Telecom/1996-04-telecom-walnutcreek.iso/back.issues/1992.volume.12/vol12.iss651-700

Internet Message Format | 1992-09-10 | 951KB

Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa08127;
          22 Aug 92 23:20 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA29519
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 22 Aug 1992 21:22:13 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA10444
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 22 Aug 1992 21:22:02 -0500
Date: Sat, 22 Aug 1992 21:22:02 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #651

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 22 Aug 92 21:22:00 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 651

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Our Moderator and Monopolies (John Higdon)
    Re: Our Moderator and Monopolies (David Lesher)
    Re: Our Moderator and Monopolies (William J. Vajk)
    Re: Telephone Company Tone Service Charges (Leonard Erickson)
    Re: Internet Access in Italy (Bill Pfeiffer)
    Re: My Email Address (Warren Burstein)
    That Email Address (Jerry Leichter)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Fri, 21 Aug 92 23:32 PDT
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: Our Moderator and Monopolies


On Aug 21 at 22:51, TELECOM Moderator writes:

> [Moderator's Note: Well, I work for a living also, but I don't know
> anyone who is really worth all they get paid. But with inflation and
> economic conditions as bad as they are right now, how could we work
> for less?

Allegedly, an employer hires an individual with the expectation that
he/she will produce more value for the company than that person is
paid in wages. In this day and age, the employer also has to factor in
taxes, regulations, benefits, and other perks in the total
expenditure.  If the person is NOT worth MORE than he is being paid,
then the employer is a fool. I ought to know; I have been in that
position (employer/fool).

But I did take exception to the comment about "corporate welfare". As
an independent contractor/consultant, I have absolutely no W2 income.
All of my sustinence is derived from what can best be described as "odd
jobs". This tends to preclude "just sitting back drawing a paycheck".
While I collect money from some big corporations, those checks are
written for services rendered and if the service was not satisfactory
or beneficial, I would not expect any repeat business. If I charge a
company $1000 for a project which ends up saving thousands of dollars a
month, then I certainly consider my services worth what I am being
paid.

As an employer, I came across many who had no concept of the value of
their work. Their standard for wages was how much they needed a month
to live on. I had a salesperson who in four months managed to sell not
one dollar's worth of equipment. This was after training classes, sales
classes, and other seminars (all provided at my expense) and a
considerable amount of personal help from other successful salespeople.
The unpleasant day came when she had to be told that we could no longer
continue her draw. Her response? "I have been at my desk every morning
at 8 AM sharp. I have stayed until 5 PM every day with only a 30 minute
lunch. I have a family to support and rent to pay. How can you be so
insensitive?"

Yes, I am happy that many companies have hired my services over the
years. But I am not "grateful" to them; we had a business relationship
where value was exchanged for value. They did not "give" me any money.
They did not "feed" me. I did that myself by exchanging something I had
(expertise) for something they had (money). I would hope that those in
the job marketplace keep that in mind, particularly in these
recessionary times. As long as an employee is of value to the employer,
he will not be laid off. And whose responsibility is it to make sure
the employee's services remain of value? I leave that as an exercise
for those who have figured out how to keep their jobs.

This has a counterpart in the discussion of monopolies. When a company
is assured business because of regulation, its incentive toward
maintaining efficiency and value is diminished. If its fortunes are
dependent on the quality of the job done, then the quality and value
remain maximized.


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

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

From: David Lesher <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Our Moderator and Monopolies
Date: Sat, 22 Aug 92 8:11:48 EDT
Reply-To: [e-mail]  (David Lesher)
Organization: NRK Clinic for habitual NetNews abusers - Beltway Annex


PAT said:

> I meant those monopolies which got that way through the hard work,
> effort and brains of the company founder, and which continue to remain
> a monopoly despite *completely obeying the law*. In other words, I
> supported AT&T intact before the breakup and Standard Oil before it
> was divested at the turn of the century. I do not support gangsters
> who maintain a 'monopoly' by force, threats and violence.

I *REALLY* had to choke on this PAT example.

IMHO, Old Man Rockefeller invented the concept of Monopoly by Force.
You sold his gasoline at your store, or else bad things happened.

He was infamous for his treatment of employees, too. A late friend
related the story of his uncles, who worked for John D. long before
Sherman. They were pipeline walkers. In other words, they started at
one end of, say, one hundred miles of pileline, and hiked to the other
end, looking for leaks. {Now, this is done weekly by air.} They stayed
at houses enroute. A trip took many days, of course. Then they started
over. [And you thought YOUR job was boring ...]

Well, they did this for decades. Then one day, just when they were
reaching pension age, they were fired. Period. The excuse was there
was a leak at the other end, and if they had really been there a few
weeks before, they'd have seen it. [Of course, there was NO chance it
had started leaking SINCE then, was there?] So clearly, they were not
doing their job. This was, of course, far before Social Security.
They died penniless.

The easements for many of those lines are, ahem, interesting also. One
of the ones I worked on was built in a big rush during WWII. (This was
post-breakup, but old habits die hard.) Of course, there was no
problem getting the farmers to sign, as the pipeline was part of The
War Effort.  While I never read them myself, the foreman who had to
knock on the doors told me the important parts were:

        99 year duration
        $1.00 rent
{the kicker}    If the line EVER needed to be moved, the
        landowner paid.

This last one meant, for example, when a city wanted to build a park,
they ended up spending bucho bucks, and I don't mean on trees and
benches.

So Mr. PAT, I submit that Standard OIl is a pretty poor example.  Do
you have another one, perhaps?


[e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: The examples you gave are anecdotal at best. Can
you supply any actual names, dates, or places for these events? And if
those things occurred, are the circumstances truly as you have
described them?  Now let us consider some things that John Rockefeller
did do which are plainly evident today. He gave the original endowment
to start the University of Chicago. He continued to give huge sums of
money to the University until his death and UC today, a century later
is still using the interest on Rockefeller's gifts, having not touched
most of the principal in many years. During his lifetime he was the
patron of one of America's best known liberal reformers and thinkers
of this century: Harry Emerson Fosdick and his Riverside Church in New
York City. He endowed Rockefeller Memorial Chapel here in Chicago.
Standard Oil in Chicago continues to give large gifts to needy
organizations, and Exxon is a substantial corporate sponsor to
National Public Broadcasting.  JDR was okay. I've got a rare photo of
him walking with William Rainey Harper (first president of UC) along
59th Street in Chicago, circa 1893.  I'd love to have met him. PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (William J. Vajk)
Subject: Re: Our Moderator and Monopolies
Date: Sat, 22 Aug 1992 12:42:58 GMT


> [Moderator's Note: By 'legal, lawfully maintained monopolies', I did
> NOT mean monopolies started by or protected by the government. I meant
> those monopolies which got that way through the hard work, effort and
> brains of the company founder, and which continue to remain a monopoly
> despite *completely obeying the law*. In other words, I supported AT&T
> intact before the breakup and Standard Oil before it was divested at
> the turn of the century. I do not support gangsters who maintain a
> 'monopoly' by force, threats and violence.  I agree, the free market
> should be the only consideration.  PAT]

Then you fail to understand the essential nature of the beast.

Rockefeller was removed from the state of Texas under court edict that
he never return under penalty of death. The same court mandated that
Standard Oil never ever be permitted to do business in the state of
Texas again. Thus it was that Humble Oil, the longtime holding company
for ESSO (now known as EXXON) did business in Texas. Even the name
change in the 1960's from ESSO to EXXON was part of the remaining
business of the Standard Oil divestiture as both the Standard Oil of
New Jersey (Eastern Shore Standard Oil) as well as Standard Oil of
Indiana (AMOCO) insisted that they had a right to the Standard Oil
name.

What you REALLY fail to understand, Pat, is that your statement above
equates to saying you support bullies so long as they don't maintain
being a bully by force, threats, or violence.

Big business invariably becomes big through the very means which you
decry.  Each of the oldtime largest corporations in this country grew
using underhanded means, and has been steadily shrinking since we, as
a nation, have taken care that our businessmen remain businessmen, no
longer accepting thuggishness as an ordinary business tactic. The
railroads have shrunk to the competition from airlines and trucks.
AT&T is shrinking and is headed for demise based on their internal
failures to become efficient in a competitive marketplace (it will
take quite a while ... they have so much money and momentum.) There
was a time when Standard Oil (meaning EXXON) was in contention for the
world's largest corporation. There was a time when RCA was thought to
be untouchable (yet has been "raided".)

Each of these three firms, in their heyday of growth, had a propensity
to resolve issues in some rather "not so very nice" ways. But in those
times, judges were more understanding, and many of our modern day laws
to prevent corporate activities of questional moral and ethical value
were not in place.  Corporate shields protected individuals from
responsibility for their actions.

Either one accepts the modern view that robber barons did bad things
which would probably make them into ordinary criminals today, or one
suports the sort of actions which built what was euphamisticaly called
"a natural monopoly" by those quite willing to rape the economy and
the public at large.

What's wrong with the implication that a clever businessman can
improve his firm's standing by cleverness is that there are plenty of
other clever businessmen out there, all ready to jump in and take part
of the pie. The only thing which permits untoward growth by one to the
exclusion of others in any marketplace is the exclusion of others by
some means. My personal conclusion, in concert with many other people
I've discussed this with over the years, is that some underhanded
tactic, perhaps chargable though undetected, is at work in all cases
where one company completely outdistances all others in a given
business segment.

"Natural monopolies" simply aren't.


Bill Vajk


[Moderator's Note: How curious to see you are still reading the
Digest, Bill.  I thought you had given up on me long ago.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Telephone Company Tone Service Charges
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: SCN Research/Qic Laboratories of Tigard, Oregon.
Date: Sat, 22 Aug 1992 17:11:51 GMT


David Sangurima <[e-mail]> writes:

> I'm curious about the touch-tone monthly service charges that telcos
> apply to most of their users.  Is it necessary to request the tone
> service or is this some abuse on the part of the telcos?

In Washington and Oregon, you had to specifically *request*
touch-tone.  A few years ago US West filed to drop the charge and make
touch tone service universal on their lines in Oregon. I believe they
did something similar in Washington.


Leonard Erickson              [e-mail]
CIS: [70465,203]             [e-mail]
FIDO:   1:105/51     [e-mail]
(The CIS & Fido addresses are preferred)

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

From: [e-mail] (Bill Pfeiffer)
Subject: Re: Internet Access in Italy
Date: Sat, 22 Aug 92 17:35:35 CDT


In a recent Telecom Digest [e-mail] (Alfredo
Cotroneo) writes:

> Does anybody know how to get possibly_free Internet (email, news,
> ftp, etc.)  access via dialup lines from Italy?  (or from any other
> location in Europe? e.g. Germany, Switzerland, ...)

Since you requested the Internet Radio Journal from me, a month ago,
every attempt at e-mail to you has bounced.  I am only using this
forum because all else has failed.  If you have a diferent address,
write to me at [e-mail] and I will start sending your
Broadcasting digests.


William Pfeiffer
Moderator - rec.radio.broadcasting - Internet Radio Journal

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

From: [e-mail] (Warren Burstein)
Subject: Re: My Email Address
Date: 22 Aug 92 17:02:44 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: WorldWide Software


Bryan King writes about his email address that comes out of DEC
MAILworks.  I'd like to point out that in addition to the very strange
address which many mailers are not willing to even consider sending
to, there is another problem with this mailer, or at least many
installations of it.  Notice how his article starts:


>From:    NAME: BRYAN P. KING / VSS-SPE SYSTEM MANAGEMENT
>    TEL: DTN: 293-5677
>    ADDR: BXB1-1/J11 (BOXBORO) <KING@AM_MSBCS@MSBCS@BXB>

and the text of his letter follows:

Now to a human who normally scans thru a page of mail headers before
getting to the article that's no problem.  To one who has a mailer
that ignores certain header lines, it's still not so bad to see three
more.

But to the UNIX Listserv program (one of which I happen to be the
keeper of, on nysernet.org), it matters that messages like this have a
blank line between the end of the header and the "From: NAME:..."
line.  This blank line means that these three lines aren't part of the
header, they're part of the message itself.  So someone who sends a
one line message to [e-mail] saying INDEX or HELP has
actually sent a five line message.  Since the entire body gets fed
into the command parser, and since there doesn't happen to be a
command called "From", the user gets back a message saying "Invalid
command: FROM - the rest of your commands have been discarded" and
gets very confused.

I think that there may some way to convince this mailer to refrain
from inserting these lines.  I've noticed that people who I correspond
with about these problems tend not to be mail gurus, and I've never
gotten a definitive answer on whether it can be worked around, or how.

The users usually ask if I could manually add them to the listserv.  I
usually decline, on the basis that I don't want to discourage them
from complaining until this gets fixed (and thereby have to manually
process their commands forever).

Someone may ask, why doesn't the listserv just go on reading lines
when it finds one it doesn't like?  The answer is that I've gotten
letters, in human language, of several pages, sent to the listserv
instead of to one of the lists that it manages.

> If people send me mail via [e-mail] it will still get
> to me as I have forwarding set on VAXmail.

Wouldn't everyone's life be so much easier if this mailer just put out
this nice address rather than the mess of colons?


[e-mail]

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

Date: Fri, 21 Aug 92 10:54:42 EDT
From: Jerry Leichter <[e-mail]>
Subject: That Email Address


There've been several totally confused postings on the issue of Mr.
King's Email address.  Some facts; these all refer to DECnet Phase IV,
which is in use today and has been for something like ten years.

1.  DECnet address syntax uses "node::" as a prefix.  This syntax is
used in many places, not just mail - access to the network is built
into the file system, so you can refer to a remote file as
NODE::THAT.FILE.

2.  In general, just as in TCP/IP, you can refer to any node from
anywhere.  That is, you just use "node::" from any node on the
network.  The mechanism used is like the old HOSTS.  table; it is
possible to set up a machine that doesn't know everyone's name.  This
was common in the old days when machines were small.  To get around
this, you can, in most cases (it depends on the network service
involved) use "poor man's routing", a holdover from DECnet Phase II:
You use a syntax like "node1::node2::something".  What this really
does is just send "node2::something" off to node1; you hope it knows
who node2 is.  (There is another reason to do this which I'll come
back to later.)

3.  DEC's Enet actually supports two different mail systems over the
same physical network.

a.  MAIL-11, also known as VAXMAIL, comes standard with VMS.
Addresses are just user login names.  To get to PERSON on node THERE,
you send mail to THERE::PERSON.  MAIL-11 supports poor man's routing;
the return address will show the entire route (which may or may not be
needed to get back).  You have to know the node someone has an account
on, and their login name (which might not be their English name), to
send them mail.

b.  ALL-IN-1 MAIL (which also goes under other names these days) can
be set up in many ways.  On DEC's Enet, it is set up so that addresses
have the form "English.Name@Location", where Location is a three-
letter site code, the same one used for sending intra-company mail.

Engineers use VAX MAIL; managers use ALL-IN-1 MAIL.  (These are broad
generalizations.)

VAX MAIL and ALL-IN-1 MAIL are about as closely related as UUCP-based
mail and SMTP-based mail.  Exactly as for UUCP vs. SMTP, there are
various gateways provided that connect the two systems.  Exactly as
for stuff that crosses the UUCP/SMTP boundary, the return addresses
can get very convoluted, and they can sometimes be unusable.

There are also gateways that connect VAX MAIL to Internet mail.
Needless to say, messages that have crossed through BOTH an ALL-IN-1
MAIL to VAX MAIL gateway, AND a VAX MAIL to Internet mail gateway, are
even more likely to have strange-looking addresses.

4.  Just to add to the confusion, DECnet Phase IV has run over its
design limit of about 65,000 distinct nodes.  (Keep in mind that
32-bit IP addresses are becoming a limiting factor, too, and that
DECnet Phase IV pre-dates TCP/IP.)  This gets worked around by a hack:
Some node numbers, by convention, are reserved for "hidden areas", and
never propagated network-wide.  (This is done by abusing some of the
software.)  Since a hidden node H can't be seen directly, it always
has to be reached by poor man's routing through some gateway node G,
as G::H::.  Many individual workstations are set up this way.  As far
as I know, you never have to pass through two gateways - there are no
"doubly hidden" nodes.  Since G is usually a "well known" node at the
site where H lives, the difference between G::H:: and the Internet
@H.G is more apparent than real.


Jerry

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #651
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa09877;
          23 Aug 92 0:17 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA12507
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 22 Aug 1992 22:26:28 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA18577
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 22 Aug 1992 22:26:20 -0500
Date: Sat, 22 Aug 1992 22:26:20 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #652

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 22 Aug 92 22:26:20 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 652

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: CPSR and Class: Rebuttal to Forrette, Harrell and Higdon (John Higdon)
    Re: Switching Systems (John Higdon)
    Re: Cellular Telephone Eavesdropping Scandal in Minnesota (Scott Dorsey)
    Re: No Information For 900 Numbers (Steven S. Brack)
    Re: How to Trigger a Pager From a Modem (Steven L. Johnson)
    Re: AT&T SDN; New Calling Cards (David R. Zinkin)
    Re: 710 and ABCD? (Keith Furrow)
    Re: ABCD as a Phreaking Tool (Michael A. Covington)
    Re: Pounding on an Octothorp (Paul A. Valin)
    Re: Pounding on an Octathorp ([e-mail])
    Re: Pounding on an Octothorp (Michael A. Covington)
    Re: Pounding on an Octothorp (Dave Niebuhr)
    Re: Dial a #, Connect Quicker? (Alan L. Varney)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sat, 22 Aug 92 11:02 PDT
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: CPSR and Class: Rebuttal to Forrette, Harrell and Higdon


[e-mail] (David Gast) writes:

> Suppose that were many local loop providers instead of just one.  In
> that marketplace, I would go with the one who promises not to use SS7,
> and not to implement CNID.  Since I don't have choice, I favor a
> regulatory requirement.

I believe this sums up your entire rebuttal. I do not wish to put
words in your mouth, but what you seem to say is that you, personally,
do not like this particular telecommunications advancement (SS7 and
CLASS).  Therefore, you do not want any part of it. Since it is
integrated into the network, you are forced to deal with it.
Therefore, you would like to see the technology banned so that no one
could use it. To justify this position, you feel the need to convince
others of the universal harm that will come from this technology.
After all, if you are telling everyone to do without, you have to give
them good reason to agree with you.

You may be interested to know that your argument was once applied to
the basic telephone. By the way, you will need to turn the clock back
further than SS7, since SS6 also has calling number delivery
capability.

Endless commentary describing alternatives to CLASS features does not
provide effective argument against the technology. One can make
similar arguments against almost any product of the twentieth century.
For instance, we all have to breath the air that is polluted by
automobiles. Horse-drawn carts will take you where you need to go. Why
not go back? Or how about the fact that on an ocean liner you can
party, eat, sleep, and do all kinds of fun things. There is no need
for aircraft. Airplanes crash. Let us ban them.

IMHO, your arguments against modern telephone technology are a
textbook example of the usual public resistance to anything that is
new or poorly understood. I would think that someone who participates
in computer forums would operate at a slightly higher plane. I have an
alternative suggestion to your point of view: perhaps you should
disconnect your telephone and be simply personally inconvenienced
rather than attempt to deprive the rest of society of developments
that you have deemed harmful and unnecessary.


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

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

Date: Sat, 22 Aug 92 12:01 PDT
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: Switching Systems


On Aug 19 at  2:09, TELECOM Moderator writes:

> [Moderator's Note: I thought the original 213-464 (back then, in the
> 1940's it was known as HOllywood) exchange was panel. I guess I am
> mistaken.  PAT]

I had friends who were served out of that office, which was SXS until
the eighties. There was much joy when it was cut to 1AESS. Remember,
it was a most unusual occurance to find SXS and Panel in the same city
due to the inherent incompatibility.

Much of the Los Angeles area was SXS, both GTE and Bell. But remember,
Los Angeles was not the city it is now back in the thirties. Panel was
only installed in MAJOR cities of the thirties, which is why San
Francisco (a "major" city since the time of the Barbary Coast days)
had Panel and LA did not.


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


[Moderator's Note: So with panel and SXS being incompatible, how were
calls handled between those offices?   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] ( Scott Dorsey)
Subject: Re: Cellular Telephone Eavesdropping Scandal in Minnesota
Organization: NASA Langley Research Center and Reptile Farm
Date: Sat, 22 Aug 1992 13:30:59 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Jon Gefaell
(KD4CQY)) writes:

> We had a interesting case here in Virginia where somethin similar
> occured with the Governor, and the person who intercepted, and
> recorded, and then disclosed Cellular communications was convicted; I
> forget what he was sentenced for.

He was sentenced under the communication act of 1934.  He was not
sentenced for any violation of the ECPA, which I found quite
interesting.  The ECPA was specifically enacted for such instances,
but no one has yet been convicted (or even accused) under the law.  I
suspect this is because the law is too weak to be useful.  You can
thank your legislators for passing another worthless law that just
takes up space on the books.


scott

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

Date: 22 Aug 1992 15:44:29 -0400 (EDT)
From: [e-mail] (Steven S. Brack)
Subject: Re: No Information For 900 Numbers


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Dave Cantor) writes:

> I tried to get 900 directory assistance tonight from Nashua, NH
> (603-888).  I got the following intercept:

> "Due to a change in network architecture, the 900 information number
> has been disconnected.  This is no further information available
> at this time."

I just tried 900 555 1212, and I got an AT&T live operator intercept.
It apparently dropped into her panel as if I had dialed "00," as she
did not answer as an intercept operator.  She did, however, have the
record that I dialed *1* 900 555 1212.  She didn't know why a 1+ call
would drop into her position.


Steven S. Brack            [e-mail]
2021 Roanwood Drive        [e-mail]
Toledo, OH  43613-1605     [e-mail]
+1 419 GR4 1010   MY OWN  OPINIONS   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Steven L. Johnson)
Subject: Re: How to Trigger a Pager From a Modem
Organization: JvNCnet
Date: Sat, 22 Aug 1992 20:00:27 GMT


Hans Ridder <[e-mail]> writes:

> In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail].
> edu (S. Spencer Sun) writes:

>> FYI, two people have mailed me to say that the ATDT <beeper number>
>> ,,, <number you want to show up> does work.  So there's no need to
>> rush out and get a BellSouth beeper or whatever it was :-)

> I'd like to point out that in my experience this type of "open loop"
> paging is probably not something you want to "bet your business" on,
> as it is not very reliable.

There are ways of making it more reliable, such as using the "wait for
quiet answer" option available on some modems.  Checking call progress
status for no-dialtone, busy, no-answer and retrying also helps.  I'm
lucky that my pager is on the same CO as my computer and the answer
times are very consistent.

No pager is reliable.  The radio portion can be much less reliable
than the telco portion of the link.  In order to close the loop, the
system needs to retry the page until the intended receipient
acknowledges the initial condition that caused the page.  And if it is
a bet your business emergency, you'll want an escalation procedure
that doesn't depend on one person and one beeper.

> I'd suggest using one of the dial-up paging protocols which actually
> get an acknowledgement from the paging system, thus "closing the
> loop."

This doesn't close the loop as the paging system isn't the intended
receipient.  It can make one portion of the loop more reliable.

Does anyone have a feel for the percentage of paging systems that can
handle IXO protocol messages for digital beepers and will allow their
customers access?  I believe that my service only allows this for
their alphanumeric beepers.


Steve    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (David R. Zinkin)
Subject: Re: AT&T SDN; New Calling Cards
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio, (USA)
Date: Sat, 22 Aug 92 19:28:23 GMT


Question: what does SDN stand for anyway?  And what makes it different
from standard long distance service?


David R. Zinkin ([e-mail])
Rochester General Hospital Radiology Dept.
SUNY Buffalo School of Medicine Class of '96
  (The sesquicentennial graduating class!)

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

From: [e-mail] (Keith Furrow)
Subject: Re: 710 and ABCD?
Organization: Pacifier BBS
Date: Sat, 22 Aug 1992 05:29:36 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Fred
Fierling) writes:

> In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Fred
> Fierling) writes:

>> In article <[e-mail]> James.VanHouten@f544.
>> n109.z1.fidonet.org (James VanHouten) writes:

>>> Radio Shack supposedly has one.  Model # 43-139.
>>                         ^^^^^^^ Wrong!!

> Abject apologies; it appears I am responsible for some of the noise
> that netters complain about.  Model 43-139 does NOT have the ABCD
> keys.  A respondent to my original posting and I had a misunderstanding.

Well from what I heard and read (In old phreak newsletters) you can
modify them to generate the extra tones.  The chip can do all 4x4
rows, but normally the keypad doesn't come with ABCD (Why?).


Keith

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

From: [e-mail] (Michael A. Covington)
Subject: Re: ABCD as a Phreaking Tool
Organization: University of Georgia, Athens
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1992 04:34:12 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Rop
Gonggrijp) writes:

> Guess this does show what 'capable minds' set up the technology that
> we are supposed to trust. Yet in the eyes of US law enforcement, we
> would have been the criminals for experimenting with this (using
> 555-XXXX numbers), and AT&T the poor victim.

When you "experimented," you _did_ impose false charges on somebody,
didn't you?  Why _aren't_ you the "criminals" then?


Michael Covington - Artificial Intelligence Programs - U of Georgia - USA
Unless otherwise noted, these are private opinions, not official statements.

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

Date: 22 Aug 92 15:35:00 EDT
From: Paul (P.A.) Valin <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Pounding on an Octothorp


Well according to proper CCITT-speak, thou shalt call the key to the
right of the zero the 'square' key (Recommendation E.161).

Rumour has it that at recent Geneva meetings 'square' key narrowly won
out over 'tic-tac-toe' key.

Oh, and the key to the left of the zero is called the 'star' key.


Paul Valin                     Tel: + 1 613 763 7394
Bell-Northern Research Ltd.    Email:  [e-mail]
P.O. Box 3511, Station C       Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
                      'only my opinions...'

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

Subject: Re: Pounding on an Octathorp
Date: Sat, 22 Aug 92 14:41:31 EDT
From: erik <[e-mail]>


In article <[e-mail]> mc/G=James/S=Arconati/
OU=[e-mail] writes:

> In Telecomm Digest V12 #632, Spencer talks about the pronounciation of
> the # symbol used on DTMF pads.

> When I worked for Mother, some 'official' publications said that it
> was called an "octothorp."

> Seems to me that "pound sign" is readily understood by most North
> Americans.

> [Moderator's Note: We covered this in excruciating detail in a special
> edition of the TELECOM Digest back in 1989. "Octothorpe" (with an \e\
> on the end) seems to be the designated name.  In another message in
> this issue, a reader asks if pounding off at the end of certain
> dialing sequences is a normal, acceptable thing to do.  PAT]

Just because I am on vacation, my mind wanders ... I suppose it would
be OK to "pound off" at the end of a dialing sequence only if they
were dialing one of those 1-900 numbers you see on late night TV.


Just my mind ... <g>

/* Erik */


[Moderator's Harrump: Trying to keep a straight face; trying to keep
from smirking.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Michael A. Covington)
Subject: Re: Pounding on an Octothorp
Organization: University of Georgia, Athens
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1992 04:36:20 GMT


Is Octothorpe related to Oglethorpe, who founded the great colony of
Georgia in 1733?


Michael Covington - Artificial Intelligence Programs - U of Georgia - USA
Unless otherwise noted, these are private opinions, not official statements.

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

Date: Fri, 21 Aug 92 07:31:39 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Dave Niebuhr)
Subject: Re: Pounding on an Octothorp


A few years ago, a supposedly computer-literate person called our
Operations Group and asked for assistance.  It seems there was a
message on a screen with the words "Press Any Key to Continue."  The
very plaintive (and frustrated question was) "I can't find the ANY
key."

If PAT doesn't put this out, I don't mind.


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


[Moderator's Note: That's *sooo* old ... I think the first time that
was published in the Digest was back in 1985 ... it seems every
company has one or more of those people working for it.   PAT]

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

Date: Fri, 21 Aug 92 16:42:42 CDT
From: [e-mail] (Alan L Varney)
Subject: Re: Dial a #, Connect Quicker?
Organization: AT&T Network Systems, Lisle, IL


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

> On a dialing instructions booklet I received from AT&T recently, it
> suggests to dial a # after the last digit on international calls, so
> the call can be completed quicker.

> Since then, I've been dialing a # after the last digit on all my long
> distance calls, both domestic and international, and they all seem to
> complete faster.  Is this just my imagination, or is the # really
> helping? My LD company is MetroMedia, in case it makes a difference (I
> have no idea why AT&T sent me the booklet, they've never been my LD
> carrier.)

   I can't speak for MetroMedia, but Bellcore's recommendation is that
all Country Codes (other than "1") be treated as variable-length,
since they no longer want to bother sending out the updates every time
CCITT decides to alter the fixed length of some country's numbers.  It
was a hassle to administer after divestiture, and getting it "wrong"
leads to a lot of customer complaints.  So (I believe) they are all
set for the maximum range (7-to-12)? of valid CCITT numbers.  So, yes,
use "#" on International calls to stop the digit timing that otherwise
occurs -- unless the number is already 12 digits.  Note that "#" can
do funny things to some phones (that change from pulse-to-DTMF on "#"
or "*") and could have other meanings for some other CPE, such as
PBXs.

   If MetroMedia is using FG-B access or 10XXX# cut-through, digit
timing is up to them (or the real carrier acting for them, if that
applies).  If the CO is collecting all the digits and using FG-D
access, the digits are timed at the CO and sent to the IXC with MF,
terminated with an 'ST' digit.  In most COs, a '#' on a domestic "1+"
call is ignored by the CO, because it already knows it's received the
last digit and has dropped the DTMF receiver.

> [Moderator's Note: In Metromedia's case, I think pounding off in the
> middle of a call will reset the dial tone for you, and allow another
> call to be dialed. At least that's my experience with that carrier. I
> think maybe AT&T allows this also on calling card calls, no?  In the
> dialing sequence, the # acts like a carriage return and forces the
> processing to begin on what has already been dialed without waiting
> for a timeout.

   "#" does speed up processing here -- maybe digit analysis doesn't
get the digits until the Operator system has collected all the digits,
either by time-out or "#".

> I don't think it makes any difference with domestic calls since 11
> digits is expected and you have entered that many when you pound off.

> It also matters on the few variable-length dialing situations we
> have in the USA; Likewise, service codes like 72 and 73 process faster
> with the # appended, but will work without it.  PAT]

   (From memory -- I'm not at work ...)  The evolution of Custom
Calling access started with two-digit codes, followed by "#" to end
timing.  The number space for these included the "7X" codes for
feature access, plus the "X" (X=2-9) and "NX" (N=2-4 & X=0-9).  The
two-digit codes on either side of the "7X" area were reserved.  And,
of course, Centrex was different, because of prior usage of "9" and
"8".

   The next wave of planning recognized that the original Custom
Calling features might be only a start, and changed to a "*XX" form of
access.  Speed Calling didn't change, so "#" was still useful there.
Backward compatibility forced "72#", etc. to still be accepted, and
required that "11XX" would serve as "*XX" for the (still-majority)
telephones.  Neither the "*" nor "11" form require timing for more
digits, so "*72#" isn't helpful.

   Divestiture allowed Bellcore (with a lot of old Bell System folks)
to re-examine the Access-to-Features issue.  Thus "#XX" for service
access and "*XX" for feature access (or maybe the reverse).  Anyway,
"#56" became the Switched-56 access code, and "#XX" was reserved for
others.  No dial-pulse equivalent was chosen.  And most new features
only briefly, if at all, mention "11XX" as an alternative to "*XX".
Some areas/vendors don't support the older "72#" form, and others
don't yet support the "*72" form.

   Bellcore is attempting to mine a few more feature codes by using
the form "*1XX" and "*0XX" to add about 200 more codes.  I haven't
seen any mention of "111XX" being permitted.  By the time they
exhaust, they hope to have something even better for feature access --
maybe a multi-level menu with prompts!!


Al Varney  -- just MY opinion

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #652
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa13727;
          23 Aug 92 1:48 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA15721
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 22 Aug 1992 23:58:06 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA22329
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 22 Aug 1992 23:57:58 -0500
Date: Sat, 22 Aug 1992 23:57:58 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #653

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 22 Aug 92 23:58:00 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 653

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Monitoring Dialtone for Voicemail Indicator (Arthur L. Rubin)
    Re: Monitoring Dialtone for Voicemail Indicator (Vance Shipley)
    Re: Bell Canada Response to CRTC Announcement (Bob Blackshaw)
    Re: RS-422-A: Which Way is Up, Polarity Wise? (Toby Nixon)
    Re: How to Trigger a Pager From a Modem (Tony Safina)
    Re: Analogue Problems With Digital Switches (Vance Shipley)
    Re: I've Fallen and I Can't Get Up! (John Higdon)
    Re: GTE Thinks I Live in 213 (Steven H. Lichter)
    Re: Call Return vs. Call Forward (Mark Baker)
    Re: 2500 Picturephone in the News (Howard Pierpont)
    Re: What CLASS Features Are Available? (Jack Adams)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Re: Monitoring Dialtone for Voicemail Indicator
From: a_rubin%dsg4.dse.beckman.com (Arthur Rubin)
Date: 22 Aug 92 15:15:56 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Arthur Rubin)


In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Matthew
Waugh) writes:

> Note that having a message waiting light or stutter dial-tone is an
> either-or option; you can't have both. The people who administer your
> PBX will have to switch each line from stutter dial-tone to message
> waiting light as you equip the phones.

Our system here at Beckman Instruments is a ROLMphone (R) with ROLM
PhoneMail (R), and I have both a flashing light and a stutter
dial-tone if I have new messages.  (They did program the wrong light,
though; it's the one next to the "CONF" button.)

I have no connection with Rolm other than a (usually) satisfied user.


Arthur L. Rubin: [e-mail] (work) Beckman Instruments/Brea
[e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail] (personal)
My opinions are my own, and do not represent those of my employer.

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

From: [e-mail] (Vance Shipley)
Subject: Re: Monitoring Dialtone for Voicemail Indicator
Organization: SwitchView Inc., Waterloo, Ontario
Date: Sat, 22 Aug 1992 13:14:08 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Aninda V. Dasgupta) writes:

> At work we have a Meridian-1 PBX system with Voicemail facilities.
> The problem is that if I have a new Voicemail message I have no way of
> finding out unless I lift the handset.  If I have any message(s) I get
> a breaking dialtone, otherwise a normal one.  I wish to find a
> solution so that I can see a little lamp on my phoneset glow when I
> have messages.

Simple, change your class of service to visual message waiting!

Depending on how old your switch is you may or may not need an
additional power supply for the message waiting lamps.  The telephones
are common and cheap.  Or you can just add the proper neon lamp to
your current set.


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

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

From: cos![e-mail] (Bob Blackshaw)
Subject: Re: Bell Canada Response to CRTC Announcement
Organization: Corporation for Open Systems
Date: Sat, 22 Aug 1992 21:03:04 GMT


I didn't copy John's post simply to save bandwidth, but I would like
to make a couple of points.

John referred to the cost of local service as having remained below
the inflation rate. The last stats I saw claimed a 300% rise in local
rates since divestiture, God, I didn't realize that inflation had been
that bad :-/.

He also mentioned the two billion figure and laughed it away. What was
forgotten was that the CRTC mandated that Bell Canada pay 70% of the
interconnection costs and the new carriers pay only 30%, and in
addition that their contribution to local rate subsidies would be
about half of what Bell now pays. This is rather like having someone
come into town and saying that he wants to start a business just like
you have and expecting you to build his store. Frankly, the
percentages should be the other way around.

As to a more responsive repair service, I would not doubt it. In
Canada (at least when I was there), a repair visit was a flat $25.
Hell, the TV, Appliance, etc. repair people charged that much just to
get to your house. Now that you own all your wiring, I imagine they
can charge similar amounts here (I wouldn't know since I never call
them -- after 33 years in the business, I figure I know as much as the
guy in the C&P truck :-) ).

No, the CRTC really screwed this one up, but then Keith Spicer always
was a strange one.


Bob

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

From: "Toby Nixon" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: RS-422-A: Which Way is Up, Polarity Wise?
Date: 22 Aug 92 03:54:33 EDT
Organization: Hayes Microcomputer Products, Norcross, GA


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail].
msfc.nasa.gov (J. Porter Clark) writes:

> Over here in the space hardware world we're trying to resolve a
> documentation conflict about the polarity of the RS-422-A signals.

> If I send a "1" (a *real* "1"), which lead, A or B, is positive with
> respect to the other?

According to CCITT Recommendation V.11 (I don't have a copy of 422
handy, but V.11 is equivalent), if the voltage at A minus the voltage
at B is less than or equal to -0.3 volts, then it is a "1".  If the
voltage at "A" minus the voltage at B is greater than or equal to +0.3
volts, then it is a "0".  Translated into English, I guess this means
that if B is more positive than A, then it is a "1".

The chairman of the TIA TR-30.2 committee in charge of RS-422 is Fred
Lucas of General Datacom.  His email address is "[e-mail]",
and he does check it regularly in case you'd like to pose this
question directly to him.

> Send mail, I'll summarize.

I tried, but it was bounced at ames.arc.nasa.gov.


Toby Nixon, Principal Engineer      | Voice   [phone]  Telex 401243420
Hayes Microcomputer Products, Inc.  | Fax     [phone]  CIS   70271,404
P.O. Box 105203                     | BBS     [phone]  AT&T    !tnixon
Atlanta, Georgia  30348             | UUCP uunet!hayes!tnixon  Fido   1:114/15
USA                                 | Internet                [e-mail]

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

From: disk![e-mail] (tony)
Subject: Re: How to Trigger a Pager From a Modem
Organization: Digital Information Systems of KY
Date: Sat, 22 Aug 1992 01:55:13 GMT


[e-mail] (S. Spencer Sun) writes:

> I guess you need a modem that's capable of dialing the # sign (let's
> NOT get into a thread on how to pronounce that) ... my Dad had three

The # sign?  The POUND sign!  <grin>

At least according to my bank -- they say, "Enter the amount and then
press the POUND sign."

Well, I know they aren't referring to the asterisk ... so IT must be
the POUND sign.


Tony Safina -=- disk![e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Vance Shipley)
Subject: Re: Analogue Problems With Digital Switches
Organization: SwitchView Inc., Waterloo, Ontario
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 01:28:46 GMT


> Anyway, I performed a quick test, which proved that there is no CPC
> through the analog line ports of the Northern PBX switch....
> ...  We looked in to converting the affected lines to E&M trunks,
> with E&M to loop start converters (Northern says that the analog
> trunks, as opposed to lines, do have CPC.), but at $500 or more per
> line for the converters.  Why not loop start trunks, instead of lines?
> No ring voltage!  oh well.  In the end, Corporate has had to install a
> bunch of CO lines to the affected lines.  Meanwhile, they have
> promises from Northern for a fix "soon".

Well it is true that the SL-1 (or M-1 if you prefer :)) does not
provide CPC on the 500 lines Northern have tried to help out in the
short term with a software fix.  A new class of service provides for
the return of dial tone after the calling/called party has
disconnected.  This may be less than what we really want but I take it
that the existing line cards would not support a line reversal type
CPC signal.  Since CO lines do not always provide CPC many
manufacturers of CPE equipment such as answering machines and voice
mail recognize that the return of dialtone signifies a disconnect and
these will work well with the new SL-1 feature.


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Richard
Nash) rants:

> DONT HOLD YOUR BREATH!!! You will turn red, then blue, then black
> doing so:) :) :)

> Soon means sometime this or next year, or perhaps after somebody real
> important has leaned on them real hard threatening all sorts of
> litigation! :) :) They don't give a damn about accounts less than a
> couple million clams! :) :) :) :)

NT as well as any company makes mistakes.  Most like this one are done
because no one put it in the design spec, the engineer doesn't know
what we'll do with it when he's through :).  That's for people like
us.


Disclaimer:   I don't work for NT and I speak solely for myself.

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

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

Date: Fri, 21 Aug 92 01:00 PDT
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: I've Fallen and I Can't Get Up!


[e-mail] (Todd Inch) writes:

> In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Michael
> Scott Baldwin) writes:

>> My grandmother is in need of one of these infamous devices.

> I'd be a bit careful about this one -- you want very high reliability.

A member of my family needed one of these things. As we sat through
some of the sales pitches, I could not help but think that there would
be cheap and dirty ways of accomplishing this. But it all came down to
monitoring: who would always be able to summon help twenty-four hours
a day?

Well, it turns out that very good arrangements can be made through
local agencies and hospitals. The Santa Clara County Council on Aging
provides an excellent unit with the little pendant and all for $30 per
month. There is no up-front cost and the fee includes rental and
monitoring. The agency takes all the information that the expensive
late night TV outfits do: people to call in an emergency, doctor's
name and number, etc.

Unless you intend to sleaze it (remember that monitoring), I would
shop around in your area for organizations that provide these things.


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

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: 22 Aug 92 09:22:00 UT
Subject: Re: GTE Thinks I live in 213


It seems that Mr. Higdon only has negative things to say about GTE.  I
had thought that the GTE Bashing things was put to an end.

I don't think that GTE always misses or loses things. My job with GTE
California is to install Hi-Caps. I have yet to miss a date because of
a GTE problem. We have had problems when the customer was not ready
with the building or one of his contractors did not do his job.

I install for LA Cellular, PacBell Cellular, MCI, AT&T, Sprint, and
government agencies including the 15th Air Force at March AFB.  I have
many commendations as do others on our crews.  I have worked with
people in other areas and see the same commitment to getting the job
done and done right the first time.

I sometime ago had Mr. Higdon contacted by our Thousand Oaks Corporate
Office and was told that the problems he had been having were all in
the past and there was no current problems. All big companies have
their problems. I can think of a couple of time where PacBell has
caused us to miss or almost miss a due date. In fact I have seen Mr.
Higdon bash PacBell on a lot of subjects including wanting to appear
the PUC order on CID.  He claims he has been in the business for 25
years. I believe he has. I'm sure he knows, but I wonder has he ever
missed a date?

I would like to see some other comments on this from other GTE people
who I know are out there, but stay out of the threads as I have for a
few weeks because I really don't want to argue to try to defend GTE
with him since it will do no good. We have a Smart Park in Moreno
Valley and another in Rancho, California and from what I have heard
evey customer is very happy with his service.


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

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: Sat, 22 Aug 92 07:33 CDT
Subject: Re: Call Return vs. Call Forward


Sorry to be a bearer or bad news (or good news depending on your
viewpoint), but Call Return, aka Automatic Callback or Automatic
Recall, attempts will not complete if the called line has Call
Forwarding Variable active or Call Forwarding Busy Line and is busy.

BellCore TR-TSY-000215, section 3.8 "Interactions" states that:

"An AC request should be denied (i.e., the short term denial
announcement [reorder]) if the called line has Call Forwarding
Variable active or SCF [Selective Call Forwarding] in effect for calls
from the AC customer."

"AC attempts should be allowed to lines with Call Forwarding Busy
Line, but call setup should only be attempted when the base station
is idle."

The TCAP message that is returned contains a indication that the DN is
call forwarded in addition to the busy/idle status of the line.


Mark Baker     - just my opinion    ... AT&T Network Systems

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

Date: Fri, 21 Aug 92 05:50:27 PDT
From: HOWARD PIERPONT <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: 2500 Picturephone in the News


In Telecom Volume 12 : Issue 648 [e-mail] (Laurence Chiu)
wrote about cable shows.

TELECOM Moderator noted:

< [Moderator's Note: Yeah, but not true with the Jukebox Channel or
< whatever it is called. I will defer to Bill Pfieffer here since he
< knows more about the one in Chicago, but I think you 'put money in the
< jukebox and make your selection' via a 900 number; eventually (a few
< minutes or so later) whatever you selected is played.  If two or more
< people selected the same thing, then like with a regular jukebox it
< still plays one time and lets each paying party assume *they* are the
< one who is paying. :) When (whatever you picked) is played, all
< pending requests for the same song are cleared from the stack.  PAT]

In Rhode Island the cable company has always played every request in
the order received. [The same Madonna video every second or third
video. The cable company houses the equipment but "rents" the channel
to an independent. They are both making big $$.


In upstate NY the cable company was told you play every request that
was paid for or refund all monies collected so far. They used to clear
from the stack, too.  Now we get the same video over and over.

Some folks never learn.


Howard Pierpont    DEC     All disclaimer apply


[Moderator's Note: I believe they pop the stack with multiple requests
for the same music once the selection starts playing and if someone
then requests it again two seconds later it goes back to the bottom of
the stack once more. So if they play the same video every third or
fourth time around, they may actually be getting two or three times as
many calls for that video as they are actually playing. Five people
ask for it while something else is on; once it starts all five
requests pop the stack; then a couple others are selected and three
more ask for the first one again ... PAT]

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

From: vixen![e-mail] (26070-adams)
Subject: Re: What CLASS Features Are Available?
Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 92 13:18:58 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Holt
Sorenson) writes:

> Hi. The switches that are digital in my NPA are #1 ESS, #5 ESS, and
                                                  ^^ 1A perhaps?

> DMS-100. I was wondering what CLASS features are available for these
> switches. I've heard of the SS7 switch. How does it fit in with the
> above and what are it's capabilities? Thanks in advance.

Assuming you mean 1A, then all of the above are CLASS (trademark of
Bellcore) compliant.  SS7 is not a switch but a high speed packet
switching network which routes call control signals between network
elements (for the most part, switches).  You need switches like the
ones you've mentioned plus you need the SS7 connectivity between them.

A more important issue however, is the tariffing of any or all of
these services.  The best answer on this is to contact your local
telecommunications local exchange carrier and ask.  Very often, some
CLASS services get mired in public policy and legal debate (witness
the state of Pennsylvania and Caller-ID) and thus may never be
offered.


Jack (John) Adams        | Bellcore RRC 4B-259
[phone] {Voice}        | [phone] {Facsimile}
[e-mail]    | [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #653
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa15447;
          23 Aug 92 2:19 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA27089
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 23 Aug 1992 00:28:53 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA18338
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 23 Aug 1992 00:28:45 -0500
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 00:28:45 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #654

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 23 Aug 92 00:28:45 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 654

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: RS-422-A: Which Way is Up, Polarity Wise? (Hans Ridder)
    Re: Mag-Stripe Reader Phones (John R. Levine)
    Re: What Are People Using For "Telnet" (John Rice)
    Re: Are Online Phone Books Available? (Stewart Rowe)
    Re: What Does a CO Switch Cost? (Kevin W. Williams)
    Re: 25 Years of 800 Service (Leonard Erickson)
    Re: Monitoring Dialtone for Voicemail Indicator (Mickey Ferguson)
    Re: AT&T Digital Answering Machine II (Vance Shipley)
    Re: Peculiar Event During Phone Call (Andrew C. Green)
    Last Laugh! Re: Deterioration of POTS (Aaron Barnhart)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Hans Ridder <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: RS-422-A: Which Way is Up, Polarity Wise?
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation - DECwest Engineering
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1992 15:44:58 GMT


[Moderator's Note: He asked for mail, but it bounced.  PAT]

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail].
nasa.gov (J. Porter Clark) writes:

> Over here in the space hardware world we're trying to resolve a
> documentation conflict about the polarity of the RS-422-A signals.

> If I send a "1" (a *real* "1"), which lead, A or B, is positive with
> respect to the other?

 From EIA-422-A 1978:

"The signalling sense of the voltages appearing across the interconnection
cable are defined as follows:

     a.    The A terminal of the generator shall be negative with respect
    to the B terminal for a binary 1 (MARK or OFF) state.

     b.    The A terminal of the generator shall be positive with respect
    to the B terminal for a binary 0 (SPACE or ON) state.

Note that MARK/SPACE refer to *data* circuits, and OFF/ON refer to
*control* circuits, and that "binary 1" is *OFF* for a control
circuit.

> I know this has been a controversial topic in the past, with one
> vendor doing one thing and another the opposite, but what is the
> current thinking?

I've never heard of any controversy.  It's pretty clear in the
standard.  Don't they let you NASA guys have this stuff?



Hans-Gabriel Ridder        Digital DECwest Engineering
[e-mail]        Bellevue, Washington, USA
{pacbell,pyramid,uunet}!rust.zso.dec.com!ridder

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

Subject: Re: Mag-Stripe Reader Phones
Organization: I.E.C.C.
Date: 22 Aug 92 19:49:21 EDT (Sat)
From: [e-mail] (John R. Levine)


In article <[e-mail]> is written:

> I noticed a magstripe-reader SW Bell phone ... I wondered what the phone
> would read if I swiped my AT&T Univeral Card thru it -- the regular MC
> number, and bill it as an MC charge, or the AT&T calling card number,
> [and it used the MC number]

There is a fairly straightforward technical problem here.  The
contents of the magnetic stripe on the back of a credit card are well
standardized (there are ANSI and ISO standards defining them) and
there is only provision for a single credit card number on the stripe.
There are three tracks on the stripe with the number recorded three
different ways for historical reasons, but they all have the same card
number.  You can't change it without changing the millions of existing
credit card readers found in businesses around the world.

If AT&T has enough muscle, they might be able to get themselves
assigned MC and Visa card prefixes that would identify the card as a
telco calling card.  It's my impression that the banks were rather
upset when AT&T got into the bank card business using a rather
peculiar little bank that does nothing but process charges for AT&T
Universal cards, so I doubt that the MC and Visa organizations would
do AT&T any favors.


Regards,

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

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: What Are People Using For "Telnet"
Organization: Teradyne Inc., Telecommunications Division
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 92 00:53:57 GMT


> I got the latest and greatest from NCSA and went to Clarkson to get
> the "packet drivers", and found a "This Stuff is Outdated" file in
> Clarkson's telnet directory.  I went back to our overworked networking
> person to ask why NCSA has two different versions of Telnet for the PC
> and Mac (2.3, and 2.5), and he suggested using the Clarkson packet
> drivers only on the PC version of Telnet (version 2.3).

> Someone else is looking into the Mac version.  Well, here I am with
> limited access to either a PC or a Mac, needing Telnet for others who
> do have PCs and Macs to use to reach us.  What configurations are in
> use around the net?

> [e-mail], PROFS: EKSMTP(JMOORE)  VMS: UX047A::JMOORE


Since you enclosed a VMS sig, I assume you have VAXs and DEC access. I
might suggest a look at DECs Pathworks TC-PIP package. The licenses
aren't too expensive @ $100 per machine and they have both MAC and PC
packages. We use both and they're stable and reasonably user friendly.
We use them to connect MACs to SUNs, PCs to SUNS, HPs and both
occasionally to our VAX cluster (although we're more likely to use
Pathworks/DECNET or LAT for that, but it works). It might require that
you have a Pathworks License for a VAX to get the PC/MAC pricing (I'm
not in that loop so I don't know), but can't hurt to check.


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]

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

From: [e-mail] (Stewart Rowe)
Subject: Re: Are Online Phone Books Available?
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio, (USA)
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 92 01:53:20 GMT


Compuserve has two files, one (PhonFile" for residential users and one
(Dun's Yellow Pages) lists business phones. Not cheap.  Phonfile will
run about 50 cents a name, DYP nearly $2.00 (but it also gives a bit
of business information, if I remember).


Stewart Rowe [e-mail]  [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Kevin W. Williams)
Subject: Re: What Does a CO Switch Cost?
Organization: gte
Date: Sat, 22 Aug 1992 22:14:15 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Henning Schulzrinne) writes:

> Just curious: how much does a CO switch cost? I realize that this
> question is about as precise as asking "how much does a car cost", but
> I'm interested in any examples, be it a small rural switch or a large
> tandem switch. I'm trying to get some feeling for the costs of
> switching bandwidth.

A lot. Depending on size, configuration, trunking, features, etc.,
prices may vary by nearly 100%, but think several hundred dollars per
line for a switch operating near the design center for the switch.  I
doubt any manufacturer (including my employer) would be willing to
give detailed pricing schedules to anyone that wasn't actually
considering buying one, but there are features of pricing that are
fairly widespread in the industry:

1) A Base cost. This is the cost for the amount of hardware it
   would take to get the first line operational.

2) A per line cost. This is the price for each line added to the
   basic system.

3) Various per unit costs. Systems have growth increments where
   additional hardware must be added to expand the internal
   network size.

4) Office wide Right to Use fees. CLASS features are priced
   this way by a number of makers: the telco has to pay a
   given price to offer CLASS services to subscribers.

5) Per Line right to use fees. A feature like Calling Number
   ID could be charged on a per line basis from the manufacturer
   to the telco.

6) Miscellaneous common equipment costs. How many biling tape
   drives does the site need? How many administrative terminals?
   How many little DC-AC inverters to power 110 VAC equipment
   from a -48V supply?

Depending on the market the maker is attempting to address, the ratio
between these costs will vary, and can frequently be tweaked around
for different sizes of office. If small line size switches are being
sold, the the base cost would tend to be small, and the per line cost
relatively high. If the target market is monster switches, the base
cost can be boosted pretty high, but the per line cost would be
lowered.

Features are sometimes priced with different options to a telco. An
office with only ten Centrex lines may choose to pay a per line
charge, while one with 25,000 Centrex lines may choose to pay a flat
rate that allows it to offer unlimited Centrex service (analogous to
per-processor software license and site-wide software license).

In general, the smaller the switch, the more it will cost when broken
down on a per-line basis.  A large urban area that uses switches with
100,000 lines only has to pay for one administration software package,
one center stage for the network, one of any number of things, but
gets to apply them to 100,000 lines. A mom-and-pop has to buy the
exact same things, but only gets to apply them to 2000 lines.  It is
quite a design and marketing juggle to figure out exactly how to
address a particular market size.


Kevin Wayne Williams
UUCP : ...!ames!ncar!noao!asuvax!gtephx!williamsk

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

From: [e-mail] (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: 25 Years of 800 Service
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: SCN Research/Qic Laboratories of Tigard, Oregon.
Date: Sat, 22 Aug 1992 17:21:18 GMT


Thomas Lapp <[e-mail]> writes:


> (the rest of this section talks about AT&T is facing competition
> from other LD carriers, as well as from resellers who sometimes
> use AT&T's name when making sales, causing headaches from
> purchasers who think that they are getting AT&T follow-up
> service as well.  It mentions how the local companies are
> getting into the act as well for intrastate (sic) phone
> service (I think they actually meant intra-LATA?), since
> Delaware has a huge credit-card banking industry which
> relies heavily on 800 service.)

No, Intra*state* calls require only dealing with the LECs and with the
State PUCs. But since LATAs seem to cross state lines as often as not,
they probably *aren't* doing specificly "Intra LATA" service.

> Finally, a side article discusses how small businesses are using 800
> service by profiling several of the companies.  However, the headline
> is somewhat ironic, since the title is "With 800, Business Has Got
> Your Number" (followup page says "Call 800: Business Has Your
> (toll-free) number").  I was looking to see if there was anything in
> the article about how businesses can get call detail on their 800
> numbers, thus getting ANI from callers.  But not a word about it.  I
> guess they didn't want to scare off the 800-using population too
> much. :-).

More likely, that aspect of it never even occured to the staffer.


Leonard Erickson              [e-mail]
CIS: [70465,203]             [e-mail]
FIDO:   1:105/51     [e-mail]
(The CIS & Fido addresses are preferred)

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

Date: Sat, 22 Aug 92 12:05:14 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Mickey Ferguson)
Subject: Re: Monitoring Dialtone for Voicemail Indicator
Organization: Rolm


In TELECOM Digest V12 No. 646 (item 10) Matthew Waugh writes:

> Sounds like your company balked at paying $25 for replacing your
> phones with new phones with message waiting lights. What you need to
> do is retro-fit your phones with lights. You can do this in many ways,
> places like Graybar will supply just the LED, or a new faceplate with
> the LED installed, or gadgets with modular jacks that will plug into
> your phone line. All these will respond to the 90 to 130VDC that the
> PBX will put on your line when you have a message waiting.

First, it probably isn't just as simple a matter as installing the new
phone, and then expecting the technicians to update the phone
configuration to know that you now have the message waiting light.  It
probably requires a different line card.  Remember that the PBX has to
supply additional current to power the light.  Of course, I can't
speak for any specific PBX.

> Note that having a message waiting light or stutter dial-tone is an
> either-or option; you can't have both. The people who administer your
> PBX will have to switch each line from stutter dial-tone to message
> waiting light as you equip the phones.

Again, I won't speak for a particular PBX, but at least with Rolm,
having the message waiting light and broken dialtone is not an
either-or option; we always give the broken dial tone, whether the
phone has a message waiting lamp or not.  You should check with your
particular vendor.


Mickey Ferguson -- Rolm -- FergusoM at scrvm2 -- [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Vance Shipley)
Subject: Re: AT&T Digital Answering Machine II
Organization: SwitchView Inc., Waterloo, Ontario
Date: Sat, 22 Aug 1992 13:09:46 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Michael
Schuster) writes:

> Now I see the AT&T 1339 being advertised and guess what new features
> it has ...

Does it support CLASS?  I have an AT&T 1337 that I bought a year ago.
I'm quite happy with it but now I would like a machine that uses CLID
information to stamp the calls.  Any one now of one?  I'm hoping the
new AT&T machine does.


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

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

Date: Sat, 22 Aug 1992 12:03:25 CDT
From: Andrew C. Green <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Peculiar Event During Phone Call


Bryan King writes:

> During the conversation his line went silent a couple of times. It was
> as though I was on the 'waiting' end of call waiting.  The line has
> call waiting but no calls came in during our conversation. [...]
> I'm curious what would cause this and what the problem is?

Has he also got three-way calling? I had the same problems a while
back, caused by a loose line connection in my phone. Pulling a bit too
hard on the phone momentarily broke the line, which the system
naturally interprets as a "flashed" switchhook. At that point it would
put the incoming call on hold and give me a new dialtone. When I
figured out that I was putting Party A on hold, not cutting them off,
another flash on the switchhook would bring them back.

I'm not sure that having three-way calling is strictly necessary for
this, but the ringing you heard at one point was your caller thinking
he'd lost you altogether and hanging up his phone, at which point it
began ringing to remind him that he had (unknowingly) got you on Hold.


Andrew C. Green
Datalogics, Inc.      Internet: [e-mail]
441 W. Huron          UUCP: ..!uunet!dlogics!acg
Chicago, IL  60610    FAX: [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Aaron Barnhart)
Subject: Re: Deterioration of POTS
Date: Sat, 22 Aug 92 01:19:02 GMT
Organization: Netcom
Reply-To: [e-mail]


> [Moderator's Note: But do you remember the Anti-Digital-Dialing League
> which formed in Berkeley, CA in the early 1960's to fight the
> conversion of named exchanges into three digit numbers?  PAT]

"The Let's All Call Up AT & T And Protest to the President March" sung
to the Michigan Fight Song (? how would I know, I went to Northwestern ?)

by Allan Sherman
1962
(from the "My Son, the Celebrity" L.P.)

It's the
Let's all call up AT & T and protest to the President march
Can you see him smirking and smiling
Cuz he's got us all digit dialing
It's the
Let's all call up AT & T and protest to the President march

So protest (So protest!)
Do your best (Do your best!)
Let us show him that we march in unity
If he won't (If he won't!)
Change the rules (Change the rules!)
Let's take our business to another phone company!

So
Let's all call up AT & T and protest to the President march

Let us wake him up in his slumber
Get a pencil, I'll give you his number

Which is
3 1 8 5 2 7 3 0 8 7 4 2 9

DASH!

5 1 1 4 9 0 6 7 4 0 8 5 2

HYPHEN!

1 1 4 6 2 0 5 7 9 hyphen dash 0 3

And now that you're on the right road
Don't forget his area code
Which is
5 1 8 2 4 7 9 0 5 hyphen dash 9 4 !

Where are the days of auld lang syne?
    (BUtterfield 8!  PLaza 9!)
Let's keep those beautiful names alive!
    (CRestview 6!  RAmses 5!)
Get ready to fight before it's too late!
    (CEntral 2!  MUriel 8!)
Let's let him know that this means war!
    (GInsburg 3!  BLumberg 4!)
Hoo-rayyyyyy!

And millions of telephone subscribers, will erect a triumphal arc
For the
Let's all call up AT & T and protest to the President march!


Aaron ([e-mail]) -- posting from Evanston, Illinois


[Moderator's Note: I'd forgotten about Allan Sherman! Thanks for
digging that up.    PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #654
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa02959;
          23 Aug 92 11:50 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA25669
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 23 Aug 1992 09:54:07 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA08796
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 23 Aug 1992 09:53:56 -0500
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 09:53:56 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #655

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 23 Aug 92 09:53:45 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 655

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Telecom Calendar (William Degnan)
    Motorola 'Secure Clear' Cordless Phones (Tim Tyler)
    Computer Privacy Digest (comp.society.privacy) (Dennis G. Rears)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (William Degnan)
Date: 22 Aug 92  21:44:00
Subject: Telecom Calendar


Vol. 2 No. 1 (and electronic edition 2.1)                       Aug 22, 1992
Copyright 1992, Communications Network Solutions       (All rights reserved)
============================================================================
This is our compilation of events calendars for various aspects of the
telecommunications industry, published from time to time by COMMUNICATIONS
NETWORK SOLUTIONS, - Independent Consultants in Telecommunications, Austin,
TX.

Send calendar items, requests to distribute/reprint or comments to:
Private Line, Calendar Editor, P.O. Drawer 9530, Austin, TX
78766-9530, or EMAIL to [e-mail], or [e-mail]

Paid subscriptions are available.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Aug 29-Sep 3
National Association of State Telecom Directors
Directors Annual Conference
Baltimore, MD
606 231-1895

Aug 31-Sep 2
Southeastern Telecom Association
Orlando, Fl
803
731-5640
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Sep 1-3
International Mobile Comm. Expo/Fall
Georgia World Convention Center
Atlanta, GA
303 220-0600
800 525-9154

Sep 8-11
OE/Fibers '92
Boston, MA
206 676-3290

Sep 9-11
ComExpo Poland
Marriott Hotel
Warsaw, Poland
703 527-8000

Sep 10
Tennessee Telecom Users Association
Nashville, TN
615 367-7676

Sep 10-12
Pacific International Expo (PIE)
Clark County Fairgrounds
Vancouver, WA
800 624-2569

Sep 13-17
Texas Telephone Association
Houston, TX
512 343-0850

Sep 14-18
NTCA FAll Conference
Chicago Marriott
Chicago, IL
202 298-2300

Sep 20-23
Rocky Mountain Telecommunications Association
Downtown Radisson Hotel
Denver, CO
707 578-5580

Sep 21-23
Nevada Annual Conference
Carson Valley Inn
Gardnerville, NV
702 827-0190

Sep 21-23
NCF '92
Hayatt O'Hare
Chicago, IL
312 938-3500

Sep 21-24
American Voice Input/Output Society
Minneapolis, MN
408 248-1353

Sep 21-25
Tele-Communications Association
Convention Center
San Diego, CA
818 967-9411

Sep 21-25
Mobile Communications Marketplace
Moscone Center
San Francisco, CA
202 467-4770

Sep 22-23
USTA Operator Services Conference
Los Vegas
202 835-3100

Sep 22-24
RF Expo/East
Tampa Conv. Ctr.

