun 22 22:04 len.rose.indictment-1
-rw-r--r--  1 ptownson telecom    192078 Jun 22 22:05 len.rose.indictment-2
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     67099 Nov  4  1990 telecom.usa.call.block-1
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     31995 Nov 20  1990 telecom.usa.call.block-2
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     10833 Nov 20  1990 telecom.usa.call.block-3
-r--r--r--  1 ptownson telecom     14821 Sep 12  1990 war.on.computer.crime

Not included here are the sub-directories which deal with Canadian
area codes and place names; the comprehensive country code listings;
the back issues of the Digest since 1981; and others. You can capture
those yourself during your visit to the Archives.

I want to especially point out that if you want a complete and up to
date area code list, the one in the archives was updated by Carl Moore
just days ago and anticipates changes being made in the next few
months. And of course Dave Leibold's hard work with the country code
tables is to be commended. (Carl also worked on this.)

The archives changes daily as each new issue of the Digest is filed
away, and new files of all kinds arrive almost weekly, so keep up to
date by reviewing the main directory each time you visit.


Patrick Townson
TELECOM Moderator










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa02713;
          1 Aug 92 1:52 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA21186
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 31 Jul 1992 23:57:11 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA19405
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 31 Jul 1992 23:56:59 -0500
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1992 23:56:59 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #598

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 31 Jul 92 23:57:00 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 598

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Cable Telephony and BT Profits (Bryan Montgomery)
    NET and a Noise-Free Line: Impossible? (Kenneth Crudup)
    A Customer-Operated Coin Telephone Could be Cheaper For You! (P. Robinson)
    Just Saw a Neat New Modem (David Ptasnik)
    Product Review of SMDR Buffered Modem (David Ptasnik)
    PC-Based Voice Mail System (Bill Garfield)
    CRC Error Downloading .arc Files From UNIX to PC ([e-mail])
    Combined Fax Machine/Fax Modem? (Anthony E. Siegman)
    Does Bellcore Also Assign the Central Office Codes? (David Leibold)
    Operator Wins Gold in Current Events Unawareness (David Leibold)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Fri, 31 Jul 92 14:41:54 BST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Cable Telephony and BT Profits


Pat,

    I thought that the following snippet may be of interest,
especially as BT recently announced operating profits up until Jun 30
1992 of 799 million pounds, down from last year's profit at this time
of 920 million pounds.

Isn't competition wonderful?


Bryan

    *************** Forwarded Note ***************

:----------------------Electronic Edition-----------------------:
:                                                               :
: Issue: 087 :-------:Published Biweekly:------: Date: 27/07/92 :
:                                                               :
:--------------(C) Copyright 1991,92 Darren Ingram--------------:
:                                                               :
:-------------------------------------------:-------------------:
: SATNEWS is published biweekly by Darren   : HOW TO CONTACT US :
: Ingram Media Services and is Copyright (C):                   :
: 1991-92 Darren Ingram/Darren Ingram Media :                   :
: Services. It is distributed on various    :                   :
: electronic computer networks. Selected    : INTERNET          :
: reproduction is permitted as long as the  :      Satnews@cix. :
: copyright holder and title is credited.   :   compulink.co.uk :
: Contributions and solicitations for use   : FACSIMILE         :
: in Satnews are welcome. Please contact    :   [phone] :
: the editor before uploading Satnews onto a: TELEX             :
: new information source. Rights Reserved   :   94026650 DBRI G :
:-------------------------------------------:-------------------:
: Editor/Publisher: Darren Ingram           : Contact Satnews   :
: Contributors    : Dave Plumb              : for details on a  :
:                 : Dr. Helmut Vahlbruch    : special Internet/ :
:                 : Robert Smathers         : CIX access deal   :
:                 : And others              : that saves money! :
:---------------------------------------------------------------:

CABLE TELEPHONY INCREASES IN THE UK

According to figures released by the Independent Television Commission
the number of telephone lines installed in customers' premises by
cable operators increased by 125 percent in the first six months of
1992.

     There are approximately 48,000 telephone lines connected in 17
franchise areas.  Several other cable television operators plan to
introduce telephony services to subscribers by the end of the year.

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

From: [e-mail] (Kenneth Crudup)
Subject: NET and a Noise-Free Line: Impossible?
Organization: Open Software Foundation
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1992 18:48:18 GMT


HELP!

When I moved into my apartment two years ago, I had New England Tel
(NYNEX) put in three additional lines (I'm getting like Higdon! :-).
One of those was my outgoing-only terminal modem line. When it first
came in, it was noise-free, or at least clean enough that I didn't
notice. Now, I can't even call Cambridge 621- from Boston 983- without
getting random modem noise. It shows up as random characters (not all
just "{"'s and "~"'s, either) every minute or so, in groups of one to
three, but sometimes it will go as long as ten minutes without a noise
hit.  Sometimes it just shows up as recieve noise (doesn't get to the
other system), sometimes it gets to the other modem as well.

Oh goody, I get to call 555-1611. So I did. First time, I got the
automated system. Other than hanging up the connection on it at the
time (I guess as a line check), I didn't even get so much as a
callback on the daytime number I left. Tried it again, got a human,
same result. Third time, ditto. Fourth time, they tell me they've got
a log entry where some tech went out there and put his noise meter on
the NI and found "nothing". I guess for voice, you won't. I said, have
him come out again, and I'll show you the problem.

I moved the computer down to the second floor, for easier reach, and
ran a 25-ft RJ11 extension out the kitchen door to the NI, (outside,
unlocked, on the ground level!) to eliminate the house wiring as a
source of the problem.  Thankfully, the problem showed while the tech
was there. I used a different modem, and a different terminal, to
prove it wasn't the equipment. He ran his noise meter again, and told
me that there was "nothing he could do". He said I could go to
business tariff, and I told him that all that means is that they
charge me more, but I won't get a new line pair. ("Oh yeah, I guess
you're right".) He told me then about a "special line" I could order
for "computer stuff", that I found out was a leased line. Thanks. (I
did wonder that if I brought that line up to business tariff, that
they would be *forced* to make that line clean. Since it's deductible,
I'd go with it.)

I wanted him to run a new pair for me. He said he couldn't, but he
said that he could see my problem. I believe he was just trying to get
out of it, and I asked for the name of his supervisor/group leader. He
"hasn't been in".

What should I say/do next? I just want a noise-free (at least regular
clean) line.

Some more background info: I was on Martha's Vineyard a month ago,
used the same line to get in, left it a while, no noise. My officemate
lives out in the sticks, no noise. Noone else complains, either. When
I called repair service, I tried to sound telecom literate (using
terms I culled from c.d.t) so they wouldn't ask me the dumb question
set, and take me seriously. I asked if I had a SLC (slick) on the
line(s), no one could tell me. When I moved the modem over to one of
the other new lines, same problem. I haven't had the modem on the home
number long enough to see if it shows up on that one.

Thanks in advance.


Kenneth R. Crudup, Contractor, OSF DCE QA
OSF, 11 Cambridge Center, Cambridge, MA 02142    [phone]
[e-mail]            OSF has nothing to do with this post.


[Moderator's Note: When you mentioned you had the same problem with
the modem on one of the other lines, it occurred to me that perhaps
your modem is at fault. They do go out of calibration, you know. Try
the modem on different lines, then try a different modem on the
original line and let us know what happens.   PAT]

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

Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 92  15:41:35 EDT
Subject: A Customer-Operated Coin Telephone Could be Cheaper For You!


I went into a restaurant in Bethesda, MD and discovered a different
pay telephone.

It consisted of a desk-style Touch-Tone* telephone with two special
additions; one is a green "TALK" button (more on this feature later),
and the other is a coin slot.  The phone claims to accept dimes and
nickels for calls.

Here's the kicker: the sign on the front:

25c Call:  Local Calls 25c / Long Distance 25c a minute
           Insert 25c; dial number; press TALK button to
           talk.

It will dial 911 and 1-800 numbers without coin (it claims; I had to
go to work and could not do a full test)*.  I did one test they would
not have liked.

I put in a quarter and dialed the local number for time.  I was
connected and did hear the annoucement.  I hung up and my 25c came
back, so it is acceptable for calling a number that is busy or does
not answer*.

They also provide CANADA and CARRIBBEAN at $1 a minute; with Canadian
rates reaching around 30c a minute that's a little steep*; but let's
look at the U.S. rate structure.

The current dial direct rate for AT&T and such is running around 11 to
18c for calls in the USA*; however, based upon the surcharge of 75-80c
for a credit card call, this type of phone would be {cheaper}* for
calls of {11 minutes}* or less:

            Call Length
           3 Min   4 Min   5 Min  6 Min  7 Min  11 Min  12 Min
Call Rate    54     72      90     118    136     198     216
Surcharge    75     75      75      75     75      75      75
  Rate      129    151     165     187    214     273     292

25c/Min      75    100     125     150    175     275     300

These rates do not count taxes imposed on calling card calls, and
discounts available, but this type of phone is {cheaper} for most
people's long distance calls when you have to pay a calling-card
surcharge on the call.*

What surprised me was the amount of time you have to be on the phone
{before} this phone is more expensive!  12 Minutes!

*Your mileage may vary.


Paul Robinson


[Moderator's Note: That style COCOT like others can be set for
whatever rate the owner wants to charge. Obviously the person who owns
that one is more interested in providing a service than in ripping
people off, like many COCOT operators.  Good for him.  PAT]

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

Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1992 15:28:24 -0700 (PDT)
From: David Ptasnik <[e-mail]>
Subject: Just Saw a Neat New Modem ...


 ... called the Q Blazer.  It is a 2" x 2" black cube.  9600 baud
(v.32 I think), has space for a nine volt battery in it that can
provide about two hoursof power for you laptopers out there.  Our
computer people are wild about it, I haven't tried it yet.

Under $300.


All of the above is nothing more than the personal opinion of -

Dave Ptasnik          [e-mail]

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

Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1992 15:34:11 -0700 (PDT)
From: David Ptasnik <[e-mail]>
Subject: Product Review of SMDR Buffered Modem


I just hooked up the Visionary Electronics 2400xt buffered modem, and
I like it alot.  It is attached to a Merlin II R.3 key system (had to
use an AT&T 355A and a null modem adapter to get from AT&T's RJ-45
format to an RS-232).  Comes with 256k, one meg, or four meg of RAM
for well under $1,000.  I am trying a one meg version.

I can call it at 300, 1200, or 2400.  It accepts data from the key
system at 3, 12, and 2400.  The Merlin II transmits at 1200.

I can call it for a normal download, or an xmodem download, or it can
call me at a set interval, or when it reaches a certain percentage of
fullness.  It is password protected and supports call back modem
operation.  It's outbound dialing commands include pauses and wait for
dial tones.

It can also call out with up to 16 different alarm states (presumably
relaying alarms to you if your PBX or key system comes without dial
out capability).

Easy to understand and pretty well written manual.  Menus when you get
in are clear and intuitive.  It has a two year warranty.

Compared to units I have seen that come packaged with call accounting
software, this is a good deal.

Visionary Electronics
141 Parker Avenue
San Francisco, CA  94118
[phone]

Ask for Brad Mc Millan.


All of the above is nothing more than the personal opinion of -

Dave Ptasnik          [e-mail]

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

Subject: PC-Based Voice Mail System
From: [e-mail] (Bill Garfield)
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 92 17:30:00 -0600
Organization: Ye Olde Bailey BBS - Houston, TX - 713-520-1569
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Bill Garfield)


Can anyone put me onto a source for a decent PC-based voice mail
system?  It needs to of course do telephone answering, but additional
features like Callers Menu (press 1 for... press 2 for... etc) and
outdialing to a pre-programmed selection of pagers is desirable.