Tampa, FL
303 220-0600
800 525-9154

Sep 22-31
Phil Telecom '92
International Convention Center
Manila, Philippines
415 573-6900

Sep 22-30
Bureau '92
Park Des Exposition
Brussels, Belgium
415 573-6900

Sep 27-30
National Telephone Cooperative Association
Fall Conference
Nashville, TN
202 298-2300

Sep 28-30
ASIC '92
Riverside Convention Ctr.
Rochester, NY
716 328-2310

Sept 28-Oct 1
BICSI Workship
Windam Resort Paradise Valley
Scottsdale, AZ
801 581-5809

Sept 29-Oct 1
PETE '92
Orange County Fair & Expo Ctr.
Concord, CA
800 525-7383
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Oct 1
Fiber Fair '92
WA State Convention Ctr.
Seattle, WA
206 277-1240

Oct 2-4  (or Oct 7-9?)
CaribeCom '92
Caribe Hilton Hotel
San Juan, Puerto Rico
305 670-9444

Oct 4-8
Intelec '92
JW Marriott Hotel
Washington, DC
908 221-0013

Oct 5-8 (also reported as Oct 5-7)
Unicom '92
North American Telecommunications Association (NATA)
Sheraton Washington
Washington, DC
800 538-6282

Oct 5-8
USTA
National Convention
New Orleans, LA
202 835-3100

Oct 5-8
Carolina-Virginias Fall Meeting
Grove Park Inn & Country Club
Asheville, NC
919 592-5751

Oct 6-8
NorthCon '92
Seattle Center
Seattle, WA
800 421-6816

Oct 7-9? (or Oct 2-4?)
CaribeCom '92
Convention Center
San Juan, Puerto Rico
305 670-9444

Oct 11-14
MilCom '92
Sheraton Harbor Island
San Diego, CA
619-534-3096

Oct 12-15
FOExpo
Jacob K. Javits Convention Ctr.
New York, NY
203 794-0444

Oct 12-17
Europas Telecom 92
Hungary Expo Center
Budapest, Hungary
[phone]

Oct 18-21
CompTel
Fall Business Conference
Scottsdale, AZ
202 296-6650

Oct 19-21
CMA '92
Communications Managers Association (CMA)
Telecom '92
New York Hilton
NY, NY
800 CMA-EXPO / 908 766-3624

Oct 20-22
ComExpo Czechoslovakia
Intercontinental Center
Prague, Czechoslovakia
703 875-8620

Oct 26-28
Electronic Messaging '92
Fairmont Hotel
San Francisco, CA
703 875-8620

Oct 26-30
Digital Cellular Telecom Seminar
George Washington University
Washington, DC
800 424-9773

Oct 26-30
Interop 92
San Francisco, CA
800 468-3767

Oct 27-30
9-1-1 Conference
Holiday Inn
Decatur, IL
217 782-4911

Oct 30-Nov 4
ExpoComm China '92
International Exhibit Center
Beijing, China
301 986-7800


William Degnan,  Communications Network Solutions
-Independent Consultants in Telecommunications and Technology-
P.O. Drawer 9530       | [e-mail] | [e-mail]
Austin, TX 78766-9530  | ![e-mail]  | Voice [phone]


[Moderator's Note: Thank you very much for sending this calendar of
events along to the Digest, and I hope you will send them on a regular
basis. I used to prepare these here a couple years ago but it took too
much time and I had to quit doing it.  I'm glad to see you involved.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Tim Tyler)
Subject: Motorola 'Secure Clear' Cordless Phones
Organization: UMCC
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1992 00:16:32 GMT


     "Cordless phone eavesdroppers are everywhere" says pro golfer Lee
Turino, spokesman for Motorola.  "But with my Motorola Secure Clear~
Cordless Phone, my private conversations stay private."

     So says a glossy brochure (# BA-81) that Motorola's Consumer
Products Division (telephone # [phone]) distributes to promote
their new 'secure' cordless phone product line.  When I first read the
cover of the brochure, I said to myself, "Wow, I wonder what
sophisticated technology it must use?"  Motorola has been developing
and selling secure voice and data systems, from DVP and DES up to the
current 'FASCINATOR' algorithm for classified military and federal
government secure voice for many years.

 Page Two of the slick brochure provides some rhetorical questions and
answers:

*****************************************************************

          Why Motorola Cordless Phones?

     Q. What is meant by Secure Clear?

     Secure Clear is an exclusive technology that assures you no
eavesdroppers will be able to use another cordless phone, scanner or
baby monitor to listen in to your cordless conversations.

     Q. How difficult is it to eavesdrop on someone's cordless
conversation?

     It's not difficult at all. Simply by operating a cordless phone,
scanner or baby monitor on the same channel as you're on, an
eavesdropper can listen in.  Security codes alone DO NOT prevent
eavesdropping.

     Q. What are security codes and what do they do?

     Security codes allow the handset and base to communicate with
each other. With the Secure Clear cordless phone, one of 65,000
possible codes are randomly assigned every time you set the handset in
the base.  This means that a neighbor cannot use his handset to link
with your base and have phone calls charged to your phone number.

     Q. Describe the basic difference between Secure Clear and
security codes.

     Secure Clear protects against eavesdropping.  Security codes
prevent the unauthorized use of your phone line. Usually all cordless
phones have security codes, but not both.

     Q. What is the purpose of the Secure Clear demo?

     The Secure Clear demo is a unique feature of Motorola phones that
allows you to actually experience what an eavesdropper would hear when
trying to listen to your conversation.  By pressing the SECURE DEMO
button on the Motorola phone, you and the person on the other end will
hear the same scrambled noise an eavesdropper would hear.

*****************************************************************

     Hmmm ... I went to the Motorola Secure Clear cordless phone
display at a Sears store, took a deep breath, and hit the demo button
in order to hear what the "scrambled noise" which would protect a
conversation from eavesdropping sounded like.

     White-noise like that of a digital data stream? Rapid analog
time-domain scrambling?  No, the scrambled "noise" sounded like
inverted analog voice.  That's right, they're using the 40 or 50 year
old (3kHz baseband) speech inversion system -- the same one which they
stopped marketing for their commercial two-way radio gear about a
decade ago -- to make Lee Turino and other ignorant people's "private
conversations stay private."

     For those of you not familiar with speech inversion, it simply
flip-flops the voice spectrum so that high pitched sounds are low, &
vice versa.  It sounds a lot like Single Side Band (SSB)
transmissions, although an SSB receiver will not decode speech-
inversion scrambling.  Prior to 1986, several companies -- Don Nobles,
Capri Electronics, etc. sold inexpensive kits or scanner add-ons which
could be used to decode speech inversion.  Several electronics
magazines also published schematics for making your own from scratch,
at a cost of about $5.  After the Electronic Communications Privacy
Act of 1986, it became illegal to decode or decipher encrypted
communications which you weren't a legitimate party to, so the
standard practice of selling these quasi-legal products as
'experimental kits' or 'for educational purposes only' became common.

Today, some companies will not specifically sell a 'speech-inversion
descrambler,' but instead market a 'speech inversion scrambling
system' which means the kit will encode as well as decode speech
inversion, although most people buy them simply to hook up to their
scanners and monitor the few public safety agencies and business that
(still) use speech-inversion scrambling.

     Yes, technically, it is a felony for you to use a speech-
inversion descrambler to monitor these Motorola 'Secure Clear'
cordless. Or for that matter, the new Radio Shack DUoPHONE ET-499,
cordless phone which also depends on speech-inversion for privacy
protection.  The public utility of the ECPA has been argued about ever
since before it was enacted.  It is rather obvious that the ECPA was
pushed upon the ignorant, money-hungry Congress by the powerful (&
wealthy) Cellular Telephone Industry Association (so the CTIA could
propagate misinformation to the public, but that's another story ...).
I also realize that the 46/49MHz cordless phone channels are
apparently allocated for analog-voice only.

     Despite the ECPA, it is unconscionable to me that Motorola -- who
surely knows better -- would produce the slick brochure and
specifically market the 'Secure Clear' line as being invulnerable to
eavesdropping.  Their wording unequivocally gives the impression that
the 'Secure Clear' conversations are secure, not only from other
cordless phone & baby monitors, which have several common frequencies,
but also against communications hobbyists with scanner radios.

     It is bad enough that many public safety officers still think
that by using the 'PL' ('Private Line~,' also known as CTCSS) setting
on their Motorola two-way radios, no one else can listen in.  While
the 'Private Line' fiasco might be attributable to misconception on
the part of the radio users, in my opinion, Motorola's Consumer
Products Division has to know that there are thousands of scanner
monitors who have the technical ability to defeat the speech-inversion
'Secure Clear' system.  A Motorola representative at the 1992 Summer
Consumer Electronics Show in Chicago confirmed this to me, with a
smirk on his face.

     There's a big difference between Motorola's aforementioned
wording and that of Radio Shack's on page 3 of their 1993 catalog:

        New! Voice-Scrambling Cordless Telephone
        DUoFONE ET-499.  Cordless phones are great.
        But since they transmit over the airwaves,
        your private conversations could be
        monitored. Now you can enjoy cordless
        convenience with voice scrambling for
        *added* [emphasis theirs] privacy protection --
        frequency inversion makes transmissions
        between the handset and base unintelligible...


     It's not "Motorola should know better."  Motorola DOES know
better.  Otherwise, they wouldn't be spending time or money on true
'secure' (based on current technology, of course) communications and
transmission security systems.

     I sure am thankful that our federal government and military users
of secure-mode communications systems don't rely on Motorola's
marketing department to provide factual information as to the level of
security provided by Motorola equipment.  Too bad that for the most
part, the public does.

     For anyone looking for a cordless telephone that offers a decent
level of privacy, take a look at some of the new cordless phones which
use 900MHz.  Most of the new ones not only use CVSD digital voice for
the RF link, but also direct-sequence spread spectrum.  By no means
are these phones secure ('encoded,' yes, but 'encrypted,' no), & the
Tropez 900 actually seems to generate a very weak analog harmonic in
the 440MHz spectrum, but you'll be a lot better off than poor old Lee
Turino.


Tim Tyler   Internet: [e-mail]  MCI Mail: 442-5735  C$erve: 72571,1005
P.O. Box 443     Packet: KA8VIR @KA8UNZ.#SEMI.MI.USA.NA
Ypsilanti MI    48197-0443

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

Date: Sun, 23 Aug 92 07:58:44 EDT
From: Dennis G. Rears <[e-mail]>
Subject: Computer Privacy Digest (comp.society.privacy)


  Hi.  This is an announcement of the Computer Privacy Digest which is
gatewayed to the comp.society.privacy newsgroup.  I am posting this
here because several people have mentioned they are unaware of the
forum.

 The Computer Privacy digest was created for discussion of the effect
of technology on privacy.  This forum of which I am the moderator
started out as the Telecom Privacy digest three years ago and at the
beginning of the year changed to the Computer Privacy Digest.  At that
time the comp.society.privacy newsgroup was created.  The Digest is
gatewayed into the newsgroup.

This Computer Privacy Digest was established to provide a forum for
discussion on the effect of technology on privacy. All too often
technology is way ahead of the law and society as it presents us with
new devices and applications.  Technology can enhance and detract from
privacy.  The name of the digest should actually be the Technology and
Privacy Digest but due to the USENET Hierarchy naming scheme the word
Computer is instead.

    Topics include but are not restricted to:

        o Telecommunications - Caller-Id, ANI, monitoring of phones
calls (cellear/cordless), tracking people's locations.

        o Cryptology - enhances citizens rights to safeguard their
information.

        o Data Bases - Big Brother is here but it is not just the
Government. It is also Corporate America.  The advent of mailing lists
has now reach an extremely high level.  Consider the Social Security
Number.

        o High Tech Surveillance Devices - ranging for sophisicated
(SP) bugs, viewing devices, and audio devices.

        o The boon in video cameras and private citizens taping
events; e.g. Rodney King episode.  Video as well as photographic
information can be forged.

        o The effect of technology on privacy in the legal arena (e.g
admissibilty in court of items produced by new and old technology).

        o Misc - National Identifier Numbers, Bar coding currency,
electronic toll devices mounted on autos, etc.

  This group is not intended for the overall issue of privacy, (e.g
should a rape victim have their name published).

Submissions go to [e-mail] and administration stuff
to [e-mail].


                        Dennis G. Rears
MILNET:   [e-mail]     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:      Computer Privacy Digest & comp.society.privacy


[Moderator's Note: The Computer Privacy Digest begas as Telecom
Privacy and had its origin here in TELECOM Digest as a result of a
huge overflow of messages on Caller-ID. Dennis has done a great job
with it since the beginning and I thank him for handling the task very
well.   PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #655
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa29061;
          23 Aug 92 23:24 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA09356
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 23 Aug 1992 21:32:00 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA23900
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 23 Aug 1992 21:31:40 -0500
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 21:31:40 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #656

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 23 Aug 92 21:31:22 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 656

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: GTE Thinks I Live in 213 (John Higdon)
    Re: GTE Thinks I Live in 213 (Leonard Erickson)
    Re: AT&T Digital Answering Machine II (Michael Schuster)
    Re: AT&T Digital Answering Machine II (Greg Jumper)
    Re: ABCD as a Phreaking Tool (Rop Gonggrijp)
    Re: ABCD as a Phreaking Tool (John Gilbert)
    Re: Deterioration of POTS (Leonard Erickson)
    Re: Deterioration of Pots (vs. Monopolies) (Alan L. Varney)
    Re: Make Mine Extra Dry, Please, and Hold the Olive (Jack Adams)
    Re: What are Personal Communication Services (Jack Adams)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sun, 23 Aug 92 01:02 PDT
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: GTE Thinks I live in 213


Steven H. Lichter   GTE Calif. COEI writes:

> It seems that Mr. Higdon only has negative things to say about GTE.  I
> had thought that the GTE Bashing things was put to an end.

As far as I am concerned, I hope it is never allowed to end until GTE
at least gives lip service to cleaning up its act. To date, there has
been no evidence that I can see anywhere that this is the case.

> I don't think that GTE always misses or loses things.

No, maybe not ALWAYS. But it seems to ALWAYS lose the first report of
trouble. In the past five years I have yet to have anything repaired
as a result of the first call, or even the second.

> My job with GTE California is to install Hi-Caps. I have yet to miss
> a date because of a GTE problem. We have had problems when the
> customer was not ready with the building or one of his contractors did
> not do his job.

There is that blaming someone else again. You obviously do not work in
any areas of northern or southern California in which I am forced to
deal with GTE. Long Beach will soon be history, thank God.

> I install for LA Cellular, PacBell Cellular, MCI, AT&T, Sprint, and
> government agencies including the 15th Air Force at March AFB.  I have
> many commendations as do others on our crews.  I have worked with
> people in other areas and see the same commitment to getting the job
> done and done right the first time.

You take my criticisms of GTE personally. Obviously you know not of
mine, my associates', and my clients' very numerous miserable dealings
with GTE. No company is perfect and I understand that. But GTE goes
beyond all reason in its crummy performance. As I said, you apparently
were not on any of the hundreds of jobs that have been botched
super-royally by GTE. Be thankful that I have not asked PAT to devote
several digests to a detailed list of GTE screwups in just the past
couple of years!

> I sometime ago had Mr. Higdon contacted by our Thousand Oaks Corporate
> Office and was told that the problems he had been having were all in
> the past and there was no current problems.

Well, that turned out to be a big horse laugh. If anything, it has all
gotten worse. It got so bad that our Long Beach client had to move or
throw in the towel. When a city starts losing its commerce because of
excrementally bad telephone service, I would hardly call that "no
current problems".

> All big companies have their problems. I can think of a couple of
> time where PacBell has caused us to miss or almost miss a due date.

Yes, Pac*Bell has missed dates and screwed up orders. No company is
perfect. But there are two major differences: 1) Pac*Bell readily
admits it error and offers "deals" to compensate (GTE always denies
any culpability and blames everything on everyone else); 2) Pac*Bell
has more successes than failures by a wide margin (GTE almost always
turns the simplist job into a major pig fornication).

> In fact I have seen Mr. Higdon bash PacBell on a lot of subjects
> including wanting to appeal the PUC order on CID.

I have major disagreements with the corporate practices of Pacific
Telesis. I will do whatever I can to keep that corporation from
ripping us all off. I have made no secret of that. But regular readers
will also tell you that I have very high praise for the men and women
who provide my Pac*Bell service. They are professional, responsive,
and treat me as a valued customer. GTE treats me, and most everyone
else like garbage. Pac*Bell goes to major effort to provide service
properly and timely. GTE does not appear to give a bowel movement
about anything except bill collection.

> He claims he has been in the business for 25 years. I believe he
> has. I'm sure he knows, but I wonder has he ever missed a date?

I not only claim it, I can prove it. Have I missed a date? Many times.
Have I copped to it with the client? You bet. Nothing enhances
credibility like straight talk and a forthright manner. I have never
lost a client admitting to mistakes. But I have seen plenty of others
in this business get sacked trying to sweep things under the rug or
trying to divert blame.

> I would like to see some other comments on this from other GTE people
> who I know are out there, but stay out of the threads as I have for a
> few weeks because I really don't want to argue to try to defend GTE
> with him since it will do no good.

No, because actions speak much louder than words. I am sure there are
many GTE people who would like to punch out my lights and defend their
company. That does not change the truth of the matter. The best way to
change my mind about GTE (and say nice things about the company) would
be for the service to do an about face and have the company act like a
real telephone company for a change. I can guarantee you that pleasant
experiences from GTE would send me to the keyboard just as fast as
pleasant experiences from Pac*Bell. And I am on record praising
Pac*Bell when it was warranted.

> We have a Smart Park in Moreno Valley and another in Rancho,
> California and from what I have heard every customer is very happy with
> his service.

As I have said before, somehow, somewhere there are a few people that
like GTE -- for whatever reason. If "every customer" is happy with his
service, then the credibility score is low. No telco provides that
level of service. It may say something about the "telecom
knowledgeability" of the customers.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: GTE Thinks I live in 213
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: SCN Research/Qic Laboratories of Tigard, Oregon.
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 13:43:17 GMT


[e-mail] (John Higdon) writes:

> aimla!ruby![e-mail] (Mark Rudholm) writes:

>> Can't somebody put GTE out of our misery??!!!

> Well, you could always do what a major client of mine is in the
> process of doing. Ignoring advice to not locate a billing center in
> GTE area, this outfit took space in a Long Beach industrial park. For
> the past year the GTE horrors have been non-stop.

> So next month Long Beach will lose a thriving company and Anaheim will
> gain one. Is it any wonder that the Town Council of Los Gatos passed a
> resolution condemning GTE?

I wonder if it'd be possible for a large group of business and
residential customers that have been shafted by GTE to somehow file a
class action suit against GTE?

If it is, and you win, I'll settle for .1% of the total judgement!


Leonard Erickson              [e-mail]
CIS: [70465,203]             [e-mail]
FIDO:   1:105/51     [e-mail]
(The CIS & Fido addresses are preferred)

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

From: [e-mail] (Michael Schuster)
Subject: Re: AT&T Digital Answering Machine II
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 11:41:58 GMT
Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix & Internet, NYC


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Vance
Shipley) writes:

> In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Michael
> Schuster) writes:

>> Now I see the AT&T 1339 being advertised and guess what new features
>> it has ...

> Does it support CLASS?  I have an AT&T 1337 that I bought a year ago.
> I'm quite happy with it but now I would like a machine that uses CLID
> information to stamp the calls.  Any one now of one?  I'm hoping the
> new AT&T machine does.

Apparently is is identical to the 1337 except for time-day stamp. Even
has the same limited 8-minute recording time. The Panasonic KX-T8000
seems the way to go although it, too, does not support special line
services.


Mike Schuster
NY Pub. Access UNIX/Internet: [e-mail] | [e-mail]
The Portal (R) System: [e-mail]   | MCI Mail,GEnie: MSCHUSTER

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

From: [e-mail] (Greg Jumper)
Subject: Re: AT&T Digital Answering Machine II
Organization: TRW Sensor Data Processing Center, Redondo Beach, CA
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 92 00:07:21 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Vance
Shipley) writes:

> In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
> (Michael Schuster) writes:

>> Now I see the AT&T 1339 being advertised and guess what
>> new features it has ...

> Does it support CLASS?  I have an AT&T 1337 that I bought a year
> ago.  I'm quite happy with it but now I would like a machine that
> uses CLID information to stamp the calls.  Any one now of one?  I'm
> hoping the new AT&T machine does.

I got the new 1339 about six weeks ago.  As far as I know (not having
had a 1337), all the 1339 adds is time-and-date stamp, voice
announcement of number of messages, and more memory.  There is no
(mention of) CLASS capability.


Greg Jumper     TRW Signal Processing Facility   [e-mail]

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

Subject: Re: ABCD as a Phreaking Tool
From: [e-mail] (Rop Gonggrijp)
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 92 13:35:03 WET/D
Organization: Hack-Tic Magazine


[e-mail] (Michael A. Covington) writes:

>> Guess this does show what 'capable minds' set up the technology that
>> we are supposed to trust. Yet in the eyes of US law enforcement, we
>> would have been the criminals for experimenting with this (using
>> 555-XXXX numbers), and AT&T the poor victim.

> When you "experimented," you _did_ impose false charges on somebody,
> didn't you?  Why _aren't_ you the "criminals" then?

If we did not experiment, we sould never have found this trick. AT&T
would say their system was totally secure. YOU would trust a system
this stupid. I did not use this system to make calls, I used it to
show that it could be done, and I have done some testing to see what
you could and could not do with it.

As a reporter that is into these things, that is what I have to do.
You may not appreciate it, but I'm doing you a favour. Believe me,
AT&T can live with about thirty to fifty dollars in "losses". They
should have "lost" a few hundred thousand dollars through this hole,
as far as I am concerned.

Knowing that this kind of thread can go on for ever, and is likely to
become a shouting match, I will not respond to any further posts on
this subject.

One thing: I hate to have to explain why I do things every second
posting I make. Can my motivations be included in the FAQ for this
newsgroup?  ;-)

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

From: [e-mail] (John Gilbert)
Subject: Re: ABCD as a Phreaking Tool
Organization: Motorola, Inc. Land Mobile Products Sector
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 1992 00:00:44 GMT


> I remember that phreaks used to use ABCD to hack directory assistance.
> Without getting into the specifics, you could use certain combinations
> during a call to DA, and you would be put in a trunk from which you
> could actually answer information calls.

Ten years ago calls such as these to 555-1212 in some areas would
allow certain test modes.  One of these was a loop around test.  Two
people could call 555-1212 at a prearranged time and talk without
charge.  This method is so old and well known that if it still works,
someone must want it that way.

Most loops that previously passed the full audio bandwidth now only
pass a 1 KHz test tone.  ATT at one time had a set of loops available
to equipment manufacturers that required a person to talk
simultaneously onto both ends of the loop to set it up. After this,
the full audio bandwidth was available.  This technique worked
effectively to prevent these loops from being used as a phone phreak
meeting place.


John Gilbert    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Deterioration of POTS
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: SCN Research/Qic Laboratories of Tigard, Oregon.
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 13:51:52 GMT


[e-mail] (mark.d.wuest) writes:

> I think another side effect of the break-up is the shift away from
> pure research at Bellcore.  They're laying off more people as I type.
> Bell Labs is rumored to be headed toward a market-driven approach to
> development (but *that* rumor's been flying around for awhile now ...).
> Who know what the end result will be?

That "rumor" was essentially *confirmed* in an article in {Scientific
American} a few months back ...


Leonard Erickson              [e-mail]
CIS: [70465,203]             [e-mail]
FIDO:   1:105/51     [e-mail]
(The CIS & Fido addresses are preferred)

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

Date: Sun, 23 Aug 92 11:50:06 CDT
From: [e-mail] (Alan L Varney)
Subject: Re: Deterioration of POTS (vs. Monopolies)
Organization: AT&T Network Systems, Lisle, IL


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Lauren
Weinstein) writes:

> The point of my original message was that the fragmentation of phone
> service has caused problems for non-techie users, who have not been,
> are are unlikely to become, the beneficiaries of most of the
> competitively driven advances in telecommunications technology.  Lots
> of fascinating alternatives and services will be opening up for
> business users, but nobody really wants to spend a lot on the
> residential POTS market (since it is mostly all regulated
> services) -- and things are getting tougher for exactly that segment.
> And contrary to some opinions we've seen, I do feel that it is
> important for the technologists (that's us!) to watch out for "Aunt
> Martha" and her needs as well.

   Most of the arguments about the break-up center over the differing
needs of business and residential service.  The needs of large
businesses center over price and day-to-day quality.  Residential
users are usually willing to pay more if they can just ignore the damn
thing -- just make it work.  Thus the hand-holding attitude of the
old Bell System; they over-stocked the limited selection of things to
be able to respond quickly to unanticipated demand, and over-hired for
the same reasons.  But if the goal is universal service, I can't think
of any alternative that would have reach the same level of SERVICE.

   In today's environment, the businesses benefit (and "large" home
users), but one can't easily say "just make it work" to anyone, even
for a higher price.


Al Varney - just MY opinion


[Moderator's Note: I have a deteriorated pot I bought many years ago
in which to cook carrots and peas. Today when I looked at it, it had
gotten a crack in the bottom so I threw it out. Maybe I should send it
to Judge Greene and ask for a new pot if he can't make this one work
right again. I'll demand that he rule the deterioration of pots has to
stop immediatly even if Tru-Value Hardware has to be divested in the
process.   PAT]

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

From: vixen![e-mail] (26070-adams)
Subject: Re: Make Mine Extra Dry, Please, and Hold the Olive
Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 92 13:33:00 GMT


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

> I was sitting in traffic behind a PacBell repair van and noticed two
> large weatherproof socket covers (the kind of thing you see on outdoor
> power receptacles) on the upper rear of the van.  One was labeled
> "DRY" and the other "WET".  I'm puzzled; anyone know what these are?

Not really sure of this instance, but I'll render an opinion (after
all, any clod can have the facts 8^)!  Wet and dry are slang for
whether or not a trunk has a battery and ground feed (Wet, or the line
contains "juice") versus a circuit without battery and ground feed
(Dry, sorry, no olives!)


Jack (John) Adams        Bellcore RRC 4B-259
[phone] {Voice}        [phone] {Facsimile}
[e-mail]   [e-mail]

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

From: vixen![e-mail] (26070-adams)
Subject: Re: What are Personal Communication Services
Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 92 13:45:32 GMT


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

> I have seen mention in many industry magazines of Personal
> Communication Services (PCS).  ...stuff deleted
> ... How is PCS different from/better than cellular?

The common usage of PCS around here, NEW BUZZWORD ALERT -> NOMADIC
SERVICES!, is to establish a single number for each person, allowing
the intelligence of the network to figure out where to route it to
(home, macro cellular, micro cellular, etc.)  Visionaries also view
PCS as not simply single phone number, but seemless service as well.
i.e., voice mail on busy/don't answer, call park and page, plus all
the services operating uniformly no matter where the customer happens
to be.


Jack (John) Adams         Bellcore RRC 4B-259
[phone] {Voice}         [phone] {Facsimile}
[e-mail]    [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #656
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa01184;
          24 Aug 92 0:20 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA26231
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 23 Aug 1992 22:30:36 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA12070
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 23 Aug 1992 22:30:26 -0500
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 22:30:26 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #657

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 23 Aug 92 22:30:30 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 657

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Our Moderator and Monopolies (Jeff Sicherman)
    Re: Our Moderator and Monopolies (Brett G. Person)
    Re: Our Moderator and Monopolies (Bob Kupiec)
    Re: I've Fallen and I Can't Get Up! (Leonard Erickson)
    Re: Pounding on an Octothorp (Dan Danz)
    Re: AT&T SDN; New Calling Cards (John R. Levine)
    Re: NYTel LATAs (John R. Levine)
    Re: What Does This "Western Electric" Box Do? (David S. Wise)
    Re: Ameritech Complete MasterCard (Jerry Greenwood)
    Re: Switching Systems (John Higdon)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 00:15:10 -0700
From: Jeff Sicherman <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Our Moderator and Monopolies
Organization: Cal State Long Beach


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Nick Sayer) writes:

> Our Moderator Notes:

>> I've no complaints about it at all. I have NOTHING against
>> competition. But I have NOTHING against legal, lawfully maintained
>> monopolies either.

 [ RBOC comments deleted }

> Government has proved time, and time, and time, and time again that it
> cannot hope to be as clever at regulating RBOCs as the RBOCs are at
> evading regulation, bribing regulatory officials and ripping off the
> public. The answer is not government.  The answer is free markets.

> [Moderator's Note: By 'legal, lawfully maintained monopolies', I did
> NOT mean monopolies started by or protected by the government. I meant
> those monopolies which got that way through the hard work, effort and
> brains of the company founder, and which continue to remain a monopoly
> despite *completely obeying the law*. In other words, I supported AT&T
> intact before the breakup and Standard Oil before it was divested at
> the turn of the century. I do not support gangsters who maintain a
> 'monopoly' by force, threats and violence.  I agree, the free market
> should be the only consideration.  PAT]

   Some of those so-called 'lawfully maintained monopiles' that you so
admire got that way by fear, threat, intimidation, bribery and sundry
other tactics that run the gamut from unethical to unlawful. Kinda
depends what the laws are at the time and whose ethical standards are
being applied. Personally, I've always considered 'business ethics' to
be somewhat of an oxymoron. Hard work and effort (is there a
difference?)  is usually only part of the story and often a minor
part. Cleverness can be more important and cutthroatness doesn't hurt
sometimes. These types of advantages are even more important if we
harken back to the glorious days of yesteryear -- the age of the Robber
Barons -- when many of the monopolies (mostly now metamorphasized into
oligopies) that our Moderator so admires were an economic and ethical
scourge on society.

   Also, you are a little skewed in your thinking about what a free
market is. If the benefits of a free market flow from competition and
the market forces it applies to a company, then by definition, a
monopoly will not be best for society because a monopoly will not be
subject to such forces. Of course some concensions to property rights
must be made in the interests of innovation, hence patent monopolies,
but anti-trust laws exist because it has been demonstrated that some
business practices which also lead to monopolies do not have a
societal benefit and often have the opposite effect.


Jeff Sicherman

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

From: plains![e-mail] (Brett G Person )
Subject: Re: Our Moderator and Monopolies
Date: 23 Aug 92 23:25:38 GMT
Organization: North Dakota Higher Education Computing Network


PAT, you are citing examples of charity, NOT employee/corporatee
relations which is the key to why Standard was broken up.

Getting back to the original thread. AT&T was just too damned big.  It
was THE PHONE CPMPANY.

   Tell me, would you want to buy gas from only Mobile, cars from only
Ford, clothes from only JC Penney?  How 'bout if the only television
station you had was WGN?

   I'm sure the details of the breakup are somewhere in the archives.
I'll look them up before I log out tonight.  I may agree with you
after I have read the details.  But right now,I don't think I can say
that I do.

   There is just something wrong about having only one service
provider.  The comparison with IBM is Dead Wrong.  IBM is big, no
doubt, but there are at least other choices.  What other choices
besides AT&T were there before the breakup?


Brett Person     Guest Account    North Dakota State University
[e-mail] || [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: There were lots of choices prior to the breakup.
MCI was selling long distance service ten years before the breakup as
was Sprint. The catch was the inconvenience in using their service
with the extra digits one had to dial and the extra cost their
customers had to pay in the form of local phone message unit charges
to the competitor's switch. Repeat: I have nothing against any form of
competition. I believe AT&T should have been ordered to interconnect
with the others in a fair way at arms-length. They should have been
ordered to include the newcomers in the Separations and Settlements
process and let the local Bells handle the billing and collection for
some fee like they do now.  PAT]

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

From: olwejo![e-mail] (Bob Kupiec)
Subject: Re: Our Moderator and Monopolies
Organization: Olwejo - Private UNIX System
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 05:53:30 GMT


In <[e-mail]>, the Telecom Digest Moderator writes:

> [Moderator's Note: You are correct. I live in a different world than
> many of the readers here. I live in a dirty, very impoverished, crime-
> ridden and rapidly dying inner city.

I've seen you write how much you dislike the city many times, and if
you don't mind me asking, what is keeping you there?  I don't think
that I would have lived in those surroundings for very long, I would
have packed my bags and gone somewhere else.


Bob Kupiec - Olwejo System Admin. - N3MML   !: uunet!cs.widener.edu!olwejo!bob
UUCP: olwejo![e-mail]             Internet: [e-mail]
School: LaSalle University, 20th St. & Olney Ave., Philadelphia, PA


[Moderator's Note: Very simple. I do not have the cash reserves I feel
I would need to live somewhere else for a month (or two or three?)
while looking for employment without being a burden on my new
community in the process. The current economic recession is a real
killer. I can barely keep my bills current. The idea of going
somewhere else without pre-arranged employment and housing is very
scary to me.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: I've Fallen and I Can't Get Up!
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: SCN Research/Qic Laboratories of Tigard, Oregon.
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 14:19:08 GMT


[e-mail] (Todd Inch) writes:

> In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Michael
> Scott Baldwin) writes:

>> My grandmother is in need of one of these infamous devices.

> I would think the best solution is to have the autodialer go into
> speakerphone mode after making the connection so the callee can try to
> listen and/or talk to the caller.  Also I would want an alarm so your
> grandmother knows when it's dialing, rather than silent operation, so
> she can abort any false alarms.  You probably DO NOT want to directly
> call the emergency services due to the "boy who cried 'wolf'"
> syndrome.  It wouldn't surprise me if they start totally ignoring
> automated calls and/or charging big bucks for false alarms.

In many jurisdictions, it is flat out *illegal* to have an automated
system directly dial the police or fire department. These laws came
about for exactly the reasons you cite above.

(It's amazing what you pick up by reading the stuff enclosed with
things like alarm systems.)


Leonard Erickson              [e-mail]
CIS: [70465,203]             [e-mail]
FIDO:   1:105/51     [e-mail]
(The CIS & Fido addresses are preferred)



[Moderator's Note: I got a system like that for my mother. It goes
through an answering service which is trained to handle those calls;
they in turn call her neighbors, the doctor, the police, etc.  I pay
$30 per month for it to some company in Colorado.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Dan Danz)
Subject: Re: Pounding on an Octothorp
Date: 23 Aug 92 18:30:13 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail]


As a former technical writer, I was blessed with an editor who
adamantly refused to allow phrases like:

    "Hit the return key"     (Too violent)
and
    "Depress the return key"   (Too depressing, we have HAPPY keys)

I wonder what she would have done with:

"Pound the return key"   or "Pound the pound key".


L. W. "Dan" Danz                  VOS Mail:  [e-mail]
Sr Consulting Software SE         NeXT Mail: [e-mail]
Customer Assistance Center        Voice Mail/Pager: [phone]
Telecommunications Division       Customer Service: [phone]
Stratus Computer, Inc. 4455 E. Camelback #115-A, Phoenix AZ 85018

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

Subject: Re: AT&T SDN; New Calling Cards
Organization: I.E.C.C.
Date: 23 Aug 92 15:19:50 EDT (Sun)
From: [e-mail] (John R. Levine)


> Question: what does SDN stand for anyway?  And what makes it different
> from standard long distance service?

It's Software Defined Network.  In Olden Days when long distance rates
were much higher than now and switching was relatively much more
expensive than it is now, large companies usually rented lots of fixed
leased lines among their various facilities to carry intra-company
traffic.  This saved money relative to toll rates and also sometimes
avoided problems of not being able to get through at peak hours.

But now leased lines have become an anachronism, because the modern
network is much better at providing bandwidth on demand, so long
distance companies provide various billing hacks to give modern
equivalents of leased lines.  Once such hack is the "virtual private
line" which is a long distance ringdown circuit -- whenever you pick
up the phone at one end it quickly calls the other end to give you
pretty much the same effect as a leased line but at lower cost since
they don't need to provide bandwidth when you're not asking for it.
SDN is basically a bulk calling plan for large businesses that
replaces networks of leased lines.  One dials 10732 to make an SDN
call (and gets a message saying to call your account rep if it's not a
line assigned to an SDN account) but as far as I know the calls are
carried just like other AT&T calls.

Then there's the matter of Tariff 12.  AT&T, still being the dominant
long distance carrier, still has regulated rates which means that they
have to offer the same terms to everyone.  When dealing with large
customers, though, the only way a carrier can keep their business is
to create a package deal that meets their particular needs.  When AT&T
makes a package for a large customer, e.g. DEC, they file it as an
offering under Tariff 12 which means that if you happen to need
exactly the same service as DEC does, you can order it at the same
price.

But filing under Tariff 12 is expensive and slow so it doesn't make
sense to do it for other than the largest accounts.  To fill in this
gap, there has arisen a bunch of grey-market AT&T resellers.  There is
an SDN offering that covers multiple locations and sends each location
its own bill, but with a price based on the total volume, which many
companies use when each location handles its own overhead expenses.

The resellers buy this service and resell it to smaller businesses,
and AT&T then bills each of the smaller businesses directly.  I'm not
sure how the resellers make money, whether it's by charging a fee
directly to the customers or by somehow getting a rebate from AT&T.

AT&T doesn't seem to be entirely thrilled by this development, since
it gets them involved in situations with resellers who are often
marginal, low-overhead, and somewhat slimy, but it is a way they can
offer competitive prices to businesses too small for the bulk plans
but too big to be happy with something like Reach Out.


Regards,

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

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

Subject: Re: NYTel LATAs
Organization: I.E.C.C.
Date: 23 Aug 92 15:26:13 EDT (Sun)
From: [e-mail] (John R. Levine)


> New York Regional Calling Area:
> New York City (212/718/917 area codes); Long Island (516) except
> Fisher's Island; ...

Aha.  I'd long been wondering where Fisher's Island gets its phone
service.  It's physically close to New London CT, has a New London zip
code (the only place in the country out of state zip sequence) and the
only way to get there is by ferry from New London.  So I guess SNET
provides their phone service, too.

> Albany Regional Calling Area:
> Capital District and Adirondack Region - all of Area Code 518 and Hancock,
> Massachussetts in Area Code 413);

That's odd, the New England Tel phone books claim that all of 413 is
in the Western Mass. LATA.  The exchange is 413-738.


Regards,

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

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

Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 10:51:13 -0500
From: David S. Wise <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: What Does This "Western Electric" Box Do?
Organization: Computer Science, Indiana University


[e-mail] (Ron Newman) writes:

> I moved into a new apartment this weekend, and found a mysterious box
> plugged into an electric outlet, with wires running into a telephone
> junction box.  Various writing on the box reads:
>    Western Electric
>    2012C  Trnsf.

> [Moderator's Note: It is indeed a transformer to light the dial on a
> Princess phone ... a style long since replaced by the Trimline models.
> The reason you do not need it on the Trimline is because instead of an
> actual little light bulb under the case of a Princess phone, the newer
> Trimline model uses LED's under each push button and they light up

Amendment: Sometime before 1984, ITT sold a Trimline clone -- "Trendline"
I believe was the cloned name.  The original Trendline (with heavier
"Indestructible 500"-style components) uses the transformer/bulb
arrangement Pat ascribes to the Princess.  BUT, the bulb was not
delivered with the instrument although the phone was already wired for
it (yellow/black).  The Trendline 2 uses a modified LED arrangement,
similar to what Pat describes for the Trimline.

Both these are fully modular phones, and so the original is likely to
be plugged in where it doesn't belong.  Thus, the following is not for
novices: for $1 you can buy a bulb and plug it in to a Trendline.  If
you still have such a transformer, you now have a WELL lighted phone.

Not all the transformers started fires, but a specific subset was
URGENTLY recalled.  LOC (which installed it) should still be able to
identify a nasty, but would probably just beg you to unplug it.

WARNINGS:

If you have such a transformer and don't need it, please UNPLUG IT.

If you want to keep it, check its recall status before using it.

DO NOT ATTACH ANY 2-LINE phones.  Competent rewiring might save you,
but I would not have both in the same building.

And if you put a bulb into an original Trendline, BEWARE OF 2-LINE
wiring.


David S. Wise [phone];  fax: [phone]  [e-mail]
Computer Science Dept., Indiana University, Bloomington, IN  47405-4101, USA

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

From: [e-mail] (Jerry Greenwood)
Subject: Re: Ameritech Complete MasterCard
Date: 23 Aug 92 07:21:21 GMT
Organization: Gagme Public Access UNIX, Chicago, Illinois.


Also ... the May 1990 issue of {Consumer Reports} has the four major
ways in which the interest is computed.  They list them according to
their desirability.

Armed with these one can make a good choice.  There is even a 7.9
percent card out there ... the catch is that it has a $39.00 fee.
That would be great for me as I carry a large balance.  I'll probably
get that card and when the balance is paid off ... switch to a no fee
card.


Jerry Greenwood              N9NRG
[e-mail]      312-545-2219

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

Date: Sat, 22 Aug 92 22:34 PDT
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: Switching Systems


On Aug 22 at 22:26, TELECOM Moderator writes:

> [Moderator's Note: So with panel and SXS being incompatible, how were
> calls handled between those offices?   PAT]

There were several hacks that were used. Early on, there were
mechanical translators to convert revertive to rotary and visa versa.
While it was not much trouble sending a call from SXS to Panel the
other direction was problematic. In the former, a switch level was
connected to special trunks from the Panel office equipped with the
same type of rotary receivers that the subscribers used.

However, the only output language spoken by Panel is revertive and
this had to be converted to rotary pulses. Due to the handshaking in
revertive signalling, conversion to rotary was not a trivial task. And
the native tongue of SXS IS rotary.

Later on, calls between SXS and Panel were routed through the local
tandem switch. The first of these were crossbar, and as you will
recall crossbar speaks all traditional signalling languages fluently.
This was how calls between San Mateo and San Francisco were handled
decades ago, when San Mateo had a major amount of SXS and San
Francisco still had some Panel offices.


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

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #657
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa02302;
          24 Aug 92 0:56 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA06092
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 23 Aug 1992 23:03:07 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA17755
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 23 Aug 1992 23:02:57 -0500
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 23:02:57 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #658

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 23 Aug 92 23:03:00 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 658

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Conversation Attack: Software Blue Box in Germany (Wolf Paul)
    Odd Calling Card Rates at NYTel (Douglas Scott Reuben)
    Interesting Stuff in a Box (Roy Smith)
    Question About PBX Phone (Dave Grabowski)
    Weird Intercept (Randy Gellens)
    Sprint and Network 2000 Sued by Sellers of Long Distance (Joe Konstan)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Wolf Paul)
Subject: Conversation Attack: Software Blue Box in Germany
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Wolf N. Paul)
Organization: Alcatel Austria - Elin Research Center, Vienna
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 14:14:04 GMT


The following is from the Austrian newsweekly "profil", No. 34, Aug.
17, 1992.

"Conversation Attack" -- German computer hackers permit cheap
telephoning around the globe.

The demonstration setup was extremely simple. A PC, a monitor with an
earphone socket, a modem, and -- most importantly -- a disk with
special software. The man in front of the keyboard dialled the digits
0130, the prefix for Germany's "freephone" numbers. A few digits later
the connection to Canada was established, the diskette began to spin
and sent some fake signals across the Atlantic. A few moments later
another dial tone could be heard, and the computer freak at the
keyboard leisurly keyed in the number of a girl friend in Tokyo with
whom he'd wanted to talk for some time.

The faces of the men who are looking over the computer freak's
shoulders show increasing dismay. Experts, particularly telco experts,
don't like to be confronted with the ease with which they can be
defeated. And that's exactly what this writer for the German magazine
"Capital" did in July.

The man took his time with his call to Tokyo. The call didn't cost him
more than a call to his mother at the other end of town. The bill
would be paid by someone else. The diabolically genial program
developed by German hackers caused the meters to rotate at the
Canadian firm whose "freephone" number was dialed at the beginning of
the demonstration.

Experts from "Telekom", the German telco, had assured the public that
security precautions against this kind of unwelcome "conversation
attack" had been been perfected. But this demonstration by "Capital"
 -- which had been previously announced -- mercilessly revealed the
weaknesses of the telco's defenses against hackers.

Here' how it works: In addition to the deluge of conversations which
pours through the ether, there are signals which are sent on certain
frequencies. These signals indicate to the phone systems who is
connected to whom, and most importantly, who pays for what. As soon as
the hackers have found out which frequencies are used for these
signals, it becomes child's play to fool the receiving system with
counterfeit signals and make it pay for the call.

The telco has started the counter-attack. Telekom spokesman Juergen
Kindervater: "We are in the process of installing technical blockers
in the network which will make access more difficult".

The hackers are not discouraged by this. The have started to offer
their software package "Blue Box" (cost inclusive one year's warranty:
DM 25,000 or $12,000) to a wider public -- as yet under the counter.
If the telco should change its system, that wouldn't be a problem, the
hackers assure potential customers. The program could always be
adjusted to allow for new measures. "Kimble", the alias of the hacker
who wrote most of the program, is convinced that this system is
"perfectly legal in Germany" and plans to start a company to publicly
market his program.

Telekom spokesman Kindervater compares the situation to a
tortoise-and-hare race. As soon as telco technicians close one
loophole, the hackers have found a new one. Kindervater: "We won't
have a chance until we can separate the voice and signal channels."
This is supposed to happen by next spring when Telekom introduces the
new digital "Signaling System Seven". A Hamburg hacker comments
gleefully: "A digital network will increase our possibilities even
more. We'll be able to get into anything, even the main telco
computers."

The damages caused by these "telecom-parasites" are still
comparatively small (according to Kindervater), maybe in the tens of
millions of Marks. But the future perspectives are disquieting. German
and Austrian telco officials are afraid of the specter of Eastern
European companies who might want to increase their communications
budget by purchasing this software from the German hackers. That could
raise damages into the billions.

The software functions equally well in Austria. One simply uses the
Austrian "freephone" prefix, 0660. While Austrian telco spokesman
Stadbauer claims that this has not yet happened in Austria, and that
measures are in place to prevent it, "Kimble" claims that several of
his customers are using Blue Box in Austria.

Telco technician Adalbert Dirnboeck admits that the Austrian security
network is not yet perfectly tight: "The analogue portion of the
network still has some loopholes, but the digital portion is safe."
Very reassuring, especially since two-thirds of Austria's 0660 numbers
are still handled by the analogue portion of the network.

In any case, "Kimble" is not fazed by the prospects of a digital
network. "Blue Box will still work -- we are demonstrating that even
now in Hamburg, which is already digital."


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)

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

Date: 23-AUG-1992 19:07:28.56
From: Douglas Scott Reuben <[e-mail]>
Subject: Odd Calling Card Rates at NYTel


I recently got a bill for Calling Card calls from NYTel, reflecting
charges for calls made from Shoreham, NY, to NYC, NY. The calls were
made at 1AM, and lasted for one minute each. Each call cost $1.10. I
thought that was a bit expensive, so I called my business office to
check these charges.

Here's what happened:

1. I was told "We charge a 40 cent surcharge, plus the coin rate, plus
toll".  I asked what that came out to be, and the rep said "We don't
have that information here, but we will get back to you." They never
did.

2. Called back the next day from Mass (collect, of course!). I asked
why my call was not returned. Rep. said she tried to call me back, but
no one was there. I told her I had an answering machine or voice mail
at EVERY number I gave her, but received no message. No answer from
her. She then tells me the same thing she did the day before, and I
repeat my request for an exact breakdown of the charges, with actual
dollar amounts. She says she will get back to me. Again, never did.

3. Repeated calls go on all week, no answer. I call the NYTel
"President's Helpline". Rep. there sounds VERY concered (they always
do! :) ). Next day I get a call on voicemail from the NYTel supervisor
for my office, she says that they have looked into the problem, and
the rate is "a 40 cent surcharge plus the coin rate for the call."
According to her, a call from a PAYPHONE in Shoreham, NY, to NYC, NY,
is 70 cents for the first minute, and $.15 for each additional minute.
Thus, a minute call is $.40 (surcharge) + $.70, which comes out to the
$1.10 which I had been billed.

I didn't think this was correct -- in the past, NY Tel (and presently
all LECs that I deal with) charge a surcharge, plus whatever the
direct dial rate is -- there is no special rate from payphones. Thus,
a payphone call has a certain "coin surcharge" plus the direct dial
rate if one pays by coin, a calling card call has a "calling card
surcharge" plus the direct dial rate, and operator assist calls have a
given number of surcharges (depending on what she does) plus the
direct dial rate.

4. I called the NYTel Pres. Helpline again, noted the above, and told
the rep.  that the NYTel phone book says "Calling card calls cost a 40
cent surcharge plus the direct dialed rate, if handled by NYTel". She
said yes, but there is a DIFFERENT direct dial rate for payphones than
what one pays from non-coin phones. Nice, ambiguous use of the term
"direct dial", eh?

Giving up on NYTel to resolve this, I called the NY Public Service
Commission.  I spoke to someone on the Rates and Tariffs staff, who
after looking up the concerned tariffs, said yes, indeed, NYTel is
correct, but ONLY for calls in the NY Metro LATA, and only for calls
from payphones. Thus, she said, there is a separate "direct dial" rate
from payphones, and if I had made the Calling Card call from a
business or residence phone I would pay a different (cheaper) rate.
(This STILL doesn't sound right to me, but it seems the PSC allows and
agrees with this.)

Thus, a NYTel handled call from downtown Albany to one of the Albany
suburbs is $.40 + toll direct dial (or local direct dial) rate. So, if
it cost me $.10 for a one minute call from Albany to another Albany
number, it would cost $.50 for a one minute calling card, ie $.40 plus
$.10, regardless of if the call was made from a payphone or a
business/residence phone.

However, a call of EXACTLY the same mileage from NYC to another number
in NYC (let's say from one payphone to another right next to it) will
be $.65, that is, $.40 surcharge, plus the cost of a placing the call
with coins, which is $.25 cents. And indeed, upon inspection of my
bill, I note that calls from payphones are billed as such.

As I noted earlier, this is the only case where I have EVER seen this
rate.  Having TWO direct dial rates (e.g., one from coin and another
for non-coin phones) seems to go against the industry "standard" of
having a set toll rate and then attaching surcharges to that rate for
special telco-offered services, like Calling Card calls, etc.

In the case of the 1AM call from Shoreham to NYC, I think it would
have been a bit cheaper to dial 10288 first (this is allowed in NY for
INTRA-LATA calls), as AT&T would charge something like $.80 surcharge
+ $.15 (or less) toll.

 From now on, I'm not using NYTel for calls in the New York Metro
calling area (NYC - 212, 718, 917; Southern Westchester - 914;
Greenwich/Byram, CT - 203; Rockland - 914, and Long Island - 516
except for Fisher's Island). One of the reasons I obtained a Calling
Card was to avoid the high coin-deposit surcharge; apparently NYTel
has managed to convince the PSC to allow them to charge it again via
Calling Card calls in the NY Metro calling area. If I can place a
no-surcharge call with Metro Media for $.20, or a surcharge call with
AT&T which for non-local calls is cheaper than what NYTel will charge
me from a payphone, why bother with them?

This seems self-defeating -- Calling Card calls save the Telco time in
collecting coins and having to tie up a payphone while a customer
deposits them.  By encouraging me to use coins, or to give my money to
someone else (although NYTel gets a cut in any event), they will gain
less revenue. I assume they expect no one to notice and/or care about
this new rate structure , and thus the minimal revenue loss from
customers such as myself who do migrate to other services is of little
interest to them. Oh well ...  :(


Doug        [e-mail] // [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Roy Smith)
Subject: Interesting Stuff in a Box
Organization: Public Health Research Institute, New York
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 17:46:49 GMT


I was just walking down the street in midtown Manhattan and came to a
Con Ed (New York's gas and electric utility) truck parked by an open
equipment box.  It was obviously some sort of gas pipeline monitoring
station.  In one side of the box was what looked like a large gas
pressure regulator and random sorts of valves and sensors.  Underneath
was a large circular chart recorder.  Another part had a digital
thermometer for outside air temperature, etc.  The interesting part
was the section which contained some neat looking telecom gear.

        There was a Radio Shack alarm dialer, a plain-jane wall-mount
telephone (presumably for the convenience of service people installing
or testing the equipment), what I could swear was a Telebit
Trailblazer modem (couldn't see the front panel but the box and rear
panel look exactly like a Trailblazer), and a neat pair of boxes which
I assume were the guts of a cellular phone.  One box was a slim metal
case with a piece of fat (RG-8?)  coax coming out one end, the other
was a fatter box connected to it with a nameplate that said "CelJack",
and had an RJ-11 jack on it, into which were plugged the Telebit,
alarm dialer, and telephone via a random assortment of T-connectors).

        One piece of gear I couldn't identify was a slim, approximately
10 x 16 inch box which was a Hewlett/Packard model 48060 (anybody know
what a HP-48060 is?)  It had two sets of barrier-strip type terminals,
one on each end.  I'm assuming it was some sort of industrial process
control computer.

        OK, my question is, why the cellular phone?  Obviously, this
is some sort of setup where they monitor gas pressure/whatnot and
download data periodically to some central point.  The alarm dialer
presumably can send in some sort of emergency message.  But why the
cellular phone?  Why not just run a regular copper phone line into the
box?  It's not like it's out in the boonies or someplace.

        I can think of only two reasons for the Telebit.  One is that
there is so much data to be sent that hey really want the speed you
get from those to cut down on cell air time.  But, if that's the case,
wouldn't a land line be cheaper?  The other possibility i that this is
such a critical station that they need the reliability you get from a
Telebit.  But if that's the case, why go with an alarm dialer from
Radio Shack?


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Dave Grabowski)
Subject: Question About PBX Phone
Organization: New Jersey Institute of Technology, Newark, N.J.
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 21:16:59 GMT


  I recently obtained a telephone that was used on a private Centrex
system. It has a sticker on the back : "Caution: For use only on
business lines or risk of electrical short circuit" (or something like
that.) I popped it open, and it doesn't have a matching transformer or
usual huge (.1mf, 450+volt) cap used in most other telephone-line
devices. My question: Do I need to bother adding this hardware? I've
got it on a line now and it's been there for a few weeks and it works
fine.


Dave

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

From: MPA15AB![e-mail]
Date: 23 AUG 92 21:56
Subject: Weird Intercept


I'm trying to reach someone in the 213-663 exchange (I've reached this
number before).  When I dial it I get an intercept that says "We're
sorry; your call cannot be completed as dialed from the phone you are
using.  Please read the instruction card and dial again."  (There are
the standard SIT tones at the beginning.)  This is odd since I'm
calling from my office phone, not a pay phone.

(I also tried it as 310-663, but got a "Your call cannot be completed
as dialed" intercept.)


Randy Gellens            [e-mail]
>>>>>>> If mail bounces, forward to [e-mail] <<<<<<<<
Opinions are personal; facts are suspect; I speak only for myself

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

Date: Sun, 23 Aug 92 20:15:40 -0700
From: [e-mail] (Joe Konstan)
Subject: Sprint and Network 2000 Sued by Sellers of Long Distance


The {San Francisco Chronicle} August 18 Business Briefs Section has a
short under the title:

    Sprint is Accused of Pyramid Scheme

To summarize, 52 resellers in 18 states have sued Sprint and Network
2000 (a marketing company whose only client is Sprint) charging that
they were recruited into an illegal pyramid scheme and were denied
commissions.  The suit demands $25,000 per plaintiff.


Joe Konstan

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #658
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa04571;
          24 Aug 92 2:04 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA18971
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 24 Aug 1992 00:12:48 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA14038
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 24 Aug 1992 00:12:38 -0500
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 1992 00:12:38 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #659

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 24 Aug 92 00:12:43 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 659

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Internet PRIVACY Forum (Lauren Weinstein)
    Announcing "The Electronic Dimension" (Lambda Computer Associates)
    SS7 and Call Forwarding Variable (James VanHouten)
    Three-Wire Phone Hookups? (Gabe M. Wiener)
    Information Wanted: Toryo (Ray Normandeau)
    Baby Bells and States (Dave Niebuhr)
    FAXes Over Internet (David Link)
    ANI Long Distance Service: Okay or Beware? (Irving Wolfe)
    GTE California Changes (Matt Holdrege)
    Please Help Absolute Beginner (Timothy Murphy)
    Cellular Phone Usage From Airplanes (Jordan Hayes)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sun, 23 Aug 92 14:26:59 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Lauren Weinstein)
Subject: Internet PRIVACY Forum


Greetings.  This is a reminder regarding the availability of the
Internet PRIVACY Forum digest and related archive materials.

The PRIVACY Forum is a moderated digest for the discussion and
analysis of issues relating to the general topic of privacy (both
personal and collective) in the "information age" of the 1990's and
beyond.  Topics include a wide range of telecommunications,
information/database collection and sharing, and related issues, as
pertains to the privacy concerns of individuals, groups, businesses,
government, and society at large.  The manners in which both the
legitimate and the controversial concerns of business and government
interact with privacy considerations are also topics for the digest.
The PRIVACY Forum digest is supported in part by the ACM (Association
for Computing Machinery) Committee on Computers and Public Policy.

Except when unusual events warrant exceptions, digest publication is
limited to no more than one or two reasonably-sized digests per week.
Other mailing lists/digests relating to some of these topic areas,
with somewhat different submission and editorial policies, may be more
appropriate for readers who prefer a higher volume of messages
regarding these issues.

The goal of PRIVACY Forum is to present a high quality electronic
publication which can act as a significant resource to both
individuals and organizations who are interested in these issues.  The
digest is best viewed as similar in focus to a journal or specialized
technical publication.  The moderator will choose submissions for
inclusion based on their relevance and content.

The PRIVACY Forum is moderated by Lauren Weinstein of Vortex
Technology.  He has been active regarding a wide range of issues
involving technology and society in the ARPANET/Internet community
since the early 1970's.  The Forum also has an "advisory committee"
consisting of three distinguished individuals who have offered to act
as a "sounding board" to help with any questions of policy which might
arise in the course of the Forum's operations.

For more details regarding the PRIVACY Forum, including FTP and
listserv archive access information, please send a message to:

   [e-mail]

with the command:

   information privacy

in the BODY of the message.  Or to subscribe, send a message to the
same address but with the command:

   subscribe privacy

in the body of the message.  Thanks much.

 --Lauren--


[Moderator's Note: This is NOT a duplicate. Lauren's publication is
entirely separate and distinct from the one published by Dennis Rears
which was discussed here earlier today. Both digests deal with
privacy issues: The one Dennis started a couple years ago had its
beginning here in telecom. The one Lauren started a few months ago is
similar, but with a different set of guidlines as Lauren noted.  PAT]

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

From: ddsw1![e-mail]
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 92 15:57 CDT
Subject: Announcing "The Electronic Dimension"


         T H E   E L E C T R O N I C   D I M E N S I O N
                        BBS Newsletter

           Premier Issue to be released - OCTOBER, 1992

        Dedicated to all members of the on-line community

        Six bi-monthly issues per year, in printed format.
        One year subscription:  $15.00

         Featuring articles of interest on:
             * BBS Software
             * Telecommunications Software
             * Feature stories on different BBS's
             * Modems & PC Hardware information
             * Shareware and Freeware
             * and much, much more!

Sign up now for your complimentary issue!
To receive the premier issue free of charge, complete the coupon
below, and mail it to:

              Lambda Computer Consultants
                     P.O. Box 264
              Park Ridge,  IL  60068-0264
                    [phone]

                          OR

Netmail your name, address and phone number to:
               Toby Schneiter or Gloria LaHay
                   FidoNet > 1:115/769

Attention SysOps & Industry Vendors:

   Advertise your product or multi-line BBS for FREE !!!  Supply us
with camera ready art, or just typed copy, and we will run a 1"x2" add
in the premier issue of THE ELECTRONIC DIMENSION NEWSLETTER.  (This
offer is limited, so please submit your ads early!)  Quarter, half or
full page ads are available on a limited basis for a nominal fee.

       ..............................................................
       .                                                            .
       .  Name ___________________________________________________  .
       .                                                            .
       .  Address ________________________________________________  .
       .                                                            .
       .  City,St,Zip ____________________________________________  .
       .                                                            .
       .   Phone #: (_____)________________________________         .
       .                                                            .
       .                                                            .
       .  Yes! Please send me the free Premier issue of             .
       .    THE ELECTRONIC DIMENSION NEWSLETTER, and sign me up for .
       .    a yearly subscription at $15.00.                        .
       .   Enclosed is my __check  __money-order  __Visa            .
       .                  __MasterCard                              .
       .                                                            .
       .   Credit Card #: _______________________________________   .
       .                                                            .
       .   Expiration Date: ______________________                  .
       .                                                            .
       .   Signature: __________________________________________    .
       .                                                            .
       .                                                            .
       ..............................................................

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

From: [e-mail] (James VanHouten)
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 04:52:11 -0500
Subject: SS7 and Call Forwarding Variable


> [Moderator's Note: I did this for awhile with my recorded message
> service back in 1973-74. Someone living in Joliet, IL had a metro area
> unlimited line which included all of northern Illinois and Chicago. I
> paid the cost for a real cheap incoming only (no outgoing calls
> without extra expense) line for him to receive calls on. He made his
> outgoing calls on the unlimited line which he also left forwarded at
> all times to my number in downtown Chicago. People in Aurora, Joliet
> and Will County called that number locally. Eventually IBT got sore
> about it and we turned it off rather than argue with them.   PAT]

 From what I understand SS7 is putting an end to this.  If Party A is
calling Party C thru Party B and it is normally a toll call for Party
A to call Party C then it will not complete the call or will complete
with a charge.

On a different topic: Is there a tariff that prevents subscribers from
dedicating modems together on POTS lines.  One of my customers has 20
auto parts stores that call into their parts computer every morning at
7 AM and they stay up until about 6 PM.  How are they getting away with
this??


James Van Houten, Vice President    | Voice:   +1.301.248.3300 CIS  72067,316
Metropolitan Security Services, Inc | Fax:     [phone] WN   55:4004/0
P.O. Box 502                        | Data:    +1.301.967.7220 FIDO 1:109/544
Temple Hills, MD   20757-0502       | Internet: James.VanHouten@f544.n109.z1.
USA                                 |           fidonet.org

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

From: [e-mail] (Gabe M Wiener)
Subject: Three-Wire Phone Hookups?
Organization: Columbia University
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 05:13:56 GMT


For years I have always known that telephone service is carried on
tip/ring pairs.  Yet for some reason I have memories of being told
that phone service was carried on three wires when I was growing up in
the 70's.  I recently came across some old "How it works" book from
the same era, replete with B&W photos of WECO 500 sets and non-modular
wiring blocks, and there was some description of how the "telephone
ring is carried on the red and yellow wires" and "when you pick up,
the yellow wire is disconnected and the voice is carried on the red
and green" or some such.

Has there ever been a time when the CO loop to the customer was
carried on three wires?  I have many antique phones and even *they*
work on two-wire systems (albeit they called it L1 and L2 then).  And
please, don't anyone chide me because the first Strowger systems
worked on five-wire (yes, five-wire) systems :-)


Gabe Wiener - Columbia Univ.  [e-mail]
N2GPZ in ham radio circles    72355,1226 on CI$


[Moderator's Note: It was thought in the past that a phone should be
grounded for best service, user protection, etc ... and frequently the
yellow wire served this purpose. Often times it provided the ground
for the bell which is higher voltage than the rest of the connection.
Now the yellow and black wires are most commonly used for the second
line in a two (or more) line installation.    PAT]

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

Subject: Information Wanted: Toryo
From: [e-mail] (Ray Normandeau)
Date: 24 Aug 92 03:02:00 GMT
Organization: Invention Factory's BBS - New York City, NY - 212-274-1243v.32bis
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Ray Normandeau)


I have a two line residential phone with brand of Toryo.  Last I heard
the company was out of business.  DAK I think had bought the last of
the stock of the two line models.  So ... if you have trouble tracking
down company, now you know why.

The phones also have the A B C D buttons.


[e-mail]

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

Date: Sun, 23 Aug 92 06:55:39 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Dave Niebuhr)
Subject: Baby Bells and States


I'm curious about who made the decision as to which Baby-Bell would be
assigned to serve what states (excluding the non-RBOCs of course).  It
seems that some cover only a few states while others like USWest cover
many.  Would this be based on the population at the time?


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

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

From: David Link <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: FAXes Over Internet
Date: 23 Aug 92 10:38:37 EDT
Organization: Lenoir-Rhyne College, Hickory, NC


Does anyone know if it is possible to send FAXes over the Internet
using TCP/IP?  If it can be done what hardware/software would be
needed, how much would it cost, and who sells it?  Thanks for any
information.


David J. Link           [e-mail]
Lenoir-Rhyne College    Hickory, NC  28603 (USA)

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

From: [e-mail] (Irving_Wolfe)
Subject: ANI Long Distance Service: Okay or Beware?
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Happy Man Corp., Vashon Island, WA 98070-7399
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 14:31:05 GMT


I've been approached by a company called ANI (through a man in Chicago
who apparently is a personal salesman for them, operating out of his
own space) to change my business long distance service to ANI.  He
claims that AT&T would still be carrying the calls but that I'd save
20% or so (on a $250 or so long distance bill) by using them instead.

Does anyone know these guys?  Are they okay?

Does what they said make sense?  Why would AT&T carry my calls for
20% below its own ProWatts rates through them?

What's the catch?


[e-mail]      Happy Man Corp.  206/463-9399 x101
4410 SW Pt. Robinson Rd., Vashon Island, WA  98070-7399   fax x108
We publish SOLID VALUE for the intelligent investor.   NextMail OK
Info free; sample $20.  Send POSTAL addrs: [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: There is no catch. Assuming they are otherwise
legitimate, they do what they say. AT&T carries the traffic and
handles the billing for them at the quoted rates under what is known
as Tariff 12. A message earlier today discusses Tariff 12 in some
detail. Look through earlier messages in the past several hours for
details on this. ANI makes its money through a fee they charge you.  PAT]

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

Date: Sun, 23 Aug 92 16:47 GMT
From: HOLDREGE_MP <[e-mail]>
Subject: GTE California Changes


John Higdon can no longer complain about the incompetant GTE reps in
Thousand Oaks, CA. He soon will be able to complain about the
incompetant GTE reps in North Carolina, Florida, and Texas.

Excerpts from 8/19 {Los Angeles Times}:

GTE California, the state's second-largest telephone company, plans to
close the LA area facilities and transfer as many as 400 jobs out of
state, union officials said Tuesday.

GTE officials confirmed plans to close the company's Norwalk and
Thousand Oaks long-distance access centers, which employ 255 people.

A GTE spokeman said that the job transfers are a part of a continuing
effort to consolidate operations at company facilities in Texas, North
Carolina and Florida, and to automate jobs now performed by humans.

The company is also considering closing its Long Beach network
operations monitoring center, which could imperil another 160 jobs.

While I can't blame any business from wanting to leave California,
what with the crazy laws, high insurance and benefits corruption, I am
upset that our phone company is pulling out.

Is is especially upsetting that the Network Operations Monitoring
center is leaving. The center, which opened only six months ago, was
responsible for alerting technicians to problems. Who is going to do
this now? Computers in Texas?


Matt Holdrege  [e-mail]  [e-mail]  714-229-2518


[Moderator's Note: I'd like you to know a great deal of Illinois
Bell's monitoring of its Chicago area facilities during off hours is
done from Springfield, IL a couple hundred miles away. There are very
definite disadvantages: after all, how do you think that terrible fire
we had in 1988 got so far out of control? A technician in Springfield
got the alarm but decided to insert his own judgment from afar over
that of someone locally who might have made a difference in the time
it took for the Fire Department to arrive. Good luck, Californians!  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Timothy Murphy)
Subject: Please Help Absolute Beginner
Organization: Dept. of Maths, Trinity College, Dublin, Ireland.
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 17:32:47 GMT


My apologies for intruding on esoteric discussions of ISDN, X400, etc
 -- but I have a very elementary question, and I should be most
grateful for an answer to it.

I have two phones, one brand new (Northern Telecom) and one possibly
antique.  (My wife thinks it beautiful, and wants to use it.)

The new phone has six wires attached to it, variously coloured.  The
old phone has eight such wires.

My question is -- is there any sort of standard meaning to these
colours?  eg; does red always mean the same thing, and if so what?

I've managed to get the new phone working on our public system, after
some experimentation.

The system here only uses two wires - so there were only 30 = 6 x 5
possible combinations.  But I'm still interested to know what the
other four wires are for.  Are they vestigial relics, like the
appendix?

I've made no progress with the eight-wire antique.  I am wondering if
some of the wires have to be connected together -- in which case it is
hard enough to calculate the number of possibilities, let alone go
through them.

Is there an FAQ for people like me?  If so, please accept my apologies
for creating noise on your line.  If not, is there any simple book on
the subject?

The problem here is that until recently one was not allowed -- or I
should say supposed -- to connect one's own apparatus to the public
network.  So little or no public information was made available.

Any help gratefully received.


Timothy Murphy     e-mail: [e-mail]   tel: [phone]
s-mail: School of Mathematics, Trinity College, Dublin 2, Ireland


[Moderator's Note: In the USA at least, the colors go like this:
red/green for line one; yellow/black for line two if the phone is so
equipped; blue/white for some supplementary feature such as an
intercom signal, etc.  Usually only two-line phones have the blue/
white pair. Was your Northern Telecom phone built for use here in the
USA or specifically constructed for use in Ireland? It matters.  PAT]

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

Date: Sun, 23 Aug 92 13:22:31 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Jordan Hayes)
Subject: Cellular Phone Usage From Airplanes
Organization: Investment Management Services Inc., NYC


Someone here wants to use a Cellblazer while commuting by aircraft,
but I remember hearing something about an FCC rule prohibiting the use
of cellular phones while airborne.  My guess is that it would make the
cells that are now equidistant from the phone go crazy trying to
figure out who has the best signal.  What about tall buildings?  What
about hilltops?  Does anyone have the real scoop on this, and (more
importantly), have any good ideas about how to "stay connected" using
SL/IP or PPP while in the air?


jordan


[Moderator's Note: We go 'round and 'round on this from time to time
here and perhaps some readers will send the appropriate past messages
direct to Jordan or correspond with him in email. Thanks.   PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #659
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa28385;
          25 Aug 92 1:46 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA19104
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 24 Aug 1992 23:35:57 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA26836
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 24 Aug 1992 23:35:43 -0500
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 1992 23:35:43 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #660

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 24 Aug 92 23:35:30 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 660

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Dialback Management (Bob Ackley)
    Panel Nostalgia(?) and Trivia (Jack Winslade)
    Call Forwarding/CLASS Version (cinpmx!cdid![e-mail])
    A Wierd Thing Happened on a Call to CA (Aninda V. Dasgupta)
    AT&T and Sandia (Jim Haynes)
    PacBell Message Center Woes (Jeff Stieglitz)
    NEED: Data/Protocol Analyzer (Richard B. August)
    Celluar Payphone (David Brightbill)
    911 on Jerry Springer Show (Jeff Garber)
    Interfacing Modem to Telephone System (Eric Jacksch)
    Looking For DID Call Transfer Device (Paul Robinson)
    Help With ROLM REDWOOD Flashing LOCK on WYSE (Robert Patrick MacKin)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sun, 23 Aug 92 03:05:03 CST
From: [e-mail] (Bob Ackley)
Subject: Dialback Management
Reply-To: [e-mail]


In a message of <29 Jul 92 07:49:39>, Richard Nash (11:30102/2) writes:

> [e-mail] (Peter Alexander Merel) writes:

>> 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.

> [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]

        Our mainframe at work has a very large (bigger than a
refrigerator) box containing eight or nine modems (and a LOT of air);
one is the dial-in line, the remaining modems are outbound only.  The
user dials in and identifies him/herself to Gandalf (they make the box
and contents, so that's what I call it), which then hangs up and dials
the user back on one of the outbound lines.  There are at least thirty
empty modem card slots, so I suspect that we will be adding more
lines.  If anyone is looking for something that big, I think Gandalf
is located in or near St. Louis.  Pat's solution is undoubtedly MUCH
less expensive.


msged 1.99S ZTC   Bob's Soapbox, Plattsmouth Ne  (1:285/1.7)

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

Date: Sun, 23 Aug 92 22:02:38 CST
From: [e-mail] (Jack Winslade)
Subject: Panel Nostalgia(?) and Trivia
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: DRBBS Technical BBS, Omaha


In a message dated 19-AUG-92, John Higdon writes:

> [e-mail] (Steven S. Brack) writes:

>> I have, over the year I've read the Digest, become fairly telecom
>> literate.  Recently, people have talked about a type of swiotch called
>> a "panel" switch.  Could someone tell me what panel is, and how it
>> differs from crossbar or SxS switches?

> The panel switch was (for its day) an amazing monstrosity. It was also
> the first major attempt at "common control", where a pool of
> components would complete calls on a non-dedicated basis. Unlike the
> SXS switch which operated in lock-step with the pulses from the
> subscriber's dial ...

As I've mentioned before, I've been fascinated by the panel switches
ever since being <quote> served <end quote> by a quirky one and
eventually seeing one in action.

The first full-scale deployment of the panel switch was on the
ATLantic office here in Omaha in 1921.  A while ago I posted a 1921
newspaper article about it.  It may be in the archives (Pat ??) but if
not, if anyone wants a copy, mail me and I'll send it.  The original
installation lived until the mid 1960's when it was replaced with a
5-Xbar.  (Note that it lived 40+ years -- I'm now seeing mid 1970's 1A
ESS machines being trashed in favor of later models.)

The last panel switch in Omaha was replaced in 1973, but I know there
were a few left in Manhattan in the late 70's.

The action of a panel switch can best be described as monkeys sliding
up and down on flagpoles.  The one I saw was a real Rube Goldberg
contraption of sliding rods and cork-covered rollers.

Pat's 'cannonball' comment brought back a memory I had far back, and
that was the distinctive 'rattle' during call setup (and sometimes
during the call itself) which was plainly audible.  Add to this a very
scratchy sound of ringback and busy tone (which John explained a while
back) and you will see it was not the clean, quiet switch that we're
spoiled with now.  (And BTW, that was a very loud and obnoxious BAAAAA
BAAAAAA BAAAAAA busy tone, not the pleasant tweet-tweet-tweet we hear
now.  It really rubbed your nose into the fact that you had reached a
busy number.)  The quirk I remember most was that when dialing a busy
number, one, maybe two cycles of ringback tone would frequently be
heard, followed by scratches and clicks, and then the raucous BAAAAA
BAAAAA busy tone.


Good day.   JSW   Ybbat (DRBBS) 8.9 v. 3.14 r.1  402-896-3537  (1:285/666.0)

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

From: cinpmx!cdid![e-mail]
Date: 24 Aug 92 22:08:55 GMT
Subject: Call Forwarding/CLASS Version (was Call Return vs. Call Forward)


[description of feature interaction between call forwarding/call return]

> Unfortunatly, the telephone that you have forwarded your calls to will
> get no indication that you were an intermediary.  In effect, the line
> that you made the nuisance call to will appear to be calling directly
> to the line you have your phone forwarded to.

It would seem to me that, in a CLASS environment, the call forwarding
implementation described above is 'buggy', since the 'dialed number'
is not signaled to the users of the forwarded-to 'terminating' phone.

Since distinctive ringing is available in CLASS environments, one
could reserver a special cadence for 'call forwarding' calls.  I'd
also expect that the 'mother-in-law' bits in the CLID format could be
used to indicate the actual dialed number.  (my Motorola CLID chip
spec sheet labels an unused sequence of bits in the message as
'mother-in-law' bits, presmuably for the situation where someone is
calling your mother in law, who has a distinctive ringing number
terminating at your instrument.)

What would YOU suggest?

disclaimer: I don't design telephone features for a living.  It's more of
a hobby, I suppose.

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

From: [e-mail] (Aninda V. Dasgupta)
Subject: A Wierd Thing Happened on a Call to CA
Organization: Philips Laboratories, Briarcliff, New York
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 19:37:40 GMT


A wierd thing happened today when I was talking on the phone (from
Westchester County, NY) to San Diego County, CA. As my friend and I
were speaking, suddenly I heard another conversation break into our
line, and my friend's voice disappeared.  I could clearly hear every
word being said in this other conversation. It appeared the
participants of this other conversation were recently connected 'coz
they were exchanging "hellos". I hung up, waited two minutes and
dialed my friend's number again. The phone rang and I was reconnected
to this ongoing conversation. I finally asked the AT&T operator to
dial the number and at the first attempt she got a busy tone and on
trying again got through to my friend.  My friend reported that
everytime she tried to get an outside line she too got connected to
this other conversation.  Neither my friend, nor I were on a cordless
phone. (She did mention later that her cordless phone has run out of
batteries.)

Any clues as to what was going on?  Was this a switch malfunction
(crosstalk?) and if so, which switch might have been the culprit,
the CO on my end, or the one in CA or something in between?  What
are the likely causes of such a malfunction? Bad programming, system
overload? Again, how did the AT&T operator manage to get through to my
friend's number?

Just curious ...


Aninda DasGupta   ([e-mail])
Ph : [phone]    Fax : [phone]
Philips (No, we don't produce Gas, we make lightbulbs) Labs.
345 Scarborough Road\n  Briarcliff Manor\n NY 10510

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

From: [e-mail] (Jim Haynes)
Subject: AT&T and Sandia
Date: 23 Aug 1992 21:58:51 GMT
Organization: University of California; Santa Cruz


I see by the news that after September, 1993 AT&T will no longer serve
as the management and operating contractor for the Dept. of Energy
Sandia National Laboratories.  Does anybody know what's happening?  Is
this AT&Ts decision, or DOE's decision, or is the lab being closed, or
what?


[e-mail]    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Jeff Stieglitz)
Subject: PacBell Message Center Woes
Organization: University of California, Irvine
Date: 23 Aug 92 00:17:55 GMT


Just what is the problem with Pacific Bell's Message Center?

Today I called my home phone number after six rings I heard: "We are
having technical difficulties, please call again later" I hung up and
called right back.  This time I heard a tinny, machine-synthesized
voice:

"I'm sorry, due to technical difficulties, Pacific Bell and the
Message Center are unable to take your call.  Please <fast busy>.

I'm interested in knowing the details of what is going wrong with the
Message Center.  This marks the fifth time I was unable to leave and
retrieve messages, not to mention the numerous pre-announced outages.

Someone asked this before in the Digest, but there was no reply, so
someone please tell me: What are the technical reasons for the recent
outages?


Jeff Stieglitz   [e-mail]

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

Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 13:02:38 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Richard B. August)
Subject: Need: Data/Protocol Analyzer


We are currently looking for a good-better-best Data/Protocol
analyzer.  It must be portable (preferably PORTABLE vs. LUGGABLE).  If
there is one available that fits in your briefcase, and leaves room
for other stuff, that would be the one.  Want all the "bells and
whistles" we can get due to the fact that we don't know just what type
of problems we will encounter in the 'field'.

Price is not of extreme importance, but we don't want to "break the
bank" ( we need about ten of these things).

Please mail your responses to me directly at:
[e-mail]
and I will post results of the responses to the group.
Thenks in advance.


Richard B. August    [e-mail]

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

Date: Sun, 23 Aug 92 21:44:43 -0400
From: David Brightbill <[e-mail]>
Subject: Celluar Payphone


I received an advertisement today that I thought the readers of the
Digest might be interested in.

TCP - Telular Cellular Payphone

Available in a variety of enclosure types, the TCP is equipped with a
microprocessor based call control network that provides the latest in
intelligent payphone features and functionality.  The TCP can be
configuted to handle coins, tokens, credit cards and/or debit cards.

For more information ... call Telular at +1.708.256.8000

Disclaimer: I have no connection with Telular other than being a, thus
far, satisfied customer.


David Brightbill

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

Date: Mon, 24 Aug 92 05:01 GMT
From: Jeff Garber <[e-mail]>
Subject: 911 on Jerry Springer Show


On The Jerry Springer Show (Aug 19, 11 A.M., KCAL Channel 9, Los
Angeles) the topic was 911.  Apparently, someone in the Cincinnati
area called 911 from a cellular phone because he believed a man was
having a heart attack on the side of the road. The 911 operator told
him that they cannot accept calls from cellular phones! They actually
played the recording from the call on the show, so I heard it with my
own ears. The man died, although he was not suffering from a heart
attack, and it was determined that he would have died even without the
delay in reaching help. I never heard what he actually died of.

What good is it to have a phone with you if you can't use it in an
emergency? I've used L.A. Cellular to call 911 many times and have had
no problems like this. The call goes first to the California Highway
Patrol, and if it's not a CHP type problem, they transfer you
immediately to the emergency agency that handles the area and type of
problem you are reporting.

The show also had a woman who dialed 0 (instead of 911) when her
daughter was being assaulted. Evidently it took awhile to get the
information to the right place. When the police got there, they found
the victim dead.

They had a 911 operator on the show complaining about people calling
911 for non-emergency calls. No one mentioned that callers to police
stations, etc. are often told to report their non-emergency problem to
911.


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

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

Subject: Interfacing Modem to Telephone System
From: [e-mail] (Eric Jacksch)
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 20:36:26 -0400
Organization: Insomniacs' Guild, Toronto, Ontario, Canada


At work I have a Harris Lanier electronic key set on my desk (the ones
with a number of lines, intercom, etc ... don't know why as I will
only talk on one line at a time, but that's besides the point ...) The
wall jack is a standard four conductor modular jack.

I would like to connect a modem so that I can make outbound calls.
Are these phones digital, or are two of the four wires a "normal" ring
and tip phone circuit?  Any suggestions?

Also, is it possible to build an interface to allow connection via the
handset cord?


Thanks,

Eric Jacksch, [e-mail]

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

Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 92  18:37:45 EDT
Subject: Looking for DID Call Transfer Device


I would like to find out if there is an inexpensive method to process
a DID trunk line for small volumes, either using a small device or a
device plugged into a Personal Computer.  What I'm looking for is
something to handle, say, five DID lines and as many phone numbers as I
want to put in.

I'm thinking of something which would sell for about $250 which would
transfer a call depending on the number passed to the device.  This
may not currently be capable but I'd like to find out if something is
possible and what it would cost.

I hope I can find something not too expensive, as I know there is a
demand for this type of device if it was available.  The reason I'm
thinking about it is to allow me to assign different phone numbers.  I
know there are some devices available but I don't know what they cost.

In the alternative, what does this require to do this, i.e. to
generate a ring signal and generate a ring voltage to a telephone, and
stop both when it is answered, as well as reversing the polarity when
it is (so the caller is charged).  Sounds like it's more complicated
than I think it is.  I'm not so interested in making outgoing calls,
it's more like what is used for a Voice Mail system or something
similar.

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

From: [e-mail] (Robert Patrick MacKin)
Subject: Help With ROLM REDWOOD Flashing LOCK on WYSE
Organization: University of Western Ontario
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 23:39:27 GMT


I can get in from a 400 set on the admin port.  But if I try to use
the WYSE-50 plugged into the back, I get the title greeting, asked for
the password, and it even echoes the *****, but it then clears the
screen, flashes LOCK on the top line, and you are left with a hung
terminal.  I know the password is correct because I can get in from
the 400 set.  It is a single cabinet ROLM Redwood running release 3.0
PBX lib card.  H E L P !!!!!  ( please... )


[e-mail] (Robert Patrick MacKin)
Western Business School  --  London, Ontario


[Moderator's Note: It is apparently sending a Control-O or an ESC #
which are the two things which are used to lock the Wyse keyboard from
the remote site.  If you use the ADDS-VP mode then a Control-D or ESC
5 would cause the lockup.  Just hit the unshifted Set Up key to
release the lock and remove the message.  PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #660
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa21853;
          26 Aug 92 1:26 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA30538
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 25 Aug 1992 23:10:18 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA30351
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 25 Aug 1992 23:10:06 -0500
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 23:10:06 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #661

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 25 Aug 92 23:10:10 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 661

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Foreign Calling Cards (David R. Zinkin)
    Where Can I Get TL1 Software Package? (Qian Li)
    Automated Hate Calls in Minnesota (Brett G. Person)
    Pulse Dialing Still Useful (Bennett E. Todd)
    GSM Adaptative Time Alignment (Jean-Louis Fuccellaro)
    800 Portability (Bill Huttig)
    Is RJ45 With Notch Same as RJ45 Without Notch? (Phill St. Louis)
    San Francisco Area Exchange Names (Daniel M. Rosenberg)
    Standardized Exchange Names (Leonard Erickson)
    Who Offers National Alphanumeric Paging Service? (Brent Chapman)
    GTE Fixes My DISA (One Year Late) (Jim Gottlieb)
    Monitoring of Broadcasts (Adrienne Voorhis)
    Archive Access (Paul Lutt)
    Polite Thief (Jerry Leichter)
    Asking Something About SLC-120 From AT&T (Yee-Lee Shyong)
    Spread Spectrum (Lesley S. Saitowitz)
    "Congestion in My Area" (Gabe M. Wiener)
    PicturePhone Power Pinout? (Bill Romanowski)
    Anti-Digital Dialing (was Deterioration of POTS) (Mark Brader)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (David R. Zinkin)
Subject: Foreign Calling Cards
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio, (USA)
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 92 19:41:01 GMT


Does anyone know how to get a calling card from a telephone company in
another country?  A friend of mine would like to get a calling card
from Japan in the hope that using it would be cheaper than dialing
directly.

I know that AT&T offers "Country Direct" for non-US citizens who have
calling cards from home; can US citizens get these cards and use them
in the same way?

Please respond by mail as my time for reading this group is decreasing
rapidly.

Thanks,


David R. Zinkin ([e-mail])
Rochester General Hospital Radiology Dept.
SUNY Buffalo School of Medicine Class of '96
  (The sesquicentennial graduating class!)

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

From: QIAN Li <[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 15:27:33 -0400
Subject: Where Can I Get TL1 Software Package?
Organization: University of Toronto, Engineering Computing Facility


I am going to buy a TL1 software package which can be stored in PC.
If you have any information about this package, please send a E-mail
to me: [e-mail].

Thank you for your information.

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

From: plains![e-mail] (Brett G Person)
Subject: Automated hate Calls in Minnesota
Date: 25 Aug 92 01:41:24 GMT
Organization: North Dakota Higher Education Computing Network


I was watching the lcoal news last night and saw a strange news report
from Minneapolis.

   Apparently, people there I getting alls from a new kind of
telemarketer slime encourageing them to hate minorites, Jews,etc.  It
sounded like the phone calls were comming from an automated dialer
that plays a tape encouraging violence. The State Attourney General's
office says that this doesn't violate any laws.

Any comments? Have any of you gotten phome calls like this?


Brett Person   Guest Account  North Dakota State University
[e-mail] || [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Bennett E. Todd)
Subject: Pulse Dialing Still Useful
Date: 26 Aug 92 02:36:49 GMT
Organization: Integration - Salomon Inc., NY


I decided not to pay extra for DTMF dialing, so the phone company has
it blocked on my line. I've found a use for this setup: I've got a
regular trimline phone, and a cordless, both switchable. I use the
regular phone for placing calls; I only want the cordless for
receiving them. Living in an apartment in NYC it seems quite possible
that someone within range would have a compatible phone -- but by
switching the base unit of the cordless to tone dialing, I can make
the cordless phone effectively incoming-only, so nobody else can use
their cordless handset to place calls on my phone line.


Bennett    [e-mail]

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

From: Jean-Louis Fuccellaro <[e-mail]>
Subject: GSM Adaptative Time Alignment
Reply-To: Jean-Louis Fuccellaro <[e-mail]>
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Laboratories
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 92 12:30:05 GMT


According to what I understood :

GSM uses adaptative time alignent to determine the transmit timing
advance required at the MS to receive bursts in their correct
timeslots.Timing advance can have 64 levels.

If two users (MS) have the same carrier (they have one timeslot from
the same frame) are in the same place, the timeslots will arrive at
the same time in the BS. Does the BS change the carrier of one of them
or do I miss something?

Thanks for answer.


Jean-Louis Fuccellaro

Post :  HP Labs        E-mail: [e-mail]
Filton Road  phone : (44) / (0) 272 228 122
Stoke Gifford    Bristol BS12 6QZ   U.K.

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

From: [e-mail] ( Bill Huttig)
Subject: 800 Portability
Date: 25 Aug 92 14:48:34 GMT
Organization: Florida Institute of Technology, Melbourne USA


I was just wondering about the 800 portability area ... will this mean
that all 800 exchanges will be come portable at once? or will they be
phased in?

Will every possible exchange become avaiable?

Will the residential user be able to switch carriers just as easily as
a large company?

Who will control the number space and be reponsiable for routing
problems?

I assume that the customer could have different carriers at different
times of day and location along with multi termination points ... (I
would hate to have to write that database).


Bill

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

Date: Tue, 25 Aug 92 10:59:20 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Phill St. Louis)
Subject: Is RJ45 With Notch Same as RJ45 Without Notch?
Organization: University of British Columbia, Vancouver, B.C., Canada


The Subject says it all.

I would like to ensure that these RJ45 wall jacks with a notch will
work.  (I am pretty sure that they are Digital Equipment Corp. (DEC)
RJ45 wall jacks that have been installed in some new offices.)  Will
these work with the standard RJ45 (without notch) plugs?


Thanks,

Phill

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

From: [e-mail] (Daniel M. Rosenberg)
Subject: San Francisco Area Exchange Names
Date: 25 Aug 1992 18:42:22 GMT
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc.
Reply-To: [e-mail]


Does anyone happen to have a phone book sufficiently old enough to
list the old-style exchange names in the South Bay?

The one I know in Palo Alto was for the main 32x exchange, known as
"DAvenport," from an old sign. Davenport? What's that have to do with
Palo Alto? Did the phone company just make that up?

And did the 424's, 85x's, 497's and so forth come from anywhere?
Where could I find out?

Any hints appreciated.


Daniel M. Rosenberg        [e-mail]   [phone]
Opinions expressed above aren't Sun's.

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

From: [e-mail] (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Standardized Exchange Names
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: SCN Research/Qic Laboratories of Tigard, Oregon.
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 13:49:35 GMT


> [Moderator's Note:  Another Hyde Park exchange is FAIrfax (324),
> which it is said was named in honor of a University of Chicago
> trustee, Fairfax Cone.

I think "FAirfax may be a "standard" name of some sort, as the 32x
exchanges in Spokane used that in the 60's.


Leonard Erickson              [e-mail]
CIS: [70465,203]             [e-mail]
FIDO:   1:105/51     [e-mail]
(The CIS & Fido addresses are preferred)

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

From: [e-mail] (Brent Chapman)
Subject: Who Offers National Alphanumeric Paging Service?
Organization: Great Circle Associates; Mountain View, CA
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 01:47:52 GMT


What companies offer national alphanumeric paging service?  I'm aware
of MobileComm, but I don't know how to contact them for more info.  I
know SkyPage offers national numeric service, but what about
alphanumeric service?

Can anybody provide me with contact info for MobileComm or SkyPage, or
other companies that offer national alphanumeric paging?


Thanks!

Brent Chapman           Great Circle Associates
[e-mail]   1057 West Dana Street
[phone]         Mountain View, CA  94041

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

From: [e-mail] (Jim Gottlieb)
Subject: GTE Fixes My DISA (One Year Late)
Organization: Info Connections, West Los Angeles
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 06:19:16 GMT


I am pleased to announce that GTE has finally fixed my DISA, over one
year after it stopped working.

My Direct Inward System Access lets me access my home centrex system
when I'm out of the house.  Over one year ago it stopped accepting my
security code.  Since then, calls to repair service have resulted in
nothing but the problem being "cleared", or worse, being told that my
DISA number does not belong to me so there is no way they can take a
report.  As recently as last week, GTE dispatched technicians to my
home (twice) to try to fix the problem (good diagnosis, GTE!).

After enlisting help from the business office, I was finally able to
convince someone at repair that I actually do subscribe to this
service, it used to work, it doesn't any more, and it's a software
problem so stop sending people to my house.

The message finally got through and they fixed it on Friday.  While I
had their attention, I asked if they could please change my security
code from 1234 to something a bit more secure.  "Sorry, it's
hardcoded" was the reply.  I don't believe it.  And I am surely not
going to pay for any calls when someone discovers this.

GTE ... I'm still not impressed.


Jim Gottlieb
E-Mail: <[e-mail]> or <attmail!denwa!jimmy>
V-Mail: [phone]   Fax: [phone]   Voice: 824-5454

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

From: Adrienne Voorhis <[e-mail]>
Subject: Monitoring of Broadcasts
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 92 8:18:08 EDT


[e-mail] (Jon Gefaell)> writes:

> It is illegal to disclose anything heard on any Radio Frequency in any
> mode other than public broadcast, Amateur Radio, and that's about it.
> This means that you can own a scanner and listen to the police, even
> covert operations (I listen to very interesting operations from time
> to time) but you _may not_ disclose those communications to any one
> else.

     Could someone please explain how the federal government can allow
you to legally monitor such broadcasts but can stop you from
disclosing what was heard?  I'm not a First Amendment lawyer, but it
would seem to me that if you lawfully became aware of information,
that the government could not muzzle you from discussing what you have
legitimately obtained.

     What if a reporter, for instance, was listening to a police band
radio and heard a newsworthy event?  Could he or she legitimately be
punished for reporting this information?


Adrienne Voorhis    Albert Einstein College of Medicine
Bronx, New York     Just MY opinion...

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

Date: Tue, 25 Aug 92 13:51:49 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Paul Lutt)
Subject: Archive Access


I seem to have misplaced my notes on how to access the Telecom
Archive.  I am interested in getting a copy of the stuff dealing with
the IXO/TAP protocol.  I do not have direct Internet access, so an
email interface would be required.  Could you please send me a copy of
the directions on how to use the archive?  Thanks.


Paul Lutt    Domain: [e-mail]  Voice: [phone]
UUCP:    uunet!fluke!pwl
Snail:    John Fluke Mfg. Co. / P.O. Box 9090 / Everett, WA 98206-9090


[Moderator's Note: This question comes up frequently. The Telecom
Archives can be accessed using anonymous ftp from lcs.mit.edu. When on
line, then cd telecom-archives.  Various email > ftp services are
available and instructions can be obtained from the operators.   PAT]

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

Date: Tue, 25 Aug 92 08:49:52 EDT
From: Jerry Leichter <[e-mail]>
Subject: Polite Thief


Yesterday, I tried to place a long-distance credit card call using a
pay phone in Piscataway, New Jersey.  LD service was from some company
like "American Network Services".  Needless to say, I dialed 10288
first.

The response was interesting: A ring, then a polite recorded female
voice, sounding just every official telco message you ever heard (but
without any SIT) told me that "it is not necessary to dial a
long-distance access code" with the number I was dialing.  Well, of
course, it wasn't NECESSARY - I just had to be willing to pay whatever
exorbitant rates the AOS would charge.

No combination I tried would let me select AT&T; either the sequence
was (legitimately) declared invalid, or I got the "not necessary"
message.

Most people, having learned about 10288 from AT&T's ads, would surely
have responded to the "not necessary" message by trying again, WITHOUT
the "optional" carrier selection.

And this is right in the heart of AT&T land: Fire a gun in any
direction and you'll probably hit an AT&T facility!

I seem to recall that AT&T has a number at which they want nonsense
like this reported, but I can't remember it.  Anyone?


Jerry

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

Date: Tue, 25 Aug 92 08:50:37 CST
From: [e-mail] (Yee-Lee Shyong)
Subject: Asking Something About SLC-120 From AT&T


Does anybody out there know the architectures or specifications anout
SLC-120 Network Access System from AT&T?  How the Automatic Protection
Switching Unit work? (E1 Trunk).

Thanks in advance !


Apollo

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

From: [e-mail] (SAITOWITZ L S)
Subject: Spread Spectrum
Organization: Wits Electrical Engineering (Undergrads).
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 13:56:54 GMT


Hi my name's Lesley. I'm looking for information on spread spectrum
techniques. Specifically what are the bandwidth versus capacity trade
offs?  What are the power/distance versus error rates say on open wire
or in fibre optics (preferably both)? Is anybody familiar with this
area? I'm doing a pie in the sky design, but would just like to gauge
how way off or near the mark I am. Please give references if available.


Thanks,

Lesley :)

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

From: [e-mail] (Gabe M Wiener)
Subject: "Congestion in My Area"
Organization: Columbia University
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 23:49:20 GMT


I'm in the process of installing two more NY Tel lines into my place,
and am running into a little technical hitch that I'm not quite
grasping.

The lineman came out and punched the new lines into the RJ-21X that
feeds my system.  he then went down to the (antiquated wooden)
breakout box in the basement to get it onto a pair back to the CO.  No
dice.  He couldn't find one.  So they apparently had to move somee
stuff around, bring it over from another building, etc.  Anyway, today
at 5:00 I plugged into the RJ21X with a test set, and ... ah ha!  No
dialtone, but there was talk power.  My DTMF pad worked, I had
sidetone, but still no dialtone.  Progress, I thought.  Four days
late, but at least some progress.

Anyway, I called the "president's help line" (misnomer, since they've
never been too helpful), and after waiting on hold for several minutes
while the "executive representative" apparently called the CO or
whatever, I was told that there is "congestion" in my area and they
don't have enough pairs and I'd have to wait until their engineering
dept. figures out a way to bring the service in.

Now wait a sec, I thought.  What am I missing here?  I've got power on
the line.  If it isn't coming from the switch, then where the heck is
it coming from?

But more to the point, is there any means of, shall we say, getting
them to take to the matter a little more aggressively?


Gabe Wiener - Columbia Univ.  [e-mail]
N2GPZ in ham radio circles    72355,1226 on CI$

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

From: [e-mail] (Bill Romanowski)
Subject: PicturePhone Power Pinout?
Date: 25 Aug 92 17:33:04 GMT
Organization: CERFnet


I have a pair of PicturePhones and want to provide them with correct
power. I know they can't be used as phones ... the have what appears
to be two video in/out bnc's and I want to connect them as a "video
mirror" ...

The units have no serial or product id's. Power looks like it comes in
on a pin header (with seven pins).

They are heavy aluminum boxes,camera on the top, landscape oriented
monitor on the bottom. A small WE (bell in a circle) logo on the front
on a greenish gray plastic bezel.

They'll be cool if I can get 'em up.

Any ideas out there?


bill romanowski   vp of antiuquities   prairie research

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

Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 09:25:00 -0400
From: [e-mail] (Mark Brader)
Subject: Anti-Digital Dialing (was: Deterioration of POTS)
Organization: SoftQuad Inc., Toronto, Canada


> Two billion, one hundred fifty-six million, six hundred forty five
> thousand, four hundred thirty two" (last n digits changed to protect
> my mother who still lives in (now) twelve billion, one hundred fifty


Oh, come now.  Since the "ten billion" digit isn't really part of the
phone number, this must be international format.  But in that case it
should be:

    POSITIVE twelve billion, one hundred fifty...


Mark Brader, SoftQuad Inc., Toronto, utzoo!sq!msb, [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #661
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa24199;
          26 Aug 92 2:24 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA23636
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 26 Aug 1992 00:20:53 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA04178
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 26 Aug 1992 00:20:38 -0500
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 00:20:38 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #662

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 26 Aug 92 00:20:40 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 662

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    AT&T Tackles Hurricane Disaster! (William Degnan)
    Help Needed: Programming Info on an EXTROM HMS-612EE (Robert P. MacKin)
    Staying Up All Night - Or All Day (Lars Poulsen)
    How Can I Splice Telephone Wires Without an Overkill? (Shailesh M. Potnis)
    Need Fiber Optic System (Wayne Jones)
    How Are Intercept Codes Interpreted? (John Gardiner Myers)
    Hearing Radio on the Phone (Robert Aaron Book)
    Decoding Touchtones With a PC (Robert Aaron Book)
    CWA Members Ratify AT&T Contracts (Phillip Dampier)
    CLID Format Compatibilty Question (Mike Riddle)
    Gating the Pound (was Pounding on an Octothorp) (Nigel Roberts)
    Request for Line/Trunk Emulation Boxes (Allen Barrett Ethridge)
    Newest MCI F&F Offer - Free Calls! (Bill Rubin)
    Good For a Laugh ... (Scott Fybush)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (William Degnan)
Date: 25 Aug 92  14:21:46
Subject: AT&T Tackles Hurricane Disaster!


AT&T PREPARES FOR HURRICANE ANDREW'S SECOND LANDFALL

     NEW YORK -- As Hurricane Andrew headed west this morning, so too
did a convoy of about a dozen AT&T trucks carrying an emergency crew,
portable generators and enough transmission equipment to provide
emergency long distance service to a small city.

     The trucks hold enough AT&T people and equipment to quickly
restore thousands of phone circuits anywhere along the Gulf Coast, if
needed.

     Initially stationed in Windermere, Fla., in case AT&T service was
affected by hurricane damage in southern Florida, the trucks and crew
have now moved on to Bonifay, Fla.  They stand ready to respond to any
damage that Andrew might do to AT&T's network along the Gulf Coast.
Bonifay is located about 105 miles east of Pensacola.

     AT&T long-distance calling on Monday totaled 172.1 million calls,
making it the second busiest day ever on AT&T's long distance network.
Overall calling on the network today is up 13 percent from the same
day a week ago.

     AT&T, reporting that its network has so far weathered the storm
with minimum damage to facilities, said calling into and out of
Florida was still running 300-500 percent above normal today.  Because
of local network congestion, some people may encounter delays in
completing their calls, AT&T said.

     The company said that calling to and from New Orleans was
beginning to build this morning.

     "Our network has performed superbly," said Jim Carroll, vice
president, network operations.  "And our emergency telecommunications
restoration team is ready and prepared to respond if the hurricane
hits the Gulf Coast."

     Meanwhile, to help with restoration efforts now underway in
southern Florida, AT&T is:

     -- Carrying calls between the United States and Cuba via third
countries -- Spain, Italy, Canada and the United Kingdom -- due to the
loss of an AT&T microwave radio tower in Goulds, Fla., that was part
of a radio link handling calls between the two countries.  If the
Cuban government agrees, AT&T is prepared to activate a 140-circuit
undersea cable that was installed in 1989 between West Palm Beach and
a point near Havana.

     -- In partnership with Cellular One, providing free long distance
cellular service to relief agencies in the Miami area.  McCaw
Cellular, which operates as Cellular One in Florida, has provided the
agencies with 500 phones.

     -- Moving portable generators and phone banks to areas in
southern Florida affected by hurricane damage for the use of local
residents there anxious to make long distance calls.

     -- Working with local telephone companies to help restore local
service.
                           # # #

Disclaimer: I'm just passing this along.
William Degnan,  Communications Network Solutions
-Independent Consultants in Telecommunications and Technology-
P.O. Drawer 9530       | [e-mail] | [e-mail]
Austin, TX 78766-9530  | ![e-mail]  | Voice [phone]


[Moderator's Note: My sympathies go out to the people in Homestead, FL
and surrounding communities.  Homestead is 95 percent wiped out; the
town is totally demolished. All phone service is dead there.  As usual
in these situations, AT&T the company which can't be trusted to stay
in one piece lest they treat the come-latelys unfairly is leading the
way to restoration of the telephone network. Maybe someone from MCI
and/or Sprint can write and tell us what those companies are doing to
assist the relief effort in southern Florida today, and perhaps in New
Orleans on Wednesday.  :(    PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Robert Patrick MacKin)
Subject: Help Needed: Programming Info on an EXTROM HMS-612EE
Organization: University of Western Ontario
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 16:00:42 GMT


I got the phone system at a flea market.  It works just fine, but I
want to change the programming (line ringing, toll restrict, SMDR,
etc.)  A copy of a programming manual would be appreciated.  Could
anyone help with info?  Thanks a million ...


[e-mail] (Robert Patrick MacKin)
Western Business School  --  London, Ontario

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

From: [e-mail] (Lars Poulsen)
Subject: Staying Up All Night - Or All Day
Organization: CMC Network Systems (Rockwell DCD), Santa Barbara, CA, USA
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 92 19:24:03 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> James.VanHouten@f544.
n109.z1.fidonet.org (James VanHouten) writes:

> Is there a tariff that prevents subscribers from dedicating modems
> together on POTS lines.  One of my customers has 20 auto parts stores
> that call into their parts computer every morning at 7 AM and they
> stay up until about 6 PM.  How are they getting away with this??

Until a few months ago, this GTE service area had flat rate local
calling, but now all business calls are metered. The rate is about
$0.02 / minute daytime, $0.01 / minute nighttime. Residential
subscribers have a choice between flat rate and measured local calls.
I would not be surprised to see flat rate phased out in a couple of
years.

The net result is that for a wide area of rate bands, from local to
transcontinental, it is cheaper to lease a line than to keep a call up
for more than about seven hours per day.

How common is flat rate or per call local calls anymore ?  If you will
mail me your data, I will summarize for the Digest.

Sample:
                    Line,        daytime    night
City or suburb, ST Co    NPA-PFX    Plan    Monthly    Percall    Per min    Per min
Santa Barbara, CA GTE    805-682    Bus    $35.00    $0.02    $0.02    $0.01
Santa Barbara, CA GTE    805-682    Resflat    $12.00    $0.00    $0.00    $0.00


Lars Poulsen, SMTS Software Engineer    Internet E-mail: [e-mail]
CMC Network Products / Rockwell Int'l    Telephone: [phone]
Santa Barbara, CA 93117-3083        TeleFAX:   [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Shailesh M. Potnis)
Subject: How Can I Splice Telephone Wires Without an Overkill?
Date: 25 Aug 92 20:01:24 GMT


    I am in the process of installing a modem and a few extra
telephone outlets.  I have a few pieces of indoor telephone cable
which I used to use at my previous address.  If I have to splice them
together to run a longer distance, I have to add two male connectors
at each splicing ends and thn use an inline female connector to
connect the male connectors.  I see this grossly redundant.  Is there
a terminal or connector which splices two ends of a telephone cable to
make a longer one?  Essentially what I would emagine would be similar
to the two male connectors fused together.

    All comments and suggestions are highly appreciated.

    Thanks in advance.


Shailesh Potnis, Associate    |Concurrent Engineering Research
Member of Technical Staff    |Center, West Virginia University

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

Date: Tue, 25 Aug 92 15:01:43 MDT
From: [e-mail] (Wayne Jones)
Subject: Need Fiber Optic System


Here I am again with another request for help.  I previously asked for
information on the Mitel SX-200 digital pbx.  Now I am wondering if
this is our best option.  Perhaps someone out there could help steer.

We have a small campus environment (8 buildings, 120 phones) situated
on top of a mountain (9200 ft. elev.) and lightning is our major
concern.  We've lost our AT&T pbx several times to the tune of $10k
in repairs.  I have already installed a fiber backbone for the
computer network, video distribution, etc., and now I am looking for a
way to put telephone distribution on the fiber as well.  I have heard
that 24 voice channels can be multiplexed onto a T1 line, then the T1
can be put on fiber.  T or F?  Is there maybe a better way to do this?
Can this be done with the Mitel SX-200 digital?

I guess what I need is to speak with a consultant with this sort of
expertise but I don't know one (hint, hint ;-).  At this point I will
be glad to hear from anyone.  Thanks in advance.


Wayne Jones                   email: [e-mail]
National Solar Observatory    voice: 505-434-7043
P.O. Box 62   Sunspot, NM  88349

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

Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 13:52:03 -0400 (EDT)
From: John Gardiner Myers <[e-mail]>
Subject: How Are Intercept Codes Interpreted?


How does one interpret the codes a the end of an intercept.  For
example, I get something like "[SIT] We're sorry, your call cannot be
completed as dialed.  Please check your number and try again.  412
1T."  I assume "412" is the area code generating the intercept.  What
is the interpretation of the "1T"?


[Moderator's Note: The letter and number following the area code
identify the switch within the area code.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Robert Aaron Book)
Subject: Hearing Radio on the Phone
Organization: Rice University
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 22:46:13 GMT


Recently I was talking on the phone to a friend of mine in Long Beach,
California, and she told me a a repetitve problem she had been having
on her phone -- whenever she used the phone, she heard a *radio*
*station* on her phone line.  I listened carefully, found that, on the
other end of the line, I heard the same thing (only when I was talking
to her), only not as loud.  We identified the radio station as KFI
(640 AM, Los Angeles).

A few weeks later, I found another friend had the same problem, also
in Los Angeles, but with a different radio station.  The latter person
had just installed a new phone, so perhaps it has something to do with
a circuit in the phone instrument responding to the radio signal.

I've heard of RF intereference before, but this is ridiculous.  It
reminds me of a fictional story I once read about someone who got a
tooth filling that picked up radio stations.

Does anyone know why this happens, or what can be done to fix the
problem (or reproduce it)?


Robert Book    [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: There are line filters available which will cure
this problem. The telco has no special responsibility to handle the
problem as long as the lines are 'clean' when they had them over at
your premises. Typically newer electronic phones seem to have this
problem more than older style instruments. If someone is located
within a mile or so of a radio station transmitter/antenna the problem
can be more difficult to clear. You might want to check out an article
which appeared in TELECOM Digest a few years ago: "Praise the Lord and
Pass the RF Filters" told the story of the fight residents of the
north side of Hammond, IN had for a long time (maybe still?) with FM
radio station WYCA whose transmitter facilities are located about
four blocks away in Burnham, IL.  Maybe I will reprint that article if
there is sufficient interest.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Robert Aaron Book)
Subject: Decoding touchtones with a PC
Organization: Rice University
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 22:53:51 GMT


Is there any device which can connect to a phone line on one end and a
PC (through a serial port?) on the other, and translate touch-tones
into numbers understandable to the computer?  Any modem (almost) can
*produce* the touch-tones; I am looking for a device that can
understand them.

A way to use a modem to do this would be even better; a device that
could also produce touch-tones and flash would be great.  I have many
applications in mind, but the one that first triggered the question is
that with such a device, and three-way calling on my phone, I could
call my home phone from my office (a local call), type in a password,
then a long-ditance number, then have the computer flash and dial the
long-distance number, thus setting up a three-way long distance call
and saving me the calling card surcharge when I am local to my home
phone.  This is essentially a reproduction of the discontinued MCI
"around town" feature, which allowed you to make long-distance calls
with no surcharge when local to you home phone (or within 11 miles, or
something to that effect).

Any ideas?


Robert Book    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Phillip Dampier)
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 18:37:01 -0500
Subject: CWA Members Ratify AT&T Contracts


CWA MEMBERS OVERWHELMINGLY RATIFY AT&T CONTRACTS

WASHINGTON -- Members of the Communications Workers of America have
overwhelmingly ratified new three-year contracts with AT&T, CWA Vice
President Jim Irvine announced today.

"Our members voted favorably by better than 88 percent to accept the
national operation and the national units contracts," said Irvine, the
union's chief negotiator in prolonged negotiations with AT&T.

The ratification votes protect retroactively on wages and other
provisions back to May 30, although the talks continued another six
weeks past that date before agreements were reached.

The unit-by-unit breakdown on local agreements follows:

    Bell Labs                   89.3  percent
    Installation and CARAs      85.03 percent
    MMS                         73.2  percent
    Manufacturing               89.7  percent
    Operations                  88.04 percent

The settlement, valued at $1.5 billion over three years, covers
100,000 workers represented by CWA and another 27,000 workers
represented by the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers.
IBEW members also ratified these agreements.

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

Date: Tue, 25 Aug 92 18:29:16 CST
From: [e-mail] (Mike Riddle)
Subject: CLID Format Compatibilty Question
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Inns of Court, Papillion, NE


An interesting question came up today, one which I couldn't answer but
am sure that someone in this group can.  The Phone Company is
currently marketing two versions of CLID in the Omaha area:

     1.  Number- only.
     2.  Number and name.

Someone who wants to purchase the service is served by a DMS-100.
According to TPC, the DMS-100 currently can only support the
number-only CLID format.  The potential purchaser wants to know, and
no one local seems able to answer definitively:

     1.  How long before the generics for DMS-100 will support
         number and name?
     2.  How interoperable are the number-only and name-and-number
         display boxes?

The intent is to buy a name-and-number box, use it for number only
service, and upgrade when the software is available for the DMS-100.
The other side of this question, will a number-only box work at all on
the name-and-number service, appears to be "no," but no one other than
a TPC Marketing Droid seems to be quite certain about this.

Can anyone help?  Thanks.


          <<<< insert standard disclaimer here >>>>
[e-mail]        |  Nebraska Inns of Court
[e-mail]        |  [phone] (Data/Fax)
Sysop of 1:285/27@Fidonet          |  V.32/V.42bis   /   G3 Fax

Ybbat (DRBBS) 8.9 v. 3.13 r.3
inns.omahug.org            [phone]           (1:285/27.0)

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

From: [e-mail] (Nigel Roberts)
Subject: Gating the Pound (was Pounding on an Octothorp)
Organization: IC Software AG (on contract at DEC)
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 14:08:30 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, Richard Cox <mandarin@
cix.clink.co.uk> writes ...

> The common name for it here, is "hash": but BT, when they introduced
> facility codes for PABXs and Network Services, decided they would give
> it their own name.  They sold phones with the "thorps" missing from
> the octothorp symbol: and then told us all to call that key the
> "square".

> Even today, when you set up any diversion or call barring, an
> automated voice tells you what the network is about to do, adding "If
> incorrect, dial square."

I recently had occasion to order Call Waiting (it's on free trial at
the moment) and Call Barring for my parents house in Liverpool.

I wanted to know what the commands were, so I phoned 150 (local BT
Business Office) to ask.

In referring to the # key, the sales rep. called it the "gate key".
Because it looks like one, I suppose. (Sort of a Five-Barred Gate,
huh?)


Nigel Roberts       | [e-mail]      | Tel. [phone]
European Engineer  | P O Box 49,Manningtree,CO11 2SZ |  &   [phone]
G4IJF           | "Life is but a tale . . . "     | FAX  [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Allen Barrett Ethridge)
Subject: Request for Line/Trunk Emulation Boxes
Organization: Whole Earth 'Lectronic Link
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 01:49:34 GMT


I'm looking for hardware that would connect into a PC or workstation
and allow several analog lines and/or analog or digital trunks to
terminate into and be controlled from the workstation.  A VME based
solution (as I believe someone else has already requested) would be
excellent. An HP-UX compatible solution would also be excellent, but
I'm open to any suggestions.

I can be reached at work as '[e-mail]' or at play as
'[e-mail]'.  I prefer the work address (it's free and I
have a real editor there).


Thanks,

Allen Ethridge

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

Date: Tue, 25 Aug 92 18:25:06 EDT
From: Bill Rubin <[e-mail]>
Subject: Newest MCI F&F Offer - Free Calls!


I saw a new (to me) MCI Friends and Family ad last night between
Murphy Brown and Designing Women.  Here's the offer: specify any one
person in your calling circle and receive a free ten minute call to
that person every month for the next year.  While aimed at new
customers, they invited existing F&F customers to call in to select
their choice as well.

Well, I called right away, after first getting no ringing at all, and
then dialing again and having it ring for a few minutes, someone
finally picked up and said that everyone was busy, they'd have to call
me back.  About 30 minutes later, they did.  They did try to get me to
add other people to my calling circle (including local numbers, for
when I travel and call them w/a calling card -- interesting approach).
I declined and just left it at the one number for free calls.

Anyway, the number is 1-800-756-4FRE(E).


Bill Rubin

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

From: [e-mail] (Scott Fybush)
Subject: Good For a Laugh ...
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 92 20:01:17 EDT


Heard on Paul Harvey Monday ...

A reader noticed an item in a Kentucky newspaper: Apparently an
elderly woman called up the complaints department of telco, saying
that her phone cord was too long and she was afraid she'd trip over
it, fall, and hurt herself.  Her request to the operator went like
this: "Now, dear, if you could just start pulling in on it from your
end, I'll let you know when you've taken in enough!"

  :-)

Good day ...

Scott Fybush -- [e-mail] -- Waltham, MA USA

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #662
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa25990;
          26 Aug 92 3:12 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA07739
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 26 Aug 1992 01:05:06 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA06745
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 26 Aug 1992 01:04:56 -0500
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 01:04:56 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #663

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 26 Aug 92 01:05:00 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 663

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    City of Omaha to Tax Telephone Books! (Jack Winslade)
    GTE Feature Dialing (Randy Gellens)
    Busy Call Forwarding Options in CA? (Kevin Wang)
    More Phone Line Woes (Dan Lanciani)
    Information on X.38 X.39 and X.5 Standards (Thomas K. Hinders)
    New Sony 696HF VCR's for $329! (Aaron M. Barnes)
    Looking For Modem to Computer Network Service (Josh N. Pritikin)
    911 From CMT (was 911 on Jerry Sringer Show) (Mark W. Earle)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Tue, 25 Aug 92 22:15:45 CST
From: [e-mail] (Jack Winslade)
Subject: City of Omaha to Tax telephone books!
From: [e-mail]
Organization: DRBBS Technical BBS, Omaha


Imagine this conversation ...

Officer: I'm afraid I'm gonna have ta take ya downtown, Mac.
Citizen: But wha'd I do, officer ??
Officer: I don't see a tax stamp on that phone book you're carrying.

But seriously, the Omaha City Council has passed a $.25 tax on
telephone directories with the stated purpose <quote> to encourage
recycling <end quote>.  The Omaha city budget is facing a shortfall in
the megabuck range, and this is one solution, along with such items as
raising the 'temporary' wheel tax.

According to television station WOWT ...

'Another revenue-raiser passed by the City Council today would put a
$.25 tax on telephone directories.  We've got a dollar's worth of tax
right here.  (announcer holds up four directories) It is promoted as a
tax to encourage recycling -- US West questions that.'

(cut to tape of Dick Johnson, US West representative)

Johnson: 'If the council truly believes that this tax is necessary to
resolve landfill problems, they must apply the tax to these other
entities also, particularly to newspapers.'

Omaha is blessed with having two full-service phone directories, now
both available in full-size and yuppie-cellular size.  ;-) One is, of
course, the 'real' US West book, and the other is that black-covered
'phony' one put out by some other company.  I've heard merchants gripe
about having to shell out twice since the second company came to town.

I will say one thing about the competition.  Before they came to town,
it was like pulling teeth to get a book from Ma Bell.  Since the
competition came, both books are available everywhere.

In my opinion, the Omaha book should have been split into white and
yellow books long ago.  Now I doubt it will happen, since I doubt if
either company would want to be the only one without a 'handy'
white-pages section.

I wonder how they will enforce this tax.  Because it's a city tax, it
cannot extend past the city limits.  (We live about two blocks
outside.)  If it's on books distributed within the city, I can see
PILES of new books sitting at supermarkets just outside the limits,
with them being few and far between within the city.


Good day.     JSW

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

From: MPA15AB![e-mail]
Date: 25 AUG 92 04:21
Subject: GTE Feature Dialing


I happened to be reading the recent post discussing feature access
(xx# vs *xx, etc) while going through my paper mail, and came across
the new feature instruction pamplets I has requested from GTE.  (I had
asked for three sets, so I could tear off the quick-reference guide
from the last page and keep by the phones I usually use.  I always
forget the codes for last number redial and busy number redial.)

They've updated the pamplets since I got the features (a couple of
years ago).  For instance, busy number redial used to have a vague
phrase about being limited to "calling certain numbers within your
local calling area."  Now it clearly says "The use of the Busy Number
Redial feature is currently limited to other numbers within your
switching office."  Not sure I like this change -- to me it implies a
long-term restriction, otherwise why bother?


Also, the old pamplet had instructions for both speed calling 8 and
30.  The new one only lists 8, and underlines the word "eight."

(Oh, busy number redial is now called "Busy Number Redial/Camp On.")

One really funny change is that now, each feature has at least two
pages, with the first (left-hand) page showing pictures of how to
activate the service!  For BNR, for example, there are three pictures
on top of each other on the left-hand page, showing a rather
old-fashioned looking phone keypad (with the letters for each digit
arranged in a half-circle above the digit), and a forefinger (with
painted and polished nail) on a digit (the pictures show the finger
pressing the "6", "6", and "#" keys.)  This is done for all features!
For call waiting, there is one big picture (instead of the three small
ones) showing the hand pressing the switch-hook on a 2500 set (side
view).

All features are activated with an xx# sequence.  The instructions
note that for rotary phones, "disregard the '#' symbol."

The pamplets now come with a line-tag card (a card with a slotted hole
for the phone line cord) with "CALL FORWARDING" in huge red letters
and "This telephone is equipped with a special {\bf Custom Calling
Service}" in smaller blue letters.  I guess so you can tag your phones
if you forward them.

There is also a peel-and-stick quick reference card (new) that says at
the bottom "If you are using a SmartCall telephone, press the button
that corresponds to the features you want to use instead of depressing
the hookswitch or dialing a code."  What is this?  Does GTE sell
phones with buttons that are preprogrammed to dial feature access
codes?


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] (Kevin Wang)
Subject: Busy Call Forwarding options in CA?
Organization: The Outland Riders
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 09:14:17 GMT


I was looking for busy call forwarding, relatively cheap.  I would
install a hunt group, but unfortunately, our house line and my line
are on two separate billing names, so I cannot use that option.

I would like to use Busy Call Forwardning (CommStar ][ ) except that
the cost quickly climbs up beyond what I would like to pay.

Anyone have any alternatives?  I'm in San Luis Obispo (Central Coast)
and we don't have the latest and greatest in CO equipment.

(However, Cal Poly, SLO is setting up ISDN to end-users' homes, so
soon we'll have 64kb access to the internet! 8> )

Email me if possible, I don't read this newsgroup often enough.


Kevin Wang    [e-mail] or [e-mail]

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

Date: Tue, 25 Aug 92 19:51:35 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Dan Lanciani)
Subject: More Phone Line Woes


[Some time ago, I described here a problem with my phone service.
Since then I've been running the twisty little maze of the repair
service.  As I don't seem to be getting anywhere, I am almost ready to
write to the PUC.  I would expect the bulk of such a letter to be a
description of what has happened so far and a first pass appears
below.  Any comments are welcome.]

For at least the past eight months, New England Telephone has been
unable to resolve a problem with their service in spite of my repeated
requests.  The details of the problem are as follows:

Every night, starting at approximately midnight (but occasionally as
early as 10pm) persons to whom I speak experience dropouts (gaps) in
the audio from my line.  These gaps are of varying lengths (some are
long enough to delete entire phrases) and at varying intervals from
seconds to many minutes.  These gaps are not accompanied by clicks or
static -- they are simply a complete loss of audio.  I hear nothing
unusual from my end of the connection.  The problem occurs regardless
of whether I place or receive the call.  In addition, the problem
occurs on my mother's phone (different number, same address) so it is
not line-specific.  The problem never occurs during the day.

I have tried a different phone connected at the demarkation point with
identical results.  In order to best illustrate the problem, a friend
and I each taped the same phone conversation from our respective
sides.  The tapes clearly show that speech which was present at my
line is completely muted at the other end.  I have experienced the
problem on calls from my home in Gloucester to Somerville, Cambridge,
Reading, and Chicago.  As these are the only exchanges that I
typically call at night, I do not know how widespread the problem is.

Below I chronicle my most recent of several attempts to have this
problem resolved.  I omit conversations with first-level repair
persons who made the expected suggestions that the problem was with my
home phone and/or wiring.

During the week of July 20 I reported the problem to the repair
service and spoke with a supervisor (Mrs. Grant).  She said that my
line would be "moved to a different switch" as a precautionary measure
although they could find nothing wrong.  My line was disabled from
afternoon until mid morning the next day (presumably to make the
change) but the problem remained.  At the end of the week I spoke to a
different supervisor (Judy) about the problem.  I played the tapes for
her and she suggested that it was probably a problem with the trunks
that could be quite difficult to track down.  She assured me that they
were working on it.

Two weeks later, on August 7, I called repair and spoke to Judy again.
She expressed surprise that the problem had not been resolved and said
they would work on it.

As of August 14 the problem remained and I spoke to Judy again.  She
suggested that it would be useful to have the problem reported by a
party with whom I was speaking when the problem occurred.  I had my
friend report the problem the next time it occurred (which was, of
course, the next time we spoke at night).  Unfortunately, the repair
service told him that the problem must be with my end and they would
send someone to check my home wiring.  However, no one arrived.

On August 21 I attempted to reach Judy again but she was away from her
desk.  A different supervisor was able to have Catherine from the
central office call me back.  Catherine indicated that they had not
looked at the problem at all yet because they did not have an adequate
description.  I described the problem and played the tape for
Catherine and then her supervisor came on the line.  He suggested that
I check the wiring in my home.  When I explained that I had connected
a different phone at the demarkation point with identical results, he
said that they would "go into the line group" that night and get back
to me first thing Monday morning.

By Monday (August 24) afternoon, neither Catherine nor her supervisor
had called back and I again contacted Judy.  Judy said that others
were experiencing problems and Catherine would call me back.
Catherine called back and said that they had not checked anything on
Friday but that they could set up to monitor my line this night.
However, I would have to be on the phone in order for them to test.  I
asked why they could not simply establish a test call of their own and
monitor the line.  Catherine said that I was the only person having
trouble and therefore they had to use my line.  Moreover, they could
not put up a call on my line: I had to be present and talking for them
to test.  I pointed out that this seemed wrong as my mother's line
showed identical symptoms to mine.  I asked whether they couldn't just
put on a test tone and monitor that.  But she said she had been told
to tell me this and could do nothing about it.

Monday night I arranged to be on the line with a friend from
approximately 11:45 PM until 4:30 AM in order to give ample opportunity
to locate the problem.  The problem occurred and there were several
splendid examples of entire phrases being dropped.

On August 25 I contacted Judy to find out how the test went.  She had
Catherine call me back.  Catherine said that the monitor listened for
as long as she could but it is "very difficult on a 5ESS switch
because they must start over each time you hang up and call."  I
pointed out that this was why I maintained the same call from 11:45 PM
until 4:30 AM.  She suggested that perhaps I had had the other party
call me back; I said no.  She could not explain further.  She did say
that the monitor detected some static but no dropouts.

I asked if the monitor was simply listening to my line and, if so, how
she could hope to detect the dropouts since they showed up only on the
other end.  She said that there was no way for them to monitor the
other end because it was in a different office.  I asked what was the
purpose of the test if it couldn't detect the problem.  She did not
explain.  She did say that they had both moved my line to another
switch and changed some software.  I mentioned that they had moved my
line before but she said that this time they "really" moved it.
(Curiously, this move did not produce the long service interruption of
the previous one.)  I asked what software they had changed.  She said
that it was far too intricate to explain.  I suggested that she try
anyway because, if this did solve the problem, I would want to be able
to request something similar the next time the problem appeared.  She
said she could not go into it.  I contacted Judy again to complain
that I was not satisfied with the way things were progressing.

[End of what would go to the PUC ...]

Several questions come to mind:

Is it really impossible for NET to test a routing path without
involving my line?

Even if they have to involve my line, is it true that I must be on the
phone talking?  Can't NET make a connection at the office and put up a
call themselves?

What is the purpose of listening only to my line?  I suspect they
wanted to show that the dropouts were coming from my phone/wiring.


Dan Lanciani     ddl@harvard.*

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

Date: 25 Aug 92 21:05:11-0900
From: /PN=Thomas.K.Hinders/OU=CCMAIL/O=CHAN.IS/PRMD=MMC/ADMD=TELEMAIL/C=US/@sprint.com
Subject: Information on X.38 X.39 and X.5 Standards


I am seeking information on several "new" (maybe ?) CCITT standards:

X.38, X.39 and X.5

Can anyone provide a brief description of these standards.

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)

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

From: [e-mail] (Aaron M. Barnes)
Subject: New Sony 696HF VCR's For $329!
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio, (USA)
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 92 19:20:42 GMT


Thats right -- New 696HF VCR's for $329.

All you have to do is send your request for information to this
gentleman:

[e-mail]

He let me know about this, but did not specify the dealer.

I am sure he would appreciate any and all responses.


Thanks.