I'm looking for a SMALL system, something that could support no more
than eight to ten users, but the paging option (ability to selectively
page any one of the eight to ten users) is a must.

Cost _IS_ a factor.

What's out there?  Any shareware?  Commercial?  What are the hardware
requirements?  Any info will be appreciated.

Please e-mail your replies and if there's sufficient intrest, I'll
post back to the net.  Thanks in advance.


Bill Garfield <[e-mail]>

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: CRC Error Downloading .arc Files From Unix to PC
Date: 31 Jul 92 23:57:34 GMT
Organization: Computing Services, UC Davis


I get a "bad CRC" and "bad block num" message and aborted download
when going from files on Unix (downloaded from ftp site in binary) to
my PC (ProcommPlus).  Other files download fine, like .zip files
transferred from ftp sites in the same way.  What is the problem?
I've tried everything I know (Ymodem, Xmodem, Kermit) etc.  Appreciate
a solution.

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

Date: Fri, 31 Jul 92 17:51:44 PDT
From: Anthony E. Siegman <[e-mail]>
Subject: Combined Fax Machine/Fax Modem?


Are there any combined fax machine/fax net-modem combinations, not too
unreasonably priced, which can be connected onto a single phone line
plus a building LAN (AppleTalk or Ethernet) and permit:

* Walk-up users to send copies from paper as usual;

* Remote networked users to send faxes from their Mac/PC disks;

* Incoming (or already received and stored) faxes to be optionally
  either printed out on demand at the machine itself, or to be
  transferred to or retrieved from the networked PCs or Macs,
  either as they arrive or on a delayed basis?

If one has such a machine, with only a single externally published
phone number, is there any realistic way to preview the header
information at the machine for routing purposes, or for remote users
to call up and see if there are any received faxes intended for them
already in the machine?

[Note: In our situation it's not reasonble to have individual codes or
PIN numbers for each user, because remote senders will in general only
know the published phone number, not individual user codes.]


AES  [e-mail]

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

Date: Fri, 31 Jul 92 22:25:35 EDT
From: David Leibold <[e-mail]>
Subject: Does Bellcore Also Assign the Central Office Codes?


There is some discussion on one of the Fidonet conferences regarding
numbering plan matters. Bellcore assigns the area codes in the North
American Numbering Plan, but the discussions I've run across mention
that Bellcore also assigns the prefixes within each area code. I know
that Bellcore maintains V&H and other lists of prefixes, but assumed
that the predominant telcos in each area would be responsible for
setting up prefixes (apart from some common, special-use numbers like
555 directory assistance, or 976 premium/announcement, or 958 and 959
for testing), and that Bellcore would compile the assignments from
each region for the various tapes and lists, etc.

In most cases, there is a predominant telco for each area code, such
as a BOC. However, there are special cases like 813 in Florida where
the region is shared by more than one company (GTE, Centel, etc) which
could result in some interesting battles over prefix assignment.

Does anyone have the official word on this?


[e-mail]

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

Date: Fri, 31 Jul 92 22:19:27 EDT
From: David Leibold <[e-mail]>
Subject: Operator Wins Gold in Current Events Unawareness


{The Toronto Star} featured the story of a reporter at the Olympic
Games in Barcelona who lost some travellers cheques (brand name wasn't
stated).  The reporter phoned the refund centre in London UK where the
operator who answered mentioned the many calls coming in from
Barcelona: "What's going on down there?" was the operator's query.

Customer service reps should not leave home without their newspapers :-)


[e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #598
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa04854;
          1 Aug 92 2:55 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA06573
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 1 Aug 1992 01:02:22 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA12184
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 1 Aug 1992 01:02:13 -0500
Date: Sat, 1 Aug 1992 01:02:13 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #599

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 1 Aug 92 01:02:13 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 599

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Bad News For Illinois Bell Management (RelayNet, M. Moen via Nigel Allen)
    Prefix Changes 404 -> 706 Area Code (Southern Bell via Paul Robinson)
    Panasonic Two-Line Phone Has a Big Problem (Brett G. Person)
    Questions About Wireless LAN (Mitsutaka Ito)
    Need Help Determining Local Access For Largest Area (Mark Boolootian)
    WYSE-50 / WYSE-60 and ROLM Telephone Systems (Robert Patrick MacKin)
    Information Wanted on AXE10, TS3, TS4 (Christin I. Mourad)
    FTP <=> Email Service For Archives (Mark Maimone)
    Re: Pac*Bell CLASS Features (John Higdon)
    Re: Pac*Bell CLASS Features (Alan L. Varney)
    Re: Pac*Bell CLASS Features (Scott Statton)
    Why Not Switch From 800 to 900? (Carl Moore)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Nigel Allen <[e-mail]>
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1992 20:00:00 -0400
Subject: Bad News For Illinois Bell Management
Organization: Echo Beach


This message was written by Max Moen in the RelayNet Phones
conference.  I gather that he works for Illinois Bell, but I'm not
sure exactly what he does there.

 (begin forwarded message)

     IBEW Local 165, the union that represents technical craftspeople
in the Illinois Bell region has notified it's members that IBT will be
offering it's SIPP (voluntary early retirement program) to "Network"
personal around the September 1. This is only the second time Network
has ever been offered SIPP and even this offering is gong to be
limited.

     Following that process, 20 to 100 first level managers are going
to be "offered the opportunity to take their tools back." i.e
volunteer to be demoted.

     Local 165 in a move that they knew was a waste of time, asked
that those union members already part of the Upgrade and Transfer
Program (at IBT, and no doubt other companies, you can nominate
yourself for a lateral or upgrade transfer -- i.e. a promotion -- this
has proved successful for moving through the crafts, but virtually no
one gets promoted to management via this system) be the first ones
offered the positions that would be vacated.  Illinois Bell promptly
froze the Upgrade and Transfer Program making the point moot.

     At this point, it is not clear whether the number of managers to
be offered their tools will coincide with the number of craftspeople
taking SIPP.  It is also unclear, but suspected, that only those
craftspeople who have a qualified manager to replace them will be
granted the SIPP.

     On a personal note; No not me, while I've got enough years (23),
I'm still too young, 41 (well, I think that's young anyway!) for an
early retirement offer.  However, my supervisor (who also happens to
be my oldest and best friend in the company) has only been management
for two+ years and our department ran unsupervised for 12 years, so
he's not a real pleasant fellow to be around right now.

(end of forwarded message)

                        -------

Canada Remote Systems  - Toronto, Ontario/Detroit, MI
World's Largest PCBOARD System - 416-629-7000/629-7044

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

Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 92  06:37:23 EDT
Subject:  Prefix Changes 404 -> 706 Area Code


According to an announcement by Southern Bell, the following area code
404 exchanges will change to area code 706 effective August 3, 1992:

208  278  354  468  549  597  657  724  778  828  883
213  282  356  472  553  598  660  731  779  829  884
216  283  357  481  554  602  663  733  782  831  886
217  285  358  485  556  613  665  734  783  838  891
219  290  359  486  557  625  667  735  788  845  893
226  291  367  492  560  628  672  736  789  846  895
232  293  369  495  561  629  673  737  790  849  896
234  295  374  506  563  630  674  738  791  855  931
235  318  375  517  567  632  675  742  793  856  935
236  322  376  537  568  635  677  743  795  857  937
245  323  379  538  569  637  678  745  796  858  947
259  324  384  539  571  638  682  746  797  860  965
265  326  397  540  574  643  685  747  798  861  966
268  327  398  541  575  645  687  754  802  862  989
269  328  437  542  576  646  689  757  812  863
272  334  444  543  579  647  692  759  820  864
273  335  453  544  582  648  693  764  821  865
274  337  456  545  585  649  694  769  823  866
275  338  462  546  592  650  695  771  824  868
276  342  465  547  595  652  721  776  825  878
277  353  467  548  596  654  722  777  826  882

Some exchanges will change later on; for that reason, the following
exchanges will be dialable with either the 404 or 706 area code
through March 28, 1993:

207  253  304  386  503  536  718  775  832  869
214  254  307  387  519  562  720  781  834  887
227  258  336  412  531  583  725  784  836  889
228  267  345  459  532  599  748  786  844  927
229  287  382  464  534  606  749  787  854  967
251  301  385  479  535  684  773  830  867  983

Southern Bell customers can call 1-800-241-8097. Non-customers can call
Bellcore at 201-829-2592

This list is effective 6-16-1992.

Southern Bell hasn't completely decided which exchanges are going to
what area code, so this list is incomplete and tentative, and is
subject to additional numbers which may be added later.

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

From: plains![e-mail] (Brett G Person )
Subject: Panasonic Two-Line Phone Has Big Problem
Date: 31 Jul 92 07:19:13 GMT
Organization: North Dakota State University, Fargo


Here's a strange one.  I've got some flavor of Panasonic two-line
phone in the office. There are two of these phones; one up front, one
in a back room.  The problem is that whenever I don't think that these
phones are hooked up properly.

I can make a call out on one line, hang up, get a dial tone and hang
up again.  Then have the phone ring on the line that I was just on and
still be connected to the call I made previously.  This is after I
flash the hook and get a dial tone.  I always thought that a dial tone
meeant that ypu had a clear line.  Why would the phone ring again and
still be connected to the last call?

It looks as though the phone company instwlled two lines into the
phone through one physical line (RJ-11?) It hooks into a slot labled
line one and two.  I don't know enough about phones to figure this one out.
It does bug me though.


Thanks.

Brett Person      Guest Account  North Dakota State University
[e-mail] || [e-mail]

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

Subject: Questions About Wireless LAN
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 92 18:35:51 +0900
From: Mitsutaka Ito <[e-mail]>


I am interested in wireless LAN.  If anyone has any information on
this topic, please inform me.

Products, research, experiments and future directions; I am happy with
any information.

   Thank you in advance.


Mitsutaka Ito                E-mail: [e-mail]
NTT Software Laboratories    Tel/Fax: [phone]
1-9-1 Kohnan Minato-ku Tokyo 108 Japan

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

Date: Fri, 31 Jul 92 08:46:08 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Mark Boolootian)
Subject: Need Help Determining Local Access For Largest Area


I would like to set up a computer and provide dial-up access.  I would
like phone calls into this system to be local calls for as wide an
area as possible (the area in question, if it matters, is the San
Francisco Bay Area).  Is there some technique to determine the optimal
location for this system so as to provide local access to the greatest
number of callers?  Perhaps Pac Bell can determine this for me?

Additionally, can someone explain to me what distinguishes local calls
from toll calls?  Are all calls within a LATA local?  Does physical
proximity have anything to do with determining whether a call is local
(i.e. is it always the case that calling a couple of blocks away will
be a local call)?  Assuming physical proximity had something to do
with it, I've always fancied setting up a dial-up system which chained
together a bunch of local calls, but for which the end-to-end call
would have been toll.

Thanks in advance.


Cheers,

Mark Boolootian       [e-mail]   [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Robert Patrick MacKin)
Subject: WYSE-50 / WYSE-60 and ROLM Telephone Systems
Organization: University of Western Ontario
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1992 13:47:15 GMT


My Wyse 60 got zapped in a surge and now the switching power supply is
blown.  I need a schematic to begin fixing it.  If anyone has a
terminal package that will emulate a wyse50 including the
"who-are-you" response sequence, because the ROLM won't respond until
it sees it, I would appreciate any help.

Thanks for your time.


[e-mail] (Robert Patrick MacKin)
Western Business School  --  London, Ontario

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

From: [e-mail] (Christin I. Mourad)
Subject: Information Wanted on AXE10, TS3, TS4
Organization: New Jersey Institute of Technology, Newark, N.J.
Date: Sat, 1 Aug 1992 01:52:12 GMT


I would like to hear from people who worked or dealt (mostly software)
with the Ericsson International Exchange AXE10.  I would like also to
know what are TS3, and TS4.