Aaron Barnes    [e-mail]


[Moderatpr's Note: Two questions: Do you think that is really such a
good deal, and who is 'interpol' here in the Chicago area. Casbah is a
work station here at Northwestern University in the Academic Computing
Center.  Oh, never mind, I will finger interpol myself:

[casbah.acns.nwu.edu]
Login name: interpol              In real life: Drew Cheng
Directory: /home/u2/interpol            Shell: /bin/csh
Last login Wed Aug 26 00:04 on ttyp1 from elvex.nwu.edu
No unread mail
Plan:
To search out and destroy every computer geek that FINGERs people to try to
find out their real names!  Do you HEAR me, you nerdy little hackers?  I'M
AFTER YOU!  Finger THIS, you putzes!  PREPARE TO DIE!!!  HAHAHAHAHHAHAHA.....
AHAHAHHAHAAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!!
hahhahahahahahahaha!!!!!!
hahahah
ha
I kill me

(sorry, I've been on Prozac lately...)


[Moderator's Note: I guess so. I think I'd rather buy a used car from
this guy than a VCR.   PAT]

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

Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 17:51:15 -0400 (EDT)
From: Josh N. Pritikin <[e-mail]>
Subject: Looking For Modem to Computer Network Service


I am looking for companies that provide a service such that customers
with personal computers can using their modem to locally connect to a
network from which they can connect to our unix box.  Currently, I am
aware that PSI provides such a service and Tymnet may also.  Are these
the only two?


Josh Pritikin  [e-mail]

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

Date: Tue, 25 Aug 92 15:58:04 CDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: 911 From CMT (was 911 on Jerry Springer Show)


Here in South Texas, Southwestern Bell Mobile systems operators handle
the initial part of a 911 call. This is because the area a cmt works
in covers a large number of Law Enforcement juristictions. For
instance, my service, based out of Corpus Christi, TX, works in:
CorpusChristi, Alice, Rockport, Beeville, Kingsville, Refugio,
Raymondville, and other places. That's an area represented by a
rectangle 100 x 80 miles! So when I dial 911, a SWBMS operator
answers, asks where I am (approximately) and transfers the call to the
proper agency, announcing "mobile call from xxx-yyyy". She/he stays on
the line during the call, in case of some trouble on the mobile side.

They NEVER (in my experience) hassle one, or question the nature of
the call -- they just connect one to the law enforcement agency as
quickly as possible.

Cellular One has a similiar procedure.


Mark W. Earle
[e-mail] (Mark Earle) [WA2MCT/5]
FidoNet at       Opus 1:160/50.0
Bitnet           [e-mail]1
Internet  [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #663
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa21416;
          27 Aug 92 3:57 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA02778
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 27 Aug 1992 02:10:09 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA01685
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 27 Aug 1992 02:09:59 -0500
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 02:09:59 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #665

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 27 Aug 92 02:10:00 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 665

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Baby Bells and States (Bill Sohl)
    Re: Baby Bells and States (Nigel Allen)
    Re: Baby Bells and States (Darwei Kung)
    Re: Baby Bells and States (J. Butz)
    Re: Polite Thief (Eugene R. Schroeder)
    Re: Polite Thief (Bob Halloran)
    Re: Polite Thief (Robert L. McMillin)
    Re: Polite Thief (Andy Behrens)
    Re: 911 on Jerry Springer Show (John Karabaic)
    Re: 911 on Jerry Springer Show (Robert S. Helfman)
    Re: 911 on Jerry Springer Show (Bill Mayhew)
    Re: 911 on Jerry Springer Show (Marshal Perlman)
    Re: AT&T and Sandia (Ronald Oakes)
    Re: AT&T and Sandia (Andy Sherman)
    Re: AT&T and Sandia (Dave Niebuhr)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: dancer![e-mail] (22501-sohl)
Subject: Re: Baby Bells and States
Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 92 12:41:57 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Dave
Niebuhr) writes:

> I'm curious about who made the decision as to which Baby-Bell would be
> assigned to serve what states (excluding the non-RBOCs of course).  It
> seems that some cover only a few states while others like USWest cover
> many.  Would this be based on the population at the time?

As memory serves me, the decision involved AT&T, the 23 telcos (NY
TEL, Pacific Bell, etc) and the court.  The goal was to have seven
regional companies of approximately equal financial size.


Standard Disclaimer- Any opinions, etc. are mine and NOT my employer's.

Bill Sohl (K2UNK) BELLCORE (Bell Communications Research, Inc.)
Morristown, NJ             email via UUCP      bcr!dancer!whs70
201-829-2879 Weekdays      email via Internet  [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Baby Bells and States
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 92 2:06:20 EDT


[e-mail] (Dave Niebuhr) writes in Volume 12, Issue 659:

> I'm curious about who made the decision as to which Baby-Bell would be
> assigned to serve what states (excluding the non-RBOCs of course).  It
> seems that some cover only a few states while others like USWest cover
> many.  Would this be based on the population at the time?

I think the intention was to create seven regional companies of
roughly the same size. I don't have any numbers handy, but I think all
the RBOCs have a similar number of access lines.

My guess is that the decision to have seven (rather than three or 22)
regional companies was made by AT&T to maximize shareholder benefit.
If AT&T had chosen to split its local operations into fewer than seven
companies, they might have been harder to manage.

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

From: [e-mail] (Darwei Kung)
Subject: Re: Baby Bells and States
Organization: University of Washington
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 10:27:22 GMT


Judge Harold Greene decided the fate of the Bell System.  His rulings
still stands today, and he is still the man who has the final say on
the fate of RBOCs.


Darwei Kung


[Moderator's Note: Actually, I believe one thing Greene did NOT say
was how many holding companies there had to be or how many telcos
would be assigned to each. I think AT&T was allowed to decide.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 92 15:03 EDT
Subject: Re: Baby Bells and States


[e-mail] (Dave Niebuhr) writes:

> I'm curious about who made the decision as to which Baby-Bell would be
> assigned to serve what states (excluding the non-RBOCs of course).  It
> seems that some cover only a few states while others like USWest cover
> many.  Would this be based on the population at the time?

Well according to my "Engineering and Operations in the Bell System"
text (a book still handed out to new AT&T employees), the current RBOC
territory boundaries seem to follow the same boundaries that formed
the old Western Electric Regions.  Also, I think the same boundaries
constituted the various regions of the old AT&T Long Lines.

LATA determination went by "area/regions of interest" or some other
buzz term.  I suppose this was by population, though I cannot say for
sure.


J Butz   [e-mail]   AT&T - BL   ER700 Systems Engineering

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

Date: Wed, 26 Aug 92 07:51:01 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Eugene R Schroeder)
Subject: Re: Polite Thief
Organization: AT&T


In article <[e-mail]> Jerry Leichter <leichter@
lrw.com> writes:

> Yesterday, I tried to place a long-distance credit card call using a
> pay phone in Piscataway, New Jersey.  LD service was from some company
> like "American Network Services".  Needless to say, I dialed 10288
> first.

> No combination I tried would let me select AT&T; either the sequence
> was (legitimately) declared invalid, or I got the "not necessary"
> message.

> I seem to recall that AT&T has a number at which they want nonsense
> like this reported, but I can't remember it.  Anyone?

The number to report having 10288+0 blocked from a public phone is
1-800-742-6260 (we got stickers some time ago to put on our
calling/universal cards).

Presumably this results in AT&T taking action to get the phone
unblocked.  Hopefully you can make the 800 for free.


Non-disclaimer:  I work for AT&T

Gene
------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Bob Halloran)
Subject: Re: Polite Thief
Organization: AT&T Universal Card Services, Jacksonville FL
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 12:53:06 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> Jerry Leichter <leichter@
lrw.com> writes:

[Moderator's Note: See earlier message this issue for the text.  PAT]

Off the sticker they sent to stick on my card, it's 1-800-742-6260.  I
recall they'll want to know where the phone was, when you tried to
make the call, and the AOS.


Bob Halloran   AT&T Universal Card   Jacksonville FL    [e-mail]

Any similarity between opinions stated here and AT&T's corporate
opinion are purely coincidental.

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

Date: Wed, 26 Aug 92 06:30:03 -0700
From: rlm@ms_aspen.hac.com (Robert L. McMillin)
Subject: Re: Polite Thief


Jerry Leichter <[e-mail]> writes:

[stuff about the phone rejecting the 10288 prefix deleted]

> I seem to recall that AT&T has a number at which they want nonsense
> like this reported, but I can't remember it.  Anyone?

The number you're looking for is 816-654-8000.  They accept collect
long-distance calls for the purpose of making long-distance calls over
AT&T's network.  Presumably, they then go after offending operator for
blocking 10288 calls.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Andy Behrens)
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 15:00:36 -0400
Organization: Burlington Coat Factory
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Polite Thief


This has been illegal since January 11 of this year.

To get AT&T's help, dial 1-800-CALL-ATT, then select options 2+1+0
from the menu.  Tell the operator that you want to report a phone that
won't let you dial 10ATT.

You should also file a complaint with the FCC:

    Informal Complaints and Public Inquiries Branch
    Enforcement Division
    Federal Communications Commission
    2025 M Street, N.W., Room 6202
    Washington, D.C. 20554


Andy Behrens
P.O. Box 116, South Strafford, Vt.                            [phone]
Burlington Coat, HC 61 Box 1B, Lebanon, N.H. 03766            [phone]


[Moderator's Note: I'd like you to know that a couple weeks ago I was
in the Executive House Hotel in downtown Chicago to meet someone and
every payphone in the place was operated by some AOS outfit. They all
had 10288 blocked and they all had a notice next to the phone actually
claiming 'it is not illegal to block 10288; to reach AT&T simply dial
the operator and asked to be 'splashed back' to AT&T ...'. I tried it
and the operator had no idea what I was talking about. I asked her if
I was speaking English or some other language, and if English was she
having difficulty in hearing me; if so I could begin screaming in the
phone at her to help her hear and understand me better.  It was like
talking to a turtle or a goldfish.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (John Karabaic)
Subject: Re: 911 on Jerry Springer Show
Date: 26 Aug 92 13:40:06 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail]


Jeff Garber writes:

> On The Jerry Springer Show (Aug 19, 11 A.M., KCAL Channel 9, Los
> Angeles) the topic was 911.  Apparently, someone in the Cincinnati
> area called 911 from a cellular phone because he believed a man was
> having a heart attack on the side of the road. The 911 operator told
> him that they cannot accept calls from cellular phones! They actually
> played the recording from the call on the show, so I heard it with my
> own ears.

Rest easy, that dispatcher was disciplined.  She (I think it was a
she) misinterpreted the policy.  Since 911's Caller-ID doesn't work
with cellular phones, despatchers had been instructed to ask specific
questions of cellular callers.  This despatcher either misinterpreted
the training, was under stress and made a mistake, or was a bozo.

I use my cellular phone with 911 all the time to report motorists in
need of assistance, accidents, and the like.  I state where I am,
where the person who needs assistance is, and am usually cheerfully
thanked.  If asked, I provide my name and my cellular number.  For
non-emergencies, some despatchers will hook you up with the state
police or county sheriff.

Since I have the (dubious) privilege of having a phone, I figure it's
my duty to use it this way.


John S. Karabaic, Systems Engineer, [e-mail], 513 792 5904
NeXT Computer, Inc.; 4434 Carver Woods Dr.;  Cincinnati, OH 45242
cellular: 513 532 0224; fax: [phone]; territory: OH, IN & KY


[Moderator's Note: I try to use my handheld in the same way. I pass by
accident scenes and situations where police intervention is required
almost every day ... and I call it in.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Robert S. Helfman)
Subject: Re: 911 on Jerry Springer Show
Organization: The Aerospace Corporation, El Segundo, CA
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 16:43:35 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> Jeff Garber <0005075968@
mcimail.com> writes:

> What good is it to have a phone with you if you can't use it in an
> emergency? I've used L.A. Cellular to call 911 many times and have had
> no problems like this ...

I have PacTel Cellular and have also had no problem using 911. I saw a
man down being beaten by someone in the right lane of Santa Monica
Blvd (the victim was holding his head and screaming while the other
guy was kicking him). I grabbed the phone about 200 feet past the
scene, called 911, told them (they had real difficulty getting the
correct intersection -- it was obvious they weren't anywhere in the
area), and drove on. About another 200 feet down the street, I passed
the fire station, where several sheriffs were starting out on their
bicycles. I rolled down my window and told them what I'd seen and they
said they had just been dispatched.  Net time: about 45 seconds.

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

From: [e-mail] (Bill Mayhew)
Subject: Re: 911 on Jerry Springer Show
Organization: Northeastern Ohio Universities College of Medicine
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 00:28:59 GMT


Here in Ohio, the Highway Patrol will accept calls from cellular
telephones at 800-525-5555.  Luckily I have not had to call the OHP,
but the instruction book I received from Cellular One recommends this
number for reporting emergencies.  The same book also mentions that
911 may be called to report emergencies.


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


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

From: [e-mail] (Marshal "Airborne" Perlman)
Subject: Re: 911 on Jerry Springer Show
Organization: University of Denver, Dept. of Math & Comp. Sci.
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 92 17:30:12 GMT


I don't know where you are, but in California the 911 people LOVE
cellular phones.

I've never called 911 from a regular phone but I understand you get
right in touch with a police or fire person.

When you call 911 from a cellular you get a 911 operator and you tell
them who you want to talk to, I.E. "Please get me the Huntington Beach
PD", then you tell the PD what is wrong. I use it all the time to
report accidents, and they are glad to hear from me. I'll also call in
when I see broken down [like with smoke comin' out of the hood or a
broken axel] car with people near it, or even little things like
traffic lights being out or large chunks of metal in the road <saw a
anvil on the 405 once> it is a free call and they are always glad to
hear from me.


Marshal Perlman - Huntington Beach - California - USA - Earth - Milky Way


[Moderator's Note: We don't have cellular 911, but we can call
787-0000 or the operator and get connected to Chicago Emergency. I
only use that for *emergencies*, but I call the city all the time for
things like stop-and-go lights out of order, open hydrants, dead
animals on the street or parkway, street/sewer cave-ins, etc. I do not
call through the main City Hall centrex number; I call direct to the
appropriate dispatcher and am always thanked for my report.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Ronald Oakes)
Subject: Re: AT&T and Sandia
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 92 9:42:32 CDT


[e-mail] (Jim Haynes) writes:

> I see by the news that after September, 1993 AT&T will no longer serve
> as the management and operating contractor for the Dept. of Energy
> Sandia National Laboratories.  Does anybody know what's happening?  Is
> this AT&Ts decision, or DOE's decision, or is the lab being closed, or
> what?

I do not think that any decisions have been made yet.  However, Sandia
will remain open -- or at least it is supposed to.  I have heard
rumors that the University of New Mexico is thinking of taking over
the management, and I suspect there may be other interested parties.

I have to say that I hope that Sandia does not close.  My father has
worked there for 30+ years as an engineer. Additionally, directly and
indirectly most of the population of Albuquerque, NM -- my home town --
would be effected by its closing.

I suspect that AT&T's decision to not renew the contract to operate
Sandia is related to the large number of lay off's that have been
occuring at the AT&T division around here, the automation of operator
services, and the other steps that they seem to be taking to
streamline operations.


Ronald B. Oakes

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

Date: Wed, 26 Aug 92 12:56:53 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Andy Sherman)
Subject: Re: AT&T and Sandia
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Andy Sherman)


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Jim
Haynes) writes:

> I see by the news that after September, 1993 AT&T will no longer serve
> as the management and operating contractor for the Dept. of Energy
> Sandia National Laboratories.  Does anybody know what's happening?  Is
> this AT&Ts decision, or DOE's decision, or is the lab being closed, or
> what?

This was AT&T's decision.  As far as I know the lab will remain open,
but with peace breaking out all over you can never tell.  As I recall
The official word was on the order of "we'd like to concentrate on
making money now".

The Sandia contract was cost + $1.00.


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, 26 Aug 92 07:38:30 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Dave Niebuhr)
Subject: Re: AT&T and Sandia


What is happening is that the contracts between the DOE sites and AT&T
are up for renewal and apparently Sandia is going with another company
for their long distance carrier.

My employer, Brookhaven National Laboratory, is negotiating a contract
right now and I don't know who the players are at the present time.

It should be noted that these contracts are of approximate ten-year
duration which would put the beginning of the AT&T-Sandia one in 1982,
the same as BNLs.


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

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #665
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa22967;
          27 Aug 92 4:50 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA31452
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 27 Aug 1992 02:44:11 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA07752
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 27 Aug 1992 02:43:56 -0500
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 02:43:56 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #666

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 27 Aug 92 02:44:00 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 666

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Monitoring of Broadcasts (Michael A. Covington)
    Re: Monitoring of Broadcasts (Steve Forrette)
    Re: Monitoring of Broadcasts (Laurence Chiu)
    Re: Hearing Radio on the Phone (Angie Clarke)
    Re: Hearing Radio on the Phone (Kenneth A. Becker)
    Re: Hearing Radio on the Phone (Ang Peng Hwa)
    Re: GTE California Changes (John Higdon)
    Re: GTE California Changes (Jeff Sicherman)
    Re: Is RJ45 With Notch Same as RJ45 Without Notch? (R. Kevin Oberman)
    Re: Is RJ45 With Notch Same as RJ45 Without Notch? (Jim Rees)
    Re: What Does a CO Switch Cost? (Richard Nash)
    Re: What Does a CO Switch Cost? (Dan Odom)
    Last Laugh! Re: Pounding on an Octothorp (Brad Hicks)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Michael A. Covington)
Subject: Re: Monitoring of Broadcasts
Organization: University of Georgia, Athens
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 05:54:39 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Adrienne Voorhis) writes:

> [e-mail] (Jon Gefaell)> writes:

>> It is illegal to disclose anything heard on any Radio Frequency in any
>> mode other than public broadcast, Amateur Radio, and that's about it.
>> This means that you can own a scanner and listen to the police, even
>> covert operations (I listen to very interesting operations from time
>> to time) but you _may not_ disclose those communications to any one
>> else.

> Could someone please explain how the federal government can allow
> you to legally monitor such broadcasts but can stop you from
> disclosing what was heard?  I'm not a First Amendment lawyer, but it
> would seem to me that if you lawfully became aware of information,
> that the government could not muzzle you from discussing what you have
> legitimately obtained.

Hmmm?  Never heard of confidentiality?

Jon was describing the Communications Act of 1934, which forbids
disclosing or "using" information obtained by listening to non-public
radio services.  (Broadcasts, hams, CBs, and a few other things are
freely disclosable.)

That law simply imposes a kind of confidentiality on people who,
through technological pursuits, come into possession of other people's
private messages.  Just like telephone repair personnel, mail
carriers, etc.

The Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986 goes further: it
forbids _listening_ to private radio communications (cellular phones,
ship-to-shore phones, etc.).  But it also makes it clear that
non-encrypted police and other public service communications, as well
as ships and aircraft (other than phone calls intended to be private),
are not subject to the prohibition.


Michael Covington - Artificial Intelligence Programs - U of Georgia - USA
Unless otherwise noted, these are private opinions, not official statements.

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: Monitoring of Broadcasts
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 07:43:25 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Adrienne Voorhis) writes:

> Could someone please explain how the federal government can allow
> you to legally monitor such broadcasts but can stop you from
> disclosing what was heard?  I'm not a First Amendment lawyer, but it
> would seem to me that if you lawfully became aware of information,
> that the government could not muzzle you from discussing what you have
> legitimately obtained.

I'm not a First Amendment lawyer either (or any other kind of lawyer
for that matter), but I do know that there is a common misconception
that the various amendments prevent any restrictions whatsoever on
certain activities.  There are many cases where "lawfully obtained"
information cannot be legally discussed:

- The tried and true "fire in a theater" example.
- Trade secrets that you legally obtain in the course of employment.


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Laurence Chiu)
Subject: Re: Monitoring of Broadcasts
Organization: GCS Limited, Wellington, New Zealand
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 23:36:04 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Adrienne Voorhis) writes:

> What if a reporter, for instance, was listening to a police band
> radio and heard a newsworthy event?  Could he or she legitimately be
> punished for reporting this information?

Then I wonder if those laws apply in England. For those who are not
royal watchers the current scandal is the publication of recording of
intimate phone conversations between Princess Diana and some
unidentified "friend" in which the subject matter is embarrassing to
say the least. The tapes were made by someone who was apparently just
idly scanning the airwaves with his scanner and happened to pick up
the cell-phone frequencies.  The last news report I saw indicated that
the UK authorities had decided not to take any action against him.


Laurence Chiu

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

From: [e-mail] (Angie Clarke)
Subject: Re: Hearing Radio on the Phone
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Space Telescope Science Institute, Baltimore MD
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 18:18:42 GMT


I certainly am interested in the article that appeared in TELECOM
Digest a few years ago: "Praise the Lord and Pass the RF Filters".
Please post.  Thanks.


Angie


[Moderator's Note: Okay, I will hunt it up and use it soon, maybe over
the weekend.   PAT]

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

Date: Wed, 26 Aug 92 17:16:38 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Kenneth A Becker)
Subject: Re: Hearing Radio on the Phone
Organization: AT&T


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Robert Aaron Book) writes:

> Recently I was talking on the phone to a friend of mine in Long Beach,
> California, and she told me a a repetitve problem she had been having
> on her phone -- whenever she used the phone, she heard a *radio*
> *station* on her phone line.  I listened carefully, found that, on the
> other end of the line, I heard the same thing (only when I was talking
> to her), only not as loud.  We identified the radio station as KFI
> (640 AM, Los Angeles).

> [Moderator's Note: There are line filters available which will cure
> this problem. The telco has no special responsibility to handle the

As it happens, I have one of these line filters in my desk, a Z100A
radio interference filter sold in AT&T phone stores.  Quote:

PURPOSE: The Radio Interference Filter is designed to eliminate
extraneous noises from local AM band radio stations that you might
hear through the receive of your phone.  It will also minimize
interference from other sources such as FM band radio stations,
citizen band, and ham radios.

Hope you all find this useful.


Ken Becker [e-mail]

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

Date: Wed, 26 Aug 92 17:39:16 SST
From: Ang Peng Hwa <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Hearing Radio on the Phone


I had the same problem of radio on the phone when I lived in LA. It
was a rap station that got louder the longer I stayed on the line. The
PacBell technician came over and after some checks concluded that it
was my cheap $4 phone bought literally off the street (guy unpacked a
box on the street) in Greenwich Village, NY. He plugged in one of
those heavy-enough-to-use-as-a-weapon phone and there was no rap
music.

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

Date: Wed, 26 Aug 92 00:26 PDT
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: GTE California Changes


HOLDREGE_MP <[e-mail]> writes:

> GTE California, the state's second-largest telephone company, plans to
> close the LA area facilities and transfer as many as 400 jobs out of
> state, union officials said Tuesday.

It does not stop does it? I have to admit that this even surprised me.
Actually I am very delighted: now the SoCal people can experience the
joy of dealing with someone who confuses Santa Monica with Santa
Barbara (hell, they're all 'Santas' aren't they???). Now everyone in
CA with GTE "service" can try talking with people with southern
accents.  Oh well, people who cannot help you, cannot help you.

> GTE officials confirmed plans to close the company's Norwalk and
> Thousand Oaks long-distance access centers, which employ 255 people.

Really dedicated to the communities that it "serves", no?

> A GTE spokeman said that the job transfers are a part of a continuing
> effort to consolidate operations at company facilities in Texas, North
> Carolina and Florida, and to automate jobs now performed by humans.

Is it not funny that Pacific Telesis can be located fully within
California, use local reps and business offices, maintain local
walk-in facilities, fully integrate with the served community, and
even contribute to local, regional, and state funds for the arts and
philanthopic causes, and STILL provide real telephone service at much
less cost than GTE?

> The company is also considering closing its Long Beach network
> operations monitoring center, which could imperil another 160 jobs.

Well, I do not blame them for doing that. The phone service in Long
Beach stinks. I would move, too. In fact, a client is moving!

> While I can't blame any business from wanting to leave California,
> what with the crazy laws, high insurance and benefits corruption, I am
> upset that our phone company is pulling out.

Pac*Bell seems to be able to make it in California. My phone company
is not leaving. And I pay less for my phone service than you do;
Pac*Bell's tariffed rates have always been lower than GTE's.

> Is is especially upsetting that the Network Operations Monitoring
> center is leaving. The center, which opened only six months ago, was
> responsible for alerting technicians to problems. Who is going to do
> this now? Computers in Texas?

Probably no one. But then I doubt that you will notice any service
level reduction. It could not get much worse. I have reported trouble
in the Los Gatos CO on a Friday night, but of course it is Monday or
Tuesday before GTE can fly someone up from southern California to fix
it.

There is an amusing story here. After calling GTE repair repeatedly
(necessary to get ANYTHING fixed), someone from the "network control
center" called me on Saturday to tell me that they were on top of the
problem. The problem, he said, was that someone had removed some of
the wiring improperly from the frames. He could see the problem from
his terminal right there (in Long Beach?). Well, I guess I was
impressed!  "So how long to fix it?", I asked. "Should take no time at
all once we get someone up there -- no later than Tuesday."


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

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

Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 01:30:11 -0700
From: Jeff Sicherman <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: GTE California Changes
Organization: Cal State Long Beach


In article <[e-mail]> HOLDREGE_MP <HOLDREGE+_MP%A1%
[e-mail]> writes:

> John Higdon can no longer complain about the incompetant GTE reps in
> Thousand Oaks, CA. He soon will be able to complain about the
> incompetant GTE reps in North Carolina, Florida, and Texas.

> A GTE spokeman said that the job transfers are a part of a continuing
> effort to consolidate operations at company facilities in Texas, North
> Carolina and Florida, and to automate jobs now performed by humans.

  Does this mean they will be programming the computers to ignore and
throw away trouble tickets ?


Jeff Sicherman

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Is RJ45 With Notch Same as RJ45 Without Notch?
Date: 26 Aug 92 18:23:09 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Phill
St. Louis) writes:

> The Subject says it all.

> I would like to ensure that these RJ45 wall jacks with a notch will
> work.  (I am pretty sure that they are Digital Equipment Corp. (DEC)
> RJ45 wall jacks that have been installed in some new offices.)  Will
> these work with the standard RJ45 (without notch) plugs?

Actually, they both have notches, but the DEC connector (called an
MMJ) has the notch offset while the standard RJ-45 has it centered. If
you have MMJ hacks installed in offices you will need MMJ plugs for
them. The RJ45 will not work.

The idea of the MMJ was to have a different connector for data to
avoid blowing up data equipment by putting the telco battery (and
ring) on it. While might have been a good idea, it never caught on and
I don't know of anyone other than DEC using it. Other vendors have
either ignored the problem or have designed their equipment to be
uneffected by telco voltages.

MMJ jacks are available at about the same cost as RJ-45s, so it's not
too expensive to use them. It's just a pain in the neck!


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

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

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

From: [e-mail] (Jim Rees)
Subject: Re: Is RJ45 With Notch Same as RJ45 Without Notch?
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: University of Michigan IFS Project
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 19:05:14 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Phill
St. Louis) writes:

> I would like to ensure that these RJ45 wall jacks with a notch will
> work.  (I am pretty sure that they are Digital Equipment Corp. (DEC)
> RJ45 wall jacks that have been installed in some new offices.)  Will
> these work with the standard RJ45 (without notch) plugs?

The jacks are the same, except for the notch.  The difference is in
the cable.  A standard no-notch RJ-45 cable is wired with a twist, so
that pin one is connected to pin eight on the other end.  A notched
cable is wired straight.

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

Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 22:38:18 -0600
From: [e-mail] (Richard Nash)
Subject: Re: What Does a CO Switch Cost?

David G Lewis writes:

> In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
> (Henning Schulzrinne) writes:

>> Just curious: how much does a CO switch cost? I realize that this
>> question is about as precise as asking "how much does a car cost"...

> Actually, I think it's more along the lines of asking "how much does
> an airplane cost?"  Depends -- are you talking a Cessna 172 or a B2
> Stealth Bomber?

The above comparison is a wee bit misleading.  Even though the machine
looks identical (minor internal equipment provisioning differences),
the price can be radically different if a toll machine, versus a local
switch, or also, who you are!  Software prices are very expensive.
After all, it is those expensive tastes of the contracting software
developer and 1000 percent markup of the equipment vendor that has to
be satisfied.  At least that is how it appears to be done in Canada. :) :)


Richard Nash   Edmonton, Alberta Canada T6K 0E8
UUCP:       trickie![e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Dan Odom)
Subject: Re: What Does a CO Switch Cost?
Date: 26 Aug 1992 09:43:13 -0500
Organization: Kansas State University


A switch can cost a LOT.  Like another poster said, nobody will give
out exact information, including my school.  But I did some asking
around and heard a "rumor" that our switch ran about $10,000,000.  I
don't know if I believe this (they are barely willing to spring for
$130,000 in computer equipment), but it's a start.


Dan Odom    [e-mail]      Send email for PGP key.

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

From: mc/G=Brad/S=Hicks/OU=[e-mail]
Date: 26 Aug 92 16:04:23 GMT
Subject: Last Laugh! Re: Pounding on an Octothorp


> The very plaintive (and frustrated question was) "I can't find the
> ANY key."

Back when I worked at a major defense contractor, I was sitting next
to a guy who took one of these calls.  He just barely stifled his
smirk, explained to the user that meant that if he hit any of the keys
on the keyboard, the computer would continue.  Which one?  ANY of
them!

After a brief pause, the user replied: "Well, I just hit a key and
nothing happened."  What key did you hit?  "The Shift key."

Now, YOU smirk.  I think this is a a "fair cop."  Once he understood
the directions on the screen, the user followed them ... and because
the instructions were wrong, it didn't do him any good.  I guess it
COULD have said "Press any non-modifier key to continue."  But my
ex-wife, who writes specifications and user documentation for another
company, designs the screens now so that they say "Press Enter to
continue."  In fact, the programmers write it so that it works if you
hit any non-modifier key, but the user is much, much better off with
simple, unambiguous directions.


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.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #666
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa23809;
          27 Aug 92 5:11 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA00898
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 27 Aug 1992 01:18:59 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA20589
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 27 Aug 1992 01:18:49 -0500
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 01:18:49 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #664

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 27 Aug 92 01:18:54 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 664

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    AT&T and Hurricane Andrew (Ed Hopper)
    Disaster Reporting (Dave Niebuhr)
    Another AOS Experience (J. Butz)
    New England Telephone Brings Back "Granite State Calling" (Mark Eklof)
    Recommendations Wanted For Pager/Beeper (Ray Normandeau)
    Do-It-Yourself Car Phone Installation? (Andrew C. Green)
    Another Valuable Service From Pac*Bell (John Higdon)
    Cell Phones in the Air (Tom Gillman)
    Modem Noise on Line (Steve Shapiro)
    How Do I Locate Graybar? (Michael Schuster)
    Slamming Prevention  (David Caldwell)
    Anyone Hear of PROVOX? (Larry Rachman)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Date: 26 Aug 92 20:25:03 GMT
Subject: AT&T and Hurricane Andrew


Pat: Here is an item of interest from AT&T Today, the internal
electronic newsletter.

HURRICANE AID *** As of 2:30 p.m. Wednesday, 80 AT&T employees in
southern Florida were unaccounted for, and the homes of an estimated
100-150 employees were devastated in the wake of Hurricane Andrew.  No
figure on total AT&T employees in the affected area was immediately
available.  Company efforts are underway to locate unaccounted-for
employees and to help others move belongings from their homes and find
temporary shelter.

The AT&T Foundation donated $100,000 today to the American Red Cross
Disaster Relief Fund for Florida.

There is an URGENT need for supplies for our friends and co-workers in
Dade County, Fla.  The following items are needed: portable radios,
batteries (size C and D), flashlights, Coleman stoves, matches, ice
chests, paper products (towels, utensils, trash bags, toilet paper),
bottled water and juices, manual can openers, canned food, linens,
cots, blankets, towels and washcloths.  Adult items needed are
clothing and toiletries. Children's items needed are shoes, clothing
and toys.  Baby items needed are diapers, formula, baby food,
clothing, bedding, powder and ointment.  Other items needed are
aspirin, Bandaids, bug spray, sunscreen, pet food, litter and litter
boxes, collars and leashes.  Donations should be sent to Pioneer
Office, 6451 N. Federal, Room 101B, Ft. Lauderdale, Fla. 33308.


Ed Hopper AT&T - IMS Atlanta, GA


[Moderator's Note: Ed, I am more than happy to help spread this call
for assistance through the telecom industry among the readers of this
Digest. How about let's all take a few minutes Thursday and prepare
boxes of stuff to be sent, preferably via Federal Express so that it
will arrive by the weekend or Monday at the latest. The need is very
great *right now*. Grab stuff that you do not need from the list
above, toss it in a large cardboard box and send it to the Telephone
Pioneers in Ft. Lauderdale. These donations will be distributed
throughout Dade County with telco employees in the area given
priority. Perhaps readers can post this on company bulletin boards and
have other employees bring in stuff Friday morning.

If you prefer (or can spare yet a second box full of stuff) your
packages can be sent to the City Clerk, City of Homestead, Homestead,
FL marked 'disaster relief supplies'. Telco employees with a few days
vacation coming might want to volunteer their service by going down
there and helping residents and businesses get their telephone
instruments connected and back on line pending restoral of service.
Even if all you do is send a few cans of food and some toilet paper,
**please do it Thursday if at all possible, and use an overnight
courier to get it there Friday**. The folks are in very bad shape.
PAT]

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

Date: Wed, 26 Aug 92 07:48:07 EDT From: [e-mail] (Dave
Niebuhr) Subject: Disaster Reporting


What with the two disasters on our hands -- the fire in California and
the damage caused by Hurricane Andrew, I was wondering if people
located in those areas who have power and telephone service and
receive the Digest could keep us posted on the efforts to recover from
these calamaties.

My sympathies go to those living in those areas and hope that their
losses are minimal which unfortunately aren't.


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


[Moderator's Notes: Very little word is coming in or out of Dade
County, and the news that is reaching us is horrible. The town of
Homestead, with 30,000 residents was wiped out of existence. Utility
poles and wires are laying on the ground in a jumble, ripped and torn
from their poles, etc. Utility service will not be fully restored for
many weeks. I forward articles to comp.dcom.telecom using nntpxmit
through several sites including cs.miami.edu, and they have not
responded to telnet since Monday. I sincerely hope that telecom people
everywhere will rally to the support of Dade County. The California
disaster is of equal concern right now but to some extent was over-
shadowed by the enormity of Andrew's fury this week.  And now we have
Louisiana to deal with ... so much to do. Please take a few minutes on
Thursday and help out however you can: Florida, Louisiana, California.
Thanks, and if you hear from folks in these areas, pass along news.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 92 17:11 EDT
Subject: Another AOS Experience


[e-mail] writes:

> And this is right in the heart of AT&T land: Fire a gun in any >
direction and you'll probably hit an AT&T facility!

At a recent reunion of my college buddies at Puglia's family style
Italian restaurant (home of Jorge the keyboard player, dancing
permitted, but don't drink the house red) in Little Italy in
Manhattan, I had the unpleasant occasion of running into one of these
AOS monsters.  A 0+ call gave me a bong tone followed by a mechanical,
female voice announcing "ITI Telecommunications."  10288 was blocked
as well.  A call to 1-800-CALL-ATT put me in touch with an AT&T
customer rep who picked up the ANI that was intentionally not posted
on the phone, recorded the street address and cheerfully connected me
to bong tone which allowed me to complete my call on the carrier of MY
choice.  AT&T and NY Tel must have an intra-lata call completion
agreement, since my intra-lata call to "da Bronx" terminated with no
problems.

> I seem to recall that AT&T has a number at which they want nonsense
> like this reported, but I can't remember it.  Anyone?

The number is 1-800-CALL-ATT.

+ To report an AOS that blocks carrier selection, select option 2,
  then option 0 for a customer rep.

+ To bill to card, select option 2, then option 1.  Enter the number
  you are dialing, followed by your card number.


Later,

J Butz   [e-mail]  AT&T-BL   ER700 System Engineering

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

Date: Wed, 26 Aug 92 23:09:02 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Mark Eklof)
Subject: New England Telephone Brings Back "Granite State Calling"


    This spring, there was mention in the Digest of New England
Telephone's switch to flat rate in-state (New Hampshire) long distance
calling.  With the new system, I could call the adjacent town to the
west of here for the same rate that I could a town on the other end of
the state (about 3.5 hours of highway driving away).  When they did
this, they also changed the discount calling plan (formerly called
"Granite State Service", and now called "CallAround 603 Plan"), with
different time periods, and rates.  The old plan allowed plan calls in
the afternoon, while the new one gave no discounts during the day.  I
called NETel at the time, to complain of the loss of the daytime
discount.  Suprisingly, the person I talked to said that many people
had voiced the same complaint (It wasn't suprising that others had
complained, it was suprising that they told me that), and that they
were "looking into" ways to address this.  I figured that was a brush
off, and there wasn't much I could do anyway.  Apparently, I was
wrong.  I received the following letter today.

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

                New England Telephone
                August 24, 1992

Dear Mr. Eklof:

Effective March 20, New England Telephone simplified and restructured
in-state long distance rates, eliminated Granite State(SM) Service,
and introduced the new CallAround(R) 603 discount calling paln.  As a
result, some customers expressed concern about the elimination of the
daytime calling period associated with their Granite State Service.

To alleviate these concerns, Granite State Service will be offerred to
qualified residence subscribers who so request between now and October 9.

As a Granite State Service customer of record during March, please
take a minute to read the descriptions below.  Then decide which plan
best fits your calling patterns and life style.  If you are unsure if
you qualify, you may call your local Business Office for more
information.

 ... [Details of the two plans ommitted.  I can send them if there's
interest, but the plan details and rates are the same as they were
before.  Also details of normal rates that would be in effect without
the plans, or during the (different) periods the plans aren't active.] ...

If you wish to re-subscribe to Granite State Service or request
assistance in choosing a calling plan, call your Service
Representative at the telephone number listed on the New England
Telephone Itemization of Account page of your bill.  Remember, orders
for Granite State Service must be received by October 9, 1992.

This will be your only opportunity to re-subscribe to Granite State
Service.  Orders for the service will not be accepted after Octover 9.
If you re-subscribe to Granite State Service, we will reinstate your
service without applying any installation charges.  If you are happy
with your current service arrangement, you do not need to contact us.

We hope this offer expresses our appreciation of your business.  Thank
you for using New England Telephone.


Sincerely,
Allen F. Pattee
Vice President - New Hampshire

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

    So, it looks like I'll be able to get the old service back,
though if I were just moving in, I'd be SOL.  I do plan to call them
in the morning and tell them to switch me back to Granite State
Service.


Mark D. Eklof    Brookline, New Hampshire, USA    [e-mail]

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

Subject: Recommendations Wanted For Pager/Beeper
From: [e-mail] (Ray Normandeau)
Date: 26 Aug 92 18:53:00 GMT
Organization: Invention Factory's BBS - New York City, NY - 212-274-1243v.32bis
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Ray Normandeau)


I am thinking of getting a pager (beeper).  I would like to be paged
when my answering machine gets a message.

What are the recommendations to accomplish this?

I now use two Panasonic KX-T1470 Answering Machines and would prefer
not to get another machine as I am very pleased with the ones I have.
They have all the features that I want, except that they will not dial
a beeper number.

As I already have telephones that handle multiple lines, I especially
would like to avoid having to get another answering machine that would
include its own phone that would only be usable on one line.

Incidentally, the reason that I use two answering machines instead of
a dual line answering machine is because a dual line answering machine
can not answer both lines simultaneously.

Ray Normandeau
INTERNET:[e-mail]
P O Box 854, Times Square Station,
New York, NY 10108-0854

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

Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 14:16:54 CDT
From: Andrew C. Green <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Do-It-Yourself Car Phone Installation?


I've been toying with the idea of picking up a used cellular phone for
my wife's car, primarily for some peace of mind (both hers and mine)
in case of breakdown. At this time, neither of us have one and I'm
(obviously) not an expert on the subject. For various reasons, I want
a permanently-installed model.

Now the question: how difficult is it to install? I have extensive
experience with car electrical systems, sound systems and the like,
but the few articles I've seen on the subject make it sound like brain
surgery; they blather on about how to choose a good installation
outfit, but don't clarify what's so darned difficult about it.

Two more questions: Does the antenna require any kind of adjustment
(i.e. tuning) after installation? Finally, what sort of bureaucracy is
involved in obtaining service? This sort of paperwork is usually done
by the installation outfits, but as I said, I'm hoping to do this
myself. Thanks in advance for the net.wisdom ...


Andrew C. Green
Datalogics, Inc.      Internet: [e-mail]
441 W. Huron          UUCP: ..!uunet!dlogics!acg
Chicago, IL  60610    FAX: [phone]

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

Date: Wed, 26 Aug 92 00:00 PDT
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Another Valuable Service From Pac*Bell


Here, right from the horse's mouth, is a new subsidized service to
attempt to put the competition out of business (and exploit the
network which Pac*Bell controls):

"Pacific Bell plans to upgrade a small number of Pacific Bell Public
payphones in its franchise territory to trial Public Coin voice
Messaging Service (CVM). Our intent is to trial this service from a
limited base beginning the first quarter of 1993 pending regulatory
approval. CVM will allow a caller, encountering a busy or no answer
condition, to send up to a one minute message to their called party for
an additional fee above the cost of the call.

The caller, after hearing a busy or set number of ring-no-answers, is
presented with a voice prompt offering the service. The caller accepts
the service by following the instructional voice prompts that are
provided when the aforementioned conditions are encountered. Once the
service is accepted, the caller is forwarded to a messaging system
where the message is recorded and the call delivery is attempted at
pre-determined intervals for a set period of time depending on the
condition encountered by the caller (i.e. every 30 minutes for the
next four hours for no answer, every 15 minutes for the next two hours
on a busy).

"During the trial, customers using Pacific Bell public payphones can
leave a message for the party they are trying to reach whenever they
encounter a busy or no answer condition. Customers can now exchange
important information even without reaching the called party live.
Messaging is an important tool for people on the go."

Remember the discussion about whether a telco should charge for busy
or no-answer condition? Looks like Pac*Bell has discovered a way to do
just that (and make the customer think he got something for his money
in the process).


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

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

From: ddssuprs![e-mail] (Tom Gillman)
Organization: Dickens Data Systems, Inc.
Subject: Cell Phones in the Air
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 92 15:54:38 EDT


I, too, would like to know why cellular phones are prohibited by law on
aircraft. Please post or email any relevant info.


Thanks,

Tom Gillman                                  | Internet:  [e-mail]
Systems Integration - Dickens Data Systems   | uucp:   ...uunet!ddssuprs!tom


[Moderator's Note: Perhaps whoever sent the old thread on this topic
to the other inquirer recently will send it to Tom also. Thanks.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Shapiro)
Subject: Modem Noise on Line
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation - Marlboro, MA
Date: 26 AUG 92 09:30:37 EST


Howdy All!

I have a problem that I hope one of you wizards can help me with.

I have a residence in which I have two phone lines. The wire coming to
the house is a 'standard' four wire line (red, black, yellow, green).
For one line I use red/green and for the other I use black/yellow. On
one line I have my BBS attached and so the modem attached to that line
is quite busy. The other line is for voice.

The problem is that whenever the modem is active, there is a lot of
hissing and noise heard on the voice line.

What can I do to eliminate this? Is there a special kind of wire I can
use inside the house?

Is there something I can do on my end or do I have to have the phone
company come out and string a second physical wire in support of the
second line?

Please advise.


Regards,

[e-mail]
FidoNet 1:101/440 [phone]
The Contract Professional BBS, North Reading, MA

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

From: [e-mail] (Michael Schuster)
Subject: How Do I Locate Graybar?
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 00:09:42 GMT
Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix & Internet, NYC


Some recent posts have referred to a supplier called "Graybar".  Is
this a chain? Mail order house? Regional store?  Do they have a
catalog?


Mike Schuster
NY Pub. Access UNIX/Internet: [e-mail] | [e-mail]
The Portal (R) System: [e-mail]   | MCI Mail,GEnie: MSCHUSTER

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

From: [e-mail] (David Caldwell)
Subject: Slamming Prevention
Date: 26 Aug 92 15:56:35 GMT
Organization: Microsoft Corp.


Well, I have just set up phone service for myself and requested my
long distance carrier.  So far, so good.  When I called Southern Bell
to make some changes to my service (they default you with their
$2.50/month Maintenance Plan ... thanks, but no thanks!) I inquired
about the status of my long distance carrier.  They informed me that
it could be changed by any LD carrier with my verbal consent to said
carrier.

Well after hearing all of the horror stories on this group about
slamming I inquired about "locking" (their word, not mine) my account
so that changes could only be made when authorized by me.  They told
me that I could pay 10.75 to have my account locked!  I told them they
could take their charge and shove it.  I know that Southern Bell has
switched people I know here to other LD companies based on "verbal
confirmation" through the LD carrier.  I am thinking that switching LD
companies is a great source of revenue for my friends at Southern
Bell.  Any advice or ideas on how to deal with the phone company from
hell?


Thanks,

David Caldwell    [e-mail]

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

Date: 26 Aug 92 21:19:07 EDT
From: Larry Rachman <[e-mail]>
Subject: Anyone Hear of PROVOX?


I will be setting up an auto-attendant/voicemail system, and am
looking at a software package from a company called Provox, in
Kailua-Kona, Hawaii. The product runs on a PC with Dialogic cards.

Does anyone out there have any experience with this product? Can
anyone recommend something similar from another vendor?


Thanks,

Larry Rachman, WA2BUX - 74066,[e-mail] - Fax: [phone]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #664
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa08082;
          28 Aug 92 3:13 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA13242
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 28 Aug 1992 01:08:05 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA27149
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 28 Aug 1992 01:07:57 -0500
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 01:07:57 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #667

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 28 Aug 92 01:07:52 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 667

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    More on AT&T and Hurricane Andrew (Ed Hopper)
    CWA Union Hall Aids Hurricane Relief Efforts (Nigel Allen)
    NYC Plans Attack on Pay-Phone Abuses ([e-mail])
    Proper Use of 66-Block Punchdown Tool (Gabe M. Wiener)
    110 vs. 66M Blocks (Jonathan Edwards)
    A Bad Time to Fall Asleep (Laura Fermi, 1965 Interview via P. Townson)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Date: 27 Aug 92 17:46:23 GMT
Subject: More on AT&T and Hurricane Andrew


HURRICANE RELIEF *** Although 60,000 storm victims spent Wednesday
night in shelters after Hurricane Andrew struck Louisiana, damage was
considerably less there than in Florida.  All AT&T employees in
Louisiana are accounted for.  Also, according to information received
early today, none of the estimated 400 to 500 AT&T people in the area
struck by Andrew, which was downgraded to a tropical storm today, lost
their homes.  There was no damage done to the network as the storm
ripped through the oil towns and Cajun country of South Louisiana
Wednesday.  Calling volumes doubled Wednesday and are still up today
at 15% above normal.

Meanwhile, in Florida today, AT&T people from NCR, American Transtech
and AT&T Universal Card Services mobilized to bring emergency supplies
to AT&T people who have been provided temporary shelter at the
company's Ojus facility outside Coral Gables, Fla. Ojus has been
established as a central emergency relief office for employees.  The
storm, which has been called the most expensive natural disaster in
this country's history, wreaked between $15 and $20 billion damage in
Florida.

Some of the 80 AT&T employees unaccounted for Wednesday have been
located through efforts by the business units, although no exact
figures were available this morning. While there were no network
outages in Florida, Andrew destroyed the homes of an estimated 250,000
people, and AT&T moved quickly Wednesday to supply emergency phone
service for victims. The company sent 200 coinless public phones to
the Fort Lauderdale area and set up approximately 12 public phones at
the Homestead Air Force Base in hard-hit South Florida.  AT&T also
shipped phones and equipment used for the Republican National
Convention in Houston to the Louisiana disaster site. Various efforts
are under way to raise cash and provide supplies for storm victims.

The AT&T Foundation donated $100,000 Wednesday to the American Red
Cross Disaster Relief Fund. Employees who wish to make tax-deductible
cash donations or equipment donations can do so through the following
organizations:

  o    The Pioneers in Florida are collecting bottled water,
       portable radios, batteries, flashlights, portable stoves and
       fuel, canned food, paper products, umbrellas, clothing, baby
       items, toiletries, pet supplies, etc.  Supplies and tax-
       deductible cash donations (checks only, please), which will
       be used to assist AT&T and South Central Bell employees,
       should be sent to the address below.  Checks should be made
       out to Telephone Pioneers of America/Andrew.

               Telephone Pioneers of America
               Florida Goldcoast Chapter No. 83
               6451 N. Federal Highway
               Fort Lauderdale, Fla.  33308

  o    Donations to Florida storm victims can also be made to:

               The American Red Cross Disaster Relief Fund
               c/o Michael Carroll
               P.O. Box 025230
               Miami, Fla.  33102-5230

  o    Dade County Emergency Relief 800-682-3362

  o    Emergency-relief collections at various local AT&T building
       sites.  Check with local management for details.

After the storm struck, AT&T's Human Resource Division quickly
provided guidance to managers to help affected employees in the
following areas:

  o    Reasonable additional time off with or without pay, subject
       to local management discretion, but not to exceed 30 calendar
       days in a 12-month period.
  o    Flex time/flex place, subject to local management discretion,
       to give employees some work-schedule flexibility to handle
       personal matters or work closer to home to oversee home
       repairs.
  o    Wage advances of up to four weeks.
  o    Expedited processing of mortgage applications through
       Prudential Home Mortgage.
  o    Assistance in forming car/van pools to help employees whose
       vehicles were lost or damaged.
  o    Discounts on rental cars through Avis, Hertz and National.
  o    Local employee-sponsored fund-raising activities to aid
       employees in need.

                           -------

Ed Hopper    AT&T - IMS    Atlanta, Ga


[Moderator's Note: As pointed out yesterday in these columns, the big
need in south Florida right now is NOT for money -- they have no where
to spend it! What they do need are all sorts of common household items
and emergency supplies as per the list provided by the Telephone
Pioneers above:  baby powder, baby and pet food, flashlights, batteries,
can-openers, toilet tissue, etc.  I was gratified to get a dozen notes
today from readers who took to heart what I requested yesterday: they
found some cardboard boxes, loaded them with all sorts of household
supplies and other odds and ends, then shipped it out by overnight
delivery on Federal Express today to the Pioneer's office at the
address shown above.  How about the rest of you doing the same?  If
you need to work on it over the weekend, then send it Monday so the
folks will have it Tuesday or Wednesday. If you prefer, you can send
the same type of shipment to the attention of the City Clerk, City of
Homestead, Homestead, Florida. Federal Express will know where to
deliver it along with the truckloads of stuff arriving from big
hearted people all over the world ... two of the notes I got today
were from Digest readers in Europe. Thank you very much.  :)   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: CWA Union Hall Aids Hurricane Relief Efforts
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 92 19:23:26 EDT


Here is a press release from the AFL-CIO which mentions that the union
hall of Communications Workers Local 10511 in Jackson, Mississippi, is
being used for hurricane relief efforts.

 Labor Assists Victims Of Hurricane Andrew
 Contact: Sharolyn Rosier of the AFL-CIO, 202-637-5010

   WASHINGTON, Aug. 27/U.S. Newswire/ -- The AFL-CIO/American Red
Cross Disaster Response Network has been activated to aid relief
efforts for victims of Hurricane Andrew in Louisiana and Florida.

   The Network of 144 local unions allows the Red Cross to use their
halls in the event of disaster.  The following union halls have been
mobilized: Carpenters Local 1765 and Plumbers Local 803 in Orlando,
Fla.; Electrical Workers Local 349 in Miami; Carpenters District
Council in Hialeah, Fla.; Electrical Workers Local 985 in Baton Rouge,
La.; and Communications Workers Local 10511 in Jackson, Miss.

   The halls are equipped with staff to assist with such services as
housing, food, and damage assessment.

   AFL-CIO Community Services liasons who have more information on
labor's outreach efforts are:

   -- South Florida -- Billy Tindle or Frank Culver at
                       305-324-2523 or 324-2525
                       or Marilyn Jacobs at 305-579-2267.

   -- Baton Rouge/Jackson -- Walt Norris (phone lines are
                             down, please call Chris Marston
                             at 202-637-5010.)

   "The union halls are the backbone of the hurricane response plan
for the gulf coast and much of the eastern United States," said Armond
Marscelli, manager of disaster operations at the American Red Cross.
"Services are provided much quicker because the halls can be readily
used as staging areas, watch districts and headquarters."

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

Date: Fri, 28 Aug 92 00:47:14 EDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: NYC Plans Attack on Pay-Phone Abuses


An article in the {New York Times} on August 23 says that New York
City is moving ahead with a plan which would require the operators of
COCOTs on public property to obtain a franchise from the city's
Department of Telecommunications and Energy, and which would be
granted only to those who comply with the (Federal, state and city)
laws which regulate them.  A survey conducted by the department shows
that "as many as two thirds" of the pay phones violate the law in a
number of ways -- by overcharging, blocking long distance carrier
access, offering misleading or no information about rates, failing to
indicate the owner of the phone, and so on.

Apparently, none of the private pay phone presently on public
sidewalks have permission from the city, although such permission is
required.  (NY Telephone routinely obtains such permission.)  The
present effort is apparently an escalation by the city in the level of
enforcment: Now the companies must obtain the franchise, whereas in
the past individual phones had to be granted permission.

The article gives a number of examples of abuses which I won't repeat
here; we're all familiar with the kinds of things which go on.

The proposal is expected to be approved by the City Council in the
fall and go into effect next year.


[Moderator's Note: Chicago is doing the same thing. All pay phones
including those of Illinois Bell will have to be registered starting
next year if they are on public property.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Gabe M Wiener)
Subject: Proper use of 66-block punchdown tool
Organization: Columbia University
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 00:52:35 GMT


How does one properly punch a wire down into a 66-block so that the
end gets trimmed?

My usual practice is to stick the end into the front of the tines and
then just click it down with the punchdown tool, however, this never
seems to trim the end as (I was told) it is supposed to.

I've seen some installers click *twice* on each terminal.  Is that one
to get it it down and one to cut?

Also, is there a significance to the colors on the tool?  Mine is
black on one side and yellow on the other, though a friend of mine has
one that's blue on one side and yellow on the other.  Does any one
color indicate which side has the blade?  (Neither side on mine seems
to trim the cable.)


Gabe Wiener - Columbia Univ.  [e-mail]
N2GPZ in ham radio circles    72355,1226 on CI$

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

From: [e-mail] (Jonathan Edwards)
Subject: 110 vs. 66M Blocks
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 21:30:18 GMT


What is the difference between 110 and 66M blocks?  I am wiring my
house for a mix of voice and possible future 10-BASET.  All the wires
will end-run to the blocks in the basement.  Should I use 110 or 66M
blocks?


Jonathan Edwards    [e-mail]
IntraNet, Inc        617-527-7020

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

Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 23:24:00 -0400
From: TELECOM Moderator ([e-mail])
Subject: A Bad Time to Fall Asleep


The article below is reprinted from the TELECOM Digest, Volume 10,
Issue 12, Thursday, January 4, 1990. With the passing of two and a
half years, there are many readers who did not see it. My thanks to
Mark Brader ([e-mail]) for suggesting this be reprinted.

PAT

   Date: Thu, 4 Jan 90 0:31:10 CST
   From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
   Subject: A Bad Time to Fall Asleep


There were simpler times in the history of telephony, and simpler
problems to deal with.

During the several years I lived in the Hyde Park neighorhood on the
south side of Chicago during the 1960's, my favorite neighbor was
Lauri Fermi, widow of Enrico Fermi, known for his work on the Atomic
Bomb.  Mrs. Fermi and I lived in the same apartment building on East
56th Street, directly across the street from the Museum of Science and
Industry, and we chatted and dined together frequently.

In the fall of 1965, on the occassion of the twentieth anniversary of
the completion and first testing of the bomb, Mrs. Fermi told a
fascinating story of that summer day, twenty years earlier. Her
comments were tape-recorded, and are transcribed below:

"The testing was of course kept closely under wraps, you know, the
government was awfully sensitive about it. All the papers were giving
reports that a monster-like weapon was in the final testing stages,
but some of the newspaper accounts were ridiculous. Enrico was given
his orders only two days earlier as to exactly where we were to be
stationed in the test zone area. Even the local people in New Mexico
were told as little as possible; I think the governor and some state
officials were told, and sworn to secrecy.

"In Alamogordo, we checked into the hotel then drove out to where
Enrico had been assigned. It was set up that the scientists were
deployed over about a two hundred square mile area; we were about
fifteen miles from the target.

"The test was set for 4:30 AM the next morning, so we returned to the
hotel and went to bed early. We got up at 3 the next morning and drove
out to the location, since it took about an hour to set up the test
gear Enrico would use ... I suppose it was about 4:15, when a fierce
rain storm developed. It lasted only five or ten minutes, but was
quite a downpour, and Enrico remarked he hoped nothing would go wrong
with the test because of it.

"Well, the time came and went, everything was quiet, no bomb, nothing.
About 4:45, Enrico decided we had better return to town and see what
was what, and we drove back. He wanted to make a phone call and see if
the test had been cancelled or not, and the only place open in town at
that time of night was the hotel where we had stayed. There was a
payphone in the lobby, and Enrico went in the booth, but he didn't get
anywhere. I heard him flashing the hook and swearing softly, then he
came out and said he could not get the operator. (Alamogordo had
manual service at that time, just a small switchboard.)

"We got in the car, and Enrico had me drive while he leaned out the
window and kept looking overhead at the phone wires. He'd have me turn
down one street, then turn back up another street, and finally he said
pull the car over and stop.

"Where we stopped was in front of a house on one of the residential
streets there, but what looked odd to me was on the side of the house,
there were hundreds of wires converging, coming in from a dozen
telephone poles which all seemed to meet in the back yard or on the
side of the house. And all these wires came down out of the sky you
might say, and went in the side of the house in a big bundle.

"The front porch light was burning, and when we went up on the front
porch, the front door was open, but the screen door was latched from
the inside. A radio was playing music very softly, and the room was
rather dim with just a single light burning. A switchboard sat on one
side of the room, and the signal lights on it were flashing off and on
like Christmas tree lights. Over by the other corner was a sofa, and
a woman was laying on the sofa, obviously sound asleep. This was right
about five o'clock, I guess, or a few minutes after.

"Enrico banged on the screen door a few times, then kicked it once or
twice with his foot. All of a sudden, the lady woke up; she looked
over at us very startled, standing at the door; she looked over at the
switchboard; looked back at us; jumped up and rushed over to the board
and sat down, pausing long enough to light a cigarette and she started
frantically answering all the flashing signals.

"We got back in the car, and drove out to where we had been before. We
were there about five minutes, and the test was conducted. Everything
the poets have said about the brilliance and beauty of that first
explosion was true.... later, we got together with the others who had
been assigned there and found out that it wasn't the rain that delayed
things; it was that woman asleep; you see, the main people responsible
were linked by phones through Alamogordo; they had to coordinate what
they were doing and sychronize their work. All of them got the same
thing on the phone we got: no answer from the operator for 45 minutes!

"Really, I can't blame the lady much. The whole summer of 1945 was
just horrid. When we arrived the day before, the temperature was over
a hundred; the poor lady probably couldn't sleep at all that day from
the heat, and still had to go to work that night exhausted. Then the
rain cooled things off twenty degrees in fifteen minutes; that sofa
was just too tempting for her; and probably every other night she only
got two or three calls in the whole eight hour shift....

"No one ever said anything to her or the woman who owned the phone
exchange there, so I suspect to this day, twenty years later, she
doesn't realize she was responsible for causing the first atomic bomb
explosion in the world to be delayed for a little over an hour ... but
as I think back now, probably someone should have told her ahead of
time about that very special morning, and sworn her to secrecy until
the test was completed.

"When I was there in town two weeks ago for the (twentieth
anniversary) reunion, just from curiosity I went past that house; it
took me awhile to remember where it was. No wires anywhere like
before; and I asked someone there if the phone exchange was there. He
told me the 'telephone lady' had been gone for years; Bell or someone
had bought it and moved it to a building in the downtown area."

===================== End of Transcription =======================

And that was Laura Fermi talking about the summer of '45 in the desert
of New Mexico, in the fall of '65 at a dinner.


Patrick Townson

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #667
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa09469;
          28 Aug 92 4:07 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA20200
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 28 Aug 1992 02:00:59 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA15822
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 28 Aug 1992 02:00:51 -0500
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 02:00:51 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #668

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 28 Aug 92 02:00:53 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 668

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: San Francisco Area Exchange Names (John Higdon)
    Re: San Francisco Area Exchange Names (Nigel Allen)
    Re: San Francisco Area Exchange Names (Carl Moore)
    Re: Weird Intercept (Arthur Rubin)
    Re: Weird Intercept (Carl Moore)
    Re: Automated Hate Calls in Minnesota (Carol Springs)
    Re: Automated Hate Calls in Minnesota (Scott Dorsey)
    Re: 800 Portability (Alan L. Varney)
    Re: 800 Portability (David G. Lewis)
    Re: AT&T and Sandia (Mike Proicou)
    Re: AT&T and Sandia (Mark Boolootian)
    Re: AT&T and Sandia (Bud Couch)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Thu, 27 Aug 92 23:44 PDT
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: San Francisco Area Exchange Names


[e-mail] (Daniel M. Rosenberg) writes:

> Does anyone happen to have a phone book sufficiently old enough to
> list the old-style exchange names in the South Bay?

I don't have a phone book that old, but memory still serves somewhat.

> The one I know in Palo Alto was for the main 32x exchange, known as
> "DAvenport," from an old sign. Davenport? What's that have to do with
> Palo Alto? Did the phone company just make that up?

Funny you mention that. As you head north on Hwy 1 from Santa Cruz you
come to a little town called "Davenport". It consists of a general
store and gas station. I would guess that it is just over the mountain
from Palo Alto (south and west). Of course, I have no idea what if any
connection there would be.

> And did the 424's, 85x's, 497's and so forth come from anywhere?

Possibly the 85x exchange has a name because it dates back into that
era, but the other exchanges are new and have no names. But for your
amusement here are some in your area:

76x = REgent (Sunnyvale)
96x = YOrkshire (Mountain View)
94x = WHitecliff (Los Altos)
36x = EMpire (Redwood City)
34x = DIamond (San Mateo)

In the San Jose area, for some unknown reason, different names were
given to prefixes that had the first two digits, even though they were
in the same town. Years ago Campbell had three prefixes: 377, 378, and
379. They were named ESsex, FRanklin, and DRexel. Two were in one CO
and the third in another. Los Gatos had two: 354 and 356. Both were
ELgato and were in separate offices and were served by the "Western
California Telephone Company" which was later acquired and hosed by
GTE.

San Jose had 29x which were all CYpress except 296 which was AXminster
and was served out of a Santa Clara office. 24x was CHerry except for
245 which was CHestnut and was actually a Sunnyvale prefix. 25x was
split down the middle with about half being ALpine and half being
CLayburn. ALpine was westside and Cupertino; CLayburn was eastside. My
prefix was named ANdrews, but 262 and 263 were AMhearst and were used
in Milpitas.

> Where could I find out?

I believe the San Jose public library has back issues of the telephone
directory. You will need to find a 1961 or earlier edition.


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

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: San Francisco Area Exchange Names
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 92 5:00:34 EDT


In Volume 12, Issue 661, [e-mail] (Daniel M. Rosenberg)
asks:

> Does anyone happen to have a phone book sufficiently old enough
> to list the old-style exchange names in the South Bay?

Pacific Bell probably has a historical department that could answer
your question.

If you are interested in looking at old telephone directories, your
local library may have them on microfilm. (In Canada, the Metro
Toronto Reference Library has a complete set of all Bell Canada
telephone directories ever issued on microfilm.) It's interesting to
look at a 1953 directory in which today's office-park suburbs show up
as farming communities with manual telephone service.