Thanks in advance.


Christin

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

Date: Fri, 31 Jul 92 11:29:04 EDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: FTP <=> Email Service For Archives


Pat,

    I know of two ftp servers.  [e-mail], and
[e-mail].  Rumor has it that bitftp only responds to bitnet
sites, and ftpmail *doesn't* respond to bitnet sites, but I've never
verified it.  I do know ftpmail works and is easy to use.  Just send
"help" to either address for info.


Mark Maimone    [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: I've had correspondence with someone who says
service from ftpmail@decwrl is not so good. He claims it does not
always work right, and is a hassle. I really don't know, and invite
users to try it for the Telecom Archives. The [e-mail]
a/k/a bitftp@pucc/princeton.edu server was quite good when it was
available in the beginning; but yes, I have heard it is now only
available to bitnet sites.  Readers should test it out also.  Are
there any others? Anyone willing to make one for our use?   PAT]

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

Date: Fri, 31 Jul 92 00:38 PDT
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: Pac*Bell CLASS Features


MPA15AB![e-mail] writes:

> GTE has had at least two CLASS features available for some time:
> distinctive ringing (ringmate) and busy number redial.  I have had BNR
> for over a year.  I believe it does BNR by terminator queueing.  Of
> course, only numbers in my switch can be used.

Features available within a single switch are hardly very impressive.
And distinctive ringing is actually a scheme to sell the customer both
(or mulitple) "sides" of a single "party" line. It has little to do
with CLASS although it is usually bundled in with CLASS offerings.
Priority ringing (as offered by Pac*Bell) is a CLASS feature, since it
requires SS7 signaling between offices to pass the caller's number for
checking against the callee's list.

But here is a bit of provinciality: in the Bay Area, Pac*Bell SS7
connectivity is virtually 100% (excluding only a very few
non-SS7-capable prefixes). GTE has 0% SS7 connectivity here. It does
not even have it internally. Is it too much to expect that the largest
LEC in the country, doing business in the fourth largest SMSA might
join the party and provide a level of service that remotely compares
with the other major LEC in the area? Apparently it is if it is GTE.

> GTE has a target date of November 1992 for offering the rest of CLASS,
> except for CLID, Call Trace, and Call Return.  Call Trace should be
> available later, after the public education program.

I'll believe that when I see it. In the meantime, it might start by
connecting its Los Gatos operation with SS7.

Pac*Bell's new slogan:

"Good enough isn't".

Suggested GTE slogan:

"Good enough isn't--possible".


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

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

Date: Fri, 31 Jul 92 09:07:14 CDT
From: [e-mail] (Alan L Varney)
Subject: Re: Pac*Bell CLASS Features
Organization: AT&T Network Systems, Lisle, IL


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Dave
Levenson) writes regarding "repeat dialing":

> It doesn't work by repeat dialing at all.  It sends a message to the
> destination CO, via the SS-7 network, requesting notification when the
> called line becomes available.

And in article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Terry Kennedy) responds:

> And it has some problems, at least from my point of view. Here in NJ
> Bell land, you can presubscribe this feature or pay $.75 per usage.
> Well, my cable TV was out and I needed to call them for a status
> update. Their repair number (201-915) was busy, so I used this feature
> from my home phone (201- 451). Both of these prefixes are on the same
> switch, a 1AESS (primary exchange 201-332). When I got the ringback
> and picked up the phone, I got a "per-chunk" (louder than the call
> waiting one) followed by "We are sorry.  Your call cannot be completed
> because the number became busy again". I'd think that it would seize
> the destination number while attempting to notify me.

   Actually, there are two versions of this feature, usually called
"originating scanning" and "terminating scanning".  The terminating
version operates by having the destination CO maintain a queue of
numbers to notify when a line becomes available.  Those queued are
notified in order, with a complex scheme of requeuing for cases where
the caller is busy or doesn't answer, or the timers in the 2 switches
are not set equally.

   The originating version is simpler, in that everything is run by
the caller's CO.  It periodically uses SS7 to query the busy/idle
status of the desired line, and notifies callers when idle is seen.
Since many switches could be doing this, the "queue" doesn't exist;
it's just a random function, like many other parts of the telephone
network.

   Which version is used depends on the availability of terminating
scanning in the terminating switch, and the purchase by the TELCo of
that option.  If the initial request from the calling CO doesn't
indicate that terminating scanning is available, the originating
switch uses originating scanning.  There are advantages to each form
of scanning: Originating is "fairer" in one sense to mass calling
numbers, because everyone gets a equal shot at the next line -- not
just the one person at the top of the queue (or in the same CO as the
called line).  But to the individual, it's not as "fair", because they
aren't assured a callback in the order queued.

   BUT IN NEITHER VERSION is the newly-idled line "held" for just one
caller.  Any regular incoming call to that line will connect if the
line is idle.  Nor is the line prevented from originating a call while
someone is being "rung back".  There are issues of fairness,
reliability, call capacity, memory and feature interaction that
dictate the current implementations.  The feature was designed to
handle idle-line notification for moderate usage lines -- in many
cases, mass calling numbers are blocked from being valid numbers for
"repeat dialing", because it's viewed as an inefficient mechanism for
such usage.  Maybe someone will come up with a better method for the
mass calling case someday; if so, it probably won't rely on "ring
back".

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

From: [e-mail] (Scott Statton)
Subject: Re: Pac*Bell CLASS Features
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 92 17:05:57 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest)


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Terry
Kennedy) writes:

In a previous edition of the digest, Terry Kennedy explains how he
tried to use Camp-on to call the busy CATV service number ...

> and picked up the phone, I got a "per-chunk" (louder
> than the call waiting one) followed by "We are
> sorry.  Your call cannot be completed because the
> number became busy again". I'd think that it would
> seize the destination number while attempting to
> notify me.

Let's assume that Terry's suggestion is taken, and the destination
number is "seized".  If the customer picks up the phone, "<SIT> I'm
sorry, you cannot use this telephone, because someone is trying to
call you.  Please hang up and allow their call to return to you."  Or
what if you initiate the feature and wander away.  How long should
(how long does it now?) wait for you to answer the stutter-ring, and
re-initiate the call?  Someone suggested that Busy-redials should be
queued in the terminating office, and answered in order.  That may
well be how they happen, but the over-riding concern is the customer
has the ultimate control over the terminating number.

Another story about Busy-Redial: A friend who works for The Company
recently ordered this feature.  He intiated a busy-redial on a local
Bulletin Board system that is almost always busy.  Now this particular
system has a ten line hunt group, and he (as all callers do) dialed
the lead number, and initiated the busy-redial.  Only when THAT
PARTICULAR term became available did he get the recall-ring.  Of
course, with SEVERAL DOZEN (!!) busy-attempts per minute, he didn't
have a chance, in the time it took him to pick up his phone, someone
else got the port.

Does anyone have the feature-interaction cross-ref for Busy-Redial and
hunting?  I can obviously see how they implemented it (415-961 a 1A
ESS) on a per-termination basis.  In other offices, can it be
implemented on a per-hunt-group basis?  I'm not familiar with number 5
internals, having never had the bad taste to live near one :-)


Scott Statton

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

Date: Fri, 31 Jul 92 12:36:46 EDT
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject: Why Not Switch From 800 to 900?


I saw an ad saying:

Attention 1-800 number advertisers, employers and realtors: Why not
provide your business information by 1-900 number?  You can earn money
and save money on your telephone expenses.  For further information
contact: 1-900-xxx-xxxx EXT xxx ($2.00 for 1st min and each additional
minute.)


[Moderator's Note: And just last week there was another "Make Money
Fast" message going around the next which promoted this same kind of
scheme through the mail: each person sign up others and profit from
their purchase (of nothing; but that was not dwelt upon.) I've seen
several versions of this 'learn how to make money with a 900 number by
calling and listening to a pitch'. Apparently some people are dumb
enough to fall for it.   PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #599
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa08816;
          2 Aug 92 11:17 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA00761
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 2 Aug 1992 09:29:14 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA14161
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 2 Aug 1992 09:29:06 -0500
Date: Sun, 2 Aug 1992 09:29:06 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #600

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 2 Aug 92 09:29:00 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 600

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Questions About Fax Tones vs. Voice (Jason Williams)
    Re: Ericsson MD110 PBX Intelligent Network (Martin McCormick)
    Re: Solve Three Problems (was Telecom Fraud) (Bob Goudreau)
    Re: Ameritech Testing Digital Cellular Phones (Andrew C. Green)
    Re: A Very Strange Experience When Calling LD (Scott Fybush)
    Re: Exploring the Telecom Archives: Archives Index (Joshua Hosseinoff)
    Re: Exploring the Telecom Archives: Archives Index (John Rice)
    Re: Remote Cable (Bob Vogel)
    Re: PC-Based Voice Mail System (Bill Mayhew)
    Re: Does Bellcore Also Assign the Central Office Codes? (Alan L. Varney)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Jason Williams)
Subject: Re: Questions About Fax Tones vs. Voice
Organization: Real/Time Communications
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 92 05:49:37 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Chris
Schmandt) w rites:

> In a nutshell: I'm looking for a fax machine that can receive faxes in
> the middle of the night without ringing my phone and waking me up.

Why not just cut the ringer off on your phone or even disconnect the
phone?


[e-mail] (Jason Williams)

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

Subject: Re: Ericsson MD110 PBX Intelligent Network
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 92 11:23:14 -0500
From: [e-mail]


Oklahoma State University got an Ericsson MD110 in 1988.  We, also
have the modem pool and the various flavors of TAU or telephone access
units.  O.S.U. hired some Ericsson personnel to stay here, permanently
after the cutover, and maintain the system as well as train new staff.
We have had some problems with the modem pool, but Ericsson has always
tried very hard to make it work.

     After much hew and cry from residential students and staff, the
Telephone Services Department has been instructed to make analog lines
available, no questions asked, for special modems, fax machines, etc.

     I understand that analog lines pose a difficulty for the MD110
switches because they use more resources in the switch node than
standard digital lines.

     The discussion of the MD110 installation at Boise State brings a
few ideas to mind.  Digital phone systems are here to stay.  For the
foreseeable future, most of the telephone equipment freely available
will be analog.  The designers of digital PBX's need to better address
this problem.  There isn't any really good reason why inexpensive
interfaces can't be designed which bridge the analog and digital
domains at the terminal level.  If this were possible, then all of the
line cards in the switch could be digital.  While not all the features
of the PBX could be preserved on the analog side of the interface, the
most basic ones such as ringing, dialing, and hook status would not
really require much engineering to implement.

     Administratively, there needs to be a workaround for situations
which arise that don't lend themselves to the standard interface.  One
shouldn't have to raise forty kinds of Hell to be able to use an
answering machine, conference phone, or other device which wasn't
thought of in the original master plan.

     If reasonably-priced analog/digital interfaces which worked at
the terminal level were readily available for anybody who wanted to
buy or rent them, much bad blood between the telephone department and
the rest of the university would disappear.


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

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

Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1992 14:31:07 -0400
From: [e-mail] (Bob Goudreau)
Subject: Re: Solve Three Problems (was Telecom Fraud)


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

> It is amazing how people misread/misunderstand the properties of a
> stored value card. I will try to make things more clear.

Likewise, it is equally amazing how people misunderstand the
properties of calling card accounts ...

>> There's one major problem I can see with this solution.  Most
>> telephones in this country are still not capable of magnetically
>> "reading" even the current calling cards.