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

Date: Thu, 27 Aug 92 12:27:53 EDT
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: San Francisco Area Exchange Names


You could go to a library and look up newspapers on microfilm.  Some
libraries might even have old telephone directories on microfilm, as
was the case in Wilmington, Delaware (where I located a 1960 directory
on microfilm and figured from it that the 1965 area code split in
Florida was 305/904).


[Moderator's Note: The Chicago Public Library has directories from
Illinois Bell and Chicago Telephone Company (IBT's 1920's predecessor)
going back to 1879. They are all on microfilm, as is a complete set of
the {Chicago Tribune} back to October, 1871. They have a few pre-fire
copies of the {Tribune) between 1842 and 1871 also. I use the old
issues of the papers a lot for reference.  PAT]

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

Subject: Re: Weird Intercept
From: a_rubin%dsg4.dse.beckman.com (Arthur Rubin)
Date: 27 Aug 92 15:29:41 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Arthur Rubin)


In <[e-mail]> MPA15AB![e-mail].
unisys.com writes:

> I'm trying to reach someone in the 213-663 exchange (I've reached this
> number before).  When I dial it I get an intercept that says "We're
> sorry; your call cannot be completed as dialed from the phone you are
> using.  Please read the instruction card and dial again."  (There are
> the standard SIT tones at the beginning.)  This is odd since I'm
> calling from my office phone, not a pay phone.

Sounds like a PBX intercept to me.

Arthur L. Rubin: [e-mail] (work) Beckman Instruments/Brea
[e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail] (personal)
My opinions are my own, and do not represent those of my employer.


[Moderator's Note: IBT has a few numbers where they 'store' various
funky intercept recordings for whatever reason: 312-856-1520 ==> 1525
always return messages like " ... can't be completed as dialed, please
ask your attendant for assistance", "<tones> all circuits are busy
now", and a particularly odd one used to be in that range of numbers
which simply said "the voting has been concluded"(?), plus one that
makes sense if you think about it, "the number you have dialed cannot
be reached from outside the customer's premises".   PAT]

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

Date: Thu, 28 Aug 92 16:52:34 EDT
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Weird Intercept


All I can find is that 663 is a Los Angeles prefix and thus would
still be in 213, not in 310.

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

From: drilex!carols
Subject: Re: Automated Hate Calls in Minnesota
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 92 17:56:13 EDT


In Volume 12, Issue 661, [e-mail] (Brett G Person)
writes:

> Apparently, people [in Minneapolis are getting calls] from a new kind
> of telemarketer slime encourageing them to hate minorites, Jews,etc.  It
> sounded like the phone calls were comming from an automated dialer
> that plays a tape encouraging violence. The State Attourney General's
> office says that this doesn't violate any laws.

> Any comments? Have any of you gotten phome calls like this?

Thankfully, not any quite of this nature.  But I did get a call the
other day that started out,

      "Hello, there.  This is Thomas Something-or-other, your
      neighbor, and I was wondering:  Has anyone ever told you
      to ... go to hell?"

                             <pause>

      "Well, I just wanted to tell you to ...  go to heaven."

It was, of course, a recorded pitch for some church; which one, I'm
not sure, since I quickly hung up.

The message served its purpose as an attention-getter.  The recording
had low enough background noise that it was hard to identify the call
immediately as automated.  Especially annoying was that I do have an
upstairs neighbor named Tom, with whom I have had conflicts about
noise in the past, so there was a considerable adrenalin rush for a
second there.  I wish now I'd stayed on the line long enough to see if
they were taking information, and if so, to respond, um,
appropriately.


Carol Springs    [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: Well what would you rather have, a phone call like
that or the Jehovah Witnesses coming to your door at 9 AM on Saturday
morning like they do mine?  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] ( Scott Dorsey)
Subject: Re: Automated Hate Calls in Minnesota
Organization: NASA Langley Research Center and Reptile Farm
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 12:59:07 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> plains![e-mail]
(Brett G Person) writes:

> Apparently, people there I getting alls from a new kind of
> telemarketer slime encourageing them to hate minorites, Jews,etc.  It
> sounded like the phone calls were comming from an automated dialer
> that plays a tape encouraging violence. The State Attourney General's
> office says that this doesn't violate any laws.

I have got calls from a local church, which uses an automated dialer
to call in the afternoons and exhort people to attend church.  I have
also got a call from an automated dialer which is reminding me to vote
for the Republican party in the next presidential election.  I did not
find either of these offensive, although I found them both rather
silly wastes of telephone switching capability.


scott


[Moderator's Note: We have one working hard here at present exhorting
whoever answers to be sure and vote Democratic.  PAT]

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

Date: Wed, 26 Aug 92 07:18:55 CDT
From: [e-mail] (Alan L Varney)
Subject: Re: 800 Portability
Organization: AT&T Network Systems, Lisle, IL


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

> I was just wondering about the 800 portability area ... will this mean
> that all 800 exchanges will be come portable at once? or will they be
> phased in?

> Will every possible exchange become avaiable?

   NOTE:  The following is opinion -- the details are still being
          "worked out" in various industry committees.

   Every exchange (NXX) can be made "portable", in theory.  Since some
of them are already "portable" in the sense of using the LEC 800
databases (that is, the LEC "NXX" codes), I don't believe you'll see
an "at once" scenario.  A local CO might cut all remaining NXX codes
at once (maintaining the same routing after the database query as
before), but it will take some time to get all the COs to use the new
database for all 800 calls.  Once that total change-over is complete,
it will be possible to change the routing of a given number.

> Will the residential user be able to switch carriers just as easily as
> a large company?

> Who will control the number space and be reponsiable for routing
> problems?

   See above NOTE.  Correction of problems is a major concern of the
industry.  Anyone know of another industry that has multiple databases
with multiple owners with content specified by companies competing
against each other???  The only one that comes to mind is the default
carrier assigned to equal access lines.

> I assume that the customer could have different carriers at different
> times of day and location along with multi termination points ... (I
> would hate to have to write that database).

   The database is already "written" for the capabilities you've
mentioned, and others.  But maintaining them ALL accurately is going
to be much harder than building them ever was ... and, of course,
you're likely to be billed based somewhat on the complexity of what
you're asking the system to do.


Al Varney -- remember, it's just MY opinion

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

From: [e-mail] (david.g.lewis)
Subject: Re: 800 Portability
Organization: AT&T
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 13:32:00 GMT


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

> I was just wondering about the 800 portability area ... will this mean
> that all 800 exchanges will be come portable at once? or will they be
> phased in?

It's phased, but not the way you're thinking.  At some point in time,
LECs will begin doing SCP (database) queries of 800 numbers in
parallel with six-digit translations in switches; these queries will
do six-digit translations in the SCP.  At first, these queries will
not be used for call processing, just to test the system.  After some
soak period, the query responses will begin to be used for call
processing and the six-digit translations in the switches will be
deactivated.  After some additional soak period, the SCPs will begin
doing ten-digit translations (instead of six-digit translations).  At
this point, "800 number portability" is available for all 800-NXXs.

> Will every possible exchange become avaiable?

I believe so, save for some which may be reserved for testing or for
network use.

> Will the residential user be able to switch carriers just as easily as
> a large company?
> Who will control the number space and be reponsiable for routing
> problems?

I believe the bid for 800 DBA (Database Administrator) is still open,
but I'm not sure.  The 800 DBA will effectively control the 800 number
space, because the 800 DBA is the organization which updates the
database.  I don't know if the upstream information flows (customer ->
800 DBA) have been well-defined yet.  (For that matter, I don't know
how well-defined the downstream information flows -- 800 DBA -> 800
SMSs -> 800 SCPs -- are ... but given the organizations involved, I
have a little more confidence in that area than in the upstream
area ...)

As to responsibility for routing problems, that's an interesting
question.  Issues of incorrect routing will have to be resolved by the
originating LEC, the 800 DBA, the customer, and any and all involved
800 service providers.  This is one of the operational issues that is
critical to the success of 800 number portability, and probably one of
the ones that some companies (among which my employer is one) have
been insisting must be well-defined before 800 NP is implemented.

> I assume that the customer could have different carriers at different
> times of day and location along with multi termination points ... (I
> would hate to have to write that database).

Bellcore calls these "vertical services"; I believe the plan is that
they are a "phase 2" implementation of the 800 database service.

Disclaimer 1: This information is drawn from memory of another AT&T
person's presentation on the 800 number portability implementation
plan.  I accept full responsibility for any errors ... is there anyone
out there, say, from Bellcore SS7 Project Management who might be able
to correct any of them?

Disclaimer 2: My views, not AT&T's, etc., etc.


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

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

Date: Thu, 27 Aug 92 09:08:45 MDT
From: [e-mail] (Mike Proicou)
Subject: Re: AT&T and Sandia
Organization: Parallel Processing Group, Phillips Lab


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Dave
Niebuhr) writes:

> What is happening is that the contracts between the DOE sites and AT&T
> are up for renewal and apparently Sandia is going with another company
> for their long distance carrier.

> My employer, Brookhaven National Laboratory, is negotiating a contract
> right now and I don't know who the players are at the present time.

Nahh, that's not it.  AT&T through Bell Labs through Sandia Corp. is
the operating contractor for SNL.  All of the DOE labs and plants are
GOCO (government owned-contractor operated) facilities.  BNL is
operated by something like Associated Universities, Inc. isn't it?  Los
Alamos is operated by the University of California.  Oak Ridge by
Martin Marietta Energy Systems.

The word in town is that DOE is pushing for the contractors to operate
the labs for profit (instead of the cost + $1).  In exchange, DOE
wants the contractor to accept liability for cleaning up any
environmental problems.  Doesn't sound like a bargain to me.

I'm across base at the Air Force's Phillips Lab, so this is all just
stuff in the papers and rumors.


Mike Proicou             [phone]
Phillips Laboratory/WSP  Kirtland AFB, NM 87117-6008

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

Date: Thu, 27 Aug 92 08:50:21 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Mark Boolootian)
Subject: Re: AT&T and Sandia


[e-mail] (Ronald Oakes) writes:

> I have to say that I hope that Sandia does not close.  My father has
> worked there for 30+ years as an engineer. Additionally, directly and
> indirectly most of the population of Albuquerque, NM -- my home town --
> would be effected by its closing.

It should be noted that there is more than one Sandia lab: Sandia,
Livermore is right across the street from LLNL.  I have not heard
rumours of a shutdown (and I'd be very surprised if it actually came
to that).

LLNL is in the process of renegotiating its contract with the
University of California.  This occurs every five years (at least for
LLNL).  If the UC were to opt to no longer manage LLNL (which was a
real possibility for awhile), we would begin the search for another
organization to manage us.  I seriously doubt we would shut down.


Mark Boolootian      [e-mail]  [phone]

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

From: kentrox![e-mail] (Bud Couch)
Subject: Re: AT&T and Sandia
Organization: ADC Kentrox, Portland OR
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 19:05:06 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Ronald Oakes) writes:

> [e-mail] (Jim Haynes) writes:

>> I see by the news that after September, 1993 AT&T will no longer serve
>> as the management and operating contractor for the Dept. of Energy
>> Sandia National Laboratories.  Does anybody know what's happening?  Is

> I have to say that I hope that Sandia does not close.  My father has
> worked there for 30+ years as an engineer. Additionally, directly and

> I suspect that AT&T's decision to not renew the contract to operate
> Sandia is related to the large number of lay off's that have been
> occuring at the AT&T division around here, the automation of operator
> services, and the other steps that they seem to be taking to
> streamline operations.

I really doubt that AT&T's decision to drop the management of Sandia
is in any way related to the "automation of operator services".

Since your father worked there, I assume you know what they did, but
maybe a lot of netters aren't aware: the Department of Energy label is
a bit of a smokescreen. Sandia Labs was operated by (originally
Western Electric Government Operations) AT&T to do weapons work, i.e.
"The Bomb".

No, I think that AT&T simply saw that, with end of the Cold War, the
government teat labeled "defense" was drying up, and big bucks were no
longer guarenteed.

I thought that Lawrence-Livermore and Sandia had been combined under
some sort of common management awhile back, but I could be wrong on
that. Does anyone if this management change affects Lawrence-Livermore?


Bud Couch - ADC/Kentrox    If my employer only knew ... standard BS applies

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #668
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa13851;
          30 Aug 92 18:02 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA07156
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 30 Aug 1992 16:09:22 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA16892
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 30 Aug 1992 16:09:12 -0500
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 16:09:12 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #669

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 30 Aug 92 16:09:00 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 669

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Automated Hate Calls in Minnesota (Harold Hallikainen)
    Re: Automated Hate Calls in Minnesota (Mark W. Schumann)
    Re: Automated Hate Calls in Minnesota (John Higdon)
    Re: 800 Portability (Alan L. Varney)
    Re: 800 Portability (David G. Lewis)
    Re: Proper Use of 66-Block Punchdown Tool (Walter R. Trachim)
    Re: Proper Use of 66-Block Punchdown Tool (John Higdon)
    Re: Proper use of 66-Block Punchdown Tool (Julian Macassey)
    Re: 66 and 110 Punchdown Blocks (Pat Turner)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Harold Hallikainen)
Subject: Re: Automated Hate Calls in Minnesota
Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo
Date: Sat, 29 Aug 1992 18:58:23 GMT


    Here in California, recorded message calls must be preceeded
by a live person who:

    1.  Identifies him or herself.
    2.  States the nature and duration of the message.
    3.  Asks wheter you are willing to listen to the message.
    4.  Disconnects if you refuse.

    These rules do not apply to calls from outside the state of
California or to calls placed by businesses to preexisting customers.

    If you receive a recorded message call which fails to do all
of the above and wish to make a complaint, your local Business Office
will need to know the name of the individual or business making the
call.

    I've received several calls that do not comply with these
requirements, and have, where the caller is identified, turned them
over to the local business office.  Have never gotten a call that
complies with the requirements.


Harold

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

Date: Sat, 29 Aug 92 13:31 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Mark W. Schumann)
Subject: Re: Automated Hate Calls in Minnesota
Organization: Akademia Pana Kleksa, Publi Access UNI* Site


I would think that anyone calling you could be cited for harrassment
if you asked him/her to stop calling and were ignored.  IMHO, if the
caller chooses not to listen to you (by automating the call), that is
the caller's problem.  The first time you get one of those calls, ask
the computer to refrain from calling ever again.  The second time, you
can prosecute.  :-)


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

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

Date: Fri, 28 Aug 92 10:53 PDT
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: Automated Hate Calls in Minnesota


On Aug 28 at  2:00, TELECOM Moderator writes:

> [Moderator's Note: Well what would you rather have, a phone call like
> that or the Jehovah Witnesses coming to your door at 9 AM on Saturday
> morning like they do mine?  PAT]

As a matter of fact, a Saturday morning phone call OR a Saturday
morning visit from the Jehovah's Witnesses would be handled about the
same way. My front door is equipped with the doorphone option on my
Panasonic hybrid. Someone comes to the door, I reach over and "answer
the phone", and tell whoever it is to "shove it under the door" and go
away. Then I hang up and go back to sleep.


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

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

Date: Sun, 30 Aug 92 07:18:55 CDT
From: [e-mail] (Alan L Varney)
Subject: Re: 800 Portability
Organization: AT&T Network Systems, Lisle, IL


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

> I was just wondering about the 800 portability area ... will this mean
> that all 800 exchanges will be come portable at once? or will they be
> phased in?

> Will every possible exchange become avaiable?

   NOTE:  The following is opinion -- the details are still being
          "worked out" in various industry committees.

   Every exchange (NXX) can be made "portable", in theory.  Since some
of them are already "portable" in the sense of using the LEC 800
databases (that is, the LEC "NXX" codes), I don't believe you'll see
an "at once" scenario.  A local CO might cut all remaining NXX codes
at once (maintaining the same routing after the database query as
before), but it will take some time to get all the COs to use the new
database for all 800 calls.  Once that total change-over is complete,
it will be possible to change the routing of a given number.

> Will the residential user be able to switch carriers just as easily as
> a large company?

> Who will control the number space and be reponsiable for routing
> problems?

   See above NOTE.  Correction of problems is a major concern of the
industry.  Anyone know of another industry that has multiple databases
with multiple owners with content specified by companies competing
against each other???  The only one that comes to mind is the default
carrier assigned to equal access lines.

> I assume that the customer could have different carriers at different
> times of day and location along with multi termination points ... (I
> would hate to have to write that database).

   The database is already "written" for the capabilities you've
mentioned, and others.  But maintaining them ALL accurately is going
to be much harder than building them ever was. And, of course, you're
likely to be billed based somewhat on the complexity of what you're
asking the system to do.


Al Varney -- remember, it's just MY opinion

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

From: [e-mail] (david.g.lewis)
Subject: Re: 800 Portability
Organization: AT&T
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 13:32:00 GMT


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

> I was just wondering about the 800 portability area ... will this mean
> that all 800 exchanges will be come portable at once? or will they be
> phased in?

It's phased, but not the way you're thinking.  At some point in time,
LECs will begin doing SCP (database) queries of 800 numbers in
parallel with six-digit translations in switches; these queries will
do six-digit translations in the SCP.  At first, these queries will
not be used for call processing, just to test the system.  After some
soak period, the query responses will begin to be used for call
processing and the six-digit translations in the switches will be
deactivated.  After some additional soak period, the SCPs will begin
doing ten-digit translations (instead of six-digit translations).  At
this point, "800 number portability" is available for all 800-NXXs.

> Will every possible exchange become avaiable?

I believe so, save for some which may be reserved for testing or for
network use.

> Will the residential user be able to switch carriers just as easily as
> a large company?
> Who will control the number space and be reponsiable for routing
> problems?

I believe the bid for 800 DBA (Database Administrator) is still open,
but I'm not sure.  The 800 DBA will effectively control the 800 number
space, because the 800 DBA is the organization which updates the
database.  I don't know if the upstream information flows (customer ->
800 DBA) have been well-defined yet.  (For that matter, I don't know
how well-defined the downstream information flows -- 800 DBA -> 800
SMSs -> 800 SCPs -- are ... but given the organizations involved, I
have a little more confidence in that area than in the upstream
area...)

As to responsibility for routing problems, that's an interesting
question.  Issues of incorrect routing will have to be resolved by the
originating LEC, the 800 DBA, the customer, and any and all involved
800 service providers.  This is one of the operational issues that is
critical to the success of 800 number portability, and probably one of
the ones that some companies (among which my employer is one) have
been insisting must be well-defined before 800 NP is implemented.

> I assume that the customer could have different carriers at different
> times of day and location along with multi termination points ... (I
> would hate to have to write that database).

Bellcore calls these "vertical services"; I believe the plan is that
they are a "phase 2" implementation of the 800 database service.

Disclaimer 1: This information is drawn from memory of another AT&T person's
presentation on the 800 number portability implementation plan.  I accept
full responsibility for any errors... is there anyone out there, say, from
Bellcore SS7 Project Management who might be able to correct any of them?

Disclaimer 2: My views, not AT&T's, etc., etc.


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

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

Date: Sun, 30 Aug 92 09:52:55 -0400
From: [e-mail] (Walter R. Trachim)
Subject: Re: Proper Use of 66-Block Punchdown Tool
Organization: UNH Network Services, Durham, NH


> How does one properly punch a wire down into a 66-block so that the
> end gets trimmed?

> My usual practice is to stick the end into the front of the tines and
> then just click it down with the punchdown tool, however, this never
> seems to trim the end as (I was told) it is supposed to.

> I've seen some installers click *twice* on each terminal.  Is that one
> to get it it down and one to cut?

In my experience, it depends on a number of things: 1.) the quality of
the cross-connect you're using, 2.) whether or not the block is new,
e.g., how many times connections have been made on the positions
you're working with on the 66 block and whether or not there are
indents under the pins, and 3.)  the sharpness of the blade. As far as
punching more than once on a wire, that depends on how well the wire
was punched after the first hit. Sometimes it will go down on one try.
But more often than not having to whack on it more than once is the
rule rather than the exception.

> Also, is there a significance to the colors on the tool?  Mine is
> black on one side and yellow on the other, though a friend of mine has
> one that's blue on one side and yellow on the other.  Does any one
> color indicate which side has the blade?  (Neither side on mine seems
> to trim the cable.)

If you look on the yellow side of your tool, you should see the word
"CUT" in bold letters at the blade end. If you install you 66 blade
with the uneven side out, the lip of the blade should be on the yellow
side for cutting. Same goes if you're using a 110/88 blade; it has a
hook on one side, and that's used for cutting the end off of the
x-connect.


                         Walter R. Trachim
 University of New Hampshire - Office of Telecom and Network Services
            Telecommunications Center, Durham, NH 03824
                       [e-mail]

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

Date: Sun, 30 Aug 92 11:00 PDT
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: Proper Use of 66-Block Punchdown Tool


[e-mail] (Gabe M Wiener) writes:

> I've seen some installers click *twice* on each terminal.  Is that one
> to get it it down and one to cut?

That is sometimes necessary, but ...

> Does any one color indicate which side has the blade?  (Neither side
> on mine seems to trim the cable.)

The tool is shipped with the CUTTING end inside the handle. You are
apparently using the NON-CUTTING end. Loosen the big screw near the
blade, pull the blade out, swing it around, push it back in, and
tighten the screw. You will see that one side of the blade now has a
sharp ridge that will trim the copper wire. It will be obvious which
way to hold the tool (you do not want to cut the business end of the
wire, but rather the excess).


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Julian Macassey)
Subject: Re: Proper Use of 66-Block Punchdown Tool
Date: 30 Aug 92 16:22:05 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Julian Macassey)
Organization: The Hole in the Wall  Hollywood California U.S.A.


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Gabe M Wiener) writes:
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 667, Message 4 of 6

> How does one properly punch a wire down into a 66-block so that the
> end gets trimmed?

> My usual practice is to stick the end into the front of the tines and
> then just click it down with the punchdown tool, however, this never
> seems to trim the end as (I was told) it is supposed to.

> I've seen some installers click *twice* on each terminal.  Is that one
> to get it it down and one to cut?

> Also, is there a significance to the colors on the tool?  Mine is
> black on one side and yellow on the other, though a friend of mine has
> one that's blue on one side and yellow on the other.  Does any one
> color indicate which side has the blade?  (Neither side on mine seems
> to trim the cable.)

    Your description is not clear. So lets make some assumptions.
You are using a springloaded punchdown tool. The tool has a bit on the
end of it that is reversable. You usually reverse these by loosening a
screw or a collet. One end of the bit is for punching and cutting, the
other end is for punching only -- used when looping wire across several
blocks. The cutting end has a knife blade on one side.

    If that blade is blunt or you are using the end without the
blade. The wire will not get cut. Get a new bit, they cost about
$10.00, worth it every time.

> I've seen some installers click *twice* on each terminal.  Is that one
> to get it it down and one to cut?

    A good tool with a sharp bit will punch and cut with one
simple stroke. If it takes two, sharpen the blade or replace it.

> Also, is there a significance to the colors on the tool?  Mine is
> black on one side and yellow on the other, though a friend of mine has
> one that's blue on one side and yellow on the other.  Does any one
> color indicate which side has the blade?  (Neither side on mine seems
> to trim the cable.)

    The colours are an indication of the manufacturer. If you
can't see the blade, you don't have one. Take out the bit and reverse
it, or buy a new bit. Some punchdown tools have a legend "Blade" on
the handle to help orient the user.

    If this is not clear, stop a telco installer - the guys and
girls with the macho tool belts. Ask how to use and adjust a puncdown
tool. Easier to use than a revolver -- much more fun. Both look good
on your hip.


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

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 92 14:13 EDT
From: rsiatl![e-mail]
Subject: Re: 66 and 110 Punchdown Blocks


Gabe M Wiener writes:

> How does one properly punch a wire down into a 66-block so that the
> end gets trimmed?

I can think of three likely reasons you aren't getting good results:

1) Dull blade (You may be able to inprove this a little with a whetstone
   but usually blades used by non-pros get nicked from being dropped
   and such.)

2) Wrong wire, 22-26 AWG PIC or PVC wire works best.  Broadcasters
   will often use them for stranded wire and 20 ga wire.

3) You are aware that the blade has two ends, one of which cuts and
   terminates, and the other which just terminates.

The inpact is supposed to be adjustable, though I've never noticed a
difference from adjusting this control.

> My usual practice is to stick the end into the front of the tines and
> then just click it down with the punchdown tool, however, this never
> seems to trim the end as (I was told) it is supposed to.

One impact should be enough

> I've seen some installers click *twice* on each terminal.  Is that one
> to get it it down and one to cut?

Not that I know of.

> Also, is there a significance to the colors on the tool?  Mine is
> black on one side and yellow on the other, though a friend of mine has
> one that's blue on one s the cutting side if the cutting end of a
> blade is used.

Jonathan Edwards writes:

> What is the difference between 110 and 66M blocks?  I am wiring my
> house for a mix of voice and possible future 10-BASET.  All the wires
> will end-run to the blocks in the basement.  Should I use 110 or 66M
> blocks?

If you are going to use ethernet, I would opt for the 110 if you can
borrow the tools to install them.  I am assuming you are familar with
the 66 blocks.  The 110 blocks were developed by AT&T as part of their
Premise Distribution System (PDS).  110 Blocks are composed of two
parts, a wiring block built in units of four strips, each holding 25
pair.

The wiring is positioned on the wiring block and a connector block is
punched down of top of them.  Connector blocks are available with
capacities of two, three, four, and five pair, and contain the actual
insulation displacement clips. The building wiring or cable from a PBX
or other equipiment goes under the blocks and jumpers are run on top
of the connector blocks.  Both the wiring block and the connector
block are color coded.

[Moderator's Note: Two sentences here were scrambled and unreadable. PAT]

110 Blocks are designed for 22-26 AWG PIC and PVC wire.  In this
respect they are not as versatile as 66 blocks.  They are however,
supposed to be better for high speed data and use much less space.

Northen Telecom has a similar product called BIX.


Pat Turner   KB4GRZ     [e-mail]

[Moderator's Note: This article arrived with several control
characters imbedded in it and various instances of letters left out of
words entirely. It has been reconstructed as I think he meant it with
the exception of a couple sentences I simply could not figure out.  PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #669
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa14972;
          30 Aug 92 18:29 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA07066
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 30 Aug 1992 16:42:24 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA07838
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 30 Aug 1992 16:42:16 -0500
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 16:42:16 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #670

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 30 Aug 92 16:42:20 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 670

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: How Do I Locate Graybar? (Android Rubin)
    Re: How Do I Locate Graybar? (Pat Turner)
    Re: How Do I Locate Graybar? (John Gilbert)
    Re: PacBell Message Center Woes (John Higdon)
    Re: PacBell Message Center Woes (Sam Drake)
    Re: Voice Message Service (John Higdon)
    Re: Is RJ45 With Notch Same as RJ45 Without Notch? (Laird P. Broadfield)
    Re: Is RJ45 With Notch Same as RJ45 Without Notch? (Pat Turner)
    Re: 110 vs. 66M Blocks (David Ptasnik)
    Re: 800 Portability (Steve Forrette)
    Re: 2500 Picturephone in the News (Michael Rosen)
    Re: 2500 Picturephone in the News (Will Martin)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Android Rubin)
Subject: Re: How Do I Locate Graybar?
Date: 30 Aug 92 20:54:33 GMT
Organization: Apple Computer Inc., Cupertino, CA


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Michael
Schuster) writes:

> Some recent posts have referred to a supplier called "Graybar".  Is
> this a chain? Mail order house? Regional store?  Do they have a
> catalog?

Graybar
2345 Paragon Dr
San Jose, CA
[phone]


Andy   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: Sat, 29 Aug 92 21:10 EDT
From: rsiatl![e-mail]
Subject: Re: How Do I Locate Graybar?


> Some recent posts have referred to a supplier called "Graybar".  Is
> this a chain? Mail order house? Regional store?  Do they have a
> catalog?

You should have looked in the phonebook first.  Graybar Electric has a
office in Manhattan.  The phone number I have is [phone] They
are set up to do counter sales, and will set up an account for almost
anyone. (volume-wise at least, I'm sure you have to be in D&B, or
otherwise have good credit) They will also take cash, check, or credit
card at least in the southeast.

They do have a catalog, but it's quite large, you may want to ask for
a mini-catalog in your area of interest.

Similar companies would include Anixter, Alltel, and North Supply.
Alltel, if I remember correctly, includes prices in their catalog.


Pat Turner   KB4GRZ  [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (John Gilbert)
Subject: Re: How Do I Locate Graybar?
Organization: Motorola, Inc. Land Mobile Products Sector
Date: Sat, 29 Aug 1992 22:31:40 GMT


> Some recent posts have referred to a supplier called "Graybar".  Is
> this a chain? Mail order house? Regional store?  Do they have a
> catalog?

Greybar "Your One Source Supplier" has regional warehouses and sales
offices throughout the country.  They do have a catalog. In Chicago
they are at:

900 Regency Drive  Glendale Hts. Il  60139
[phone]    (800) BUY-ELEC  (Chicago area only)  [phone]  FAX

Some of the 100+ other places:

Boston     617-482-9320
NY         212-219-8840
LA         213-265-7000
Atlanta    404-355-1040
Miami      305-325-0910
Houston    713-224-6831


John Gilbert   [e-mail]

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

Date: Sun, 30 Aug 92 00:14 PDT
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: PacBell Message Center Woes


[e-mail] (Jeff Stieglitz) writes:

> Just what is the problem with Pacific Bell's Message Center?

I have a number of associates who have (for whatever reasons)
Pac*Bell's Message Center. On the basis of their experiences I have
opted to pass on the service for myself.

The Message Center has been and still is plagued with difficulties of
every description. I remember some inside scuttlebutt about the firm
who was awarded the contract. Officials of the company supplying the
VM equipment felt that they had it made in the shade when Pac*Bell
selected their wares for The Message Center, but a number of Pac*Bell
types shuddered in disbelief. The vendor selection was apparently
based upon considerations other than performance and quality.

IMHO, Pac*Bell is going for the "GTE Service Award" with this one. The
Message Center regularly loses messages, does not answer the phone
when it is supposed to, and has, according to my associates, done a
number of other very quirky things. It is a breeze to hack, so your
messages are not very secure; the amount of recording time you can
store is severely limited; it is unreliable in recording; it is
unreliable in retrieval; and it is more expensive than an answering
machine in the long run.

My advice would be to by a machine. Pac*Bell seems to be completely
unable to do anything about it -- probably because the system is
fatally flawed to begin with.


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


[Moderator's Note: Oddly enough, Ameritech's system operates quite
well using equipment from a company in Texas called Tygon, which
coincidentally happens to be an Ameritech subsidiary. Everyone has
their own taste of course, but technically our telephone 'voicemail'
is a decent product.  I have it at home.  PAT]

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

Subject: Re: PacBell Message Center Woes
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 92 16:03:26 -0800
From: Sam Drake <[e-mail]>


Here in Northern CA, the Message Center was sick a lot last week, too.
Rather than having the problem you mentioned, here the system was UP
but didn't seem to be getting ANI from the main phone system.  So if
you called to get your messages it didn't know what number you were
calling from and asked you to key it in.  Worse, if someone called
your number, rather than getting your recording / beep, they got a
message center recording asking them to enter my "mailbox number" ...
THEN they got my recording and the beep.

I had the message center for four months, and had two major problems
with it.  Last week's failure was the final straw; I cancelled and
plugged my "old fashioned" answering machine back into the wall.
Pfui.

Actually, the final straw was when I called Message Center repair to
complain.  The person I talked to actually told me to call all my
friends and tell them that my "mailbox number" was equal to my "phone
number", so my friends would know what to do if they called me and got
the semi-broken Message Center.  As {Consumer Reports} might say, I
judged this suggestion Not Acceptable.


Sam Drake / IBM Almaden Research Center
Internet:  [e-mail]    BITNET:  DRAKE at ALMADEN

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

Organization: Green Hills and Cows
From: zygot![e-mail] (John Higdon)
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 15:01:13 PDT
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Voice Message Service


On Aug 27 at 15:37, Scott Hinckley [phone] writes:

> Around here only the COCOTs offer that leave a message on busy service.
> Of course they charge much more for it ($1.00 I believe).

I did not see a price for the Pac*Bell proposal. Do you know that it
is actually cheaper?

You bring up an interesting point, however. Notice how as with the
information providing business, the field has been tried and tested by
true entrepreneurs who had to put up real risk capital to try out
their ideas. Once a market seems to be viable, then the telco muscles
its way into the market with its network control and ratepayer
subsidization.  Then it offers a better product at a cheaper price,
putting the competition out of business. Of course it does this with
free money and its superior network access.

Sidebar: Free Money: If the venture is successful, then no venture
capitalists must be paid off. If it fails, then the telco goes to the
PUC with a rate increase to cover its losses. Win/win.

It sure is a good thing for the LECs that there are plenty of suckers
out there willing to try out new technologies and markets. That way,
the telcos can sit back, watch for new markets that look attractive,
and then take over the ones that appear to hold promise for high
profits.

Note: The above correspondent asked that I submit his comment. It is
herewith submitted at the top of this message in its entirety complete
with my remarks. A two for one bonus!


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

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Is RJ45 With Notch Same as RJ45 Without Notch?
Date: 30 Aug 92 02:47:10 GMT


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

> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Phill
> St. Louis) writes:

>> I would like to ensure that these RJ45 wall jacks with a notch will
>> work.  (I am pretty sure that they are Digital Equipment Corp. (DEC)
>> RJ45 wall jacks that have been installed in some new offices.)  Will
>> these work with the standard RJ45 (without notch) plugs?

> Actually, they both have notches, but the DEC connector (called an
> MMJ) has the notch offset while the standard RJ-45 has it centered. If
> you have MMJ hacks installed in offices you will need MMJ plugs for
> them. The RJ45 will not work.

Ummmm, careful there.  I'm not sure (since he mentions a "notch") that
he means an MMJ.  There's also the "keyed RJ45" still floating around
out there.  Whether it's RJ45keyed *or* MMJ, the answer is still "no",
though, the regular RJ45 plugs will not physically enter the jack.
(This is an entirely different problem from the fact that everone
seems to have chosen their own standard for not only what to carry on
each pair, but even which pins go to which pairs, and even which pins
*are* paired.  Anyone who can explain the logic behind the AT&T pair
arrangement wins a prize.)


Laird P. Broadfield     [e-mail]    ...{ucsd, nosc}!crash!lairdb

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: Sat, 29 Aug 92 21:11 EDT
From: rsiatl![e-mail]
Subject: Re: Is RJ45 With Notch Same as RJ45 Without Notch?


> Actually, they both have notches, but the DEC connector (called an
> MMJ) has the notch offset while the standard RJ-45 has it centered. If
> you have MMJ hacks installed in offices you will need MMJ plugs for
> them. The RJ45 will not work.

> The jacks are the same, except for the notch.  The difference is in
> the cable.  A standard no-notch RJ-45 cable is wired with a twist, so
> that pin one is connected to pin eight on the other end.  A notched
> cable is wired straight.

Actually two different connectors are being discussed.  The MMJ is a
six conductor modular plug whose top "key" (with the locking lever) is
offset so it is asymetrical when viewed from the front.  As the first
author said it uses RJ type modular plugs.

The RJ 45 is a eight conductor version of the RJ11, with an enlarged
"shell" and is available in both keyed and unkeyed versions.  The
latter is usually used for voice telecommunications, and often for
data as well.  The unkeyed versions will fit either jack.  As the
second author stated analog RJ45 cables and unigender connectors are
crosspinned (1-8, 2-7, 3-6,..). Dcom cables are straight pinned.

RJ11/12/14's will plug into a keyed or unkeyed RJ45 jack, usually w/o
any problem.


Pat Turner   KB4GRZ   turner@dixie

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

Date: Sat, 29 Aug 1992 17:29:50 -0700 (PDT)
From: David Ptasnik <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: 110 vs. 66M Blocks


[e-mail] (Jonathan Edwards) wrote:

> What is the difference between 110 and 66M blocks?  I am wiring my
> house for a mix of voice and possible future 10-BASET.  All the wires
> will end-run to the blocks in the basement.  Should I use 110 or 66M
> blocks?

The technicians at the University of Washington (where I am an
analyst) won't let me have a punch tool, they say that it would be to
horrible to imagine.  They are probably right.  Still, I asked them
the same question one day, as a group of them were roundly cursing the
new 110 blocks.  The 110 blocks take up a lot less wall space.  As we
were wiring outlets every 15 feet with four sets of four pair, this
was VERY important.  They claim, however, that the 66's are a lot
easier to punch, and that you can punch more wires onto the same post
(for those occasions where several single line phones share a line)
than you can with the 110's, and that the 66's give you a good
connection more reliably.  110's also use different punch tools for
most efficient use (I think you are supposed to be able to punch five
wires at a time on a 110)(when it works right).  They also claimed
that it was much easier to hook a test set up to 66 blocks for trouble
testing (clip leads instead of a special connector).

Overall the 110 review from this crew on that day was extremely
negative.  I suspect that a negative reaction to a "new" thing was
part of it.  Techs seem to be a pretty conservative lot.  Your mileage
will vary.


All of the above is nothing more than the personal opinion of -

Dave Ptasnik          [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: 800 Portability
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 20:17:16 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Alan L
Varney) writes:

> Correction of problems is a major concern of the
> industry.  Anyone know of another industry that has multiple databases
> with multiple owners with content specified by companies competing
> against each other???  The only one that comes to mind is the default
> carrier assigned to equal access lines.

Problems with the 800 database will be of much larger scale than with
the equal access default.  In most cases, incorrect settings of the
equal access PIC result in billing problems only.  Call completion is
so uniform between the carriers for 1+ calls that spurious PIC changes
are often not noticed for some period of time (like when the bill
arrives).  However, any problem with the 800 database is likely to
bring all calls to the affected 800 number to a screeching halt, as no
carrier other than the correct one is likely to know what to do with
the call.  At least this will remove the motive for carriers to slam.


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Michael Rosen)
Subject: Re: 2500 Picturephone in the News
Organization: University of Denver, Dept. of Math & Comp. Sci.
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 92 17:40:50 GMT


I was watching Nickelodeon for Ren and Stimpy last weekend and noticed
that in between features they have some sort of call in contest for
kids watching.  I only saw this twice, and both times the kids were
calling in on AT&T Picturephones.  They even said, "we've got Kim on
the line with her AT&T Picturephone," or something to that effect.  It
was a jerky picture, probably taking multiple still-frames every few
seconds.

Is Nick doing some kind of promotion with these phones that everybody
calling has one?

Oh, I thought it was cool how they piped the Picturephone picture onto
the screen.


Michael Rosen    Tau Epsilon Phi - George Washington University
[e-mail]   [e-mail] or @lambada.oit.unc.edu

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

Date: Sun, 30 Aug 92 8:01:03 CDT
From: Will Martin <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: 2500 Picturephone in the News


Regarding the TV Jukebox channel discussion:

Here in St. Louis, this is an over-the-air service on Low-Power TV
Channel 58. (I suppose you can also get it through some or all of the
cable services but I don't have cable so don't know for sure.) Anyway,
I'm glad the topic came up, since I have several questions about it
which I've never known where to ask!

1) Is this a nationwide service, fed from a satellite, so that
everyone all over the country (or continent, or wherever) is seeing
the same video at the same time, and there is one master "jukebox"
feeding these videos in response to te 900-number calls? Or is this a
localized service in which each region has their own "jukebox", so
that what I see here in St. Louis may be entirely different from what
is seen in another region?

2) Is there one single 900 number for the whole nation, going into
that "central" site mentioned above, or different 900 numbers for each
area?  Or does a single 900 number feed into separate local
"jukeboxes" depending on the geographic location of the caller?

3) Does this system use laserdiscs of the videos or what? Can anyone
provide a summary of the hardware that drives it?

4) I note the three-digit codes for specifying songs skip over
intervening numbers in the index displays -- for example, it could go
789, 790, 792, 794, etc. Are the skipped numbers actually invalid, or
do they still point to previously-advertised selections which are
still in the system?  Is it possible to get these people to send you a
"master list" of all the three-digit codes and what songs they point
to if you call one of the 800 numbers they run?


Regards,
Will   [e-mail] OR [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #670
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa16851;
          30 Aug 92 19:16 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA16980
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 30 Aug 1992 17:26:25 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA14741
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 30 Aug 1992 17:26:16 -0500
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 17:26:16 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #671

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 30 Aug 92 17:26:13 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 671

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: GTE California Changes (Richard Nash)
    Re: GTE California Changes (Gordon Burditt)
    Re: GTE Fixes My DISA (One Year Late) (Leonard Erickson)
    Re: Monitoring Radio Broadcasts in England (John Pettitt)
    Re: Monitoring of Royal Telephone Calls (Richard Cox)
    Re: Monitoring of Broadcasts (Leonard Erickson)
    Re: Monitoring of Broadcasts (Charlie Mingo)
    Re: Monitoring of Broadcasts (William Sohl)
    Re: Monitoring of Broadcasts (Adrienne Voorhis)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sat, 29 Aug 1992 10:02:35 -0600
From: [e-mail] (Richard Nash)
Subject: Re: GTE California Changes


Jeff Sicherman <[e-mail]> writes:

> In article <[e-mail]> HOLDREGE_MP <HOLDREGE+_MP%A1%
> [e-mail]> writes:

>> John Higdon can no longer complain about the incompetant GTE reps in
>> Thousand Oaks, CA. He soon will be able to complain about the
>> incompetant GTE reps in North Carolina, Florida, and Texas.

>> A GTE spokeman said that the job transfers are a part of a continuing
>> effort to consolidate operations at company facilities in Texas, North
>> Carolina and Florida, and to automate jobs now performed by humans.

> Does this mean they will be programming the computers to ignore and
> throw away trouble tickets ?

Most network operations, surveillance operators have a pre-programmed
hot-key on their workstations that brings up the ticket and
automatically closes it with a "no trouble found". :) :) All they have
to do while watching TV on the big impressive network status screen,
is wait for the beep!  Of course some types have unofficially
programmed the workstations to completely do this, recognizing key
trouble phrases such as NDT (no dial tone) and dispatching
accordingly.  A cross reference of trouble phrases to standard results
has been built up over the years and much like the old artificial
intelligence program ELIZA, can make about the same apparent
intelligent decision. SNITS, Switching Network Intelligent Testing and
Surveillance program is written in different flavors, (to accurately
reflect the locale jargon). :) :) :) --


Richard Nash   Edmonton, Alberta Canada T6K 0E8
UUCP:       trickie![e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Gordon Burditt)
Subject: Re: GTE California Changes
Organization: Gordon Burditt
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 08:41:33 GMT


> Probably no one. But then I doubt that you will notice any service
> level reduction. It could not get much worse. I have reported trouble
> in the Los Gatos CO on a Friday night, but of course it is Monday or
> Tuesday before GTE can fly someone up from southern California to fix
> it.

John Higdon, you need to stage a coup on a GTE central office.  Move
yourself and your office into one.  Change around a few street signs.
Re-paint the outside of the building.  Change the locks.  It will
probably be at least a month before they notice that they can't find
the CO, and at least another year before they admit it.  If you point
the street signs so they think that your current home is the CO, well,
they might be fooled indefinitely if you leave all your telecom gear
in place.

You do have to be careful, though.  You need to keep generating and
ignoring fake trouble tickets, because if you spend a few minutes a
day fixing stuff, there won't be enough real ones.  That few minutes a
day paying for free phone service will be worth it, and you'll be
providing service instead of feeding the Department of Excuses
(today's excuse: Lunar Flares!).


Gordon L. Burditt     sneaky.lonestar.org!gordon

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

From: [e-mail] (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: GTE Fixes My DISA (One Year Late)
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: SCN Research/Qic Laboratories of Tigard, Oregon.
Date: Sat, 29 Aug 1992 11:45:20 GMT


[e-mail] (Jim Gottlieb) writes:

> The message finally got through and they fixed it on Friday.  While I
> had their attention, I asked if they could please change my security
> code from 1234 to something a bit more secure.  "Sorry, it's
> hardcoded" was the reply.  I don't believe it.  And I am surely not
> going to pay for any calls when someone discovers this.

Ask them to change it again. And insist on *written confirmation* that
they can't change it. Then if you do get nailed, you'll have hard
evidence that you *couldn't* have prevented it.


Leonard Erickson              [e-mail]
CIS: [70465,203]             [e-mail]
FIDO:   1:105/51     [e-mail]
(The CIS & Fido addresses are preferred)

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

Date: Sat, 29 Aug 92 22:47 PDT
From: [e-mail] (John Pettitt)
Subject: Re: Monitoring Radio Broadcasts in England


In a recent Digest Mr. Chew asks if it is legal to monitor radio
conversations in the UK.  The answer is NO.  What is more should you
accidentally hear somebody elses conversation divulging the content is
also illegal.  The Wireless Telegraphy Act(s) (there are several I
believe) prohibit doing just about anything in this area (unless you
are GCHQ the UK equivilent of the NSA :-)

Now in practice I have never come across anybody who has been
prosecuted under the WT act.  (I was arrested once for having a CB
radio but that is another story :-).

[I wonder the reference to GCHQ and NSA will cause this post to be read
in those organisations - I you are a spook reading this why not send me
some mail and say hi :-)  :-)   :-) ]


John Pettitt    [e-mail]
Archer N81034    apple!starnet!jpp
Fax:   [phone]     Voice: +1 415 967 UNIX


[Moderator's Note: Actually, no keywords are required. The Digest has
a number of subscribers in federal agencies including NSA. All they
have to do to see your message is read this issue when it arrives in
their mail.   PAT]


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

Date: Sun, 30 Aug 92 18:08 GMT
From: Richard Cox <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Monitoring of Royal Telephone Calls
Reply-To: [e-mail]


Laurence Chiu writes:

>>  the current scandal is the publication of recording of intimate phone
>>  conversations between Princess Diana and some unidentified "friend" in
>>  which the subject matter is embarrassing to say the least.

>>  The tapes were made by someone who was apparently just idly scanning the
>>  airwaves with his scanner and happened to pick up the cell-phone
>>  frequencies.  The last news report I saw indicated that the UK
>>  authorities had decided not to take any action against him.

If we are to believe what the British papers tell us, two separate
people "just happened" to buy a scanner, and recorded separate parts
of that conversations [not last week but some considerable time ago]
and then by coincidence the transcripts appear in the press, followed
almost immediately by the official statement that the persons making
and publishing the contents of the recordings would not be prosecuted.

It would be most surprising if those papers had carried that material
without some form of advance guarantee that no action would be taken
against them.  I will leave you to draw your own conclusions.


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] (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Monitoring of Broadcasts
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: SCN Research/Qic Laboratories of Tigard, Oregon.
Date: Sat, 29 Aug 1992 11:53:56 GMT


[e-mail] (Adrienne Voorhis) writes:

> [e-mail] (Jon Gefaell)> writes:

>> It is illegal to disclose anything heard on any Radio Frequency in any
>> mode other than public broadcast, Amateur Radio, and that's about it.
>> This means that you can own a scanner and listen to the police, even
>> covert operations (I listen to very interesting operations from time
>> to time) but you _may not_ disclose those communications to any one
>> else.

> Could someone please explain how the federal government can allow
> you to legally monitor such broadcasts but can stop you from
> disclosing what was heard?  I'm not a First Amendment lawyer, but it
> would seem to me that if you lawfully became aware of information,
> that the government could not muzzle you from discussing what you have
> legitimately obtained.

Check the Communications Act of 1933. That's where this comes from.
And I think it's a matter of them *allowing* you to listen to private
communications that cross yourproperty via radio. But you aren't
allowed to distribute the info to others.

It's stood up in court for a *long* time. And it is a situation that
is not all that black and white. I believe that some folks have
actually argued in court along the lines of "if I'm not allowed to
listen to it, make them stop sending it to me!"

With the exception of the nonense about cellular phone monitoring that
crept into ECPA, this policy still holds pretty well. The only real
change was that you are not allowed to decrypt transmissions that have
been encryupted for purposes of privacy.


Leonard Erickson              [e-mail]
CIS: [70465,203]             [e-mail]
FIDO:   1:105/51     [e-mail]
(The CIS & Fido addresses are preferred)


[Moderator's Note: The argument which goes 'make them stop sending it
to me and bombarding me with radio waves' has been tested in court on
various occassions and always found by the court to be specious and
puerile.  Its like arguing about income taxes on the basis of whether
the IRS is legally allowed to do it; ie, the irregularities under
which the income tax came into being, the vote in Ohio, etc.  The
court says 'YOU LOSE!'  PAT]
------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Charlie Mingo)
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 17:00:59 -0500
Subject: Re: Monitoring of Broadcasts


[e-mail] (Laurence Chiu) writes:

> Then I wonder if those laws apply in England. For those who are not
> royal watchers the current scandal is the publication of recording of
> intimate phone conversations between Princess Diana and some
> unidentified "friend" in which the subject matter is embarrassing to
> say the least. The tapes were made by someone who was apparently just
> idly scanning the airwaves with his scanner and happened to pick up
> the cell-phone frequencies.  The last news report I saw indicated that
> the UK authorities had decided not to take any action against him.

   From what I gather from the British papers, there is no prohibition
on eavesdropping on cellular or cordless calls.  There is some sort of
restriction on "using" material heard over the air, but it is not
being enforced in this case.

   I remember thinking when recently reading _Diana: Her True Story_
that the royals seem to use cordless phones in strong preference to
corded, even for the most intimate of conversations.  Charles would
reportedly take the phone into his bath to have a private chat with
his mistress, Camilla Parker-Bowes.  (Diana would discover this by
pressing the redial button after he came out, and getting the P-B
residence.)

   Also, the royals seem to use something they call a "scrambler,"
which is supposed to make their calls uninterceptable.  I suspect it
is nothing more than an audio-inverter, since there is no key used to
control it (just tell the other party to "go to scrambler").

   British laws concerning wiretapping in general seem to be rather
loose.  Recently, members of the press recorded conversations between
the Minister of National Heritage (David Mellior) and his mistress, by
tapping into an extension socket at the flat the mistress was using.
They apparently had the *landlord's* permission, but not that of
either party to the conversation.  According to the {Sunday Times},
this activity broke no laws.

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

From: dancer![e-mail] (22501-sohl)
Subject: Re: Monitoring of Broadcasts; Cordless, Cellular, etc.
Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 92 13:46:14 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Laurence Chiu) writes:

> In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
> (Adrienne Voorhis) writes:

>> What if a reporter, for instance, was listening to a police band
>> radio and heard a newsworthy event?  Could he or she legitimately be
>> punished for reporting this information?

Reporters do this all the time, although they probably do not rely on
only what they heard to generate the story.  Our local town weekly
newspaper office has a scanner on all the time.  They use it to learn
what is happening and then often follow up with a story on the
incident.

I personally don't ever want to see any more restrictions on listening
to what is being freely broadcast into the airways.  I especially
don't ever want to see any restrictions on the manufacture, sale
and/or possession of any type of radio receiving equipment.  This
country does NOT need the "electronics police" to be looking over
anyone's shoulder to be sure their radio equipment doesn't receive
certain frequency bands, etc.

Laurence Chiu writes:

> Then I wonder if those laws apply in England. For those who are not
> royal watchers the current scandal is the publication of recording of
> intimate phone conversations between Princess Diana and some
> unidentified "friend" in which the subject matter is embarrassing to
> say the least. The tapes were made by someone who was apparently just
> idly scanning the airwaves with his scanner and happened to pick up
> the cell-phone frequencies.  The last news report I saw indicated that
> the UK authorities had decided not to take any action against him.

While I'm no authority, I have heard that many other countries place
severe restrictions on listening to certain types of broadcasts (eg.
police, government, etc.) and some have restrictions on ownership of
certain types of radio receiving equipment also.

The bottom line in my opinion is that anyone that is concerned about
other people listening to any radio communication they may be involved
in had better resort to encryption to insure the security of their
radio communications.  After many years of effort here in New Jersey
we finally got a 50 year old law changed that made it illegal to
possess a radio (ie. scanner) in an automobile that could receive
police, fire, etc.  Because the law was so broad in scope and the
current scanner frequency coverage so vast the law effectly made it
illegal to have any type of scanner in a car since the police
frequencies are all over the spectrum.  We even had some ham radio
operators prosecuted because their ham radio transciever included a
receive capability that included police frequencies.  The new state
law does not make possession or use of a radio illegal, the law
prohibits misuse of any information heard.

Last night on New York TV channel 5 (Fox network) there was a brief
news item (10pm news) where they showed how easy it is to listen to
cordless (as well as cellular) telephones with a typical inexpensive
(under $200) scanner.  They did have an FBI person indicate it is
illegal to listen to cellular, but they also pointed out that there is
no prohibition against listening to cordless phones.  From my
perspective, they, at least, did not try to make any case against the
manufacture, sale or possession of scanners in the news report.  The
news item seemed to be targeted as an informative piece to caution
folks that their communications over cordless (as well as cellular)
phones may be overheard by evesdropers.


Standard Disclaimer- Any opinions, etc. are mine and NOT my employer's.

Bill Sohl (K2UNK) BELLCORE (Bell Communications Research, Inc.)
Morristown, NJ             email via UUCP      bcr!dancer!whs70
201-829-2879 Weekdays      email via Internet  [e-mail]

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

From: Adrienne Voorhis <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Monitoring of Broadcasts
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 92 9:44:59 EDT


Recently I, (<[e-mail] > Adrienne Voorhis) asked:

> Could someone please explain how the federal government can allow
> you to legally monitor such broadcasts but can stop you from
> disclosing what was heard?

I appreciate the responses I received and found them helpful, but I
don't think they sufficiently answered my question.

First of all, I am not a First Amendment absolutist.  I am aware of
and fully support just about all of the restrictions to the "freedom
of speech" clause that the Supreme Court has promulgated, such as
libel laws.

Second, I am not questioning that the state can preserve the
confidentiality of these broadcasts.  I merely question how, on the
one hand, the government can classify these broadcasts as being in the
"public domain" by freely allowing private citizens to monitor them,
yet on the other hand prohibit them from ever being discussed.

Steve Forrette <[e-mail]> responded:

> I do know that there is a common misconception that the various
> amendments prevent any restrictions whatsoever on certain activities.

Agreed.

> There are many cases where "lawfully obtained" information can be
> legally discussed:

>  -  The tried and true "fire in a theater" example.
>  -  Trade secrets that you legally obtain in the course of employment.

These examples demonstrate only that the First Amendment is not
absolute.  I don't think they really answer my question.

There is no prohibition against telling people there is a fire in a
theater, only against *yelling* "fire" in a crowded theater when the
person knows that it's *false*.  This is merely a "time, place, and
manner restriction" on knowingly false and dangerous speech designed
solely to create a public safety hazard.  Here, I am talking about
presumably true information that a private citizen is being prohibited
from discussing, even for legitimate purposes of public debate.

The trade secrets example is more to the point because it shows that
speech can sometimes be restricted based on content.  However the
analogy fails because the restriction is only enforceable because the
employee voluntarily agreed in advance not to disclose this
information as part of a written contract with his employer.  A news
reporter scanning the airwaves has not entered into any such
agreement.

Michael A. Covington <[e-mail]> responded:

> Hmmm?  Never heard of confidentiality?

Of course I have.  However, I am also aware that even when the press
publishes confidential information -- even secret goverment
information -- they cannot be punished for it as long as they
committed no crime in obtaining it and reasonably believed the
information is correct.  The government went after Daniel Ellsburg for
disclosing the Pentagon Papers, not the {New York Times}.

>  The law simply imposes a kind of confidentiality on people who,
>  through technological pursuits, come into possession of other people's
>  private messages.  Just like telephone repair personnel, mail
>  carriers, etc.

I agree that the law should be able to classify certain information as
confidential and prohibit private citizens from using electronic
devices to obtain it in the first place (such as the person who uses
electronic eavesdropping equiptment to overhear a private conversation
inside someones home).  I also agree that the state can prohibit those
who service communications media, such as telephone repair personnel
and mail carriers, from disclosing this information outside the scope
of their employment, to ensure the privacy of the media itself.

But these legitimate restrictions all treat the communications as
confidential in the first place, unlike the one I question that gives
private citizens the right to monitor them.

> The Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986 goes further: it
> forbids _listening_ to private radio communications (cellular phones,
> ship-to-shore phones, etc.).  But it also makes it clear that

I believe this act is defensible, because it *classifies* certain
communications as confidential before it restricts their
dissemination.  I don't question that the state can say you can't
report conversations concerning private matters that you shouldn't be
hearing in the first place.

The whole purpose of the "freedom of speech" clause is to allow the
citizens to freely discuss almost any matter without fear of
government reprisal.  The government can obviously create certain
carefully deleneated exceptions, such as those I have agreed to above,
based on overriding public policy concerns.  But it is fundamentally
unfair, and I believe inconsistent with the First Amendment, for the
state to say to private citizens and the press "Go ahead and listen,"
but then say "You can never talk about it."

Don't worry, Pat.  I don't plan to continually stand on a soapbox and
reply to future posts with impassioned comments on freedom of speech.
I am simply curious if any TD subscribers are aware of a reasoned
basis, or court approval, for the particular restriction on freedom of
speech that this particular restriction imposes.


Adrienne Voorhis    Albert Einstein College of Medicine
Bronx, New York        Just MY opinion....


[Moderator's Note: I do not believe you are correct in saying you can
'state there is a fire in a theatre as long as you do not shout it.'
If this were true, then you should be able to make false utterances to
911 with impunity. As a matter of fact the law in most (all?) states
says that to declare an emergency exists when there is no emergency is
a crime. To call 911 because you like to see and hear fire trucks
racing down the street is a crime; your free speech rights don't take
priority here. In actual practice here in Chicago, ONE false alarm is
usually written off as 'mistaken citizen trying to be helpful', but
subsequent false alarms will get you sued by the City of Chicago.  PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #671
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa18385;
          30 Aug 92 19:55 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA15978
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 30 Aug 1992 18:03:06 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA26642
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 30 Aug 1992 18:02:55 -0500
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 18:02:55 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #672

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 30 Aug 92 18:03:00 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 672

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Weird Intercept (Robert S. Helfman)
    Re: Weird Intercept (Randy Gellens)
    Re: Weird Intercept (Mark Rudholm)
    Re: Weird Intercept (John Higdon)
    Re: Cell Phones in the Air (Aubrey Philipsz)
    Re: Cell Phones in the Air (Anthony Clifton)
    Re: Cell Phones in the Air (Laurence Chiu)
    Re: Modem Noise on Line (Julian Macassey)
    Re: Modem Noise on Line (Leonard Erickson)
    Re: Modem Noise on Line (Marc Unangst)
    Re: Modem Noise on Line (Hans Ridder)
    Re: Modem Noise on Line (John Rice)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Robert S. Helfman)
Subject: Re: Weird Intercept
Organization: The Aerospace Corporation, El Segundo, CA
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 17:21:27 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (VLD/VMB)
writes:

> All I can find is that 663 is a Los Angeles prefix and thus would
> still be in 213, not in 310.

I don't know what question prompted the above reply.

The 663- (once-upon-a-time NOrmandie prefix) is mid-Wilshire-up-to-
Hollywood, right around Normandie Avenue -- very definitely nowhere
near the 213/310 boundary.

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

From: MPA15AB![e-mail]
Date: 30 AUG 92 05:20
Subject: Re: Weird Intercept


a_rubin%dsg4.dse.beckman.com (Arthur Rubin) writes:

> In <[e-mail]> MPA15AB![e-mail].
> unisys.com writes:

>> I'm trying to reach someone in the 213-663 exchange (I've reached
>> this number before).  When I dial it I get an intercept that says
>> "We're sorry; your call cannot be completed as dialed from the phone
>> you are using.  Please read the instruction card and dial again."
>> (There are the standard SIT tones at the beginning.) This is odd
>> since I'm calling from my office phone, not a pay phone.

> Sounds like a PBX intercept to me.

As far as I know, our PBX never gives voice intercepts (but it is very
fond of reorder).  Also, the intercept does have the standard SIT
tones.

The problem only occurs if I try and dial it as a normal PacBell call,
that is, by dialing 9 for an outside line, then 1-213-663-xxxx.  If I
dial it via our long-distance network, or via MCI or Sprint, it works
fine.


Randy Gellens            [e-mail]
>>>>>>> If mail bounces, forward to [e-mail] <<<<<<<<
Opinions are personal; facts are suspect; I speak only for myself

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

Date: Sun, 30 Aug 92 13:37:10 PDT
From: aimla!ruby![e-mail] (Mark Rudholm)
Subject: Re: Weird Intercept


In TELECOM Digest V12, I668, Message 5 [e-mail] writes:

> All I can find is that 663 is a Los Angeles prefix and thus would
> still be in 213, not in 310.

663 is in 213 but much of the city of L.A. is not in 213 (parts are in
818 and 310).  But prefixes that are _labelled_ as "Los Angeles" by
TPC are all in 213*.  Some prefixes that are within the city but are
labelled something else are for example 310-444 (West L.A.) and
818-778 (Van Nuys).

*There are a couple of exceptions such as some cellphone prefixes and
the choke exchange (520) which is dialable from 818, 310, or 213.


Mark D. Rudholm    [e-mail]    Philips Interactive Media
------------------------------

Date: Sat, 29 Aug 92 23:23 PDT
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: Weird Intercept


MPA15AB![e-mail] writes:

> I'm trying to reach someone in the 213-663 exchange (I've reached this
> number before).  When I dial it I get an intercept that says "We're
> sorry; your call cannot be completed as dialed from the phone you are
> using.  Please read the instruction card and dial again."

This non-sequiter type of intercept is quintessential GTE
incompetence.  For instance, in Long Beach one of our Centrenet lines
had the following recording in response to the simple dialing of '0':

"Your call cannot be completed as dialed. You must first dial '950' and
a carrier access code before the number".

What? This is baloney. Not only does it not work, it could never work.
It is complete and total nonsense. Mind you this is a "professionally"
done recording, not some blathering by a CO dweeb, so the content at
least came from Thousand Jokes. Get someone at GTE to fix it? HA!

Now mind you that I understand that the wrong recording could simply
be an erroneous channel assignment on the drum announcer. But the
recording itself is complete nonsense. It has no application anywhere.
It indicates a complete lack of understanding of even GTE's
procedures.  So why was it made in the first place? Heaven only knows.

> This is odd since I'm calling from my office phone, not a pay phone.

Yeah, well good luck trying to get it fixed. It sounds like you have a
residual problem from the 310 cut. As you will recall, GTE made major
news botching that operation up (of course, it was all Pac*Bell's
fault to hear it from General).

BTW, 663 IS still in 213. Call GTE repair about six times. That might
do it. You will notice that I never had to ask if you were in GTE
territory.


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


[Moderator's Note: The phraseology in the intercept you mention is not
the greatest, but there is some truth to it. Usually the four digits
following 950 are a portion of the same carrier access code one would
dial as 10xxx; for example I believe MCI has 950-0222. When you dial a
950 number of this sort, usually after it connects you hear dial tone
again (from the carrier) and you continue by dialing the number you
wish to reach and your PIN. So if some customer wished to have no LD
carrier assignment for whatever reason and dial everything via 950
with a PIN, the intercept you described would make sense if they
attempted to one-plus dial. I repeat, the wording is not the best.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Aubrey Philipsz)
Subject: Re: Cell Phones in the Air
Organization: Express Access Public Access UNIX, Greenbelt, Maryland USA
Date: Sat, 29 Aug 1992 22:26:30 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> ddssuprs![e-mail]
(Tom Gillman) writes:

> I, too, would like to know why cellular phones are prohibited by law on
> aircraft. Please post or email any relevant info.

I have been told by someone in the airline industry that there has
been a ruling on this which now allows for cellular use while the
aircraft is on the ground; this was sort of confirmed recently when
the Captain of a USAir flight borrowed my cell phone to allow an irate
passenger to make a phone call when the aircraft had been holding,
waiting for ATC to clear it to take off, for about an hour and a half.