> Yes, you will have to upgrade every public phone that is to use a
> stored value card.

Whoa, who said anything about limiting the scope to just payphones?
Most of the times I use my calling card number, it is *not* from a
payphone, it is from a "regular" phone in a hotel room, rental
property, or home of a friend or relative.  I believe this is what the
first poster meant by "most telephones in the country".  Upgrading a
couple hundred million personal telephones to incorporate a card-
reader seems rather unlikely.

Remember, although stored-value cards have their uses, they are still
essentially glorified payphone tokens, so their range of capabilities
is very narrow.  Calling card accounts are much more general-purpose
because they can be used from almost any phone in the country (and
even some outside).


Bob Goudreau        Data General Corporation
[e-mail]    62 Alexander Drive
[phone]        Research Triangle Park, NC  27709, USA

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

Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1992 14:16:51 CDT
From: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Ameritech Testing Digital Cellular Phones


David Lemson <[e-mail]> writes:

> I was told by the Ameritech guy at SuperComm/ICC who demonstrated the
> phone for us that they had way more than enough people to test the
> system.  He said "I can't even get one!"  Maybe they're onto the next
> phase and have more openings?  Or maybe because I was with my dad who
> works for a telecommunications company ... (and whose nametag showed
> it) :-)

No, yes and yes. :-) I ran into some of the Ameritech people at the
train station again this morning and they said that they gave away
about 150 applications yesterday and were looking for more people this
morning. In fact, they were getting a bit worried about pestering the
same people all over again in an effort to get enough people signed up
in the test area. They're now at the stage of trying to sign up Joe
and Mary Sixpack for some real world testing, although they are
currently stuck waiting for another shipment of prototypes to arrive
before they can get more in circulation.

I told Mr. Kim about TELECOM Digest the other day on the phone, and I
think he was a little apprehensive about it until I pointed out that
the Digest is read by everybody including Ameritech, and the
information in the last posting was nothing that hadn't been in the
papers a couple of months ago. I passed along a copy of my original
posting, and also a listing of their local Ameritech <-> Internet
connection that I obtained from local maps, so hopefully they'll be
contacting TELECOM Digest themselves in the near future!


Andrew C. Green
Datalogics, Inc.      Internet: [e-mail]
441 W. Huron          UUCP: ..!uunet!dlogics!acg
Chicago, IL  60610    FAX: [phone]

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

Date: Fri, 31 Jul 92 22:45 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Scott Fybush)
Subject: Re: A Very Strange Experience When Calling LD


I've noticed occasionally when calling New England Tel's free weather
line (+1 617 936 XXXX, where XXXX can be anything) that in the dead
period (about three seconds or so) between the e end of the weather
recording and the start of the next cycle, it's possible to hear other
people on the line.

Apparently this is being used as a "party line" by kids at various
junior high schools around here, judging by the voices I've heard and
by the numbers they give out.  (It must be something that gets passed
around at one school at a time ... one week most of the kids on the
line had Needham numbers; another week most of them were giving out
Waltham numbers.)

It's most active during the afternoon and early evening.  Try it
yourself and see ...

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

Date: 01 Aug 1992 21:56:10 -0400 (EDT)
From: JOSHUA HOSSEINOFF <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Exploring the Telecom Archives: Archives Index


Here are two reliable and quick email ftp servers.  Just send a
message with the command help in the first line of the message and you
will get info on how to use them.  At times when demand is low I
usually can get the files I request within a few minutes.

The email addresses are:

[e-mail]    and   [e-mail]

These are two completely different email ftp servers so check out both
of them to see which one works best for you.


Joshua Hosseinoff
[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Exploring the Telecom Archives: Archives Index
Organization: Teradyne Inc., Telecommunications Division
Date: Sun, 02 Aug 92 02:38:58 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, TELECOM Moderator (telecom@eecs.
nwu.edu) writes:

> ==  Can anyone provide us with a good reliable email <==> ftp link?  ==
> If so, you'd be doing a big favor for all the Compuserve, MCI/ATT Mail,
> and UUCP sites reading the Digest ... please write me with details.

A reliable ftp mail-server is at [e-mail] . It's busy,
but reliable. I use it periodically to retrieve files from cica and
SIMTEL.  For information send e-mail;

     To: [e-mail]
     Subject: help

and you will receive a help message with instructions.


John Rice        K9IJ     |  "Did I say that ?" I must have, but It was
                          |   MY opinion only, no one else's...Especially
                          |   Not my Employer's....
[e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: Well, I've had a few messages now on these two
services and the thing I should point out is that bitftp will only
respond to Bitnet sites. It used to answer everyone, but no longer.
Then in a letter from someone yesterday I was advised the one at
decwrl is not too reliable, but I can't say this because I've never
tried it. So my suugestion to UUCP sites and others without Internet
connections would be to experiment with decwrl and see how well it can
handle your requests from the Telecom Archives (ftp lcs.mit.edu).  PAT]

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

Date: 01 Aug 1992 11:10:54 -0500 (EST)
From: BOB VOGEL <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Remote Cable


Matt McConnell <[e-mail]> in TCD Vol 12 #578 asks what is
"remote cable".  Something to do with: communities that have no cable,
are hard to reach, small, the government is selling licenses like with
cellular.

What your friend is probably referring to is more accurately known as
MMDS or "multi-point microwave distribution system".  It is a
controlled direction transmitter in the Ghz range (I think around one
or two, but I will check and advise) which typically now carries 20-30
TV channels.

It is received by a small, approximatly one foot diameter, parabolic
antenna which is often mounted on an existing TV antenna mast.
License have indeed been under distribution by the FCC for several
years.  A number of fraud complaints have been lodged by promoters
marginal to ridiculous claims of high profits to be made by this
service.  One such service calling themselves "Choice TV" recently
went into business in Fresno, CA.  They offer 28 channels and one
"free" pay service for about $29/month and have additional pays and
pay- per-view movies available for extra charge.  I believe they
actually transmit about 20 channels, received from satellite, and have
a frequency convertor that takes the off-air signals off a regular
antenna (we have only UHF stations in the valley) and converts them
into a "seamless" channel lineup.