Use of cellular inflight falls under the much more broad restriction
on transmitting devices.  The basic reason is that electronics in an
aircraft are pretty important to the safety of the passengers and
crew.  The draconian measures may seem excessive, but this is a
"better safe than sorry" situation.  I will note that there IS
interference with navigation systems from radio signals, it really
does happen, and it is a bit unnerving to have to shoot landings with
instruments that you suddenly can not trust.

Of course, there is always the question of operating a cell phone at
30,000 feet; sounds a BIT higher than the antenna altitude
restrictions for cellular.


Aub

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

From: [e-mail] (A Person of Awareness)
Subject: Re: Cell Phones in the Air
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames, IA
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 16:14:44 GMT


The reason that you can't use a cell phone on an airplane is so you
can't call for a rescue team to save you from the food.  =-)

Although, it WOULD be fun to order from Dominos while in the air.

"Yeah, that's right I'm only a mile or two away.  My address?  Oh
well, let's just say I'm passing through."  =-)


Anthony Clifton

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

From: [e-mail] (Laurence Chiu)
Subject: Re: Cell Phones in the Air
Organization: GCS Limited, Wellington, New Zealand
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 01:21:35 GMT


Slightly diverging from the topic here, but I was wondering about the
air-phone service that is now fairly common on US carriers. While on a
trip to the US each time I flew (usually United) the air hostesses
would always invite us to use the service, especially convenient since
the phones were located in the seat in front of us (at least on some
of the smaller planes like 737's). This led me to think about the
movie Die Hard II where air phones figure prominently in the plot. In
some sequence, our hero gets paged by his wife from a plane, he checks
the pager and calls her back on the plane.  Is this possible or some
Hollywood license? I never noticed any numbers on the air phone which
indicated you could call one.  Just wondering ...


Laurence Chiu   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Julian Macassey)
Subject: Re: Modem Noise on Line
Date: 30 Aug 92 15:54:35 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Julian Macassey)
Organization: The Hole in the Wall  Hollywood California U.S.A.


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Steve Shapiro) writes:

> I have a residence in which I have two phone lines. The wire coming to
> the house is a 'standard' four wire line (red, black, yellow, green).
> For one line I use red/green and for the other I use black/yellow. On
> one line I have my BBS attached and so the modem attached to that line
> is quite busy. The other line is for voice.

> The problem is that whenever the modem is active, there is a lot of
> hissing and noise heard on the voice line.

    The reason for this problem is the cheesy wire you describe
above. This wire is known as "Quad Wire". It is not designed to
isolate signals. The wire you need for this is called "twisted pair".
For your installation, it would be usually called "Three pair". Three
pairs of twisted wire. The colour coding on twisted pair is always
white/blue stripe & blue/whire stripe etc. Most business telephone
installations use twisted pair. The phone company uses twisted pair
between your home and their central office -- yes this is why you can't
hear everyone else's modems and phone calls.

> Is there something I can do on my end or do I have to have the phone
> company come out and string a second physical wire in support of the
> second line?

    Yes, rewire the house with three pair or use three pair to
wire in just the modem. You can do this ($), the telco can do this
($$$), or you can call in an electrician or independant phone
installer (Called Interconnects) ($$).

    The big question is "Why are people still doing installations
with quad wire?"


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Modem Noise on Line
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: SCN Research/Qic Laboratories of Tigard, Oregon.
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 12:48:08 GMT


[e-mail] (Steve Shapiro) writes:

> The problem is that whenever the modem is active, there is a lot of
> hissing and noise heard on the voice line.

> What can I do to eliminate this? Is there a special kind of wire I can
> use inside the house?

Go down to Radio Shack and get one of their "special" adapters. The
one you want in this case is one that plugs into a wall jack and
provides 3 output jacks: L1, L2, L1+2.

The L1 and L2 jacks have *only* the center two wires connected. This
tends to be necessary with modems because many of them have "feature"
that shorts the second pair of wires (the black/yellow pair) together.

If that doesn't work, you'll have to go for desperate measure like
replacing the regular four-conductor phone wiring with *real* twisted
pair wiring. If you check, you'll discover that your internal house
wiring *isn't* twisted pair! Thus, all the crosstalk.


Leonard Erickson              [e-mail]
CIS: [70465,203]             [e-mail]
FIDO:   1:105/51     [e-mail]
(The CIS & Fido addresses are preferred)

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

From: [e-mail] (Marc Unangst)
Subject: Re: Modem Noise on Line
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 03:10:16 GMT
Organization: The Programmer's Pit Stop, Ann Arbor MI


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Steve Shapiro) writes:

> The problem is that whenever the modem is active, there is a lot of
> hissing and noise heard on the voice line.

It sounds like you are a victim of a pretty bad crosstalk problem.
Most likely, it is the fault of your inside wiring, not the phone
company.  To determine where the problem lies, disconnect your voice
line at the demarkation point, but leave the modem line connected.
Then, plug a voice phone into the voice line at the demark while the
modem is active.  If you still hear crosstalk, then the problem is
with the telco's wiring.  Otherwise, it lies within your house, and
you're going to have to either fix it yourself or pay the telco to fix
it for you.

If it turns out to be with your wiring, the problem is most likely
that inappropriate cable was used for at least part of the wiring.
Flat "silver satin" or "quad" cable should not be used for anything
other than short runs between a phone jack and a telephone or other
telecom equipment.  This is because quad does not properly shield the
two pairs from each other, resulting in mutual coupling and crosstalk
in anything resembling a long run.  If quad was used for wiring
between the network interface and a phone jack, or if it was used to
extend an existing cable run, you almost certainly will get crosstalk.

The solution is to find all the quad in your house that was used
inappropriately, rip it out, and replace it with "twisted-pair" cable.
As the name implies, this is cable where each pair of wires is twisted
together, thus shielding the pair and lessening the chances it will
interfere with an adjacent pair.  Since you're pulling new cable, you
might as well plan for the future and pull more pairs than you need;
four-pair cable isn't that much more expensive, and will save you a
lot of trouble if you ever add lines.


Marc Unangst       [e-mail]

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

From: Hans Ridder <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Modem Noise on Line
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation - DECwest Engineering
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 16:42:58 GMT


You will probably hear from many folks that this type of wire ("quad")
allows crosstalk between your phone lines because it doesn't have
twisted pairs.  I had quad in my last home, and used the BK/YL pair
for my modem line, without *any* crosstalk.  Actually, I did have a
crosstalk problem but I was able to completely eliminate it.  Mine was
caused by four-wire modular (flat) line cords, not by the quad.

> What can I do to eliminate this? Is there a special kind of wire I can
> use inside the house?

Assuming you have modular jacks and that you have both lines appearing
at every jack in the house, here's what I did: First unplug all your
phones *at the wall*.  Then plug your modem and one phone into your
two-line splitter plugged directly into the wall jack.  Then make a
test call.  (Make a connection with your modem, and then pick up your
voice line and then break dial tone by dialing a "1" or something.)
In this configuration, my problem was cured.

At this point, you'll want to re-install your other phones.  You'll
either need to use a splitter at each jack, re-wire the jacks to only
have the one desired phone line, or use two-wire modular cords.  The
thing you are trying to avoid is having both lines running together
over the same flat cord.

If the above test doesn't cure your problem, then you'll want to rig
up a temporary connection directly at the network interface (or
"protectors") *making sure* you have the inside wiring disconnected.
If you still get crosstalk, then you need to call telco.  If so, then
the problem is definitly your wires (or *something* inside your
house.)

> Is there something I can do on my end or do I have to have the phone
> company come out and string a second physical wire in support of the
> second line?

You shouldn't need to have a separate run for your second line, but it
might come down to that if you can't get your wire to behave.  The
trick is figuring out if the wire is the problem.  If you are handy
with a screw driver, wire cutters, etc.  You should be able to do all
these things yourself.


Hans-Gabriel Ridder      Digital DECwest Engineering
[e-mail]      Bellevue, Washington, USA
{pacbell,pyramid,uunet}!rust.zso.dec.com!ridder

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Modem Noise on Line
Organization: Teradyne Inc., Telecommunications Division
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 92 19:11:56 GMT


Some suggestions:

Before you call 'TPC' you might want to disconnect both lines at the
DMARC (telco box where the lines enter the house) and run a temporary
wire from the modem to one line, and a phone to the other. Then test
to see if the noise problem still exists. If so, then the problem is
in the drop wiring or Telco Outside Plant Cables. Call repair and
report that you have "cross-talk" between your two lines. If they
suggest that you have inside wiring problems, explain the previous
test.

If not, then you may have a cross connection between the two lines
inside your house. With standard 'twisted pair' inside wiring, this
should not happen and no modem noise should be heard.

If you have a number of phones, first try to disconnect all but one
and see if the problem persists (the cross may be in one of the
phones). If not, then the best way to trouble-shoot the problem is
probably to physically trace out all of the connections. Find each
terminal block where the lines are connected and look to make sure all
of the colors match up.

You may have to literally disconnect all of the lines and re-connect
them one at a time, testing for the problem each time you re-connect
another leg. The problem from a trouble-shooting standpoint, is that
if the house is an older home, phone extensions are often
'daisy-chained' from one jack to another, as they were installed (at
different times). There may be no logic as to how the connections were
made. (This is often a good time to re-wire, bringing each
extension/jack to a common hub. This makes future trouble-shooting or
expansion more convenient).

Hope this helps.


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]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #672
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa19721;
          30 Aug 92 20:35 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA14300
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 30 Aug 1992 18:45:42 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA18185
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 30 Aug 1992 18:45:33 -0500
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 18:45:33 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #673

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 30 Aug 92 18:45:24 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 673

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Question About PBX Phone (Tony Harminc)
    Re: Question About PBX Phone (Michael A. Covington)
    Re: Question About PBX Phone (Leonard Erickson)
    Re: 911 on Jerry Springer Show (Holt Sorenson)
    Re: 911 on Jerry Springer Show (Ron Heiby)
    Re: Sony IT-A4000 Digital Answering Machine Review (Bob Clements)
    Re: Is RJ45 With Notch Same as RJ45 Without Notch? (Robert S. Helfman)
    Re: FAXes Over Internet (Guy Hadsall)
    Re: How Can I Splice Telephone Wires Without an Overkill? (Bud Couch)
    Re: Pounding on an Octothorp (Syngen Brown)
    Re: Dial a #, Connect Quicker? (Michael Rosen)
    Re: Dial a #, Connect Quicker? (Todd Inch)
    Funny Answering Service Error (was How Do I Locate Graybar) (H Hallikainen)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sun, 30 Aug 92 00:44:12 EDT
From: Tony Harminc <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Question About PBX Phone


[e-mail] (Dave Grabowski) wrote:

> I recently obtained a telephone that was used on a private Centrex
> system. It has a sticker on the back : "Caution: For use only on
> business lines or risk of electrical short circuit" (or something like
> that.) I popped it open, and it doesn't have a matching transformer or
> usual huge (.1mf, 450+volt) cap used in most other telephone-line
> devices. My question: Do I need to bother adding this hardware? I've
> got it on a line now and it's been there for a few weeks and it works
> fine.

Probably this just means that the phone is wired for A-lead control,
i.e. the second pair in the modular cord is connected to an additional
set of normally open contacts on the hook switch.  This is used on old
(1A2 etc.) key systems, but if plugged into a jack with a second line
on it will short that line when the phone is picked up.

The worst case is, as was mentioned recently, if a Princess phone with
lighted dial was installed at one time, and the dial light transformer
is still connected to the second pair.  Then you may have a fire.  You
could easily disconnect and tape the red/black leads inside the phone
to be safe.


Tony H.

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

From: [e-mail] (Michael A. Covington)
Subject: Re: Question About PBX Phone
Organization: University of Georgia, Athens
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 03:53:04 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Dave
Grabowski) writes:

> I recently obtained a telephone that was used on a private Centrex
> system. It has a sticker on the back : "Caution: For use only on
> business lines or risk of electrical short circuit" (or something like
> that.) I popped it open, and it doesn't have a matching transformer or
> usual huge (.1mf, 450+volt) cap used in most other telephone-line
> devices. My question: Do I need to bother adding this hardware? I've
> got it on a line now and it's been there for a few weeks and it works
> fine.

Maybe it's the kind of phone that has a pair of contacts (for turning
on a light, or something) across yellow and black.  This would short-
circuit a second line if you had one.  Hayes modems have the option of
working this way.


+ Michael Covington - Artificial Intelligence Programs - U of Georgia - USA
+ Unless otherwise noted, these are private opinions, not official statements.

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

From: [e-mail] (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Question About PBX Phone
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: SCN Research/Qic Laboratories of Tigard, Oregon.
Date: Sat, 29 Aug 1992 08:58:50 GMT


[e-mail] (Dave Grabowski) writes:

> I recently obtained a telephone that was used on a private Centrex
> system. It has a sticker on the back : "Caution: For use only on
> business lines or risk of electrical short circuit" (or something like
> that.) I popped it open, and it doesn't have a matching transformer or
> usual huge (.1mf, 450+volt) cap used in most other telephone-line
> devices. My question: Do I need to bother adding this hardware? I've
> got it on a line now and it's been there for a few weeks and it works
> fine.

It's probably set up to do A/A1 answer supervision. That means that
when you take it off hook, it *shorts* the second pair of wires
together.

If you have two-line wiring, this'll "busy out" the other line. If you
have one of those transformers mentioned recently, it'll short *that*
out. (not good!)

It's easy enough to check. See where the *outer* pair of wires
connects inside. Then, while the phone is not connected to the wall,
take it off hook. If the resistance between those wires drops to
nothing, it's wired that way, and you should disconnect one of the
wires where it enters the phone.

Some modems have A/A1 supervision as a "feature". I was getting
*quite* upset about the way one of our phone lines was failing to work
until I traced the problem to the modem!


Leonard Erickson              [e-mail]
CIS: [70465,203]             [e-mail]
FIDO:   1:105/51     [e-mail]
(The CIS & Fido addresses are preferred)

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

From: [e-mail] (Holt Sorenson)
Subject: Re: 911 on Jerry Springer Show
Organization: sdf Public Access UNIX, Dallas--unrestricted free shell access
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 02:59:07 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> Jeff Garber <0005075968@
mcimail.com> writes:

> On The Jerry Springer Show (Aug 19, 11 A.M., KCAL Channel 9, Los
> Angeles) the topic was 911.  Apparently, someone in the Cincinnati
> area called 911 from a cellular phone because he believed a man was
> having a heart attack on the side of the road. The 911 operator told
> him that they cannot accept calls from cellular phones! They actually
> played the recording from the call on the show, so I heard it with my
> own ears. The man died, although he was not suffering from a heart
> attack, and it was determined that he would have died even without the
> delay in reaching help. I never heard what he actually died of.

I recently witnessed an accident as I was traveling the loop that
surrounds Ft. Worth/Dallas TX and I exited immediately to find a pay
phone.  Approximately 30 seconds elapsed from the time I saw the
accident to the time I began to dial 911. The operator informed me
that they had already recieved a call from a cellular phone and that
help was on the way, so I know that here in 817, 911 accepts cellular
calls.


Holt Sorenson

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

From: [e-mail] (Ron Heiby)
Subject: Re: 911 on Jerry Springer Show
Organization: Motorola Computer Group, Schaumburg, IL
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 21:51:44 GMT


> [Moderator's Note: We don't have cellular 911, but we can call
> 787-0000 or the operator and get connected to Chicago Emergency.

I'm surprised that our Moderator didn't mention it, but in the
Chicagoland area, they have put signs up all over the place that one
should dial "*999" to report any sort of emergency from a cellular
phone.  I've used it several times to inform the authorities of
stranded motorists, non-working traffic signals, possibly-drunk
motorists, downed trees or power lines, and speeding peace officers.

In Buffalo Grove, where 911 service was installed a year or two ago,
they have found that the system "isn't getting enough use"!  They tell
us that people are only using it for truly life-threatening
emergencies.  We have been told, through the town newsletter, that we
should use 911 *any* time we want fire/police/ambulance dispatch.  So,
the way I read it, if I have a fender-bender and need a police officer
to come by to see what happened, from a non-cellular Buffalo Grove
phone, I'm to dial "911", rather than the police non-emergency number.
I think it's wierd, but who am I to argue?


Ron Heiby,  [e-mail]    Moderator: comp.newprod


[Moderator's Note: Who are you to argue? You are a citizen with an
above average knowledge of the telecommunications network. Don't fall
into that all too common trap of criticizing some bureaucrat only to
be attacked in return, 'how would you know anything about this?'. That
is BS! Continue arguing that 911 is *only* for dire emergencies when
immediate police intervention is required.  PAT]

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

Subject: Re: Sony IT-A4000 Digital Answering Machine Review
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 92 14:51:00 EDT
From: [e-mail]


In V12,I641,M2, Mark Lottor gave us a review of the Sony IT-A4000:

> The Sony IT-A4000 has been out for a while now.  It is a speakerphone
> and digital answering machine. [...lotsa good stuff deleted...]  In summary,
> it's a nice phone.  It has some minor annoyances, mostly because you
> know they could have just added a few lines of code to make it do
> something differently.  However, it easily beats having a machine with
> tapes or paying someone for voice-mail service.  It sells for around
> $199.

I would add just a few comments:

    1) I'm glad to see that the price has come down, if that's
       accurate.  I had to pay over $300 for mine.

    2) I would have preferred this unit without the built-in
       phone, which must add a fair amount to the price.  I've
       got plenty of better phones.

    3) It isn't very good at ignoring no-message calls if the
       line it's on doesn't have CPC pulses.  I run mine behind
       my Panasonic PBX, which doesn't give a CPC pulse on
       hangup, and I get a lot of silent messages and
       dialtone/busy messages.  I've used other machines that
       were much better in that situation.

    4) This one surprised me, and is the main reason for my
       posting:  There's no way to stash your outgoing message in
       memory while you use a different one for a while.  I'd
       never really thought about it, but with a cassette-based
       OGM you can set one cassette on a shelf for a day if
       that's appropriate, and then put it back in the machine
       later.  On Rolm PhoneMail you can do the same thing - have
       a "regular" OGM and an "alternate" OGM that you change
       more frequently.  But with this Sony machine, you have to
       re-record your "regular" OGM from scratch.  There's no
       concept of saving an OGM.  I say it "surprised" me but
       that's only because the thought that you might not be able
       to do this never crossed my mind.

Just my additional two cents.


Bob Clements, K1BC, [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Robert S. Helfman)
Subject: Re: Is RJ45 With Notch Same as RJ45 Without Notch?
Organization: The Aerospace Corporation, El Segundo, CA
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 20:11:31 GMT


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

> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Phill
> St. Louis) writes:

>> I would like to ensure that these RJ45 wall jacks with a notch will
>> work.  (I am pretty sure that they are Digital Equipment Corp. (DEC)
>> RJ45 wall jacks that have been installed in some new offices.)  Will
>> these work with the standard RJ45 (without notch) plugs?

> The jacks are the same, except for the notch.  The difference is in
> the cable.  A standard no-notch RJ-45 cable is wired with a twist, so
> that pin one is connected to pin eight on the other end.  A notched
> cable is wired straight.

Not necessarily true. DEC uses their cables as null-modems by having
the 'twist' in them. The wiring for RJ-12's is:

White = DSR
Blk   = Rcd
Red   = Grnd
Grn   = Grnd
Yel   = Txd
Blu   = DTR

So if you have a 'twist' cable connecting two devices, the effect is a
null-modem (DSR <> DTR, Rcd <> Txd).

I believe the RJ-45 setup is the same, plus RTS <> CTS.

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

Organization: The American University - University Computing Center
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 17:10:14 EDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: FAXes Over Internet


Someone a long time past (not in geological terms) "wondered" the same
question; what was to be created from this initial "wonderment" was a
listing of 'nets that would be willing to receive routed email,
convert it to ASCII, then make a LOCAL phone call to the requestors
FAX number.

I have made myself, and my personal PC/Faxboard available to all email
requests for the WASHINGTON DC metropolitan area.  Please also note
that given the legal *sling* I could potentially place myself in I
reserve the right to return the email without transmission. NO
COMMERICAL FAXES.  Only personal (including *your name* address, etc)
to potential employers, congressmen (people), etc that *include*
correct fax numbers will be sent.  I am not, nor do I or the rest of
us wish to become FAX directories so please include the correct fax
number.

FORM is up to the sender; please put the FAX number in the header.


Guy Hadsall   Washington DC    [e-mail]

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

From: kentrox![e-mail] (Bud Couch)
Subject: Re: How Can I Splice Telephone Wires Without an Overkill?
Organization: ADC Kentrox, Portland OR
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 16:52:28 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail].
wvnet.edu (Shailesh M. Potnis) writes:

> Is there a terminal or connector which splices two ends of a telephone cable
> to make a longer one?  Essentially what I would emagine would be similar
> to the two male connectors fused together.

Well, there is always the old WECO 710 splicing connector, but it
requires a rather elaborate tool to use, since it uses an
insulation-displacement mechanism. I think that the tool runs about
$300, and I don't think that AT&T will sell the connectors in
quantites of less than 25.

Personally, I'd use a pair of needle-nose pliers (and some wire
strippers if you don't have the touch to strip wire with them), a
soldering iron, a little solder, and a roll of electrical tape, but
then again, I *have* been called a dinosaur (along with some other
names!). :-)


Bud Couch - ADC/Kentrox   If my employer only knew...  standard BS applies

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

From: [e-mail] (Syngen Brown LNT)
Subject: Re: Pounding on an Octothorp
Date: 30 Aug 1992 10:45:55 GMT
Organization: London Network Team
Reply-To: [e-mail]


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

> In the UK, some people did call it an "octothorp" at first.  But no
> "e" on the end !.  We *don't* call it the pound sign, however, for
> fairly obvious reasons (like we have a pound sign all of our own !)

> The common name for it here, is "hash": but BT, when they introduced
> facility codes for PABXs and Network Services, decided they would give
> it their own name.  They sold phones with the "thorps" missing from
> the octothorp symbol: and then told us all to call that key the
> "square".

This wasn't solely a BT invention.  According to CCITT Rec. E.161:
"The symbol will be known as the _square_ or the most commonly used
equivalent term in other languages".

My feeling is that this is a potential source of confusion; imagine
the scenario in which a user is requested to press the square key --
yes, but which one?


Syngen
London Network Team, ULCC, 20 Guilford St, London WC1N 1DZ, UK
[phone] Ext. 406                     [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Michael Rosen)
Subject: Re: Dial a #, Connect Quicker?
Organization: University of Denver, Dept. of Math & Comp. Sci.
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 92 17:33:24 GMT


Is it possible to make a calling card call and not have to wait for
the <bong> to enter your card number?  I'd love to be able to just
dial it all straight and not have to wait those extra few seconds.


Michael Rosen   Tau Epsilon Phi - George Washington University
[e-mail]  [e-mail] or @lambada.oit.unc.edu

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

From: [e-mail] (Todd Inch)
Subject: Re: Dial a #, Connect Quicker?
Organization: Maverick International Inc.
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 92 19:36:46 GMT


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

> One question that I have not been able to answer myself is why it
> helps to hit # after entering an additional destination number for a
> calling card call (that is, after hitting # to terminate the first
> call).  I can't think of a situation where it would be expecting more
> than 11 digits, but it definately waits for more.

Many international calls require more than 11 digits.

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

From: [e-mail] (Harold Hallikainen)
Subject: Funny Answering Service Error (was How Do I Locate Graybar?)
Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 22:44:02 GMT


    Years ago when we used an answering service, we got a call
back from Graybar confirming some order.  The answering service told
us the call was from "gay bar".


Harold


[Moderator's Note: Did the answering service people look sort of
askance at you after that whenever you were in their office? :)   PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #673
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa27184;
          1 Sep 92 1:43 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA05559
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 31 Aug 1992 23:31:08 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA00398
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 31 Aug 1992 23:30:57 -0500
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 23:30:57 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #674

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 31 Aug 92 23:31:00 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 674

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: A Bad Time to Fall Asleep (Mark Brader)
    Re: A Bad Time to Fall Asleep (Michael Schuh)
    Re: A Bad Time to Fall Asleep (Bob Riegelmann)
    Re: A Bad Time To Fall Asleep (Ken Jongsma)
    Re: Cell Phones in the Air (Blake Farenthold)
    Re: Cell Phones in the Air (Robert L. Ullmann)
    Re: AT&T SDN; New Calling Cards (Jack Adams)
    Is AT&T's SDN (Software Defined Network) Any Good? (Jesse W. Asher)
    Re: Funny Answering Service Error (John Higdon)
    Re: Funny Answering Service Error (Anthony Clifton)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 03:53:00 -0400
From: [e-mail] (Mark Brader)
Subject: Re: A Bad Time to Fall Asleep


Our Moderator writes:

> My thanks to Mark Brader ([e-mail]) for suggesting this be reprinted.

You're welcome, Patrick, but I now wish I hadn't.  You see, a couple
of hours after I sent that suggestion, I looked at the applicable
section of Richard Rhodes's superb book "The Making of the Atomic
Bomb" (Simon & Schuster, 1986, ISBN 0-671-44133-7).  It implies, on
pretty good evidence, that there is something wrong with Mrs. Fermi's
story.

Let me summarize the timetable:

>  "The test was set for 4:30 AM the next morning, so we returned to the
>  hotel and went to bed early. We got up at 3 the next morning and drove
>  out to the location ...

The chronology that she gives after that is:

4:45... they return to town to telephone, but can't get the operator.
5:00 or just after... Fermi finds and wakes up the operator.
They are back at their observation point 5 minutes before the explosion.

>  .... later, we got together with the others who had
>  been assigned there and found out that it wasn't the rain that delayed
>  things; it was that woman asleep; you see, the main people responsible
>  were linked by phones through Alamogordo; they had to coordinate what
>  they were doing and sychronize their work. All of them got the same
>  thing on the phone we got: no answer from the operator for 45 minutes!

So this would imply that the operator's nap started at about 4:15, if
not earlier.

Okay, now to Rhodes.  On page 664 of my copy:

#  [Robert] Oppenheimer, [Gen. Leslie] Groves, [Kenneth] Bainbridge,
#  [Gen. Thomas] Farrell, [Richard] Tolman and an Army meteorologist met
#  with [the meteorologist for the test, Jack] Hubbard at McDonald Ranch
#  at four that afternoon [the day before the test] to consider the
#  weather.  ...  They decided to wait and see.  They had scheduled
#  a last weather conference for the next morning at 0200 hours;
#  they would make up their minds then.  The shot was set for 0400
#  and they let that time stand.

As a source for at least part of this paragraph, Rhodes cites "The Day
the Sun Rose Twice" by Ferenc Morton Szasz (Univ. of N.M. Press, 1984).

Now on page 666:

#  Thunderstorms began lashing the Jornada [del Muerto] at about 0200
#  hours ...  Winds gusted to thirty miles an hour.  Hubbard hung
#  on at Zero for last-minute readings--only misting drizzle had yet
#  reached the tower area--and arrived eight minutes late for the
#  0200 weather conference at Base Camp, to find Oppenheimer waiting
#  for him outside the weather center there.  Hubbard told him they
#  would have to scrub 0400 but should be able to shoot between
#  0500 and 0600.  Oppenheimer looked relieved.
#
#  Inside they found an agitated Groves waiting with his advisors.
#  "What the hell is wrong with the weather?" the general greeted
#  his forecaster.  ...  Groves demanded to know when the storm would
#  pass.  Hubbard explained its dynamics: a tropical air mass, night
#  rain.  Afternoon thunderstorms took their energy from the heating of
#  the earth and collapsed at sunset; this one, contrariwise, would
#  collapse at dawn.  Groves growled that he wanted a specific time,
#  not an explanation.  I'm giving you both, Hubbard rejoined.  ...
#
#  Oppenheimer applied himself to soothe his bulky comrade.  Hubbard
#  was the best man around, he insisted, and they ought to trust his
#  forecast.  The others at the meeting--Tolman and two army meteor-
#  ologists, one more than before--agreed.  Groves relented.  "You'd
#  better be right on this", he threatened Hubbard, "or I will hang
#  you."  He ordered the meteorologist to sign his forecast and set
#  the shot for 0530.  Then he went off to roust the governor of New
#  Mexico out of bed to the telephone to warn him he might have to
#  declare martial law.

For all of this material, Rhodes again cites Szasz, but he notes that
Szasz in turn cites Hubbard's *contemporary* personal journal.  This
is pretty solid evidence, unless Hubbard had some reason to falsify
it.  The signed forecast would be even better evidence: has anyone
seen it or seen it reproduced somewhere?  According to Rhodes, Hubbard
gave it to Bainbridge at "about 0508", following which the master
switches were unlocked and the bomb fired with a 20-minute delay.

There is further evidence that the telephones were not all down during
the period that Mrs. Fermi mentions.  From page 667 of Rhodes:

#  The meteorologist prepared his final forecast at S-10000 [the command
#  center, 10000 yards south of Zero].  He called Bainbridge at 0440.
#  "Hubbard gave me a complete weather report", the Trinity director
#  recalls, "and a prediction that at 5:30 am the weather would be
#  possible but not ideal.  ...  I called Oppenheimer and General
#  Farrell to get their agreement that 5:30 would be T = 0."  Hubbard,
#  Bainbridge, Oppenheimer and Farrell each had veto power over the shot.
#  They all agreed.

Rhodes cites a different source for this: "All in our Time" by Jane
Wilson (Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, 1975).

There is a further problem with Mrs. Fermi's story, which is this: the
Trinity test site is 60 miles from Alamogordo!  From her account it
seems to be at most a 25-minute drive from the telephone exchange to
the observing point, which she says is 15 miles from the site.
(Unfortunately, while Rhodes mentions something about what Fermi did
during the test, he doesn't mention where he did it.)

I am left with three possible interpretations.  One is that Mrs.
Fermi's story simply never happened.  A second is that it happened
exactly as she said, except that after 20 years she got some of the
times wrong, while Hubbard participated in a cover-up, and Wilson's
source was also misleading.

And the third, which I think most likely, is that Fermi's drive into
town did happen, but the operator's nap did not really affect the
timing of the test.  In this interpretation, not all the telephones
for everyone went through that operator; perhaps it was only the lines
between the test site and the hotels where the scientists were
staying, say.  (Also, maybe the operator was not in Alamogordo but in
a smaller town closer to the site, such as Tularosa or Carrizozo.)
Maybe what someone really said was that they had been afraid that the
test would have to be cancelled because certain people couldn't be
telephoned, and then it was all right.

I dunno.  I'd like to believe the original story.  But the evidence ...


Mark Brader, SoftQuad Inc., Toronto, utzoo!sq!msb, [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: Well, my observation back then (1965) was that she
was, to put it kindly, starting to get forgetful, particularly after a
large pasta dinner and a couple drinks. The Windermere Hotel's dining
room ('The Anchorage') did not serve skimpy meals or drinks ... PAT]

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

Date: Mon, 31 Aug 92 11:45:05 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Michael Schuh)
Subject: Re: A Bad Time to Fall Asleep


I enjoyed the article.  Thanks for re-posting it.

Fermi's method of locating the exchange reminds me of an anectode
Feyman mentions in one of his books, using the denisty of phone lines
to find the way back to town.

Also, if all atomic/nuclear weapons could be stopped by napping
operators, then we might never have had a cold war.  Interesting
concept ...

Thanks again.


Mike Schuh   [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: But then again, maybe it never happened at all,  or
maybe it happened, but a little differently than related.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Bob Riegelmann)
Subject: Re: A Bad Time to Fall Asleep
Organization: National Solar Observatory/SP, Sunspot NM, USA
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 92 19:51:17 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> TELECOM Moderator
([e-mail]) writes:
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 667, Message 6 of 6

> Mrs. Fermi and I lived in the same apartment building on East
> 56th Street, directly across the street from the Museum of Science and
> Industry, and we chatted and dined together frequently.

Then you must have lived close to my graduate advisor, Russ Donnelly.
And knew one of my best friends, their son, Jim, (who was still in
diapers I expect.)

[Moderator's Interjection: I lived in the Windermere Hotel, 56th and
Stony Island Avenue, and ate in the hotel dining room 'The Anchorage'
most evenings.]

> In Alamogordo, we checked into the hotel then drove out to where
> Enrico had been assigned. It was set up that the scientists were
> deployed over about a two hundred square mile area; we were about
> fifteen miles from the target.

I now live in Sunspot, 5000 feet straight up from Alamogordo and in
the hills.

> "Where we stopped was in front of a house on one of the residential
> streets there, but what looked odd to me was on the side of the house,
> there were hundreds of wires converging, coming in from a dozen
> telephone poles which all seemed to meet in the back yard or on the
> side of the house. And all these wires came down out of the sky you
> might say, and went in the side of the house in a big bundle.

This fits with the service I get here in the hills.  No Class here for
a long time to come.

> "Really, I can't blame the lady much. The whole summer of 1945 was
> just horrid. When we arrived the day before, the temperature was over
> a hundred;

This also fits well, the temps in Alamogordo lately have been in the 90's.
When it gets really hot, I flee home to the hills, where I can see alamogordo,
but the daily highs are in the 70's.

> "When I was there in town two weeks ago for the (twentieth
> anniversary) reunion, just from curiosity I went past that house; it
> took me awhile to remember where it was.

I could go ask, the house is probably still there.

Small world, huh?

Thanks for posting this, it made my day, I'll forward it on to Jim, if
he hasn't seen it.


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


[Moderator's Note: I would suggest including the lead article in this
issue with any distribution of the original article however.   PAT]

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

Date: Sat, 29 Aug 1992 09:13:03 EDT
From: Ken Jongsma x7702 <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: A Bad Time To Fall Asleep


I used to live in Alamogordo a few years ago. The town is not that
much larger today than it was in Mrs. Fermi's story. Twice a year,
they allow the public to drive out to both the detonation site and the
ranch house where the scientists were staying. Both locations are
within the White Sands Missile Range and are usually not accessable by
the public.

I was fortunate enough to have been doing some test flights on the
range one day and asked for permission to overfly both places. Ground
Zero is about the size of a round football field. It's been fenced in
and leveled, with a black monument commemorating the event. On the
public access days, they allow a convoy of civilian vehicles to leave
from Alamogordo and drive about two hours to the site. They usually
have a mockup of the actual bomb there as well.

The ranch house has not been used in many years and is pretty much
weathered and falling apart.

When you first ran your story a few years ago, I contacted the
International Space Museum in Alamogordo and the Atomic Energy Museum
in Albuquerque. Both were very pleased to receive FAXed copies of it
for their historical records.


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


[Moderator's Note: Alamogordo now has a population of about 24,000 I
believe. I think a half century ago the population was less. Perhaps
you also should send the lead story in this issue to the same places
where you sent the original.   PAT]

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

Date: Mon, 31 Aug 92 10:55:08 CDT
From: [e-mail] (Blake Farenthold)
Subject: Re: Cell Phones in the Air
Organization: Corpus Christi, Texas' pro-party bbs [phone]


> This led me to think about the movie Die Hard II....

What a classic for telcom continuity blunders. You caught only one ...

> In some sequence, our hero gets paged by his wife from a plane, he
> checks the pager and calls her back on the plane.

No can do.  (Actualy I'm suprised SHE was able to call at all,
whenever I really need the airphone all I get is a synthasized voice
saying processing call please wait for about half an hour) Of course
they are GTE air phones, I should have known not to count on them.

The other telcom blunders I remember in Die Hard 2 are:

Pac*Bell (Pacific Bell, serves California) payphones in what was
supposed to be the Washington DC airport.

Faxing fingerprints for identification.  I can't even read half the
typwritten stuff that is faxed to me ... nuch less make out the
details of a graphic as fine as a finger print.

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

From: [e-mail] (Robert L Ullmann)
Subject: Re: Cell Phones in the Air
Organization: The World in Boston
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 1992 02:51:57 GMT


[e-mail] (Laurence Chiu) writes:

> of the smaller planes like 737's). This led me to think about the
> movie Die Hard II where air phones figure prominently in the plot. In
> some sequence, our hero gets paged by his wife from a plane, he checks
> the pager and calls her back on the plane.  Is this possible or some

At the risk of somehow accepting-by-failure-to-rebut the other 100-odd
totally hilariously stupid technical errors in the "plot"; no, you
can't call an Airfone.

That said: I watched it a couple of days ago on cable, and if you just
watch the "human" story as a shoot'em-up, it ain't bad at all.  Hell,
all TELECOM readers should watch it just for the amusement of
wondering what you could make as a consultant if Hollywood cared one
whit for technical accuracy.

This movie has almost as many technical idiocies as SPACE*1999 but
not quite. Start with the idea that airplanes are somehow "stuck" at
the outer marker when the radio goes down, continue through the idea
that a pilot of a commercial passenger airplane would try to land
without visual on the runway lights, and end with the idea that you
can tap into and simulate an airport control tower by attaching
alligator clips (or equivalent) to the cables and then hacking through
them with an ax.

In between, forget that blanks _sound_ different to any expert, and
forget that if you toss anything larger than a small chicken through a
turbine engine, it disintegrates. (The engine, not the chicken. Well,
it too .. ;-)


Robert Ullmann        [e-mail]    [phone] x226

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

From: vixen![e-mail] (26070-adams)
Subject: Re: AT&T SDN; New Calling Cards
Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 92 13:15:48 GMT


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

> Question: what does SDN stand for anyway?  And what makes it different
                      ^^^ Software Defined Network (As of 1986ish!)

> from standard long distance service?

I believe SDN is a trademark of AT&T (possibly even registered).  I'm
a little hazy on this, but I believe SDN provides a multi-location
customer (read as big businesses) with an economical alternative to a
private voice network of dedicated trunks.  Using the intelligence of
AT&T's NCPs and LD net, all sorts of virtual numbering schemes are
possible (Corporate universal numbering plans for instance).

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

>> Question: what does SDN stand for anyway?  And what makes it different
>> from standard long distance service?

> It's Software Defined Network.  In Olden Days when long distance rates
> were much higher than now and switching was relatively much more
> expensive than it is now, large companies usually rented lots of fixed
> leased lines among their various facilities to carry intra-company
> traffic.  This saved money relative to toll rates and also sometimes
> avoided problems of not being able to get through at peak hours.

So far so good ...

> {STUFF DELETED}.        Once such hack is the "virtual private
> line" which is a long distance ringdown circuit -- whenever you pick

Are you sure about this?

> up the phone at one end it quickly calls the other end to give you
> pretty much the same effect as a leased line but at lower cost since
> they don't need to provide bandwidth when you're not asking for it.

> SDN is basically a bulk calling plan for large businesses that
> replaces networks of leased lines.

It's a little more technical than a "calling plan".  It involves
called number routing manipulation based on all kinds of things (Day
of week, time of day, your telephone number, etc.).  The routing is
performed according to logic which resides in the Network Control
Points (NCP) which are simplisticly speaking, large databses of these
routing logic algorithms.

> One dials 10732 to make an SDN

This depends on your dialing plan of your LEC switch.

> call (and gets a message saying to call your account rep if it's not a
> line assigned to an SDN account) but as far as I know the calls are
> carried just like other AT&T calls.

In most applications of SDN, a second dial tone is played and the
number dialed is captured and sent to the NCP in the form of a query.
Based on your number, the number you dialed, and a lot of other stuff
(mentioned above), your call is routed to its destination via the AT&T
public switched telephone network.


Jack (John) Adams        | Bellcore RRC 4B-259
[phone] {Voice}        | [phone] {Facsimile}
[e-mail]    | [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Jesse W. Asher)
Subject: Is AT&T's SDN (Software Defined Network) any good?
Organization: G.O.D Inc.
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 92 01:28:49 GMT


Does anyone have any information on how good AT&T's SDN offering is?
Would it be useful for providing switched DDS lines?  Is this really a
rip off?  Thanks.


Jesse W. Asher     Phone: [phone]
Varco-Pruden Buildings  6000 Poplar Ave., Suite 400, Memphis, TN  38119
Internet: [e-mail]   UUCP: ...!banana!homecare!jessea

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

Date: Sun, 30 Aug 92 23:52 PDT
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: Funny Answering Service Error (was How Do I Locate Graybar?)


On Aug 30 at 18:45, TELECOM Moderator writes:

> [Moderator's Note: Did the answering service people look sort of
> askance at you after that whenever you were in their office? :)   PAT]

Back in my "big business" days, we had a young man in our service
department who was apprenticing to be an installer. As is custom, he
usually got stuck with much of the "gofer" responsibilities, such as
making trips to distributors to pick up supply orders.

He was newly married and his wife was a very young, insecure person
who checked up on her hubby several times a day. Late one afternoon,
she called for her man, only to be told by the service manager that he
had not yet returned from Graybar. The next day, word was all over the
shop about how when our young apprentice returned home, he was given
all manner of hell about drinking on the job, and worse, doing it in a
gay bar.

In his honor, we all referred to Graybar as "gaybar" from then on.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (A Person of Awareness)
Subject: Re: Funny Answering Service Error (was How Do I Locate Graybar?)
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames, IA
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 17:28:06 GMT


Speaking of miscommunications:

I worked for US West Paging in Iowa this last spring and we had a
radio so we could act as an intermediary point between the police
department and the towing company that does their impounds.

I listened to a conversation one night that I will relate:

Base: [name deleted], you might want to grab the private tow at 10th and
      Locust.  It's a 79 Gray Dodge Van.

Mobile:  What color did you say it was?

Base:  Gray

Mobile:  What color, didn't get that?

Base:  Graaaaay    GRRRRRRRAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAYYYYYYYYYYYYY!!!!!

Mobile:  Sorry still didn't get the color.

Base:  It's ggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrraaaaaaaa
       aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy   GRAY!!!!!

Mobile:  You say it's a GAY van????

At this point I was laughing so hard my headset fell off and I almost
disconnected some poor woman trying to reach an insurance company.


Anthony Clifton

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #674
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa02745;
          1 Sep 92 3:57 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA29624
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 1 Sep 1992 01:56:08 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA16942
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 1 Sep 1992 01:55:58 -0500
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 1992 01:55:58 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #675

TELECOM Digest     Tue,  1 Sep 92 01:56:00 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 675

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Major Phone Outage in Omaha (Jack Winslade)
    Hurricane Andrew Notes (David E. Bernholdt)
    A Non-Horror Story (Roy M. Silvernail)
    Disaster Reporting On Usenet (Rick Broadhead)
    AT&T to Cut Six Offices (Washington DC Times via Paul Robinson)
    Ohio Bell Announces DMS-100 for Cleveland East (Michael J. Logsdon)
    Which Uses Less Resources: Off Hook or On Call? (Paul Robinson)
    ATM Introduction Wanted (Kevin Beauchamp)
    Is It OK To Leave Cell Phone Battery Charger Plugged In? (Scott Brenner)
    Computer/Phone Interface (David Gingold)
    Merlin+ Station Wires (Gabe M. Wiener)
    Advice Sought on Pay Phone Ruckus (Brian Capouch)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 31 Aug 92 23:03:33 CST
From: [e-mail] (Jack Winslade)
Subject: Major Phone Outage in Omaha
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: DRBBS Technical BBS, Omaha


At about 10:45 AM this morning, a major malfunction in US West's 135th
St. office resulted in the disruption of 3/4 of the phones served from
the CO, according to the {Omaha World-Herald}.  At press time, the
exact cause was not known, but a US West spokesman stated that it was
probably a problem with the switching or computer equipment.

Television station WOWT reported that 'It was a computer error and not
a cable cut' and that service was restored in the late afternoon.
(The map shown by the station GREATLY exaggerated the area of the
outage, showing large areas to the east and south of the area served
by that office.)

The 135th St. office serves some 33x and all 69x prefixes in the Omaha
area.  I've been told by an 'insider' that it is a #5 ESS <tm>.
Ironically, both the west Omaha US West office (which includes
residential service reps) and some of AT&T's offices are served out of
135th and were shut down.  Non-emergency lines to the Douglas County
Sheriff's office were out, but 911 was said to be in service during
the outage.

The CLID log on DRBBS shows a call from the 330 office at 10:24 AM
with no other calls from the affected COs since.  Calls from the
surrounding offices appear to be coming through with no trouble.


Good day.   JSW

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

Date: Mon, 31 Aug 92 15:13:23 EDT
From: David E. Bernholdt <[e-mail]>
Subject: Hurricane Andrew Notes


Not terribly telecom related, but since people have asked for info
about South Florida, here's a second-hand account ...

The secretary in our Project, Judy, has a sister in Homestead, in the
center of the area devastated by Andrew.  She and her husband left
here Wednesday to go down there and help out; they returned Saturday
morning -- they said they had to get some rest or they wouldn't be
able to get to work today.

Despite the fact that they are supposedly only allowing residents into
the area, they arrived in Homestead unchallenged, though there were
checks at a few offramps from the highway. (They were expecting checks
and had prepared by contacting State Police, etc. in advance.)

The place is (hardly suprisingly) a complete mess.  She had pictures
of her sister's block and in some places you couldn't even see the
street for all the rubble.  Though the TV reports are likely to show
the places where the houses were of lesser construction and have
totally collapsed, she says that many more houses were effectively
just as bad because the roof had been ripped off, allowing wind and
water to get inside the house.  Pictures of her sister's block showed
houses with the exterior walls remaining but no roof.  There were four
families, including Judy's sister, actually living in their houses in
that neighborhood.  Some other people would come in during the day and
leave at night.

They live close to Homestead Air Force Base.  Despite reports that it
was leveled, they did manage to clear some of the runways and are
flying in and out frequently (lots of helicopters, apparently).  What
little they could see of the base (mostly housing) suggested it was in
a similar condition to the houses in their neighboorhood -- windows
blow out, many roofs blown off, exterior walls usually standing.

They have no power.  Water available, but the pressure was so low you
had couldn't raise the hose more than three feet.  Their telephone was
working, but there were relatively few in the area that were (despite
the fact that the area has underground cables).  They foud the phone
quite useful because it meant they didn't have to drive -- most cars
were destroyed by the storm, including Judy's sister's. Newspapers are
publishing, but they don't deliver.  TV and radio are broadcasting,
but you have to have batteries or a generator to run them.  Generators
are like gold -- Judy said she had heard of $500 units being sold for
$1800-3000.  I don't know about gasoline to run them.  Fortunately,
they brought a generator and some gas for her sister.

As they were driving down Wednesday, and again heading up on Saturday,
they saw convoys of ambulances, fire equipment, and semi tractors -- a
dozen or so at a time -- barrelling down the highway behind a State
Trooper using lights and sirens.  Unfortunately, though, the aid does
not seem to be disbursed very well.  People have no way of finding out
where it is being distributed, and if they did, most cars are
inoperative or don't have gas.  They only aid they saw was private
citizens who had loaded up their cars and were cruising through
neighborhoods offering it to people.

The only law enforcement the came in contact with was 3.00 AM Friday
They stopped to make sure Judy and company were armed.  They said to
be sure to shout "duck" to the neighbors before you shoot (it is a
fairly densely packed area), and to choose you words carefully when
the cops come back to investigate any shootings.  The cops were a
little bit miffed that they weren't allowed on the street earlier.
Apparently, they had been held in a staging area waiting to respond to
reports of looting.  They'd rather just patrol.

The insurance adjusters had also not yet been seen in her sister's
neighboorhood, though Judy heard many were handing out initial ($2500)
checks as soon as they had verified that you had an insurance policy
with them.

Judy said she slept about six hours in those three days, and they had
two hot meals.  The rest of the time, they just worked on cleaning up
the mess.  People were very helpful to each other.  Judy said if it
weren't for her job, she'd go back in a flash.  They need lots of help
down there, and it sounds like it will be quite a while before any
sort of normalcy is restored.


[Moderator's Note: This will go down in history as one of the worst
natural tragedies ever to strike the USA. And help, in the form of
practical household goods is still in short supply.  Apparently they
will not have electric service restored for *several months* if not a
year or more as transmission lines are totally down.   PAT]

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

Subject: A Non-Horror Story
From: cybrspc![e-mail] (Roy M. Silvernail)
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 92 14:51:46 CDT
Organization: Villa CyberSpace, Minneapolis, MN


I just moved into a new apartment in Minneapolis.  The building is
some 28 years old, and I wondered what the telephone service would be
like.

The manager gave me a look at the demarc, and I shuddered.  It's one
of those old panels with screw-studs. (I don't know the exact term,
but you use a can wrench on them) The incoming cabling is a rat's
nest, and absolutely nothing is labelled.  The guides on the terminal
frame are numbered, but the numbers don't match reality.

Hoping for the best, I called US West.  The local service number goes
through an ACD, and handed me to a representative in fairly short
order.  She took my name, my new service address, and asked whether I
had service in my name before.  Then she offered me a measured-service
line and a flat-rate line.  Other than mentioning measured service
first, I got no pressure to select that service.

I was offered the standard custom calling options: Call Waiting, Call
Forwarding, Three-Way Calling and Speed Dial.  I declined all but Call
Waiting, since my building's security system uses the telephone as a
doorbell.  Final cost for the line is 23.80/month, including LineBacker
(because I didn't put the wiring in myself, I don't want to have to
pay to get it fixed) and Tone Calling.

She then asked if I had a computer or FAX machine.  I had heard from a
friend that there was some special on second-line installations, and
asked.  I found that the second line is $16.25 to install (first one
is $18.75), but that she could waive all but $2.50 of that
installation.  I accepted and ordered a second line with tone calling
only for $19.25 a month.

When the day came, I checked the apartment, and found line 1 working,
but nothing on line two.  I presumed that a field man would have to
visit the demarc from hell for that, and met him when he arrived.  I
told him that line 1 worked, but not line two, and he answered "did
you want a second line installed?"  This caught me off guard.  He went
on that there was a $58 charge to install the second line to my jacks.
I told hin the jack work had already been done.  Then he asked me if I
had a two-line phone.  I assured him that I did, and showed him to the
demarc.

After talking with the installer a bit, I found out why we
miscommunicated at first.  He said most people that order two lines
want separate RJ-11 jacks.  He didn't expect me to understand RJ-14.
After he realized I wasn't the usual dunce, we got along fine.

The installation proceeded smoothly.  He quickly located and hooked up
my second pair, and we tested them from the apartment.  He almost gave
me the ANI number, but didn't.  (it's six digits with a four digit
security code, changed every three months ... that's all he would
say.)

Footnote: Later, when I was setting up the phones and the modem, I had
trouble with the second line.  I finally traced the fault to an old
ITT 2500 desk set I have.  When the modular kit was put on this phone,
the black/yellow pair was tied together on the G network terminal!


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

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

Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 14:11:35 EDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Disaster Reporting On Usenet
Organization: York University


I am surprised that Usenet, as powerful a medium as it is, has not
been more widely used to coordinate disaster relief activities.  For
example, I am sure there would be great support for a group such as
misc.disaster.coordination and/or misc.disaster.reports, which could
be used by anxious friends and relatives to find out about friends and
family in disaster areas, to disseminate information on relief
efforts, provide addresses of those agencies accepting donations, and
to report on the situation in affected areas.  It is my feeling that
the Usenet community would benefit from newsgroups that would act as a
central clearinghouse for information of this sort when a natural
disaster strikes, anywhere in the world.

Are there any folks out there who have experience in creating a new
newsgroup, and are willing to moderate a discussion and run a vote for
the creation of newsgroups dealing with disaster assistance?  Does
anyone think this is a good idea?  I don't have the time to get fully
involved at this stage because of other demands on my time, but I am
hoping that someone is willing to take this idea and work with it.


Rick Broadhead    <[e-mail]>    <ysar1111@yorkvm1>

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

Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 92  17:36:12 EDT
Subject: AT&T to Cut Six Offices


AT&T to axe six offices in aim to serve 'efficiently'.

By Kent Gibbons
The Washington (DC) Times, Saturday Aug 29, 1992, Page B5

   AT&T plans to shut six of 18 customer service shops in November,
although one in Silver Spring [Md.] will remain open, the company said
yesterday.

   The closings will affect 860 union workers and 83 managers, all of
whom will be offered other work within the company if they qualify and
are willing to relocate, American Telephone & Telegraph Co. Spokesman
Mark Siegel said.

   The offices, where AT&T employees field questions about service and
billing are being closed to serve customers more efficiently, Mr.
Siegel said.  He would not elaborate, saying that would reveal to
competitors secrets about AT&T's call traffic.  But he said the
offices to be closed were targeted on the basis of their staffing,
technology and operating costs.

   A union official said the plan "may satisfy some ill-conceived
management scheme, but hundreds of working people, thousands of family
members, and communities in six states will suffer."

   The official, Communications Workers of America Vice President
James Irvine, said thousands of AT&T union members have become
"high-tech migrant workers, following their jobs from one closing
office to the next."

   Job security was a key issue in union contract talks with AT&T this
year.

   Union employees who are not placed in other jobs will be given job
retraining, counseling, outplacement help and up to 104 weeks'
severance pay depending on length of service with the company, Mr.
Siegel said.

   Offices to be closed are in Columbus, Ohio; Mobile, Ala.;
Parsippany, N.J.; Radnor, Pa.; St. Cloud, Minn.; and Wauwatosa, Wis.

   Remaining offices are in Silver Spring [Md.]; Atlanta; Bloomington,
Minn.; Charleston, W.Va.; Dallas; Itasca, Ill.; Kansas City, Mo.;
Phoenix; Pittsburgh; Pleasanton, Calif.; Providence, R.I.; and San
Antonio, Texas.

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

Date: Mon, 31 Aug 92 19:13:39 -0400
From: [e-mail] (Michael J. Logsdon)
Subject: Ohio Bell Announces DMS-100 for Cleveland East
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Michael J. Logsdon)


We have just received a letter regarding the impending cutover to
DMS-100 on 10/24/92 for (216) 321/371/397/932 xxxx.  What do I need to
change for our SRX business switch in this Ohio Bell Eastern Cleveland
suburb?


Mike Logsdon    University School   [e-mail]

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

Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 92  20:58:39 EDT
Subject: Which Uses Less Resources: Off Hook or On Call?


I'd like to start some discussion and some thinking over an issue
which we had a bit of some hot discussion.

If you have to make a number busy, for example, when changing the
paper in a fax machine -- especially if you have multiple fax machines
on hunt group so that a busy line rolls over to the next unused line
 -- that you want a line to be busy.  (When someone sends to a fax
machine and it's busy, they retry in a short while; if it doesn't
answer, they figure it's out of order.  (At least, I do.)

So what is the least use of the telephone system for keeping a line
busy?  I said that you are better off, say, calling a silent line or
calling the line itself and listening to its own busy signal except
that some systems drop you on a call to a busy number after a time.

Someone else said to just leave the phone off-hook.  I pointed out
this ties up a dialing sender.  They claimed, yes, but only for the 30
seconds it allows you to dial, and is less resources than a call
set-up and tear-down among the battery hold, etc.

Someone want to settle this?


Paul Robinson     [e-mail]

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

Subject: ATM Introduction Wanted
From: [e-mail] (Kevin Beauchamp)
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 12:15:28 -0600
Organization: Edmonton Remote Systems #3, Edmonton, AB, Canada


I would like an introduction to Asynchronous Transfer Mode (ATM)
technology.  I would like a general overview of the technology, and
perhaps a glossary of related terms.

How does ATM interface with Ethernet?

Will ATM interface with FDDI?

What is the relation of ATM to SONET?  ISDN?

What is the projected maximum bit rate?

When will product be available?

How expensive will it be vis-a-vis FDDI?

Can someone on the net help me out?


Thanks,

Kevin Beauchamp   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (scott.d.brenner)
Subject: Is It OK To Leave Cell Phone Battery Charger Plugged In?
Organization: AT&T
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 13:44:20 GMT



I have an OKI 891 transportable cellular phone that has a 12V NiCd
battery (number RP 9021A/64-21055, if it matters).  The charger for
this battery (model RP9022A) doesn't have any warnings against leaving
it plugged in all the time.  My question is: would this be all right
(leaving it plugged in)?

On a related matter, why does my FM radio at work seem to get much
better reception when the cell phone battery charger is plugged into
the same power strip?


a T d H v A a N n K c S e

Scott D. Brenner    AT&T Consumer Communications Services
Basking Ridge, NJ   [e-mail]  -or-  [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (David Gingold)
Subject: Computer/Phone Interface
Date: 31 Aug 92 13:52:55
Organization: Thinking Machines Corporation, Cambridge MA, USA


I'm looking for hardware which will interface either a PC or a Mac to
a phone line.  It should be able digitize and play back sound and send
and receive DTMF (Touch Tone) signals.  A built-in DSP chip would be
nice but is not strictly necessary.  I'm willing to write my own
software.

Can anyone provide tips on what equipment is available and what is
good?


dg

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

From: [e-mail] (Gabe M Wiener)
Subject: Merlin+ Station Wires
Organization: Columbia University
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 19:57:07 GMT


Merlin Plus stations take four pairs.  Does anyone know what the
breakout on these pairs is?  Someone told me that it goes:

blue/white = voice
orange/white = line data
green/white = control leads
brown/white = thru-phone page

Any accuracy to this?  He didn't seem positive.


Gabe Wiener - Columbia Univ.  [e-mail]
N2GPZ in ham radio circles    72355,1226 on CI$

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

Date: Mon, 317 Aug 92 15:58:27 -0500 (CDT)
From: Brian Capouch <[e-mail]>
Subject: Advice Sought on Pay Phone Ruckus


We are a small (1000FTE) rural-based college.  A couple of years ago
our local telco installed a 5ESS, putting an Optical Remote Module
into it on our campus.  At that time, after a pretty hard sell from
both the local company and AT&T (who reportedly were financing the
install) we signed up for Centrex.  This setup replaced our aging PBX.

We don't have phones in students' rooms.  For at least the last
decade, there have been two phones in each hall: a campus phone that
would allow calls to any number in the same exchange, and a pay phone
owned by the phone company.

This summer, the head honcho at our carrier gave our administration an
ultimatum: the pay phones weren't generating near the revenue they
could.  Lots of our students rent private lines from this same telco,
and it bothered them that our students could call those lines from the
"free" phone in each hall instead of using the pay phones.  So we
either had to block all calls not aimed at our Centrex lines or they
would yank every one of our pay phones.

I need to see what alternatives we might have, or to find out that we
have none.  The phone company rep will only talk to one person on
campus, and she has told him that unless each phone generates $35.00 a
month they would be losing money on it.

Thanks for any help that might be forthcoming.


Brian Capouch    Saint Joseph's College     [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: You can have the pay phones converted to semi-public;
meaning you pay some fee to telco each month for having them there. The
telco then has to leave you alone since you are paying for the phones.
But I do think you would be wise to keep the centrex phones limited to
calls on your system only. You are giving away a lot of local service
which could generate quarters in the coin box. You might also (and I
would be inclined to) call telco's bluff; tell them to come and get
the phones out by a certain date or you will personally remove them.
Before you do that, contract with a manufacturer of private pay phones
(sometimes called COCOTS) and buy a few dozen of them at a good rate
and then you get to keep *all* the money they take in. By programming
the new COCOTS you purchase so they give free calls on campus and
charge a reasonable fee for off campus use (and a very low rate for
long distance calls) you can beat telco at their own game. If you own
the COCOTS there will be no middleman looking for a profit. You can
program them for something like 25 cents per minute on all LD calls
and 15 cents a minute on local calls ... run them through your centrex
lines on the trunks the hall phones are on now; that way you won't
even need to pay the miserable telco for the extra lines.  PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #675
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa19360;
          2 Sep 92 0:32 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA00136
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 1 Sep 1992 22:37:16 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA15278
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 1 Sep 1992 22:37:04 -0500
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 1992 22:37:04 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #676

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 1 Sep 92 22:37:10 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 676

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Summary: Tapeless Answering Machines (Derek Andrew)
    Summary: RS-422-A: Which Way is Up, Polarity Wise? (J. Porter Clark)
    Pulse Diling Through to a PBX Extension (Michael M. O'Dorney)
    Automatic Call Router (Javier Henderson)
    North American ISDN Users Forum (Steve Rogers)
    Calling 911 From a Cellular Phone (Javier Henderson)
    Call Home Country Codes From UK and France (Fred E.J. Linton)
    Area Code 700 Number For ANI Read-Back? (Bill Mayhew)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Derek Andrew)
Subject: Summary: Tapeless Answering Machines
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: University of Saskatchewan
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 22:49:38 -0600


I recently posted a request for information on the various tapeless
answering machines on the market. This is a summary of what I have
learned.

Panasonic, AT&T, GTE, Sony and Phonemate were the only manufacturers
that I found anything on. The following features appear to be common
to all machines.

o    battery backup

o    on the machines that include a phone, the phone usually has
    some speed call buttons, and maybe other features like redial.

o    when the machine supports day/time stamping, it appears to be
    the day of the week and the time of day.

o    all machines seem to support remote operation, but only
    the AT&T and MAYBE the Panasonic machines allow selective
    deletion of individual messages REMOTELY

o    NOBODY, but NOBODY supports Caller ID.

AT&T 1337, 1339, 1539    $100-$200

The features of these models are the same but... The 1339
has the additional features of Day/Time stamping and voice
prompts; the 1539 is the 1339 with a built in phone.

o    Capacity for seven minutes of messages.

o    Allows selective deletion of individual messages,
    (other vendors allowed deletion of only ALL messages).

o    Battery backup.

o    It has the standard play, fast-forward, back, pause,
    and delete buttons.

  Complaints

o    The toll saver feature will cause the machine to answer
    after two rings if there are *any* messages -- even if
    you have heard them before -- rather than just *new*
    messages.  All messages must be deleted to reset it.

o    The OGM still sounds like it was recorded on tape.

o    The fast-forward button doesn't react very quickly,
    you have to pause about a second between presses.

o    It won't record a blank message if the caller hangs
    up before the beep, but it will record the sound of
    the phone being hung up if the caller stays on after
    the beep.

o    If the last message is a blank, then you have to start
    the play sequence over again and fast-forward to it in
    order to delete it, since the machine gives you no time
    to back up.

Panasonic KX-T8000

o    Eighteen minutes of messages

o    maybe has remote selective deletion of messages

PhoneMate ADAM (All Digital Answering Machine)     >$200

o    Variable speed playback.

o    Will call another number when it receives a message.

o    Ten minutes of messages, expandable.

o    LCD display

o    Day/time stamping.

o    variable speed message playback

o    commands to skip forward or back to next message, and
    forward or back within message during playback.

o    phone included

o    smart enough not to record pauses

  Complaints

o    Poor sound quality.

o    Message playback is LOUD

GTE 9821    < $100

Although there is a new model out, the 9831, I received no
responses from any owners. Indications were that the owners
of the 9821 would never buy another GE machine again.  A vendor
told me the 9831 allows ten minutes of messages and supports
call screening.

o    two minutes of messages.

o    simple phone included

  Complaints

o    no way to screen calls

o    must listen to calls on the handset

o    You can't back up or go forward -- to review a call,
    you have to review ALL of your calls

o    bug: if someone talks to the full two minutes, it crashes
    the system, eats your outgoing message, and from then on it
    answers the phone, beeps at the person on the other end,
    and won't take messages.

Sony IT-A4000

o    Phone included.

o    Variable speed playback.

o    Time/date stamp.

o    Voice prompting.

o    three separate mailboxes.

o    Will call a phone number when it receives messages.

  Complaints

o    Poor sound quality (like the ADAM)

o    Cuts of messages from cellular phones (verified by
    manufacturer.) Another owner has not experience this bug.

The following article is copied from a previous posting in the TELECOM
Digest. I have included it here for comparison to the others.


 Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1992 12:02:08 PST
 From: Mark Lottor <[e-mail]>
 Subject: Sony IT-A4000 Digital Answering Machine Review

The Sony IT-A4000 has been out for a while now.  It is a speakerphone
and digital answering machine.  It has a very hi-tech design and a
real nice backlit LCD display.  The answering machine has three
outgoing messages, which can be your own or ones from ROM.  The first
is the normal please leave a message message.  Another is for when
your recording memory is full.  And another is for when you put the
machine in announce only mode.

When leaving a message, a caller can push *1, *2, or *3 to have the
message tagged for a particular recipient.  The phone does not tell
them to do this, you put it in your message if you want to, otherwise
things go into box one by default.  The phone has three LEDs on three
buttons; the corresponding one blinks when a message is left "in" a
particular "mailbox".  Also, the display shows how many messages are
in each box.  Then the recipient can just hit one of the buttons to
play back that box.  However, don't get the impression that this is a
voice-mail system.  Messages are time and dated.  A memo button lets
you record from the local speakerphone mic or the current phone call
into message area three.

The phone can also be set to call another number after a message is
received.  It will try calling every 30 minutes until you answer (or
read the new messages).  It plays a recorded message (your own or from
ROM) and waits for your password to access it.  You could potentially
record touch-tones into your "remote access" message if you wanted it
to call your pager, although I haven't tried this.  The remote mode is
voice-synthesized but has only minor prompting.  You can do most
functions from the remote mode, including turning the machine on/off,
call transfer on/off, change transfer number, and change OGMs.
However, you can not delete individual messages, only complete
mailboxes (you can play, delete, and skip individual messages from the
front panel).  It is slightly annoying when you call it because it
doesn't tell you if there are new messages or not; you need to try the
play command (or use toll-saver mode).  Also, it will only listen to
DTMF commands when it is finished prompting you, which can be annoying
but the wait is never more than a second or two.

The sound quality of digitized messages is OK but not great.  However,
it does hold up to 16 minutes worth of messages.  The phone has CPC,
toll-saver modes, and speed dials.  The LCD display shows time, modes,
number dialed, minutes talking, and number of messages.  It can only
be set to answer after three or five rings, or TS mode.  In summary,
its a nice phone.  It has some minor annoyances, mostly because you
know they could have just added a few lines of code to make it do
something differently.  However, it easily beats having a machine with
tapes or paying someone for voice-mail service.  It sells for around
$199.

This article has been prepared from information obtained
from the following helpful individuals:

    Dan D Grove        <[e-mail]>
    David Whiteman        <[e-mail]>
    J. Brad Hicks        <mhs!mc![e-mail]>
    Jim Berilla        <[e-mail]>
    Justin Leavens        <[e-mail]>
    Laurence Chiu        <[e-mail]>
    Mark Lottor        <[e-mail]>
    Mark Wuest        <[e-mail]>
    Michael Schuster    <[e-mail]>
    Steve Atlas        <[e-mail]>
    Tom Scheer        <[e-mail]>
    Vance Shipley        <[e-mail]>
    Willie Smith        <[e-mail]>


Derek Andrew, Manager of Computer Network & Technical Services
University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon Saskachewan, Canada, S7N 0W0
[e-mail], [phone],  52 11 23N 106 48 48W

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

From: [e-mail] (J. Porter Clark)
Subject: Summary: RS-422-A: Which Way is Up, Polarity Wise?
Organization: NASA/MSFC
Date: 31 Aug 92 17:32:13 GMT


Last week I inflicted this message upon the world:

> Over here in the space hardware world we're trying to resolve a
> documentation conflict about the polarity of the RS-422-A signals.

> If I send a "1" (a *real* "1"), which lead, A or B, is positive with
> respect to the other?

> I know this has been a controversial topic in the past, with one
> vendor doing one thing and another the opposite, but what is the
> current thinking?

I received several responses.  I like Fred Bauer's explanation the
best:

  From: Fred Bauer <[e-mail]>

> According to the EIA Standards, RS-422-A is a _Mark Negative_ system,
> which means that the A lead will be negative with respect to the
> B lead when sending a binary One. Note that this definition applies
> only to the _Data_ signals.  For the Control leads, A>B means on.  For the
> timing signals, a negative-to-positive transition on the A lead should
> be coincident with the data transitions.  The definitions for control
> leads and clocks are taken from RS-530, as RS-422-A only specifies the
> electrical characteristics of the signals, not what they are used for.

> The same definitions apply in the C.C.I.T.T. equivalent, V.11.

> Some confusion may be caused when interconnecting RS-422 devices to
> MIL-188-114C devices.  The MIL standards specify a _Mark Positive_ System.
> I am not sure as to the exact specification, as I don't have a copy
> handy, but I believe that the polarity of the timing signals may
> be reversed also.

Fortunately, I'm not dealing with a MIL-188-114C system.

I upgraded my mini-inews shortly before I posted my original query,
and I soon regretted it.  The "From:" line came out wrong and people
couldn't send replies to it.  Sorry about that, folks.  All fixed now,
I hope.  As a result of this problem, a couple of people posted
followups:

  Hans Ridder <[e-mail]>
  [e-mail] (Toby Nixon)

There was some discussion along the lines of "What controversy?"  I
can remember a time in which about 90% of the industry was polarized
the way it is now and 10% the other way.  Apparently, this is no
longer a practical concern and everyone is consistent.


J. Porter Clark    [e-mail] or [e-mail]
NASA/MSFC Communications Systems Branch

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

From: Michael M. O'Dorney <[e-mail]>
Subject: Pulse Dialing Through to a PBX Extension
Date: Tue, 01 Sep 92 8:51:36 PDT


In 1967, I called Columbia University (New York City) from Buffalo.  I
was using a rotary dial phone.  I called a conventional ten digit
number (212-xxx-xxxx) and received a recording to dial an extension
and then a dial tone.  I dialed the extension (I was answering a job
and had the extension number) and was connected to the extension.

This was either the biomedical engineering department or the
electrical engineering department number.  Does anyone know how this
was done, how did the system pick up dial pulses reliably, was this
Bell hardware or third party (or home-brew) by the school's
department.  I later heard that this system was called "direct inward
dialing" and not "centrex", although later on, centrex and DID were
used interchangeably in marketing hype from NYTelephone.  (I do not
know when "centrex" as a term was created.)


Michael M. O'Dorney         | Voice: 206-237-1274 (work)
Boeing Commercial Airplanes |
P.O. Box 3707, M/S 96-02    | Internet:   [e-mail]
Seattle  WA  98124-2207     | Boeing net: mmo2273@aw2


[Moderator's Note: I'll tell you who else used to accept dial pulses
through their WATS extender: United Airlines on their Unitel network,
a system which connects all UAL facilities across the continent. I
have no idea how they could do it, but you could call into the WATS
extender (which by the way went with *no password required* for
several years) and rotary dial all over the immediate, local area
network of United. Pulsing could not be done throughout the entire
Unitel network however; tones were required to hop off-net and
continue dialing through a remote PBX to an outside line in a distant
city. UAL finally wised up, getting rid of progressive dialing in lieu
of 'enter only the end destination number, we will route it' and also
requiring passwords.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Automatic Call Router
Organization: Pomona College
Date: 01 Sep 92 14:10:37 PDT


Radio Shack has a device that accepts one phone line, and can
automatically route voice calls to a phone and modem calls to a modem.

It works by using a feature offered in some areas, with which you get
a second 'phone number' for your line, that when dialed produces a
different ring.

RS sells its box for $119. My question to the net is, are there any
other similar devices elsewhere that can be purchased for a lesser
price?

Thank you.


Javier Henderson     [e-mail]

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

Date: Tue, 01 Aug 92 15:50:38 CDT
From: [e-mail] (Steve Rogers)
Subject: North American ISDN Users Forum


Dear Telecommunications and Messaging Industry Professionals:

We are pleased to invite you to attend the October 28, 1992 meeting of
the North American ISDN Users' Forum (NIUF) Messaging and Answering
Group.  This meeting is part of the October 26-30, 1992 NIUF being
held at the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) in
Gaithersburg, Maryland.

The NIUF has created a strong user voice in the implementation of
geographically consistent ISDN and ISDN applications and has helped to
ensure that the emerging ISDN environment meets users' application
needs.  More specifically, the NIUF Messaging and Answering Group
focuses on how messaging and answering applications can be realized in
an ISDN environment.

Applications include defining ISDN interfaces for Voice Mail,
Electronic Mail and Fax Mail, Transparent Networking of Voice Mail
Systems (VMS), Centralized VMS, Unified Message Retrieval, and Unified
Message Notification.

At this meeting you will have an opportunity to preview a prototype
ISDN application which provides an integrated desktop, including a
single user interface for notification and retrieval of voice, email
and fax messages.  This service demonstrates functionalities addressed
in the following NIUF applications:

Unified Message Retrieval (Application #160009.0) and
Unified Message Notification (Application #810035.0).

Included as one of the TRanscontinental ISDN Project 1992 (TRIP '92)
applications, this service is being developed specifically for use
with standardized ISDN utilizing X.25 packet messaging over the ISDN
D-channel.  TRIP '92 will bring together members of the
telecommunications industry to showcase real life uses of ISDN and the
national scope of the ISDN network.

We encourage participation from messaging vendors, enhanced service
providers, RBOCs, and businesses with their own messaging needs.  With
your involvement, we can make these and other ISDN applications a
reality.

For more information about the North American ISDN Users' Forum and
registration material, please contact:

Dawn Hoffman
National Institute of Standards and Technology
Building 223, Room B364
Gaithersburg, MD  20899   Phone: [phone].


Sincerely,

Glenn Ehley, Siemens Stromberg-Carlson
Chair, NIUF ISDN Implementors' Workshop

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Calling 911 From a Cellular Phone
Organization: Pomona College
Date: 01 Sep 92 14:14:51 PDT


I live in the LA area, and use Pac Tel for my cellular service.

Calls to 911 are free, and you're connected to a CHP dispatcher (I
assume that most calls for help in this area are from stranded
motorists). This dispatcher will connect you to other agencies as
needed.

Incidentally, the rep that programmed my phone said that even if the
service is disconnected, 911 calls still go through. I never had my
service disconnected so I don't know if he was right or not.


Javier Henderson    [e-mail]

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

Date: 01-SEP-1992 17:10:26.50
From: Fred E.J. Linton <[e-mail]>
Subject: Call Home Country Codes from UK and France


France Telecom this summer was distributing a "Pays Direct" (Home
Direct) prefix list, as follows.  In all cases, one must await a new
dial tone after dialing the initial "19".


             Service  Number
             -------  ------
      ATT USA DIRECT  19 00 11
       BRAZIL DIRETO  19 00 55
       CANADA DIRECT  19 00 16
     COLOMBIA DIRECT  19 00 57
      ESPANA DIRECTO  19 00 34
      FINLAND DIRECT  19 00 358
       HK <<< DIRECT  19 00 852
   ITALIA IN DIRETTA  19 00 39
        JAPAN DIRECT  19 00 81
        MCI CALL USA  19 00 19
    NEDERLAND DIRECT  19 00 31
           NZ DIRECT  19 00 64
OTC AUSTRALIA DIRECT  19 00 61
     PORTUGAL DIRECT  19 00 351
    SINGAPORE DIRECT  19 00 65
      SPRINT EXPRESS  19 00 87
       SVERIG DIREKT  19 00 46
           UK DIRECT  19 00 44
  DEUTSCHLAND DIREKT  19 00 49
      DENMARK DIRECT  19 00 45
      IRELAND DIRECT  19 00 353

The UK's BT (British Telecommunications plc) offered a similar listing:

Country                 number      Name of Service
 -------         ------     ---------------
Australia    0800 89 0061    OTC-Australia Direct
Austria        0800 89 0043    Austria Direct
Bahamas        0800 89 0135    Bahamas Direct
Bermuda        0800 89 0123    Bermuda Direct
Brazil        0800 89 0055    Brasil Direto
Canada        0800 89 0016    Canada Direct
Chile        0800 89 0056    Chile Directo
Columbia    0800 89 0057    Columbia Direct
Denmark        0800 89 0045    Danmark Directe
Eire        0800 89 0353    Eire Direct
Finland        0800 89 0358    Suoraan Suomeen
France        0800 89 0033    France Direct
Germany        0800 89 0049    Deutschland Direkt
Hong Kong    0800 89 0852    Hong Kong Direct
Indonesia    0800 89 0062    Indonesia Direct
Italy        0800 89 0039    Italia In Diretta
Japan        0800 89 0081    Japan Direct
Japan (bis)    0800 89 0080    Japan Straight (IDC)
South Korea    0800 89 0082    Korea Direct
Malaysia    0800 89 0060    Malaysia Direct
Netherlands    0800 89 0031    Nederland Direct
New Zealand    0800 89 0064    NZ Direct
Norway        0800 89 0047    Norge Direkte
Portugal    0800 89 0351    Portugal Direct
Singapore    0800 89 0065    Singapore Direct
Spain        0800 89 0034    Espana Directo
Sweden        0800 89 0046    Sverige Direkt
Thailand    0800 89 0066    Thailand Direct
Turkey        0800 89 0090    Turkey Direct
USA        0800 89 0011    AT&T USA Direct
USA (bis)         0800 89 0222    MCI CALL USA
USA (ter)    0800 89 0877     Sprint Express
USA (quad)    0800 89 0456     Phone USA (TRT)


[Submitter's query: Who is TRT?  Used to be the name of AT&T Mail's
Telex Service.]


Fred E.J. Linton  Wesleyan U. Math. Dept.  649 Sci. Tower  Middletown, CT 06459
E-mail:  <[e-mail]>     ( or  <fejlinton@{att|mci}mail.com> )
Tel.:         + 1 203 776 2210 (home)      or     + 1 203 347 9411 x2249 (work)

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

From: [e-mail] (Bill Mayhew)
Subject: Area Code 700 Number For ANI Read-Back?
Organization: Northeastern Ohio Universities College of Medicine
Date:Tue, 01 Sep 1992 01:31:15 GMT


I was told that there is a 700 number that reads back your own number.
A check of telecom back articles at our site doesn't pull up any
references.  If it exists, could somebody pass the number along?


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


[Moderator's Note: None that I know of. 700-555-4141 tells you which
long distance carrier is assigned to your line however.   PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #676
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa21122;
          2 Sep 92 1:29 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA23585
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 1 Sep 1992 23:33:07 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA12898
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 1 Sep 1992 23:32:56 -0500
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 1992 23:32:56 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #677

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 1 Sep 92 23:33:00 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 677

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Cellular 911 Equivalent in Chicago (Bill Nickless)
    Cellular Mobile Phone Use in Australia (David E.A. Wilson)
    GTE Cordless/Cellular Service in Tampa FL (Thomas K. Hinders)
    New Cell One/Boston Service in NH (Douglas Scott Reuben)
    Cellular Providers Charge Air-Time Forwarding to Land Line (John Galloway)
    Bell Canada Does it Cheaper (Alayne McGregor)
    Trinary FAX Number? (Nigel Allen)
    CWA Comments on AT&T Sales Office Closings (Phillip Dampier)
    Wiring Advice Sought (Joe Konstan)
    Finding Exchange Names (Rudolph T. Maceyko)
    ISDN and Dialing 911 (Johnny Zweig)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Tue, 01 Sep 1992 22:44:21 -0500
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Cellular 911 Equivalent in Chicago


I've called *999 several times on the highways around Chicago to
report drunk drivers and stranded motorists.  Somewhere in the back of
my mind I think it's only for the highway system.  I called *999 from
Indiana on my way to Michigan once, and they said they'd pass it on to
the Indiana authorities.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (David E A Wilson)
Subject: Cellular Mobile Phone Use in Australia
Organization: Dept of Computer Science, Wollongong University, Australia
Date: Tue, 01 Sep 1992 04:42:37 GMT


At June 30 this year Australia had 441,256 mobile phones in operation,
up 51% over the previous year. It is not just yuppies either, many
blue- collar workers are finding it an essential tool of their trade.

The breakdown by capital city is:

Sydney        131,116        Melbourne    102,906
Brisbane     52,887        Perth         28,214
Adelaide     22,117        Hobart          3,431

Australia has had cellular mobile phones for the past five years and
now has 25.1 mobile phones per 1000 people, more than either the US,
UK or Scandinavia after five years. Scandinavia has had mobile phones
for ten years and now has 58 mobile phones per 1000 people (after five
years it had only half Australia's current figure).

The mobile network covers 350,000 square kilometres making it the largest
geographic coverage in the world.


David Wilson               (042) 21 3802 voice, (042) 21 3262 fax
Dept Comp Sci, Uni of Wollongong   [e-mail]

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

Date: 01 Sep 92 06:55:10-0900
From: /PN=Thomas.K.Hinders/OU=CCMAIL/O=CHAN.IS/PRMD=MMC/ADMD=TELEMAIL/C=US/@sprint.com
Subject: GTE Cordless/Cellular Service in Tampa FL


I heard a report on the radio (WMAL in Washington DC) that GTE is
testing a new service in Tampa FL area.  This unnamed service would
permit you to use a cordless phone like a cellular phone.  Calls would
be cheaper and can be made in environments were cellular calls can't
get through (tunnels, basements etc).  The example cited was carrying
a cordless phone while shopping, at work etc.  It wasn't clear (a LOT
wasn't clear) whether you used your existing phone number, or
subscribed to another.

The presenter of this info was reporting on stock market activity and
not a techo-wiz.


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

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

Date: 01-SEP-1992 16:37:31.67
From: Douglas Scott Reuben <[e-mail]>
Subject: New Cell One/Boston Service in NH


I was just up in Laconia, NH, and noticed that there is now service in
the area, ie, from Concord to Albany (New Hampshire) to south of
Laconia to Franklin.

Suprisingly, the service is provided by Cell One/Boston, owned by
SWBell, who provides cell service for the Boston Metro area. It is
surprising because there is an intermediate system in Nashua, NH, so
the Boton and Concord/Laconia systems of Cell One/Boston are not
adjacent.

The system is in effect a separate system, and is not (presently)
linked to the Boston system, at least in a way that the casual user
will notice.  The NH system is run off of a Motorola EMX swtich (as is
the Boston); indeed, it may even be that Cell One/Boston "partitioned"
one of their Boston swtiches to run service in Franklin/Laconia NH.
Metro Mobile does this with their Springfield switch -- e.g., although
it can not pass calls between its Springfield (south central Mass)
switch and its Pittsfield/Franklin County (north central and western
Mass) system since they are now owned by a Bell outfit (Bell
Atlantic), both systems are run off of the same physical switch.  Cell
One/Boston, up against similar regulatory constraints, may be doing
the same thing. Anyone know about this?

The SID code for the new system is 01485 (yes, it is different from
Boston which is 00007), and the roam port number is [phone].

Since it is an EMX-based system, it will respond like the rest of the
Motorola linked systems in the northeast -- your features like
Call-Forwarding and Three-Way calling will work, if your phone is busy
(and you have no Call Waiting) callers will hear a busy, you can place
seven digit calls while roaming, etc. Moreover, the [phone]
port will respond to call-forwarding set in ANY other system. Thus if
you are a Wilmington, DE customer who sets CF in Wilmington (or
anywhere else in the "system"), someone dialing the NH port will get
transfered as if they had dialed your number directly in Wilmington.
(Some exceptions for CF via *71 to voicemail, though ...)

Cell One/Boston, as well as all "New England Network" customers, pay
the highly attractive roam rates of $.44 peak/$.29 off peak, and no
daily charge.  Cell One/Boston customers will NOT, however, get their
Boston rates, as this is a "separate" system.

Calls are not delivered between systems (due to regulatory problems,
although this is easily cured via a "*28/*29" system using IXCs to
pass calls between the two). However, when Nationlink/Roam America
starts up in a few weeks, callers will be able to reach Cell
One/Boston customers in NH. Since all features will work as well, the
system will thus become "somewhat" transparent to Boston customers who
use the Nationlink service.

Finally, Cell One/Vermont just got Nationlink/Roam America, and thus a
Cell One/Boston customer can get calls practically all the way from
eastern New Hampshire all the way up I-89, through Vermont, and to the
Canadian border.  (They will pay a $3.00 per day/$.99 per minute roam
rate in VT, though ...)

As to when Boston will connect with its neighboring system in CT and
Western Mass (Metro Mobile) who knows ... Metro Mobile is so busy
trying to put Cell One/Litchfield (CT) out of business (and themselves
in the process, it seems) that they don't seem very interested in
doing anything else of use to their customers. After all, ever since
the ENTIRE technical staff in one of their switches (Norwalk?) quit in
protest a few months ago, handoffs from CT -> Cell One/NY haven't been
working. For some reason, they can't figure out how to fix it after
all this time! :( :(

Anyhow, enough digression; I'd be interested to hear from anyone who
uses the NH system about coverage, technical problems, etc. I don't
get around that area too often so any input/info would be appreciated!


Doug    [e-mail] // [e-mail]

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

From: infmx![e-mail] (John Galloway)
Subject: Cellular Providers Charge Air-Time Forwarding to Land Line
Organization: Galloway Research
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 92 01:56:01 GMT


I was very disappointed to find that both Cellular-One and GTE charge
normal air time rates for calls that are made to your cellular number,
when you have your number forwarded to a land line.  This seems like a
real rip off since in this case the only resources being used are the
land line connected switches, which likely have plenty of bandwidth,
there is no cellular communication occuring (that I can see anyway, am
I mistaken?).

I had planned to get a cellular, then only give out that number.  When
I get to an office or am at home, I just forward the cellular to the
number where I am -- simple.  I only give folks one number and it
either goes to where I am, or to my home phone with an answering
machine.  But, as I now realize, this would be very expensive.  You
can only control forwarding from the phone being forwarded, so
executing this plan with (for example) my home phone as the base
doesn't work, since I can not un-forward or re-forwad it remotely.
RATS!!

(Call your cellular carrier and complain TODAY! :-)


internet    [e-mail]  John R. Galloway, Jr  795 Beaver Creek Way
applelink   D3413                  CEO...receptionist    San Jose, CA   95133
                                   Galloway Research     [phone]


[Moderator's Note: *Which* Cellular One? *Which* GTE?  Cellular One in
Chicago does not charge for forwarding calls to landline numbers, nor
does Ameritech, the 'B' carrier here.  And regards forwarding of
calls, Illinois Bell now allows us to *remotely* change our forwarding
at no additional cost. I will comment more on this in the next issue.  PAT]

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

Date: Tue, 01 Sep 1992 17:56:34 -0400
From: [e-mail] (Alayne McGregor)
Subject: Bell Canada Does it Cheaper


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

> "Pacific Bell plans to upgrade a small number of Pacific Bell Public
> payphones in its franchise territory to trial Public Coin voice
> Messaging Service (CVM). Our intent is to trial this service from a
> limited base beginning the first quarter of 1993 pending regulatory
> approval. CVM will allow a caller, encountering a busy or no answer
> condition, to send up to a one minute message to their called party for
> an additional fee above the cost of the call.

Bell Canada has had this feature for quite some time now -- except it
only charges you the quarter that you would have paid anyway to reach
the person.


Alayne McGregor    [e-mail]   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Trinary FAX Number?
Date: Tue, 01 Sep 92 1:50:27 EDT


The fax number for {Advertising Age} magazine in New York City, (212)
210-0111, looks as if it could be in base three.

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

From: [e-mail] (Phillip Dampier)
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Date: Tue, 01 Sep 1992 00:30:19 -0500
Subject: CWA Comments on AT&T Sales Office Closings


STATEMENT FROM CWA ON AT&T SALES OFFICE CLOSINGS

WASHINGTON -- "Once again, AT&T has put the whims of its top managers
above the well being of its workers and the communities where they
live and serve," charged Communications Workers of America Vice
President James Irvine.  "Their decision to close six customer service
offices later this year may satisfy some ill-conceived management
scheme, but hundreds of working people, thousands of family members,
and communities in six states will suffer."

"AT&T allows its managers to make decisions of this magnitude without
regard for the impact that it will have on the families and
communities affected," Irvine continued.  "The union has argued
against these kind of consolidations and re-organizations in the past,
because they ultimately work against AT&T's best interest."

"People are told that they can uproot their families and follow their
work, but that is very difficult for them.  And thousands of our
members have become high-tech migrant workers, following their work
from one closing office to the next.  Then the next manager decides to
redesign the business for no good reason, and people are uprooted and
displaced again.  It just doesn't make sense."

AT&T will announce next week the closing of six of its fourteen
customer sales and service offices.  The closing offices employ about
860 workers represented by the Communications Workers of America.  The
offices, which will close on December 1, 1992, are located in
Columbus, OH; Mobile, AL; Radnor, PA; St. Cloud, MN; Wauwatosa, WI;
and Parsippany, NJ.

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

Date: Tue, 01 Sep 92 16:00:29 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Joe Konstan)
Subject: Wiring Advice Sought


I'm moving to a house where we'll be having two phone lines (is this
bottom 10% for Telecom readers?).  Since we are renting, and neither
want to pay for nor have to undo wiring changes, I'd like to do the
minimum possible to use my single line phones properly.

Three cases:

1.  I do have one room where I want to use both lines.  I already
    have an adapter that puts out line one, line two, and BOTH.  That
    seems to be sufficient there.

2.  For rooms where I want only line-one, should I just use a normal
    RJ-11 cable (four wires through) or should I make one that only
    passes through the middle wires?  One of the phones has a
    lighted dial, but I don't think it expects power from the
    extra wires (AT&T Trimline).

3.  For rooms where I want only line-two, is the easiest solution to
    just make a cable that's wired one -> two, four -> three without
    wiring two and three through?  I have the crimpers and plenty of
    cable to make whatever will work best.  The phones are old 2500
    sets, an AT&T 5500, the trimline, and a "decorative" phone.

Also, are there any useful standards for marking these special cables
(something that other people might recognize)?


Thanks,

Joe Konstan   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Rudolph T Maceyko)
Subject: Finding Exchange Names
Date: 01 Sep 92 15:48:57 GMT
Organization: University of Pittsburgh


A few weeks ago, I sought a list of exchange names in area code 412.

I asked at the Pennsylvania Department of the Carnegie Library in
Pittsburgh and lo and behold, under a very small stack of papers was a
list of exchange names!

I was surprised that it was so readily available.

The librarian couldn't tell me how old it was, but it has "7-70"
printed at the bottom of it, so I'm assuming that's a date, even
though it seems too recent.  (I'm told, however, that the names
weren't completely abandoned here until about 1973 or so.)

I have typed in the list, if anyone is interested.  It also includes
some exchanges from area code 814.

By the way, the Carnegie doesn't keep telephone directories, even on
microfilm.  But they do have the City Directory, going way back to
1893 (?) or so (I didn't look at them since I had already found what I
wanted).


Rudy Maceyko <[e-mail]>   Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania USA

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

From: [e-mail] (Johnny Zweig)
Subject: ISDN And Dialing 911
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: University of Illinois, Dept. of Comp. Sci., Urbana, IL
Date: Tue, 01 Sep 1992 16:02:08 GMT


I was chatting with a couple of friends last night about the rumored
criminal case in which somebody died because Garth Brooks concert
tickets went on sale and nobody could get a dialtone to call 911 with
the switches saturated with thousands of eager ticketbuyers, and it
occurred to me that the obvious solution to the problem may be
forthcoming.

The obvious solution, to me at least, is to have line cards that are
smart enough to tell that someone is dialing 911, and some
priority-based emergency override in the switch so that an emergency
call goes through at the cost of possibly not giving a line to (or
even taking bandwidth away from) a non-emergency call.

My understanding is that current switches are designed to have the
line cards just digitizing the customer's loop signal and send
keypresses on to the switch for processing (it isn't clear to me if
keypresses are decoded before or after digitization -- I could see
arguments for either way of doing it).  The problem is that the system
needs a distributed way of detecting the emergency call -- there must
be some resource that belongs to a line permanently, so that mobs of
concert fans can't use it all up. Since line cards are the only piece
of central office equipment a line is always connected to, that seems
the logical place to put the emergency detection smarts.

Then I considered that ISDN line cards might well be intelligent
enough to more sophisticated processing of the signal coming from a
customer's line.  The must clearly be enough stuff for it to
demultiplex out the D channel and send signalling information to the
switch.  It thus seems that the protocol that operates between the
line card and the switch could be set up to allow an emergency
override, so that dialing 911 on one's ISDN phone caused the call to
go through no matter what kind of nasty stuff was going on in the
switch.  All that is needed is some way for a line card to demand
attention somehow.  Since the phone units are smart, they could
generate a special signal to put on the D channel, regardless of
whether there is switch capacity to give dial tone.

So my question for the list is: Do you suppose that ISDN can and will
create an environment in which everyone in town flooding a switch with
requests will not cause people to be unable to dial 911 due to lack of
dialtone?


Johnny Emergency

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #677
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa12839;
          3 Sep 92 2:55 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA02744
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 3 Sep 1992 00:52:08 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA26413
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 3 Sep 1992 00:51:56 -0500
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 00:51:56 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #679

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 3 Sep 92 00:52:00 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 679

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    MCI Mail Automatic Autoforwarding (MCI Press Release) (Paul Robinson)
    Hardware/Software Position Wanted (Amir S. Hatefi)
    My Trimline Phone is Broken! (Roy M. Silvernail)
    FCC Docket 92-136 Available via Anonymous FTP (Paul W. Schleck)
    AT&T 'Buying' Back Customers (Justin Leavens)
    American Phone on British Phone System (Nancy J. Airey)
    Distinctive-Ringing Decoder (Alan T.C. Penn)
    Baudot Codes (Thomas E. Lowe)
    Conference: Commercializing Internet (Matt Lucas)
    How to be Listed in the Internet White Pages (Paul Robinson)
    Clever Phone Fraud by 900 Line (Paul Gloger)
    Looking For Off-Hook Specs in RJ12 or RJ13 Connections (Scott A. McMullan)
    Modem Access From Europe to North America (Rom M. Kieffer)
    Unadvertised SW Bell Offering (Charles Mattair)
    Travelers Offers Toll Fraud Insurance (Andy Sherman)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 02 Sep 92  21:28:01 EDT
Subject: MCI Mail Automatic Autoforwarding (MCI Press Release)


                    MCI MAIL INTRODUCES AUTOMATIC
                 FORWARDING CAPABILITIES TO ENHANCE
                      MESSAGING FLEXIBILITY

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE             Contact: Jane Levene
                                        [phone]
                                 Internet: [e-mail]

Corporation (MCI), today announced a new electronic mail feature which
allows customers to automatically forward their incoming MCI Mail
messages to any destination including other MCI Mail users, X.400
recipients, and any fax, telex or postal address for a specified
period of time.  This new feature, AutoForward, is available
immediately and gives MCI Mail users more control in managing their
correspondence.

The new functionality allows MCI Mail customers to have multiple
AutoForward settings to control the starting/ending dates and the
specific recipients or destinations for their autoforwarded messages.
Customers with active settings are notified immediately when they log
on to MCI Mail.  Settings may be edited for future reactivation,
cancelled to immediately terminate an active setting, or deleted
entirely from a user's account.

"The AutoForward feature is designed to make it easier for people to
manage their day-to-day correspondence whether they are in or out of
the office", said Jerry DeMartino, Vice-President of Sales and
Marketing for MCI International, a subsidiary of MCI.  "It is
particularly useful for business executives, and people on vacation or
personal leave who may not have immediate access to a PC.  Customers
can AutoForward messages to fax machines at their hotels.  And market
research suggests that AutoForward can be used to distribute market
survey results and customer feedback.  Other uses for AutoForward are
limited only to our customers' imaginations."

MCI Mail customers can use the Autoforward feature by typing CREATE
AUTOFORWARD at the Command: prompt.  MCI Mail will prompt the user to
provide a start and end date, as well as the name they want to give
their AutoForward setting and the recipients to whom they want their
AutoForwarded messages delivered.  Once the user has entered their
setting information and confirmed that the information is accurate,
the setting will become active based on the Start Date and Time
provided by the user.  For further details, customers may type HELP
AUTOFORWARD at the on-line Command: prompt.

MCI Mail provides a complete range of messaging services including
electronic mail, EDI, X.400. fax, telex, hardcopy postal and courier
delivery worldwide.  Customers can access MCI Mail through a toll-free
number in the U.S., through packet switched networks in over 90
countries, or via MCI Mail Global Access, currently offered in 27
countries.

MCI offers a full spectrum of domestic and international
communications services.  In addition to electronic mail, other
international services include worldwide direct dialing, MCI CALL USA,
MCI WORLD REACH, 800 services, telex, private voice and data networks
and television transmission.  MCI offices in over 50 countries, Guam
and Puerto Rico are positioned to provide and support the full range
of global telecommunications services.

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

[Moderator's Note: With all these improvements MCI Mail is making to
their system, I wonder why they still have not managed to bring their
service into compliance with Internet mail standards. There is not a
week goes by that mcimail.com does not dump out at least one and as
often as not two or three issues of TELECOM Digest undelivered due to
a bad name on the list or some other problem. The rule is supposed to
be that delivery of the same email to multiple names is not affected
because of one bad name: you skip that one and deliver to the others.
Several dozen readers at mcimail.com don't get their copy because MCI
dumps the whole load. Of course then I have to pull the bad name from
the list and resend the issue to everyone there. My solution soon will
be to discontinue delivery of the Digest to MCI Mail and send subscrib-
ers there a note suggesting they bring pressure on MCI Mail honchos
to join the rest of the email world in conforming to standards set up
to serve everyone. I've tried calling MCI Mail about this; I get
nowhere fast.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (ShAhin)
Subject: Hardware/Software Position Wanted
Date: 02 Sep 92 15:39:57 GMT
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.


Hello everyone,

A friend has asked me to post this for him. Please respond directly to
him by phone or to me via email.

Thanks,

S

                        -----------

Hi,

I am looking for a position in the area of computer software/hardware
and netwroking. I have a MSEE with emphasis on Computer Architecture.
Also, I have two years experience in designing both hardware and
software for microprocessor based medical instruments.

I also have about six months of experience in design and
implementation of Ethernet LANs using NOVELL3.11.

Please for further info and/or a resume call me at: [phone].


Thanks.

Amir S. Hatefi

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

Subject: My Trimline Phone is Broken!
From: cybrspc![e-mail] (Roy M. Silvernail)
Date: Wed, 02 Sep 92 00:38:53 CDT
Organization: Villa CyberSpace, Minneapolis, MN


One of my best-ever garage-sale aquisitions is an old (and ugly
yellow-green) ITT Trimline-type phone.  Got it for $1, with no cord.
It's been a faithful bedside phone for years, now, and gives me
something to do with that little transformer I unplugged from the
basement six houses ago :-).

After this move, it's given up.  The microphone isn't working.  I
checked the mic with my ohmmeter, and it shows a good connection.
Changes resistance with audio, so I don't think the mic has gone.  But
I find no voltage across the mic when the phone is off-hook.

Perhaps one of you might have an idea, or even a schematic they could
pass along?  The phone says "ITT 180447" on the flex-circuit in the
handset.  I don't really want to tear into it with no roadmap.

E-mail preferred, and thanks in advance.


Roy M. Silvernail   (in the throes of a mail crisis, so try....
                     [e-mail])

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

From: [e-mail] (Paul W Schleck KD3FU)
Subject: FCC Docket 92-136 Available via Anonymous FTP
Date: Wed, 02 Sep 92 12:20:33 CDT


Just a short note to let everyone know that a copy of FCC PR Docket
92-136 (Ammendment of Part 97 of the Commission's Rules to Relax
Restrictions on the Scope of Permissible Communications in the Amateur
Service) is available via anonymous FTP from ftp.cs.buffalo.edu in
file /pub/ham-radio/pr_docket_92-136.

As any reader of rec.radio.amateur.policy knows, the subject of
permissible communications in Amateur Radio is a matter of some
dispute.  Historically, amateurs had great latitude on content, the
FCC only being concerned with the pecuniary interest of the operator
himself, rather than that of incidental 3rd parties who may benefit
from that communication.  In 1972, however, in response to an inquiry
(isn't it always some poor sucker asking a leading question of the
Commission that causes them to do really undesirable things?) the FCC
decided to take a much more restrictive view of business
communications, making illegal any communications that could POSSIBLY
benefit third parties.  The docket attempts to restore the rules to
their pre-1972 state.

This has put a serious crimp on many types of public-service
communications (the Idiatrod dog race in Alaska is a prime example) as
well as up-and-coming amateur packet networks (remember the Desert
Storm message of 1990?).

Some of the interesting questions raised by the docket (and subsequent
discussion on rec.radio.amateur.policy) include:

1.  Are amateur operators responsible enough to insure that the service
isn't exploited by commercial interests?

2.  Would simplified rules concerned only with operator compensation be
a help or a hindrance?  Would this open the door to commercial
exploitation?

3.  Is the Amateur Radio Service an experimental service, a
communications service, or both?  Where do we draw the line between
the two?

4.  Is the transmission of "incidental music" (such as when making a
telephone call via radio patch and you get hold music, or some
occasional background music during FCC-authorized retransmissions of
"NASA Select" shuttle audio/video) something that should be permitted,
with restrictions, or prohibited?

5.  What consitutes "regular use" of amateur radio for communications
and when should such communications be relegated to alternative
services such as cellular phone?

6.  Should transmissions by a compensated control operator, when such
transmissions are for the purpose of classroom instruction at an
education institution, be permitted?  (Currently the only exception is
for the transmission of bulletins and Morse Code practice, with
certain scheduling and frequency-use requirements).

Interested parties should submit comments to the FCC by October 1, 1992
and reply comments by December 1, 1992.


Paul W. Schleck, KD3FU  [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Justin Leavens)
Subject: AT&T 'Buying' Back Customers
Date: 02 Sep 1992 15:10:13 -0700
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA


I heard someone else mention this briefly before, and I didn't
understand what they were talking about then, but it seems as though
AT&T is offering customers $40 to switch to AT&T. I received a mailing
from AT&T, and I was immediately annoyed by this check-looking thing I
saw inside (it looked like one of those things that are usually marked
'You may already have won').  Strangely enough, this was a real check
for $40 made out to me, marked 'Endorsement indicates your acceptance'
or something like that. Anyway, I guess the deal is that if you cash
the check, you agree to switch over to AT&T. I'll take $40 over my MCI
totebags and Sprint AM/FM radios anyday ...

For $40, I'd switch my _mother_ to AT&T.


Justin Leavens   University of Southern California   Microcomputer Specialist

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

Date: Wed, 02 Sep 92 16:41:06 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Nancy J Airey)
Subject: American Phone on British Phone system
Organization: AT&T


Some time ago I picked up a phone connector at an electronics gadget
store that is supposed to "convert" an American "modular" phone to a
British modular plug.  The American end is the "typical" one I'm used
to seeing.  The "British" end is somewhat larger but has a similar
type of "push in" connection.  (Love the technical terms!)

I am planning on giving a "nice" phone to some friends over there for
Christmas.

Now I know that I could not select any phone that has features
requiring electrical connections and expect a direct connection, but
what is the likelihood that making a connection for the other end is
going be a hassle?  Are modular wall outlets common?

For any British folks reading this -- what would be a "nice" feature
set on a phone for you to get as a gift? I haven't been in a lot of
private homes, and am not sure if things like programmable speed
calling, speakerphone etc. are appealing -- or would the cutesy phones
(Mickey Mouse, Kermit the Frog) be more appreciated?

Is this going to work on touchtone -- or will it have to be set to
dial-pulse?

Feedback appreciated.


att!hrcce!jean

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

From: Alan TC Penn <[e-mail]>
Subject: Distinctive-Ringing Decoder
Date: Wed, 02 Sep 92 17:15:12 PDT


I am going for a distinctive-ringing decoder or demultiplexer. The
function of this device is to route the incoming phone message
directly to either an answering machine or a modem.


                                 |--------- answering machine
                                   |  ring A
  Wall jack ------- device --------
                                   |
                       |--------- modem
                                      ring B


With this device, I can utilize my one phone line to have two
different phone numbers for different applications.

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

From: [e-mail] (thomas.e.lowe)
Subject: Baudot Codes
Organization: AT&T
Date: Wed, 02 Sep 1992 18:34:38 GMT


I need the five bit codes (mark/space) for the baudot protocol.  If
anyone has them, I would appreciate a copy.

Thanks.


Tom Lowe    AT&T Bell Labs
[e-mail]    or    [e-mail]
908-949-0428   Fax: [phone]

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

Date: Wed, 2 Sep 92 15:22:34 -0400
From: matt lucas <[e-mail]>
Subject: Conference: Commercializing Internet
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: TeleStrategies Inc.


TeleStrategies is hosting "Commercializing Internet: Issues,
Opportunities and Entrepreneurial Strategies" on September 15-16.

The following topics will be discussed:

- New opportunities for computer vendors, information service entrepreneurs
  and telecommunications carriers.

- NSF acceptable use.

- RBOC, IXC and entrepreneurial strategies for multimedia and gigabit
  networking.

- Creating public network services from the emerging national research
  and education network.

Also, there will be a one day pre-conference tutorial "Understanding
Internet for Non-Engineers" on September 14.

For more information call [phone], ask for Matt Lucas, or Eva
Waskall.  Or, if you e-mail your postal mailing address to
[e-mail] I will send you a brochure.


Matt

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

Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 02 Sep 92  17:49:26 EDT
Subject: How to be Listed in the Internet White Pages


For persons wishing to make their Internet address public, you may
register it with the "Internet White Pages" which are maintained by
the Network Information Center (NIC), the same people who register and
assign Internet domains.

You send them an E-Mail message giving your name, your E-Mail address,
your mailing address and telephone number.  Within a week they will
send you back a code which is your initials and a 1 to 3 digit number.
There is no charge to be listed or to obtain this identification code.

Here is one example.  One of my accounts which has Internet access is
TDARCOS on MCI Mail, so I can list that.  For example, my name is Paul
Robinson, and my identification code assiged by the NIC (which is
called a 'NIC Name') is PR 142.  If you were to use the telnet
facility to call up the address shown below, you would find my name
and internet address ([e-mail]).

Before I had an MCI account, I used a local BBS to access Internet (I
still do).  So on the NIC listings, I showed my Internet address as:
[e-mail] (which I still use and is still
valid.)

The address to E-Mail requests to be listed in the NIC "Internet White
Pages" is:    [e-mail]

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

Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 01:25:57 PDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Clever Phone Fraud by 900 Line


The {Wall Street Journal} on Friday, August 28 (or maybe Thursday the
27th) carried an article primarily about computer fraud, which
included one interesting tale of a computer/phone fraud.  I'm
reporting from memory here since I have been surprised to see no
mention of this story yet here in Telecom.

The gist of the story was that several employees of a large company
set up a 900 phone line outside of work, then went back to work and
programmed a company computer to repeatedly phone their 900 line,
quickly racking up huge 900-line charges.  The company evidently paid
the 900 charges only for a while at most, since the story became
sufficiently known to be written up in the WSJ.

An ironic added touch is that the large company in question was AT&T.

Definitely an imaginative way to rip off one's employer.

(No, none of us think rip-offs are good.  Yes, all of us expect 'most
large company phones to be blocked against outgoing 900 calls.)


Paul Gloger <[e-mail]>


[Moderator's Note: I certainly hope the employees in question were
fired immediatly when their fraud became known; and I hope that once
they had been discharged AT&T then referred their names to the U.S.
Attorney for criminal prosecution. Did the article discuss this?  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Scott A. McMullan)
Subject: Looking For Off-Hook Specs in RJ12 or RJ13 Connections
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 92 7:21:59 EDT


As far as telecom hardware goes I'm about as green as it gets, so
please feel free to correct me where I'm wrong.

In RJ12/RJ13 phone connections I believe there is a separate circuit
that is used to control the "off-hook" lights in other phones on the
system.  I need to know how much power goes thru that circuit in a
"normal" (I know, there's no such beast) system.  I'm trying to design
a piece of hardware which will be controlled by the relay in a modem
which exists to complete that circuit, and I can't find the ratings on
the contacts of that relay.

Please e-mail replies if you can, and I'll summarize if there's
interest.


Scott A. McMullan  GE AOD, Valley Forge    [phone]
 :) All opinions expressed are mine, I cannot speak for my employer or others.
 :) Try my BBS at [phone]  9600 baud

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

Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 8:40:59 -0600 (MDT)
From: [e-mail] (ROM M. KIEFFER)
Subject: Modem Access From Europe to North America


Greetings,

One of our employees will travel to the Netherlands in the near future
 from where he will need to access various computing devices back at
the office in Canada, with his Macintosh powerbook and built-in modem.

This gives rise to several questions:

- since European jack wiring is different from North American
standards, what kind of cable will I need to build/acquire to make
ends meet?

- is it legal in to connect private modems to the public carrier?

- and, are the European digital dial tones the same as the North
American ones?

(I have thought about packet carriers instead of long distance calls,
but the services at the NA end of the link cannot be reached/used that
way.)

I would appreciate hearing from the European readers about these
questions, either direct to me, to summarize to the net, or via the
standard distribution.


Thanks,

Rom

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

Date: Wed, 2 Sep 92 09:31:42 CDT
From: [e-mail] (Charles Mattair)
Subject: Unadvertised SW Bell Offering
Organization: Synercom Technology, Inc., Houston, TX


SW Bell has been advertising Call Notes (SM) as a new service.  This
is your typical Teleco based answering machine clone with little if
any product discrimination.

However, the ad leads you to believe SW Bell must have forward on
busy/no answer to provide this service.  Call the local order office
and ask.  Sure enough they do but to quote her: "We can sell it if you
ask for it but we can't offer it to you."  If anyone's interested,
$0.75/mo for each service, $1/mo if you subscribe to both.


Charles Mattair                  (preferred) [e-mail]
Fast, Cheap, Good.  Choose Two. (anon)           (or)    [e-mail]
Any opinions offered are my own and do not reflect those of my employer.


[Moderator's Note: IBT offers forward on busy/no answer and likewise
they do not market it to residential users but will sell it if you ask
for it. The only problem is that it is not user programmable: it is
turned on at all times to one selected number which must be another
number in the same CO.  So they say.    PAT]

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

Date: Wed, 2 Sep 92 11:26:37 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Andy Sherman)
Subject: Travelers Offers Toll Fraud Insurance
Organization: Salomon Inc


Today's {Communications Week} reports that the Travelers Corp. has
begun offering a program to insure users against toll-fraud losses of
up to $1 million per year.  The policies will cover fraud from hacked
DID access and fraud from hacked voice mail access.  While loss of
income or business interruption will not be covered, calls appearing
on the insured customer's phone bill will be covered.

Coverage will be sold in $1,000 increments from $50,000 to $1,000,000.
A $50K policy will cost $2500/year and have a $5000 deductable.  A
$500K policy has a $24,500 premium and $50,000 deductable.  A
$1,000,000 policy will cost $49,400 with $100K deductable.  (If you do
the math, you see that the premium is about 5% of coverage amount and
the deductable is 10%.)

According to Travelers, this is the first offering of insurance for
toll fraud, although several carriers and manufacturers offer programs
to protect users against losses incurred with their equipment or on
their networks.


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."

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #679
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa14193;
          3 Sep 92 3:48 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA29290
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 3 Sep 1992 01:42:05 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA09919
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 3 Sep 1992 01:41:55 -0500
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 01:41:55 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #680

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 3 Sep 92 01:42:00 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 680

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    PBS Videoconference Announcement (Tom Flavell)
    Warning: Deceptive Use of This Account by Phreaker/Cracker (SDF Admin)
    Bad Connection to MCI (John M. Sullivan)
    Multi-Frequency Signalling Queries ([e-mail])
    V.25bis, or: Are CCITT and PTTs Totally Bonkers? (Michael C. Berch)
    GTE Spacenet to Join Advanced Retail Communications Project (Paul Robinson)
    Caller ID is Now Working in Indianapolis, Indiana (Bill Kessler)
    UK - US Compatible? (Robert A. Carolina)
    Unusual Part Search (Kevin Wang)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject:PBS Videoconference Announcement
Date: 3 Sep 92 12:41:18 EDT


The following program will be broadcast on many PBS stations in
October.  Please check with your local PBS station Education Services
Director to see if this will be broadcast in your area:

TELECOMMUNICATIONS: BRINGING THE WORLD INTO THE CLASSROOM, a
professional development videoconference for educators and school
boards will be presented on October 22, 1992, from 2:00-4:00 PM
Eastern Time by the National School Boards Association's Institute for
the Transfer of Technology to Education, the PBS Elementary/Secondary
Service and The National Foundation for the Improvement of Education.
The videoconference will originate from INFOMART, Dallas, TX, site of
the annual "Making Schools More Productive" NSBA conference.  This
live, interactive videoconference will investigate issues in
telecommunications use in schools from a variety of perspectives --
from policymaker to practitioner.

The videoconference will feature NFIE's 1992 award-winning Christa
McAuliffe Educators -- Bonnie Bracey, Arlington, VA; Misty Brave,
Kyle, SD; Carol Gilkinson, Covina, CA; Marilyn Schlief, Garden City,
MI; Jim Zimmerman, Urbana, IL -- who employ some of the most
innovative applications of technology in schools today, such as:

*Connecting Students from Around the Globe Via Lumaphones and
slow-Scan-Video: Voice and picture messages are carried over telephone
lines from Michigan to Japan connecting students and teachers in the
Garden City Public Schools with their Japanese contemporaries.

*Teaching About Cultures Close to Home: Technology is being integrated
into multicultural curriculum programs in Little Wound School in South
Dakota to educate and instill value of traditional native American
customs.

*Achieving Real Life Studies of Our Earth: Students in Arlington,
Virginia are taking part in the National Geographic Kids Network to
share current information in an international telecommunications-based
science and geography curriculum studying acid rain.

*Opening Up the World of Science: Students are utilizing a variety of
technological tools including computers, video disc, scanners,
telecommunications, and robotics to complete classroom assignments and
discover the world of science.

*Creating a Global Perspective, Community, and Classroom: Students in
Covina, California are being introduced to Prodigy and E-mail and
other educational technology to engage students in collaborative
efforts to examine worldwide problems, increase cultural awareness,
and promote a global perspective.

By offering this videoconference, educators in your area will learn
how (and be able to ask questions of) these motivated, innovative
teachers are applying telecommunications-based programs in new and
exciting ways. Their insights and experiences will prove invaluable to
educators who are striving to change education.

Date/time and related videoconference information is as follows:

TITLE        :   TELECOMMUNICATIONS: BRINGING THE WORLD
            INTO THE CLASSROOM
NUMBER/LENGTH    :   1/120 minute videoconference

DATES/TIMES    :   October 22, 1992
            1:30-2:00 PM/Eastern Time  Test Time
            2:00-4:00 PM/Eastern Time  Videoconference

TRANSPONDER INFO:   Will be announced to registered sites

DESCRIPTION    :   The videoconference will examine issues in
                    telecommunications use in schools from a variety of
                    perspectives - from policymaker to practitioner.  The
                    1992 NFIE Christa McAuliffe Educators will demonstrate
                    projects currently in place in their respective
                    districts and help participants explore the challenges
                    and opportunities presented in implementing
                    telecommunications-based programs in today's
                    classrooms.  Telecommunications issues for schools,
                    including planning and policy issues, governance,
                    curricular issues, technical requirements, and
                    financial impact will be addressed.

PRODUCER       :    Produced by the National School Boards
                Association's Institute for the Transfer of
                Technology to Education, with support from
                the Regional Bell Operating Companies

RIGHTS           :    Unlimited broadcast and duplication rights.

COST           :    $150 per downlink site.  This is a
                non-exclusive offering.

PRINT MATERIALS:    A reproducible resource guide and a local
                promotional packet will be distributed to all
                sites registered through PBS.

FOR INFORMATION:    To register contact Tom Flavell at PBS
                Elementary/Secondary Service at [phone],
                or fax [phone].

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

From: [e-mail] (a real lamer)
Subject: Warning: Deceptive Use of This Account by Phreaker/Cracker
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: sdf Public Access UNIX, Dallas - 214/436-3281
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 06:40:55 GMT


    #    #    ##    #####   #    #     #    #    #   ####
    #    #   #  #   #    #  ##   #     #    ##   #  #    #
    #    #  #    #  #    #  # #  #     #    # #  #  #
    # ## #  ######  #####   #  # #     #    #  # #  #  ###
    ##  ##  #    #  #   #   #   ##     #    #   ##  #    #
    #    #  #    #  #    #  #    #     #    #    #   ####

The person previously using this account (and now barred from it) has
apparently been deceptively posing as a PBX equipment buyer named "Tom
Downs".  This is *NOT* the name of the user.  He is also known to have
used the alias "Patrick ONeal".

This person is a teenage or early 20's "phone phreak" known (primarily
to other phreaks) as "shadow master".  It is expected that his intent
as posing as a PBX buyer is to obtain information on PBX systems which
are large (easier to conceal diddling), remotely configurable, have
outdial capability (to thwart CLIDs and call tracing during
"phreaking"), and voice mail (phreakers communicate with each other
via stolen VMB's).

If you have a system of this type, and have revealed it to this
person, it is quite probably has been cracked already.  He apparently
has acquired access to phone company databases and other sources of
information to seek out places to break into.  Even casual posters to
Usenet should beware if they manage or deal in such equipment.

This is certainly not the first or last time for such an event.  It
would be prudent to exercise caution in dealing with ANYONE who posts
and mails from public access systems such as this one.

This will be the final posting from this account, and it is being used
for this purpose since we expect it increases the chances of this
posting being seen by people who had formerly been in contact with
this person.

The actual identity of this person will be made available to any
authorized law enforcement agency in the case any criminal proceeding
ensues.

    In utmost sincerity,

    The sdf system administration group.

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

From: [e-mail] (John M. Sullivan)
Subject: Bad Connection to MCI
Organization: Geometry Center, Univ. of Minnesota
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 19:23:30 GMT


A friend of mine just moved to a new apartment yesterday, here in
Minneapolis.  Her phone was connected by US West on schedule.  She had
requested MCI Dial-1 service, and had told MCI about her new number so
that her account billing and F+F circle, etc would be transferred
over.

But she couldn't dial 1 + area + number yesterday.  I suggested trying
10222 + 1 + area + number, but this behaved exactly the same way.
After a ring or two, we heard the message "Your call cannot be
completed as dialed.  Please check the number and dial again.  2EB"
(no doo-wee-dee tones at the beginning)` This same message was heard
when dialing 1-700-555-4141.  I then tried placing a long distance
call with ATT (10288) and Sprint (10333).  Both of these worked fine.

This, and the "2EB" code in the message, led me to believe that the
problem was MCI's.  But my friend had called MCI earlier, and they
said it must be that US West hadn't set up the long distance right.
She had called US West, who had promised to get the repair department
to select MCI for Dial-1 by noon today.  She had been told by MCI to
try dialing 10222 + 00 to get an MCI operator, who could put through
the call, which had worked.

I tried calling MCI last night, and tried to explain that the 2EB
message must be theirs, and that I wasn't interested in the Dial-1
service, but only in being able to use 10222 + 1 +.  The woman finally
agreed to get my local USWest customer service rep on the line
three-way.  They were both agreeing that my problems were due to
USWest not having put in the Dial-1 choice properly, and I couldn't
convince them otherwise.

At one point the conversation went:

USW: Is your pick code two-twenty-two?
me:  Yes.
USW: Is she [MCI] still on the line?
me:  I don't know.
MCI: Oh.  What?
USW: Is your pick code two-twenty-two?
MCI: What's a pick code?
me:  You know, like one-oh-two-two-two.
MCI: Oh, I've never heard it called a pick code. [Neither had I]

Does anyone out there know what's going on here?

What message should I hear when dialing 1-700-555-4141 if no carrier
is selected for Dial-1?

(If I dial 10-xxx-1-700-555-4141 for a random choice of "xxx", I hear
a very long pause with some touchtones in the background, and finally
"doo-wee-dee Your call failed.  Please try again".)

Thanks for any info.


John Sullivan

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Multi-Frequency Signalling Queries
Date: 2 Sep 92 23:09:54 +1000
Organization: University of New South Wales


Hi,

   I have a query about multifrequency signalling used in the
telephone system.  Is there any standard set of frequencies used for
signalling worlwide?  Where can I find out specific info on signalling
in Australia, the local Telecom office library won't let me in as I am
not a staff member!

  Is inband signalling still popular or is it all done on special
signalling circuits.  If you can help clear up my confusion please
E-mail to:

     Henry,   [e-mail]
     University of NSW,  Sydney Australia.

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

Date: Wed, 2 Sep 92 16:32:08 -0800
From: [e-mail] (Michael C. Berch)
Subject: V.25bis, or: Are CCITT and PTTs Totally Bonkers?


I borrowed a MultiTech V.32 modem to do some testing, and while
waiting for something to complete I thumbed through the manual and
came to a curious appendix at the end: "CCITT V.25bis Operation".

After explaining the differences between normal commands and V.25bis
commands, there was a section entitled "Delayed and Forbidden
Numbers", which I quote below:

"V.25bis provides the facility to delay failed call retry attempts by
putting numbers that failed to connect on a special Delayed Numbers
list.  Subsequent dialing of these numbers will be delayed (time
specified by a country regulation) and an appropriate message
displayed.  If the number is retried more than the maximum allowed
number of times (also specified by country regulation) it is placed on
the Forbidden Numbers list, and no further retries will be allowed.

[...] Numbers are removed from the Forbidden Numbers list after a
certain time has passed (also by country regulation).  Some country
regulations have numbers remain on the Forbidden Numbers list
permanently. [...]"

I looked at this for a while, and thought it might be some sort of
inside joke among modem manufacturers, and then I came to the
per-country regulations and operations guide:

"SWITZERLAND

[...] b) Delay and Forbidden List behavior

1. Two minute delay between four retries.
2. After four retries the number is put on the forbidden list
3. The number remains on the forbidden list forever."

Austria and France are similar; Belgium, Italy, and Singapore use a
120-minute timeout for removing a number from the Forbidden List.

OK, I can see that a PTT might want to have some reasonable
regulations that restrict automatic redialing by modems and similar
devices, to prevent older switch equipment from being overloaded.  But
 ... a Forbidden Numbers list?  With numbers that stay on it FOREVER??
Have these people totally taken leave of their senses?  If I dial up
my local BBS in Zurich, and the system is down, and the modem doesn't
answer four times, I am Forbidden from ever trying it again?

I assume that either I am not reading something right, or that V.25bis
is optional/voluntary, or outdated, or something, but I really can't
imagine what reasonable thoughts were occurring in the heads of the
people that thought up this scheme.  Does anyone have any ideas about
what CCITT was trying to accomplish here?


Michael C. Berch    [e-mail]

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

Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 02 Sep 92  21:01:20 EDT
Subject: GTE Spacenet to Join Advanced Retail Communications Project


News Briefs, August 27, 1992  {Washington Technology Magazine}
Vol. 7 No. 10, Page 3


GTE Spacenet to Join Advanced Retail Communications Project:

  McLean, Va.-based GTE Spacenet is teaming with JCPenney and Capital
Cities/ABC to deliver television, audio and data services to retailers
and malls nationwide via combined satellite and terrestrial networks.
Called Advanced Retail Communications, the venture will initially use
existing GTE Spacenet and JCPenney satelite communication facilities.
Capital Cities/ABC will provide broadcase programming for the effort,
which will open in 1993.

Ameritech Mobile to test both CDMA and TDMA side by side:

  In another victory for Qualicomm, Inc of San Diego, Calif., and
CDMA, its core digital wireless technology, Ameritech Mobile has
decided to conduct the first side-by-side trial of CDMA and its chief
rival TDMA.  The trial will last for 60 days and will take place in
the Chicago metropolitan area.  CDMA, or Code Division Multiple
Access, and TDMA, or Time Division Multiple Access, are competing
standards for future digital wireless phone systems.

Comsat files tariff for full-time international digital television:

  Comsat Corp's World Systems business unit filed a tariff on Aug. 7
with the FCC to offer full-time international digital television
service.  If the tariff is approved, the system could come on-line by
Sept 21.  Comsat says the system will allow existing satelite news
gatherers to load more programming into their transmissions.  The
International Digital Television Service places Comsat in the
forefront of the future all-digital high-definition television market.

       Intelsat K satelite now on-line:

  On Aug. 21, Intelsat announced that the Intelsat K satelite is
commercially on-line.  From its location ove the Atlantic Ocean, the
Ku-band satellite offers broadcasters uplink and downlink service from
the eastern half of North America to as far east as Central Europe.
Downlink service is also available to the major metropolitan areas of
South America.

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 92 08:32 EST
Subject: Caller ID is Now Working in Indianapolis, Indiana


After waiting about three years, Caller ID is finally working in
Indianapolis.  It started working at about 8:15am on my ISDN set.  Per
call blocking *67 has been working for about a month.


Bill Kessler   [e-mail]

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

Date: Wed,  2 Sep 1992 16:12:59 -0500
From: Robert A. Carolina <[e-mail]>
Subject: UK - US Compatible?


Hello all,

I am moving to the UK next month and would apreciate some
advice/information about electronics compatability.  In addition to
the issues raised below, I would be grateful if you send replies along
with any advice or tips via Internet email to:

 [e-mail]

1. Will my phones work in the UK?  I have a couple of phones with
RJ-11 jacks and my own wire splicing kit.  Do they use RJ-11 jacks in
the UK?  Are the voltages, etc, compatible?  Will British Telecom come
and arrest me if I install my own phones?  Do I need to pay any extra
fee to use a modem?

2. Is my nice new Mitsubishi color TV going to work in the UK?  I have
heard that the broadcast standards are completely incompatible and I
must purchase a new TV in the UK.  (Yes, I am aware of the 75.00 pound
Sterling annual tax on color TV's.)

3. Will my other electronic gadgets work allright with the proper
transformer?  For example, my CD player?  Will a US CD player be
compatible with an amplifier purchased in the UK?

Thanks in advance for any suggestions you may have.


Rob Carolina
Assistant Corporate Counsel
InterCon Systems Corporation
950 Herndon Pkwy, Suite 420
Herndon, VA  22070    USA
703.709.5500    703.709.5521 (direct dial)
703.709.5555 (fax)    Internet email:  [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Kevin Wang)
Subject: Unusual Part Search
Organization: The Outland Riders
Date: Wed, 02 Sep 1992 05:30:36 GMT


I'm looking for something like an RJ45, the eight position jack,
except that I only need a six conductor cable.  I've dug through all
of my catalogs, books, and whatnot, and can't find a single thing,
except for the 8P/8C jacks.  Does anyone have a source?

What I need them for is ISDN.  We're about to be the first commercial
users here in San Luis Obispo County, Calif, except that we want to
wire the house ourselves.  We already have 9 phones lines in the
house, so we will have no difficulty wiring (I just went out and
bought another 200' of nine-pair cable), so that's not the issue.


Kevin Wang   [e-mail] or [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #680
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa16526;
          3 Sep 92 4:55 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA17620
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 3 Sep 1992 02:56:23 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA20967
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 3 Sep 1992 02:56:14 -0500
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 02:56:14 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #681

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 3 Sep 92 02:56:00 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 681

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Hohocon '93 Pre-Announcement: Conference on Hold! (Dave Quinn)
    Re: Weird Intercept (Mike Morris)
    Re: Weird Intercept (Mark Baker)
    Re: Weird Intercept (Alan L. Varney)
    Re: Weird Intercept (Randy Gellens)
    Re: Weird Intercept (Mike Coleman)
    Re: Cell Phones in the Air (Gordon Hlavenka)
    Re: Cell Phones in the Air (chuckle) (Allen Gwinn)
    Re: Modem Noise on Line (Harold Hallikainen)
    Re: Modem Noise on Line (Leonard Erickson)
    Re: Modem Noise on Line (Dennis Mitchell)
    Re: Automated Hate Calls in Minnesota (Scott Dorsey)
    Re: Automated Hate Calls in Minnesota (Andrew Klossner)
    Re: Automated Hate Calls in Minnesota (Barrey Jewall)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Dave Quinn)
Subject: Re: Hohocon '93 Pre-Announcement: Conference on Hold!
Date: 3 Sep 1992 10:19:29 -0500
Organization: Texas A&M University


The information posted about Hohocon is no longer valid. It seems that
some pre-conference hotel trouble occurred. So, for now, disregard
that posting about the Hobby Airport Howard Johnson's. HoJo didn't
want hoho ... so ... please stay tuned for more up-to-date info.


dave

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

From: [e-mail] (Mike Morris)
Subject: Re: Weird Intercept
Organization: College Park Software, Altadena, CA
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 1992 05:38:44 GMT


> [Moderator's Note: IBT has a few numbers where they 'store' various
> funky intercept recordings for whatever reason: 312-856-1520 ==> 1525
> always return messages like " ... can't be completed as dialed, please
> ask your attendant for assistance", "<tones> all circuits are busy
> now", and a particularly odd one used to be in that range of numbers
> which simply said "the voting has been concluded"(?), plus one that
> makes sense if you think about it, "the number you have dialed cannot
> be reached from outside the customer's premises".   PAT]

Are these nonbilling?