The service avoids the cost of stringing cables to homes and also
avoids payment of franchise fees to the cities and counties that hard
line cable operators must pay.  Because of the high frequency involved
their transmission is essentially line of sight.  If you can't "see"
their transmitter, you can't get the service.  They will be subject to
the usual microwave problems of rain fade and inversion layer
problems.  While the many channel services are relatively new, there
have been one to five channel services operating for some time, at
least since the early 80's. Anchorage had a pay service there on one
for many years.

And now a quick recap of similar / confusing / related services: home
dish satellite -- receiving antenna about 5-10 feet diameter, receives
C band (3.7-4.2 Ghz) Tx, same satellites the cable operators use,
scrambled with marginally secure VideoCipher technology, needs "big"
dish, little rain fade, subject to telephone microwave interference
from terrestrial point-to-point service which is in the same band,
needs good view to the south of orbital arc.

DBS (Direct Broadcast Satellite) -- relatively new service in Ku band
(roughly 12 Ghz), dish two to four foot diameter-much smaller, less
obtrusive, subject to rain fade (though this is less of an issue ith
newer high power Ku band satellites), various TV service packages are
marketed by various companies; most in "test" stage.  This is where
things like "Sky Channel" are slated to be.

Low power TV stations are either stand alone broadcasters or (like
most) repeaters of nearby broadcast stations.  They may have as little
as 100 watts and can go as high as 1Kw, but I'm not sure of the upper
power limit.  They often will Tx to small valleys, pockets that have
no cable and can't get off-air because of the terrain.  Some of these
licenses have been auctioned or lotteried by FCC in the last few years
and have had the same complaints as MMDS on over zealous marketing.

If you have other questions in this area or I have failed to clarify
something, you can address questions directly to me as above and I
will summarize same.


Bob Vogel

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

From: [e-mail] (Bill Mayhew)
Subject: Re: PC-Based Voice Mail System
Organization: Northeastern Ohio Universities College of Medicine
Date: Sat, 01 Aug 1992 15:48:58 GMT


I bought a product called "Complete Answering Machine" from Mendelson
Electronics for $140US about a year and a half ago.  Mendelson is
located in Dayton, Ohio and advertises in Computer Shopper and
assorted hobbyist magazines.  As far as I know, the manufacturer is
still around because I still see "Complete Xxxx" products for sale.

The CAM is a PC-ISA board with CODEC and DTMF decode and generate
capabilities.  Up to seven CAM cards may be installed in a machine.  A
286+ machine is recommended for multicard use.

My CAM card is in an old AT&T 6300 that I keep around the house for
"in case of emergency, break glass" conditions if my serious machine
fails.

CAM is pretty neat, offering most features of what commercial voice
mail systems.  CAM also runs in the background with DOS.  I tried it
in my '386 with DOS 5 and windows running.  CAM took and distributed
messages with minimum impact on foreground applications.  CAM supports
multiple mailboxes and can do call transfer by hook flashing and
DTMFing.  You can set it up as an el-cheapo automated attendant.  CAM
also supports message forwarding.  I've got it set up to beep my
pocket pager when somebody leaves a message.

The CAM software is pretty good and supports enough flexibility that
you probably can do whatever you want.  They don't have a generalized
scripting system like the covox developers' kit or AT&T voice power.
CAM is probably about as flexible as the Genesis CINDI that we have at
the office.

If you don't care about using an ISA PC, keep an eye on the for sale
group.  The AT&T UnixPC outfitted with a voice power board is pretty
affordable system.  (I've got that too).  I don't have the AT&T
answering machine software, so I can't comment on that.  The basic
voice power software does give you the ability to write routines that
interface nicely with shell programming.  We set up a job info bank at
work with a voice power board and UnixPC because at the time, the
Genesis software wasn't really configurable enough to meet our
desires.


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

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

Date: Sat,  1 Aug 92 11:25:37 CDT
From: [e-mail] (Alan L Varney)
Subject: Re: Does Bellcore Also Assign the Central Office Codes?
Organization: AT&T Network Systems, Lisle, IL


In article <[e-mail]> David Leibold <DLEIBOLD@
VM1.YorkU.CA> writes:

> There is some discussion on one of the Fidonet conferences regarding
> numbering plan matters. Bellcore assigns the area codes in the North
> American Numbering Plan, but the discussions I've run across mention
> that Bellcore also assigns the prefixes within each area code.  ...
> [thought] the predominant telcos in each area would be responsible for
> setting up prefixes (apart from some common, special-use numbers like
> 555 directory assistance, or 976 premium/announcement, or 958 and 959
> for testing), and that Bellcore would compile the assignments from
> each region for the various tapes and lists, etc.

> Does anyone have the official word on this?

OFFICIAL? -- hey, not from me.  But in the:

   "North American Numbering Plan Administrator's Proposal On The
    Future of Numbering In World Zone 1", Jan. 6, 1992,

published as an Information Letter from Bellcore, there is a statement
(from memory) to the effect that --

     The primary LEC in each NPA is responsible for assigning
     Office Codes.

   That should not imply there is no discussion/agreement with the
other LECs or Bellcore in the assignment process; just that the
primary LEC has "official" responsibility.

   By the way, the discussion you mention will be somewhat confused if
the term "prefix" is used for office codes (or one of the other
popular terms).  I believe "prefix" is understood to be the digits in
front of the actual "number", such as 1+, 0+, 10XXX, *70, etc.
Bellcore certainly has recommended "prefix" assignments -- I'm not
sure anyone has undisputed ownership of such assignments.  The current
(and increasing) mess of CLASS(sm) feature code usage and "local"
service marks for them would suggest some TELCo's view "prefix"
assignment as a "local matter".


Al Varney - just MY opinion.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #600
******************************