Also 714-259-0020 thru 0029 are nonbilling intercepts.  A while ago I
pulled a fast one on a friend who I knew was going to call me from a
cellphone -- I forwarded my line to the -0029 number, which asks the
caller to drop 20 cents and try your call again ... his wife told me
later that the look on his face when he heard that was wonderful ...
(it was a cell speakerphone and she heard it too).


Mike Morris   WA6ILQ
PO Box 1130            |
Arcadia, CA. 91077     | All opinions must be my own since nobody pays
818-447-7052 evenings  | me enough to be their mouthpiece...

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 92 07:35 CDT
Subject: Re: Weird Intercept


> I'm trying to reach someone in the 213-663 exchange (I've reached
> this number before).  When I dial it I get an intercept that says
> "We're sorry; your call cannot be completed as dialed from the phone
> you are using.  Please read the instruction card and dial again."

> The problem only occurs if I try and dial it as a normal PacBell call,
> that is, by dialing 9 for an outside line, then 1-213-663-xxxx.  If I
> dial it via our long-distance network, or via MCI or Sprint, it works
> fine.

It it possible that your employer (the owner of the PBX) has asked
Pacific Bell to block all long distance calls from your PBX.  This
would force you to dial such calls via your long-distance network at
presumably a cheaper rate.  The other possibility is that the lines
associated with your PBX have no default PIC, forcing either 10XXX
dialing or private network access for inter-LATA calls.

Just a thought.


Mark Baker   AT&T Network Systems

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

Date: Wed, 03 Sep 92 10:06:44 CDT
From: [e-mail] (Alan L Varney)
Subject: Re: Weird Intercept
Organization: AT&T Network Systems, Lisle, IL


In article <[e-mail]> John Higdon <john@zygot.
ati.com> writes:

> This non-sequiter type of intercept [deleted ] is quintessential GTE
> incompetence.  For instance, in Long Beach one of our Centrenet lines
> had the following recording in response to the simple dialing of '0':

> "Your call cannot be completed as dialed. You must first dial '950' and
> a carrier access code before the number".

> Now mind you that I understand that the wrong recording could simply
> be an erroneous channel assignment on the drum announcer. But the
> recording itself is complete nonsense. It has no application anywhere.
> It indicates a complete lack of understanding of even GTE's
> procedures.  So why was it made in the first place? Heaven only knows.

> [Moderator's Note: ... So if some customer wished to have no LD
> carrier assignment for whatever reason and dial everything via 950
> with a PIN, the intercept you described would make sense if they
> attempted to one-plus dial. I repeat, the wording is not the best.  PAT]

   You're close, PAT.  The specified announcement is required by
Bellcore's TR-530/FSD 20-24-0000 Interconnection requirements, in
Section 3.3.2F, when a caller dials 10XXX in a CO that only offers
950-WXXX access to the XXX-specified carrier -- in other words, to a
carrier that only wants to pay for FG-B trunks.  Bellcore's preferred
wording (from SR-TSV-002275, "BOC Notes on the LEC Networks - 1990"),
Table 6-54:

    "We're sorry, the long distance company access code you dialed
     must be preceded by the digits 950.  Please hang up and try
     your call again."

   Those fortunate enough to also have TR-NPL-000275, "Notes on the
BOC Intra-LATA Networks - 1986", will note that Table AU in Section 6
also shows this as List 228 on the CK-22550 standard announcement
tape.  (The 1990 document deletes many details from the 1986 version.)
You'll also note the announcement is slightly different:

   "We're sorry, the long distant company ...."

   Either way, the GTE recording is about a clear (or un-clear) as the
Bellcore version.  So now, John, you know WHY the announcement EXISTS
in the GTE switch.  As to why "0" would yield the announcement, it's
obviously a screw-up in specifying the correct routing for that digit.

   Note that with the divorce of FG-B XXX codes from FG-D codes and
the expansion to four XXXX digits for both by 1995, this particular
announcement (and it's twin, where 950-WXXX should have been 10XXX)
will no longer be meaningful.  I doubt if many companies even bother
to use the announcements.

   For further reference, see:

TR-NWT-000690, "IC/INC Interconnection FSD 20-24-0000", which
               replaces the TR-530 bundle of FSDs.
TR-NWT-001050, "Expansion of Carrier Identification Code Capacity for
                Feature Group D (FGD)"


Al Varney - just MY opinion.

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

From: MPA15AB![e-mail]
Date: 03 SEP 92 02:24 GMT
Subject: Re: Weird Intercept


In reference to my report of a "Your call cannot be completed as
dialed from the phone you are using; please check the instruction card
and dial again" intercept when trying to call 213-663-xxxx,
[e-mail] (John Higdon) writes:

> BTW, 663 IS still in 213. Call GTE repair about six times. That might
> do it. You will notice that I never had to ask if you were in GTE
> territory.

In this case, GTE has an airtight alibi: the intercept only occurs
when I try it from my office (in PacBell land) as a normal, 1+ call.
If I place it over our long-distance network, or via a major LD
carrier, it goes through fine.


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] (Mike Coleman)
Subject: Re: Weird Intercept
Organization: Twin Sun, Inc
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 04:39:56 GMT


In <[e-mail]> MPA15AB![e-mail].
unisys.com writes:

> When I dial it I get an intercept that says "We're sorry; your call
> cannot be completed as dialed from the phone you are using.  Please
> read the instruction card and dial again."

I've run into this very problem myself, courtesy of Southwestern Bell
(in Kansas City).  In my case, what that intercept actually *meant*
was "even though the number is in another area code, you must dial as
though it were in this one".  (This took *quite* a while to discover.)

In my case, the logical next step was to dial 1-XYZ-1234, which drew
an intercept "It is not necessary to dial one when dialing this
number", which is apparently Bell-speak for "dial one all you like,
but we're not going to connect you until you don't."

Ugh.  The upshot of all of this seems to be that you're not allowed to
call someone unless you know where you yourself are dialing from.  How
bogus.

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

From: [e-mail] (gordon hlavenka)
Subject: Re: Cell Phones in the Air
Organization: Vpnet Public Access
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 1992 03:25:29 GMT


> ... This led me to think about the movie Die Hard II where air
> phones figure prominently in the plot. In some sequence, our hero gets
> paged by his wife from a plane, he checks the pager and calls her back
> on the plane.  Is this possible or some Hollywood license?

Exactly.  No uplink calling on Airfone.  Never had it.  Possibly never
will, for political rather than technical reasons.  Imagine an
insurance salesman or 12-year-old prankster (or terrorist!) calling up
to random airplanes. Now try and find a _cost-effective_ way to
prevent these calls.

Incidentally, a comment WRT the base post here: The main reason that
you aren't supposed to use your cellphone in flight is that it will
clobber _every cell_ in the ground network. (Line-of-sight from 30,000
feet ...)  Kinda screws up the frequency reuse scheme.


Gordon S. Hlavenka   [e-mail]

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

Date: Wed, 02 Sep 92 07:01 CDT
From: [e-mail] (Allen Gwinn)
Subject: Re: Cell Phones in the Air (chuckle)
Organization: sulaco


> This led me to think about the movie Die Hard II where air phones
> figure prominently in the plot. In some sequence, our hero gets paged
> by his wife from a plane ...

Just a side note, if you look real close, the investigative reporter
who is also on the flight, uses the AirPhone as well.  In the first
two sequences, you'll note that he's even found a way to use it
upside-down (with the earpiece and mouthpiece reversed) :-)

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

From: [e-mail] (Harold Hallikainen)
Subject: Re: Modem Noise on Line
Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo
Date: Wed, 02 Sep 1992 23:43:13 GMT


    Another possibility here (although slight) would be poor
longitudinal balance in either the modem or the phone, making the
voltage to ground on each conductor of the twisted pair not equal and
opposite, allowing capacitive coupling into other pairs.

    Balanced twisted pair lines are great!  Radio stations have
twisted pairs running thru the same cables your phone does and they
get signal to noise of 70 dB or so.  This is truly amazing, especially
with dial pulses, ringing signals, and the LOUD off hook beeping
noise.


Harold

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

From: [e-mail] (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Modem Noise on Line
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: SCN Research/Qic Laboratories of Tigard, Oregon.
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 1992 05:33:33 GMT


[e-mail] (Julian Macassey) writes:

> The big question is "Why are people still doing installations
> with quad wire?"

Maybe because when they go to Radio Shack or Pay'n Pak (a big chain
ha1rdware/electrical retailer here) and ask for "telephone wire" they
get sold quad!

I'm going to have to find a use for the quad I got stuck with (no
receipt) and track down some two-pair to make a *long* extension cable
for my apartment. (Phone jacks in the bedrooms, and the kitchen.
*none* in the living room ... <sigh>)


Leonard Erickson              [e-mail]
CIS: [70465,203]             [e-mail]
FIDO:   1:105/51     [e-mail]
(The CIS & Fido addresses are preferred)

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

From: [e-mail] (Dennis Mitchell)
Subject: Re: Modem Noise on Line
Organization: University of Nebraska at Omaha
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 03:00:12 GMT


[e-mail] (Steve Shapiro) writes:

> The problem is that whenever the modem is active, there is a lot of
> hissing and noise heard on the voice line.

> What can I do to eliminate this? Is there a special kind of wire I can
> use inside the house?

I had a similar problem in my apartment in Hawaii.  I ran a BBS on the
second line and when it was on-line I got a lot of crosstalk.  After
three visits the Hawaiian Telephone tech isolated it to a defective
modular receptacle.

He explained that in the humid air of Hawaii, there was often a small
amount of corrosion that conducted the signal between the two lines.
I wasn't willing to believe it ... until he fixed it by changing the
receptacle, and it stayed fixed until I moved out.

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

From: [e-mail] ( Scott Dorsey)
Subject: Re: Automated Hate Calls in Minnesota
Organization: NASA Langley Research Center and Reptile Farm
Date: Wed, 02 Sep 1992 13:31:44 GMT


> [Moderator's Note: We have one working hard here at present exhorting
> whoever answers to be sure and vote Democratic.  PAT]

What do you want to bet that it's run by the Republican party in an attempt
to annoy voters and dissuade them from voting Democratic?


scott


[Moderator's Note: That sort of thing is always possible.  :)  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Andrew Klossner)
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 92 11:56:34 PDT
Subject: Re: Automated Hate Calls in Minnesota
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Tektronix, Wilsonville, Oregon


TELECOM Moderator notes:

> What would you rather have, a phone call like that or the Jehovah
> Witnesses coming to your door at 9 AM on Saturday morning like they do
> mine?

I'll take the visit.  Then I know who it is, and they react so nicely
if I open the door unclothed.  :-)

JWs are supposed to keep files on area households.  Tell them firmly
that you have your own faith, are definitely not interested in theirs,
and ask that they please never visit you again, and (if the system
works) they'll leave you alone.  (However, they'll deny that any such
file exists.)


Andrew Klossner  ([e-mail]) (uunet!tektronix!frip.WV.TEK!andrew)


[Moderator's Note: An aquaintance of mine has tried that technique on
them a couple times -- opening the door in various stages of undress;
but I think that is a little rude, and apparently it is a common
response to the Saturday morning visitors; the Jehovah people have
seen it many times and no longer pay attention. In other words, the
joke has worn thin. A precious little black girl about ten years old
stands outside the subway station once or twice a week where I get on
the train offering copies of {Watchtower Magazine}. I always buy a few
copies from her and leave them in the subway for whoever wants them.
The couple dollars means little to me and so much to her.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Barrey Jewall)
Subject: Re: Automated Hate Calls in Minnesota
Organization: Novell, Inc.
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 23:06:08 GMT


In <[e-mail]> drilex!carols writes:

>> Apparently, people [in Minneapolis are getting calls] from a new kind
>> of telemarketer slime encourageing them to hate minorites, Jews,etc.  It
>> sounded like the phone calls were comming from an automated dialer
>> that plays a tape encouraging violence. The State Attorney General's
>> office says that this doesn't violate any laws.

Fortunately, in California there is a law that says that recorded
announcements have to be preceded by a live human, which tends to
avoid Sears calling me at 3:30 AM to tell me that my dishwasher (which
I had not ordered) had arrived. This doesn't stop the calls from out
of state, however, as the state of California doesn't do anything
about 'em.

> [Moderator's Note: Well what would you rather have, a phone call like
> that or the Jehovah Witnesses coming to your door at 9 AM on Saturday
> morning like they do mine?  PAT]

This was avoided by me rather simply. Upon arrival at our door, the
JW's were greeted by two unshaven, slightly drunk men (me and a
friend) one of whom was holding a Mossberg police shotgun. Jeff (my
friend) cocked the weapon, and asked "you won't be coming back, will
you?"...

They never did.

(BTW ... it was 7 AM, not nine, and we'd gotten home about four hours
earlier.)

Bah.


Barrey Jewall - Network  Admin. ++ and yea, though I walk through the shadow
[e-mail]            ++ of death, I shall fear no evil, for I am
Novell, Inc.- San Jose, Calif.  ++ the meanest sonofabitch in the valley...


[Moderator's Note: For all the philisophical differences I have with
JW's, I would rather have them as neighbors any day over the nasty
people I deal with now. JW's are clean and very quiet. Their children
are very well-behaved. Most of my neighbors now are like animals and
Chicago is like a zoo where the violent animals are in control.  PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #681
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa27987;
          4 Sep 92 2:28 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA05036
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 4 Sep 1992 00:39:16 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA23350
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 4 Sep 1992 00:39:08 -0500
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1992 00:39:08 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #682

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 4 Sep 92 00:39:00 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 682

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Disaster Reporting On Usenet (Mark Christophel)
    Re: Disaster Reporting On Usenet (Peter M. Weiss)
    Re: Disaster Reporting On Usenet (Robert L. McMillin)
    Re: Disaster Reporting On Usenet (Michael A. Covington)
    Re: Disaster Reporting on Usenet (Jim Graham)
    Re: Disaster Reporting On Usenet (John Rice)
    Misc.Disaster.* Newsgroups (Robert L. McMillin)
    Re: 911 on Jerry Springer Show (David Lemson)
    Re: 911 on Jerry Springer Show (Marc T. Kaufman)
    Re: 911 on Jerry Springer Show (Dennis Mitchell)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Fri, 04 Sep 92 00:45:19 GMT
From: [e-mail] (Mark Christophel)
Subject: Re: Disaster Reporting on Usenet


The Moderator has asked to hear what is happening in South Florida.  I
live in Broward County, 30-40 miles north of Andrew's path of
destruction.  South Florida (south Dade County mostly) was hit very
hard by Hurricane Andrew.  At last report the estimated damages are in
the area of $20 billion, 280,000 people are reported homeless and
twenty people are reported dead (four in the Bahamas, one in
Louisiana, the rest in Dade County, Florida).  These figures are
expected to continue to rise as rescue workers make it into some of
the areas worst hit.

The destruction is absolutely incredible to comprehend.  For those
familiar with the destructive force of a tornado which takes out
everything in its path of say 300 feet, imagine that swath being 30
miles wide!  Entire neighborhoods and cities have been leveled.  Most
of the destruction in north Dade County and in Broward County was
limited to downed power lines and trees being uprooted.  1.5 million
people were without electricity after the storm.  Many of them have
regained power, but those areas hardest hit may not have power for
many weeks.  Amazingly (or not? ;-)), 98% of the residents did not
lose telephone service, even in the height of the storm.

The storm hit Monday morning with top wind gusts of 164 miles per
hour.  Sustained winds were around 140 mph.  South Florida has the
strictest building codes in the nation, and all buildings are built to
withstand 120 mph winds.  Andrew's strength surpassed this.

The outpouring of support has been great.  For those of us in Broward
County, we see how close we came to being the ones needing help.  When
I went to sleep Sunday night (if you can call it sleep), the storm was
expected to hit north Dade/south Broward.  The needs are very great.
Everything basic to survival is needed: food, water, shelter.  Many
cities across the US are gathering goods to send down.  Check in your
area to see if you can participate in any way.  I can also forward a
list of organizations that are accepting donations.

The moderator mentioned cs.miami.edu.  University of Miami is in Coral
Gables, one of the areas hit hard by Andrew.  I don't know the status
of the University, but they are planning to start classes on Sept. 14,
only two weeks late, and expect to finish the Fall Semester by
Christmas.


Mark J. Christophel   [e-mail]   Racal-Datacom, Inc.


[Moderator's Note: Thanks for your report. cs.miami.edu has started
responding to my nntpxmit calls once again; apparently they are back
in operation at least in a limited way. I've previously posted calls
for help to South Florida, and the Telephone Pioneers in Ft. Lauderdale
are collecting from members of the telecom industry all over the USA.
If readers here have not yet sent emergency boxes consisting of house-
hold goods and supplies; clothes, food for babies and pets, etc. then
it is vital that they do so today.  Boxes of whatever you can spare
can be sent via Federal Express to "Telephone Pioneers Disaster
Assistance, Ft. Lauderdale, FL" ... that address will be sufficient.
In addition, parcels can be sent to the City Clerk, Homestead, FL by
Federal Express.  Thanks very much, everyone!   PAT]

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

Organization: Penn State University
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 08:29:08 EDT
From: Peter M. Weiss <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Disaster Reporting On Usenet


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
says:

> I am surprised that Usenet, as powerful a medium as it is, has not
> been more widely used to coordinate disaster relief activities.  (...)

On the news that we carry here:

    alt.hurricane.andrew

There were 13 articles posted.


Pete - [e-mail]

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

Date: Thu, 3 Sep 92 06:08:29 -0700
From: rlm@ms_aspen.hac.com (Robert L. McMillin)
Subject: Re: Disaster Reporting On Usenet


Rick Broadhead <[e-mail]> writes:

> I am surprised that Usenet, as powerful a medium as it is, has not
> been more widely used to coordinate disaster relief activities.

That's why we have Amateur Radio.  Hurricane Andrew has made me
rethink the idea of getting a 2M FM handheld transceiver for
emergencies, along with the license to use it.  (That and buying some
of the 55 gallon barrels for water storage I saw at Home Depot the
other day, and maybe an emergency generator.)


Robert L. McMillin                     | Voice:    [phone]
Hughes Aircraft/Hughes Training, Inc.  | Fax:      [phone]
Los Angeles, CA                        | Internet: [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Michael A. Covington)
Subject: Re: Disaster Reporting On Usenet
Organization: University of Georgia, Athens
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 15:18:57 GMT


Back during the Los Angeles riots, I suggested organizing emergency
communications on Usenet, which should be able to play much the same
role as amateur radio.  Nobody did anything.  Rick Broadhead's mention
of the hurricane raises the issue again.  Any takers?


Michael Covington - Artificial Intelligence Programs - U of Georgia - USA
Unless otherwise noted, these are private opinions, not official statements.

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

Date: Thu, 03 Sep 1992 17:38:09 CST
From: Jim Graham <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Disaster Reporting on Usenet


[e-mail] writes:

> I am surprised that Usenet, as powerful a medium as it is, has not
> been more widely used to coordinate disaster relief activities.  For
> example, [...] a group [...] which could be used by anxious friends
> and relatives to find out about friends and family in disaster areas,
> to disseminate information on relief efforts, provide addresses of
> those agencies accepting donations, and to report on the situation
> in affected areas.

Actually, such a service exists today ... but not under Usenet.
Amateur Radio (aka Ham) operators have, for a long time, been doing
just this sort of thing. In a disaster, there are several different
types of traffic (messages) handled by Hams.

The first of these, and the most important, is true EMERGENCY traffic,
which, among other things, includes direct support for organizations
such as the Red Cross/Red Crescent, Civil Defense, etc., on both
a local and wide-area scale.

Another type of traffic we handle is more what you're looking for.
It's called HEALTH AND WELFARE traffic. Basically, H&W traffic is
where someone who has family in the affected areas asks for
information about those family members, or the reverse, where someone
in the area wants to let their family outside know that they're ok.

All of this traffic is handled on very formal "nets" on the air,
directed by a single net control station. All transmissions on that
frequency, except illegal ones (malicious interference) are at the
direction of the net control operator. These nets are all part of a
formal, regular operation. Uunder normal conditions, these nets still
run (except the specific disaster nets such as the United Nations
nets, etc) and handle routine traffic (which is basically designed to
keep people's traffic handling skills sharpened.

Now, there are some very important reasons why this might not really
want to be handled by such an informal thing as Usenet ... I'll list
the three main things that come to mind now ... perhaps others will
add to this.

Imagine, if you will, John Doe wants to find out about his mom, Jane
Doe, who lives in the disaster area ... so he posts this to the group.
Now, along comes Joe Jerk, who fakes a post from that area, and
describes this guy's mothers demise in gory detail ... and all a lie.

Think it wouldn't happen? When I was helping out with H&W traffic for
the San Salvador earthquake (et al), I actually heard people jamming
(or at least, trying to jam ... they didn't get very far ...) the net,
talking about how in their opinion, they somehow deserved to get hit
with that earthquake. There are some real slimeballs out there, and
they key on events like this to get their jollies. Strike one. (Could
be solved to some degree with a moderated group, but would then be too
slow due to the overhead.)

But, even more important, here's another reason why this wouldn't
really work out too well --- how are people in that area going to get
on Usenet? In many cases, for a while, at least, Amateur Radio is
truly the *ONLY* stable communications in/out of the disaster area.
Amateur Radio is a formal part of the disaster plan for all of the
areas I've seen, and generally includes plenty of station equipment,
emergency power, etc., all at the Emergency Operations Center (EOC)
for a city, often with at least one backup site for the primary
Amateur operations. Compare this with something as loose and informal
as Usenet, and you've got strike two.

Here's strike three: Usenet is often just too slow. According to the
headers, your article was posted to comp.dcom.telecom on 31 August at
1811 UTC. It just arrived here (I'm in Chicago, just like our
Moderator), and it's now 1 September 2219 UTC. That's a pretty
substantial delay, just to get the request registered -- and that's
not even under adverse conditions ...

True, as long as everyone involved is on a link connected with the
Internet backbone, this delay isn't an issue, but in strike two, we
pretty much eliminated the Internet connectivity in the disaster area
as a reliable option. And even then, any type of landline service is
likely to be marginal after such disasters (or at least, we have to
assume this will be the case ... and then be thankful if it isn't).


Later,

jim
#include <std_disclaimer.h>
INTERNET:  [e-mail]  |  [e-mail]  |  [e-mail]
ICBM:  41.70N 87.63W                    UUCP:  gagme!n5ial![e-mail]
AMATEUR RADIO: n5ial@n9hsi (Chicago.IL.US.Earth)              73 DE N5IAL (/9)

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Disaster Reporting On Usenet
Organization: Teradyne Inc., Telecommunications Division
Date: Thu, 03 Sep 92 17:44:56 GMT


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

> I am surprised that Usenet, as powerful a medium as it is, has not
> been more widely used to coordinate disaster relief activities.  For

> Are there any folks out there who have experience in creating a new
> newsgroup, and are willing to moderate a discussion and run a vote for

Look for alt.hurricane.andrew. It's been in existence since shortly
after Andrew hit florida.


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]

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

Date: Thu, 3 Sep 92 07:12:34 -0700
From: rlm@ms_aspen.hac.com (Robert L. McMillin)
Subject: Misc.Disaster.* Newsgroups


Rick Broadhead writes:

> I am surprised that Usenet, a powerful and international medium of
> communication, has not been more widely used to assist in the dissemination
> of information during crisis situations and calamities.  For example, I am
> sure there would be great support for newsgroups such as misc.disaster.
> reports and/or misc.disaster.coordination, which could be used:

> (a) by anxious friends and relatives to find out about friends
>     and family in disaster areas
> (b) to disseminate information on relief efforts
> (c) to provide addresses of those agencies accepting donations
> (d) to report on the situation in affected areas

misc.disaster.* group(s) would be of limited utility as a mechanism
for response to a great disaster.  The reason is that the underlying
hardware needed to make USENET work, specifically, the telephone
system, would likely be out of commission, possibly for an extended
period of time.  Luckily for the people in Florida left in the wake of
Hurricane Andrew, the telephone system still works, somewhat.  In
Mogadishu (sp?), no phone service even exists.  You can't call into or
out of the country unless you have a satellite phone or other
radio-based communication.

In the recent riots here, and during several minor earthquakes over
the last several years, I can assure you that the phone systems became
swamped.  USENET hubs that rely on the "physical transport layer" of
the public switched analog telephone network would be unusable in
times of emergency.  This would shut down many sites instantly and
greatly limit the utility of those that remained online -- probably
large commercial or academic sites with leased lines and a very good
reason for having continuous power plugged into a computer room in
case of a disaster, or were just lucky that they didn't lose power.
Again calling up the example of Florida, the power grid probably won't
get rebuilt for another six months.

Of course, it wouldn't necessarily mean that USENET wouldn't be useful
outside the area of the disaster.  It would just mean that it would be
limited to second-hand information relayed by other means -- like
amateur radio -- or publishing "send money to:" information.  I see
misc.disaster.* groups as an ancilliary means of information disbursal
at best, at least until direct satellite telephony becomes cheap and
readily available.


Robert L. McMillin                     | Voice:    [phone]
Hughes Aircraft/Hughes Training, Inc.  | Fax:      [phone]
Los Angeles, CA                        | Internet: [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (David Lemson)
Subject: Re: 911 on Jerry Springer Show
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 1992 05:35:01 GMT


[e-mail] (Ron Heiby) writes:

>> [Moderator's Note: We don't have cellular 911, but we can call
>> 787-0000 or the operator and get connected to Chicago Emergency.

> I'm surprised that our Moderator didn't mention it, but in the
> Chicagoland area, they have put signs up all over the place that one
> should dial "*999" to report any sort of emergency from a cellular
> phone.  I've used it several times to inform the authorities of
> stranded motorists, non-working traffic signals, possibly-drunk
> motorists, downed trees or power lines, and speeding peace officers.

In the St. Louis area, the cellular carriers encourage you to use *55
(this is with SBMS at least, I think the Non-wireline has the same
number) to contact the State Police for non-emergency or outside of
city emergencies.  That is a free call.  Once I called to report some
railroad lights that were continuously going off, and ended up talking
to the guy, who was obviously bored, for about five minutes giving him
information.

About St. Louis cellular 911, there are two separate numbers: one for
the Illinois side of the river (Mississippi) and one for the Missouri
side, since the service area spans both states.  Once when I was in an
accident I got them confused ... not hard to do (one is 611, one is
511 I think, hard to remember ... :-) Also, whenever I did call the
cellular 911 in STL, I always was put on hold, even when I was in an
accident: "Hi, I was just in an accident, a guy rear-ended me."  "Is
anyone hurt?  "No, I don't think so."  "Ok, hold."  They always want
to know what city you're on, and you hold on while they call that
city's emergency dispatch operator. (Usually you can hear that
conversation while you wait).


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] (Marc T. Kaufman)
Subject: Re: 911 on Jerry Springer Show
Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University.
Date: Thu, 03 Sep 1992 16:10:25 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Ron
Heiby) writes:

> We have been told, through the town newsletter, that we
> should use 911 *any* time we want fire/police/ambulance dispatch.  So,
> the way I read it, if I have a fender-bender and need a police officer
> to come by to see what happened, from a non-cellular Buffalo Grove
> phone, I'm to dial "911", rather than the police non-emergency number.
> I think it's wierd, but who am I to argue?

> [Moderator's Note: Who are you to argue? You are a citizen with an
> above average knowledge of the telecommunications network. Don't fall
> into that all too common trap of criticizing some bureaucrat only to
> be attacked in return, 'how would you know anything about this?'. That
> is BS! Continue arguing that 911 is *only* for dire emergencies when
> immediate police intervention is required.  PAT]

911 is for whatever the local agency says its for.  In many areas of
the country there is plenty of excess bandwidth for the 911 operators,
and few if any "daytime" numbers appearing on the board.  Besides, the
average citizen is not always in a position to distinguish grades of
emergency between life-threatening and non.  A "smoke check" or "smell
of gas" can easily turn into a structure fire.  A "fender bender with
one victim with a sore neck" can turn into a full code response.  Even
us volunteer firemen sometimes get it wrong when we are on scene.


Marc Kaufman ([e-mail])


[Moderator's Note: You are incorrect in saying '911 is for whatever
the local agency says it is for ...'  In Illinois at least, the state
legislature passed the '911 Enabling Act' many years ago which
directed local municipalities to install 911 as promptly as possible
in cooperation with the local telco using available technology. The
Act went on to define the purpose of 911 as a method of communicating
EMERGENCY circumstances to the appropriate EMERGENCY RESPONSE agency
or agencies within the community. A stolen car or a home which was
burglarized several hours previous to being discovered are not what I
would term emergencies.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Dennis Mitchell)
Subject: Re: 911 on Jerry Springer Show
Organization: University of Nebraska at Omaha
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1992 02:33:39 GMT



Regarding 911 calls from cellular phones: I was traveling cross
country through the Quad Cities area (Davenport, Iowa and Moline,
Illinois) and needed to call 911 to report a car stranded on the
highway.  My call went to the wrong 911 office, but they were used to
it and forwarded it to the right office (across the river).  A few
weeks later I got my bill, and I got hit with a $3 roaming charge, and
the billed phone number wasn't 911, but some other 'local' seven-digit
number.  Wierd.


[Moderator's Note: If you report the circumstances of your call to the
cellular provider (don't just rely on them to see it on your bill and
do it automatically) many will write off the charges as goodwill. I
know Ameritech here in Chicago has done that on occassion when
motorists have called in emergencies then stayed there to assist until
emergency personnel arrived on the scene.  PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #682
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa29871;
          4 Sep 92 3:41 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA10639
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 4 Sep 1992 01:45:19 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA19374
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 4 Sep 1992 01:45:10 -0500
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1992 01:45:10 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #683

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 4 Sep 92 01:45:00 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 683

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Monitoring of Broadcasts (Adrienne Voorhis)
    Re: Monitoring of Broadcasts (Jerry Leichter)
    Re: Proper Use of 66-Block Punchdown Tool (Terry Kennedy)
    Re: Proper Use of 66-Block Punchdown Tool (Aubrey Philipsz)
    Re: 110 vs 66 (Jeff Hakner)
    Re: Dial a #, Connect Quicker? (Robert Aaron Book)
    Re: Dial a #, Connect Quicker? (Bob Yazz)
    Re: Baby Bells and States (Laird Broadfield)
    Re: More Phone Line Woes (Dave Levenson)
    Re: How Can I Splice Telephone Wires Without an Overkill (Joe Trott)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Adrienne Voorhis <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Monitoring of Broadcasts
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 92 2:04:48 EDT


Recently I, (<[e-mail] > Adrienne Voorhis) said:

>> There is no prohibition against telling people there is a fire in a
>> theater, only against *yelling* "fire" in a crowded theater when the
>> person knows that it's *false*.  This is merely a "time, place, and
>> manner restriction" on knowingly false and dangerous speech designed
>> solely to create a public safety hazard.  Here, I am talking about
>> presumably true information that a private citizen is being prohibited
>> from discussing, even for legitimate purposes of public debate.

And Pat responded:

> [Moderator's Note: I do not believe you are correct in saying you can
> 'state there is a fire in a theatre as long as you do not shout it.'
> If this were true, then you should be able to make false utterances to
> 911 with impunity. . . .

     Well, you *can* yell fire in a crowded theater if there is one.  :-)

     What I meant to say (and actually thought I did say) was that the
yelling "fire" in a crowded theater was an example of a "time, place,
and manner restriction": not all reports are punishable, just *false*
reports that could conceivably threaten public safety.  Clearly,
causing fire trucks to rush to a false alarm threaten public safety.

     Of all the reponses I have received to my question how the
government can allow monitoring of broadcasts, but not dissemination
of this information, I particularly appreciated Leonard Ericson's
([e-mail]):

> Check the Communications Act of 1933.  That's where this comes from.
> And I think it's a matter of them *allowing* you to listen to private
> communications that cross your property via radio.  But you aren't
> allowed to distribute the info to others.

> It's stood up in court for a *long* time.  And it is a situation that
> is not all that black and white.  I believe that some folks have
> actually argued in court along the lines of "if I'm not allowed to
> listen to it, make them stop sending it to me!"

First, I appreciate that he recognizes that it "is not all that black
and white."  I also appreciate that he did not assume that I believe
the "don't shoot electrons at me if you don't want me to repeat it"
argument.  As I noted in my last post (vol. 72, issue 167), my
argument is "you can't say its public to hear but not public to
repeat," *not* "its automatically public if its possible to hear."

     I am curious how this 'long line of court cases' justify what
appears to me to be a contradictory public-to-hear, yet
confidential-to-not-repeat distinction.  If the government *execises
its discretion* to let you hear these broadcasts, it seems wrong for
it to muzzle you from ever discussing it, no matter how newsworthy.

     As Bill Sohl <[e-mail]>, pointed out,
reporters in New York City are often monitoring police band radios and
using the information to obtain stories.  Recently one of the local TV
stations even rebroadcast police band transmissions when some racist
comments were overheard on them during a riot in Washington Heights.
(BTW, it may well have been that the comments were not made by police
officers.)


Adrienne Voorhis
Albert Einstein College of Medicine   Bronx, New York, USA

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

Date: Thu, 03 Sep 92 10:12:02 EDT
From: Jerry Leichter <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Monitoring of Broadcasts


Adrienne Voorhis continues to question how the 1934 Communications Act
can prevent one from talking about what one has overheard on a
non-broadcast band -- after all, what about the First Amendment?

This strikes me as one of those "it's a free country" arguments that
kids get into.  The fact that one element of a crime, considered
alone, is not illegal (and may even be constitutionally protected)
does not prevent the combined acts from constituting a crime.  It's
not illegal for me to walk down the street in front of a bank.  It's
not illegal for me to take a bag from your hand as I walk by the door
of the bank.  But if you and I agreed to rob the bank, and you just
stole that bag and handed it to me to carry away, I'll go to jail.
(In fact, part of YOUR illegal act was saying to the bank clerk "Give
me all your money".  Free speech?)

The crime is "intercepting a non-broadcast radio communication and
revealing its contents (or even existence) to another".  I'm safe as
long as I don't perform both acts.

If I intercept such a communication and turn the results over to my
friend the reporter, he is free to print it.  I've broken the law.  If
he had no prior understanding with me that I would be doing this
interception, he's home free.  (Consider the Pentagon Papers case:
Even if the physical papers themselves were arguably stolen property,
and the Times should have known that, the most that the government
could do is insist that the physical papers be given back; the Times
could still publish the information in them.)

If, on the other hand, my friend and I agreed that I will provide this
service for him, he's an accessory to my crime.  (If I do this for him
on a continuing basis, even if we never talk about it, at some point a
court would probably decide that we had an understanding.)  Daniel
Ellsberg came to the Times with the Papers; they didn't send him off
to take them.


Jerry

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

From: Terry Kennedy <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Proper Use of 66-Block Punchdown Tool
Organization: St. Peter's College, US
Date: 03 Sep 92 19:22:05 EDT


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

> The tool is shipped with the CUTTING end inside the handle. You are
> apparently using the NON-CUTTING end. Loosen the big screw near the
> blade, pull the blade out, swing it around, push it back in, and
> tighten the screw. You will see that one side of the blade now has a
> sharp ridge that will trim the copper wire. It will be obvious which
> way to hold the tool (you do not want to cut the business end of the
> wire, but rather the excess).

  If the original poster was _really_ unfortunate, they have a
non-spring-loaded tool. Those need a really good _WHUMP!_ to cut the
wire. Of course, folks will ask what that ugly bruise on your palm is
from 8-)

  The best tool I've seen is the one from Harris/Dracon. It uses a
twist- and-lock blade holder, and you can switch between cut and
non-cut nearly instantly. It also has a pocket in the far end for
holding the blade when not in use -- keeps the edge from being dulled.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Aubrey Philipsz)
Subject: Re: Proper Use of 66-Block Punchdown Tool
Organization: Express Access Public Access UNIX, Greenbelt, Maryland USA
Date: Fri, 04 Sep 1992 06:31:35 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Julian Macassey) writes:

> In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
> (Gabe M Wiener) writes:
> X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 667, Message 4 of 6

>> Your description is not clear. So lets make some assumptions.
>> You are using a springloaded punchdown tool. The tool has a bit on the
>> end of it that is reversable. You usually reverse these by loosening a
>> screw or a collet. One end of the bit is for punching and cutting, the
>> other end is for punching only -- used when looping wire across several
>> blocks. The cutting end has a knife blade on one side.

Some tools have a spare blade hiden in the "butt end" of the tool,
with an embedded knob to turn and release the spare bit.  Often this
is where they are hiding the cutting bit.  Sort of depends on what
kind of installation I was last doing ...

> If that blade is blunt or you are using the end without the
> blade. The wire will not get cut. Get a new bit, they cost about
> $10.00, worth it every time.

Or just touch it up with a stone; lots of meat on those blades.

> If this is not clear, stop a telco installer - the guys and
> girls with the macho tool belts. Ask how to use and adjust a puncdown
> tool. Easier to use than a revolver -- much more fun. Both look good
> on your hip.

For a whole generation of phone enthusiasts, this would not be a good
thing to do.  My tools are the wrong color and they might laugh or
something ;-)

Aub

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

Subject: Re: 110 vs 66
Date: 3 Sep 92 11:21:27 EDT (Thu)
From: [e-mail] (Admin)


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(David Ptasnik) says:

> They claim, however, that the 66's are a lot
> easier to punch, and that you can punch more wires onto the same post
> (for those occasions where several single line phones share a line)
> than you can with the 110's, and that the 66's give you a good
> connection more reliably.  110's also use different punch tools for
> most efficient use (I think you are supposed to be able to punch five
> wires at a time on a 110)(when it works right).  They also claimed
> that it was much easier to hook a test set up to 66 blocks for trouble
> testing (clip leads instead of a special connector).

> Overall the 110 review from this crew on that day was extremely
> negative.  I suspect that a negative reaction to a "new" thing was
> part of it.  Techs seem to be a pretty conservative lot.  Your mileage
> will vary.

I strongly disagree with your techs.  From a mechanical standpoint,
110 blocks are much easier to work with.  You don't need to "lace" the
pair through the terminals, as you do with 66.  You simply lay the
wire across the slots and push it down a little.  On 66 blocks, the
excess wire frequently does not fall away cleanly.  This is not a
problem on 110 blocks (although the wire sometimes comes flying back
into your face!)

If you're running high-speed data, 110 is much superior to 66.  The
primary reason is that 110 terminals are stacked end-to-end, while 66
terminals are face-to-face.  This means that the capactiance between
adjacent terminals is much higher on 66 blocks.  To high-frequency
signals (such as 10-BASE-T), that capacitance acts as a shunt,
introducing termendous attentuation (I've heard figures of 10-15dB per
66 termination).  110, on the other hand, introduces almost neglible
attentuation at 10-BASE-T frequencies.

As for reliablity, 110 connections are gas-tight and have a "quiet
front", meaning there are no exposed terminals.

The only drawbacks I can think of: You can't "run the count" (run a
tone pickup or test set down the terminals), because of the quiet
front.  You can't easily bridge over the terminals, and you can't use
110 as a bridging point, because there are only two terminals per wire
(one below for the feed, one above for the cross connect), unlike 66
which can have up to sixbridged terminals.  Finally, I find the wire
management accessories (rings, spools, runways, etc.) associated with
66 to be easier to work with than 110, although this is the price one
pays for higher density.

To get back to the original poster's question, I would definitely
recommend 110 (or at the very least NOT 66 !!) for a high-speed data
application.


Jeff Hakner  Assistant Director of Telecommunications
Cooper Union School of Engineering    NYC

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

From: [e-mail] (Robert Aaron Book)
Subject: Re: Dial a #, Connect Quicker?
Organization: Rice University
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1992 04:56:25 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Michael Rosen) writes:

> Is it possible to make a calling card call and not have to wait for
> the <bong> to enter your card number?  I'd love to be able to just
> dial it all straight and not have to wait those extra few seconds.

If you are calling the "home" number associated with the card, you can
usually just type in the card number (instead of the phone number then
the card number).  This will generally give you the "two-tone" and
connect you with your home number.

I have done this with both Sprint and MCI cards, so I would guess that
it's standard.  No guarantees -- your mileage may vary.  :-)


Robert Book   [e-mail]

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

From: Bob Yazz <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Dial a #, Connect Quicker?
Date: Fri, 04 Sep 1992 04:09:18 GMT


[e-mail] (Steve Forrette) writes:

> One question that I have not been able to answer myself is why it
> helps to hit # after entering an additional destination number for a
> calling card call

The '#' tells circuits waiting for you to dial more digits to stop
waiting, and proceed.  I don't know why AT&T doesn't recognize a
common ten-digit (eleven including the preceeding '0') US area code
and phone number.  It seems to me they could fix it.

The same "timeout" mechanism comes into play to distinguish calls to
'0' from calls to '0 plus the number'.  You'll get to the operator
faster if you dial '0 #'.  (Some COCOTS choke on this; I hope nobody
is suddenly disillusioned.)

I use '#' most every time I dial.  If, for example, I've omitted a
digit in a common local seven-digit phone call, I get informed of my
error sooner.


Bob Yazz

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Baby Bells and States
Date: 04 Sep 92 02:36:56 GMT


In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Darwei
Kung) writes:

> Judge Harold Greene decided the fate of the Bell System.  His rulings
> still stands today, and he is still the man who has the final say on
> the fate of RBOCs.

> [Moderator's Note: Actually, I believe one thing Greene did NOT say
> was how many holding companies there had to be or how many telcos
> would be assigned to each. I think AT&T was allowed to decide.  PAT]

Judge Greene:  "Okay, how many little companies?"
AT&T attorney: "Ummm, how about, ahhhhh... ... one?"

Hee hee.


Laird P. Broadfield     [e-mail]    ...{ucsd, nosc}!crash!lairdb

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

From: [e-mail] (Dave Levenson)
Subject: Re: More Phone Line Woes
Organization: Westmark, Inc.
Date: Fri, 04 Sep 1992 02:13:01 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Dan
Lanciani) writes:

> What is the purpose of listening only to my line?  I suspect they
> wanted to show that the dropouts were coming from my phone/wiring.

It would seem that by their own tests, they have proved that the
problem is _not_ in your wiring or in your telephone set.

I'm curious -- is your line metallic to the central office, or are you
served by a SLC somewhere in your loop?  A friend here in NJ had a
similar problem (I heard drop-outs when talking with him, but he
didn't hear them).  NJ Bell replaced a line card in a SLC-96 remote
terminal in his neighborhood, and the problem went away.


Dave Levenson      Internet: [e-mail] Westmark, Inc.
Warren, NJ, USA      UUCP: {uunet | rutgers | att}!westmark!dave
Warren, NJ, USA      Voice: 908 647 0900 Fax: [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Joe Trott)
Subject: Re: How Can I Splice Telephone Wires Without an Overkill?
Organization: U.S Dept. of Transportation
Date: Thu, 03 Sep 1992 14:27:29 GMT


kentrox![e-mail] (Bud Couch) writes:

> In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail].
> wvnet.edu (Shailesh M. Potnis) writes:

>> Is there a terminal or connector which splices two ends of a
>> telephone cableto make a longer one?  Essentially what I would emagine
>> would be similar to the two male connectors fused together.

> Well, there is always the old WECO 710 splicing connector, but it
> requires a rather elaborate tool to use, since it uses an
> insulation-displacement mechanism. I think that the tool runs about
> $300, and I don't think that AT&T will sell the connectors in
> quantites of less than 25.

If you stick (or already have) a couple of RJ11 ends on your cables,
Radio Shack sells a coupler to put them together.


JTT

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #683
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa18401;
          5 Sep 92 11:16 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA19362
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 5 Sep 1992 09:30:52 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA32301
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 5 Sep 1992 09:30:43 -0500
Date: Sat, 5 Sep 1992 09:30:43 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #678

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 2 Sep 92 02:44:00 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 678

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Hohocon '93 Pre-Announcement Details (Barnard Leddy)
    Illinois Bell Now Allows Remote Call Forwarding (TELECOM Moderator)
    Status of Non-Dialable Points (Gabe M. Wiener)
    Telemarketer Identification (was Automated Hate Calls) (Dave Niebuhr)
    Powering Accessories From the Line (Roy M. Silvernail)
    Telecom Using Power Lines (Leslie S. Saitowitz)
    A Correct 1-800-I-RECYCLE (Carl Moore)
    A Note on Graybar History (KSandy Kyrish)
    Deaf Dialtone (Marshal Perlman)
    Looking For Mr. Graybar (Bob Vogel)
    Wierd Ring(s) (Clay Jackson)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: barnard leddy <[e-mail]>
Subject: Hohocon '93 Pre-Announcement Details
Organization: University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame
Date: Tue, 01 Sep 1992 03:38:16 GMT


dFx International Digest and cDc - Cult Of The Dead Cow proudly present :


                       The Third Annual

                        X M A S C O N

                             AKA

                        H 0 H 0 C O N


          "Here... why don't you talk to my lawyer"

Who:   All Hackers, Journalists, Security Personnel, Federal Agents,
              Lawyers, Authors and Other Interested Parties.

Where:               Howard Johnson's - Hobby Airport
                          7777 Airport Boulevard
                          Houston, Texas  77061
                                  U.S.A.
                           Tel: [phone]
                           Hou: [phone]
                           Fax: [phone]

When:      Friday December 18 through Sunday December 20, 1992

Somebody call hotel security, we're at it again! Xmas/HoHoCon '92,
three years and running. HoHoCon '91 turned out to be the largest and
most chaotic gathering of any other computer underground conference
ever, yet it was also the most organized and well planned. Everything
from party ball soccer to interhotel telegrams from Cliff Stoll to
elite cYbuR-strippers, and everyone from Bruce Sterling to Erik
Bloodaxe & Doc Holiday of Comsec to K0DE WARRI0R himself. It was also
the first conference to produce .gifs, a definite new trend. How we
got away with it is still a mystery, and how we'll top it, I just
don't know. But you can bet we're gonna try!

We're looking to get an even larger group of people from the computer
underground, computer security, media, and telecommunications world
together to discuss a variety of topics. Still no ego trip either, the
event will once again be open to the public so that anyone may attend,
and everyone is encouraged to participate in the activities.

                           Hotel Information
                           ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
This year, we've moved the conference from Intercontinental Airport to
Hobby Airport. This was mainly due to conference room availability and
room pricing. It shouldn't create an inconvenience as most airlines
service both Airports.

The Hobby Airport Howard Johnson's Lodge is located almost directly
across the street from the entrance of the airport (approximately one
block west if facing the airport). The HoHoCon group room rates are
$41.00 plus tax (15%) per night, your choice of either single or
double.  There are also two suites available, a mini and a large. You
can call the hotel for pricing and availability of the suites. Once
again, when you make your reservations (800-654-2000, which is also
reachable from Houston), you will need to tell them you are with the
HoHoCon Conference to receive the reduced room rate, otherwise you
will be shelling out $59.00. There is no charge for children,
regardless of age, when they occupy the same room as their parents.
Specially designed rooms for the handicapped are available. The hotel
provides free on call transportation to and from the airport.

The hotel restaurant, The Mulberry Tree, is open from 6 AM to 10 PM.
Meal prices range between $5 and $10, with breakfast being closer to
$5 and dinner closer to $10. There is also a buffet available for
$6.95. The hotel bar, The Hobby Saloon, is open from 2 PM to 2 AM and
features the general assortment of table games and bar attractions.
There is an outdoor pool and an exercise room. Car rental agencies are
located in the lobbies of both the hotel and airport.  Unlike last
year, there will be no need to hack the television sets as the hotel
provides free cable tv, which includes HBO (don't know about those
wonderfully edited R rated hotel pornos yet, kidz). Check-in and
check-out times are both 12:00 noon. Earlier check-in is allowed if
there are rooms available. If you need further information, contact us
or the hotel directly.

If you are only able to get a flight into Intercontinental Airport,
there is a shuttle that will take you to Hobby for $11.50. Departures
start at 10 AM and continue until 10 PM, leaving every hour on the
hour. For more information contact the Hobby Airport Limousine Service
at [phone].

Similar to last year, the hotel is placing the HoHoCon guests (those
renting rooms) in their own building (smart move). Thus, we are
encouraging people to make their reservations as early as possible to
ensure themselves a room in our building. As of this writing, there
are six rooms reserved and there is a total of 40 rooms in the
building.

                                 Directions
                                 ~~~~~~~~~~
If you plan to drive to the conference, plan your route to get you to
Interstate 45. From there, if you are coming from the North (which
most of you will be), take I-45 South to the Broadway exit. Make a
right on Broadway and drive down for about a mile or so until you come
to Airport Boulevard (you will be right in front of the airport at
this point). Make a right on Airport Boulevard and the hotel is one
block down on the right.

If you are coming from the South, take I-45 North to Airport
Boulevard.  Go left on Airport Boulevard and the hotel will be on the
right, one block past the airport.


                             Conference Details
                             ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
HoHoCon will last three days, with the actual conference being held on
Saturday, December 19, starting at 11:00 AM or 12:00 noon, depending
on the number of speakers, and continuing until 4:30 PM. The reason
for having to vacate the conference room so early is because there is
a Christmas party following our conference. Hopefully, the partiers
will get so drunk, loud and obnoxious that the hotel staff won't have
the time to pay attention to us.

This is actually a pre 'official announcement', so at this point, we
don't exactly have all of the conference itself planned. We are still
in the midst of arranging times and confirming speakers. We would like
to have a number of people speak on a varied assortment of topics. If
you would like to speak, please contact us as soon as possible and let
us know who you are, who you represent (if anyone), the topic you wish
to speak on, a rough estimate of how long you will need, and whether
or not you will be needing any audio-visual aids. The main announcement
will probably be going out in three weeks, and we will be releasing
updates every three to four weeks after that.

We would like to have people bring interesting items and videos again
this year, so if you have anything you think people would enjoy having
the chance to see, please let us know ahead of time, and tell us if
you will need any help getting it to the conference. If all else
fails, just bring it to the con and give it to us when you arrive. We
will also include a list of items and videos that will be present in a
future update.

We received a nice amount of media support last year in the form of
pre-conference announcements and would greatly appreciate the same
this year. Besides our updates, you will most likely be able to get
HoHoCon details from CuD, Informatik, Mondo 2000, and Phrack Magazine.
If you are a journalist and would like to do a story on HoHoCon 92, or
know someone who would, contact us with any questions you may have, or
feel free to use and reprint any information in this file.

If anyone requires any additional information, needs to ask any
questions, wants to RSVP, or would like to be added to the mailing
list to receive the HoHoCon updates, you may write myself (Drunkfux)
or any of the other HoHoCon planning committee members (uh ... whoever
they may be) at:

                    [e-mail]

For those without net access, we'll list a few boards to reach us on
in the upcoming announcement, as well as a P.O. Box. Currently, your
best bet would be to try any of the cDc systems. Mainly, Demon Roach
Underground -- [phone], Login: THRASH, NUP: Jihad (I think).

HoHoCon 92 will be a priceless learning experience for professionals
(yeah, right) and gives journalists a chance to gather information and
ideas direct from the source. It is also one of the very few times
when all the members of the computer underground can come together for
a realistic purpose. We urge people not to miss out on an event of
this caliber, which doesn't happen very often. If you've ever wanted
to meet some of the most famous people from the hacking community,
this may be your one and only chance. Don't wait to read about it in
all the magazines, and then wish you had attended, make your plans to
be there now! Be a part of what we hope to be our largest and greatest
conference ever.

Remember, to make your reservations, call [phone] and tell them
you're with HoHoCon.

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

Date: Tue, 1 Sep 1992 23:46:13 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Subject: Illinois Bell Now Allows Remote Call Forwarding Changes


IBT has started a new feature for subscribers to Call Forwarding which
allows users of the service to turn on or off the service, or change
the number to which calls are forwarded from a remote location.

In the past, forwarding had to be done only from your own phone. As of
the past month, IBT has been phasing in remote access throughout the
312/708 areas. The way it works is you dial the number assigned to your
CO (one example is xxx-9923); insert your phone number on request and
then the PIN you were given.  The change is effected immediatly.

There is no additional charge for this service. It is being offered
to all Call Forwarding subscribers. Some COs already have it and others
are being converted this month. My own office, Chicago-Rogers Park will
be equipped as of September 22. Passwords are being distributed with
an introductory letter going out this month.

Any other of the Sister Bells adding this inovation?


Patrick Townson

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

From: [e-mail] (Gabe M Wiener)
Subject: Status of Non-Dialable Points
Organization: Columbia University
Date: Tue, 01 Sep 1992 05:18:45 GMT


Can anyone with access to the Bellcore database give a current report
on the status of U.S. non-dialable points?

Several years ago there was an article in the Digest about this, and
the nondialable points included Shoup, Idaho (Farmer's magneto line),
Newhalem, Washington (Independent four-digit exchange) and a few
others, and then the usual array of Nevada toll stations, plus some
unusual ones, such as Texas ranchers who were reachable by _name_ in
the Bellcore database.

That article was from four years ago.  I'd be curious to know the
current situation.  Last I heard, both Shoup and Newhalem had become
dialable.


Gabe Wiener - Columbia Univ.   [e-mail]
N2GPZ in ham radio circles     72355,1226 on CI$

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

Date: Tue, 01 Sep 92 17:47:01 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Dave Niebuhr)
Subject: Telemarketer Identification (was Automated Hate Calls)


I seem to recall New York enacting a law similar to those in other
states that requires telemarketers to identify themselves, their
company, etc.  and I've received two from one within a matter of days
and both stated the same thing in the preamble.  I don't recall the
effective date, though.

The other day I received a telemarketer call who spewed the preamble
and after the person was finished, I told her that I didn't want the
product they were selling and not to call me again and to inform their
company of that.

Last night, another telemarketer from the same company called and that
really ticked me off.  I'm now thinking of writing the company a
letter demanding that they stop or I'll think seriously of taking some
sort of legal action.

This company is a national chain most recently noted for deceptive
auto repair practices in several states.

I'm already battling NYTel over a billing problem and I won't mind taking
on another so called pillar of the community.


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

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

Subject: Powering Accessories From the Line
From: cybrspc![e-mail] (Roy M. Silvernail)
Date: Tue, 01 Sep 92 14:42:23 CDT
Organization: Villa CyberSpace, Minneapolis, MN


I'm getting my winter projects lined up, having just moved into a new
apartment.  One of the things I'm considering is an electronic line
switch for my modem.  I'd like to power it from the line.

What are the limits for drawing power from the loop?  A 386
motherboard is probably out of the question, isn't it? :-> How about
an LED or two, and maybe a small relay?  How about blocking ring
voltage?

Any other homebrewer's hints appreciated.  E-mail preferred, and if
there's any interest, I'll summarize to the Digest.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (SAITOWITZ L S)
Subject: Telecom Using Power Lines
Organization: Wits Electrical Engineering (Undergrads).
Date: Tue, 01 Sep 1992 12:01:13 GMT


Hi, just a quick question, has anyone ever heard of sending telephony
down the power lines?

{How's that for quick!!?}


Thanks,

Lesley :)    [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: The Chicago Transit Authority used to use the
electrified 'third rail' for telephone service between subway/elevated
trains and the rail dispatchers along the routes. Each car is equipped
with a telephone for the conductor and motorman; they talk on those
phones to the supervisors. For a few years now they have used UHF
radio instead (I listen on the scanner at 470 megs).  PAT]

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

Date: Tue, 01 Aug 92 10:04:17 EDT
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject: A Correct 1-800-I-RECYCLE


On Saturday (Aug. 29), I saw the correct "1 800 I RECYCLE" at
Taneytown, Md. (not far from Gettysburg, Pa.) at the city park.  Also
there was the same number 1-800-473-2925, shown in "normal" format.

This is in a different part of Maryland from the earlier-reported
1-800-1-RECYCLE.


[Moderator's Note: Is the incorrect one still in place also? :)  PAT]

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

Date: Tue, 01 Sep 92 15:09 GMT
From: Sandy Kyrish <[e-mail]>
Subject: A Note on Graybar History


Perhaps someone already commented on this, but it should be noted that
Graybar was originally co-founded by Elisha Gray, who contended to his
death that he filed a telephone patent hours before Bell did and was
thus cheated out of fame and fortune.  And Graybar became a subsidiary
of Western Electric til it was sold off in 1928.

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

From: [e-mail] (Marshal "Airborne" Perlman)
Subject: Deaf Dialtone
Organization: University of Denver, Dept. of Math & Comp. Sci.
Date: Tue, 01 Sep 92 17:43:37 GMT


Hi, I have GTE (shoot me now), and a couple of times in the last year
(more this last week then ever), I have a dial tone that does not care
if I dial or not ... it is DEAF.

For example, I dial a phone number, and when I am done dialing, the
dial tone is still there ... nice huh? So I hang up, try it again,
same problem.  Finally ... I'll try it five minutes later and it is
fixed.

What the heck is the deal?


Marshal Perlman - Huntington Beach - California - USA - Earth - Milky Way


[Moderator's Note: Nothing 'got fixed' five minutes later. You simply
got a different piece of the central office common equipment than you
had earlier ... the 'deaf dialtone' is still hanging around out there
giving grief to someone else.  PAT]

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

Date: 01 Sep 1992 19:44:10 -0400 (EDT)
From: BOB VOGEL <[e-mail]>
Subject: Looking For Mr. Graybar


I want ten points for this.  After arduous search and discussion with
800 information it can now be revealed that Graybar has an 800 locator
number which will give you a direct connection to the store nearest
you, if only you know and can "tone in" your zip code.

                        1 [phone]

I tried it and it works.  They got me right to the store closest to
me.  In the process I talked to a couple of 800 info operators who
were OK.  MCI 800 repair, so-so, and people at several Graybar
locations (not closest to me) who were universally pleasant, helpful,
and interested enough to care about the one wrong 800 that information
had [phone] -- don't use that one.


[Moderator's Note: You know who else is still giving out a wrong 800
number? ATT Mail ... 800-555-1212 still cannot come up with a number
for them most of the time; when they do, it is some totally irrelevant
(to the public) office.  And the AT&T corporate HQ switchboard acts
like they never heard of ATT Mail either ... pitiful.    PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Clay Jackson)
Subject: Wierd Ring(s)
Date: 01 Sep 92 19:09:57 GMT
Organization: U S WEST NewVector Group, Inc.


I live right on a boundary between GTE and US WEST (PNB). So, we have
two phone lines, one US WEST and one GTE.  The US WEST line is two
"pieces", a GTE "Foreign Exchange" down the hill to a box, and then
the US WEST line.

A while back, we experienced a continuous ringing on that line, that
would typically start around midnight and, in one case, continued
until sometime after 8:00 AM next morning (the phone spent the entire
time off-hook).  When I take the phone off-hook, there's no apparent
signal there.  This went on for several nites until I finally got
someone high enough up in GTE to get it fixed.

Last nite it started happening again.  Does anyone know what might be
causing this?

Thanks!


Clay Jackson - N7QNM
US WEST NewVector Group Inc
Bellevue, WA    uunet!uswnvg!cjackso

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #678
******************************











Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa20014;
          5 Sep 92 12:04 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA22254
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 5 Sep 1992 10:15:39 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA18858
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 5 Sep 1992 10:15:29 -0500
Date: Sat, 5 Sep 1992 10:15:29 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #684

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 5 Sep 92 10:15:31 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 684

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: V.25bis, or: Are CCITT and PTTs Totally Bonkers? (Joel M. Snyder)
    Re: V.25bis, or: Are CCITT and PTTs Totally Bonkers? (Toby Nixon)
    Re: V.25bis, or: Are CCITT and PTTs Totally Bonkers? (Fred R. Goldstein)
    V.32/V.32bis Modems With Direct T-1 Carrier Connection (Louis A. Mamakos)
    Re: Dialback Management (Eric Jacksch)
    Re: Voice Message Service (Jerry Leichter)
    Re: Slamming Prevention (Andrew Klossner)
    Re: How do You Pronounce "#" ([e-mail])
    Re: 2500 Picturephone in the News (Russell Kroll)
    Re: Question About PBX Phone (William Degnan)
    G.ross! (Dick Rawson)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: V.25bis, or: Are CCITT and PTTs Totally Bonkers?
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: University of Arizona MIS Department


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

> I borrowed a MultiTech V.32 modem to do some testing, and while
> waiting for something to complete I thumbed through the manual and
> came to a curious appendix at the end: "CCITT V.25bis Operation".

[Followed by detailed discussion of V.25bis operation.]

The CCITT is a treaty organization.  With the exception of the United
States, the representatives to the CCITT from the countries affected
are from the national PTTs.  The answer is, yes, it's just as ugly as
you think it is: Delayed and Forbidden numbers were something that no
one could agree on, therefore it was left as a matter for national
standardization.

PTTs are strange beasts.  That's what the Swiss PTT wanted, and so
that's what a V.25bis compatible modem must support.

To answer your questions:

> I assume that either I am not reading something right, or that V.25bis
> is optional/voluntary, or outdated, or something, but I really can't
> imagine what reasonable thoughts were occurring in the heads of the
> people that thought up this scheme.  Does anyone have any ideas about
> what CCITT was trying to accomplish here?

Whether it's optional or not depends on the country the modem is sold
in.  If you use a modem in a country (except, of course, for the
anarchic US), you have to follow their regulations.  It's not
outdated; it's new.  Claiming that CCITT reps are reasonable is not a
useful pasttime -- they're not.  The only thing that the CCITT was
trying to accomplish was to quiet the arguments, get the useful part
of the Recommendation put forward, and get on to real business.  What
the Swiss do in their own country is their own problem.

Remember, the CCITT meets in Geneva.

Have you ever tried to use a Cirrus/Plus/Star card in a Geneva bank
machine, one of which is in almost every downtown street corner?  You
can't; you need a UBS card.  Have you ever tried to get a VISA card in
Geneva?  There's a $200 annual fee.  Buy a Big Mac, fries, coke?  It
costs over $10.  Take a cab?  They take American Express (and cash).
Change money?  You can do it at machines on the street that take 25
different currencies, with multiple denominations of each---and do so
at competitive rates, 24 hours a day.  Find a bar open after midnight?
Hah.

An infinite forbidden number list in a modem with finite memory is not
out of character.


Joel M Snyder, 1103 E Spring Street, Tucson, AZ, 85719
Phone: [phone] (voice) .4095 (FAX) .4093 (data)
BITNET: jms@Arizona  Internet: [e-mail]  SPAN: 47541::telcom::jms

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

From: Toby Nixon <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: V.25bis, or: Are CCITT and PTTs Totally Bonkers?
Date: 5 Sep 92 12:50:13 GMT
Organization: Hayes Microcomputer Products, Norcross, GA


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

> OK, I can see that a PTT might want to have some reasonable
> regulations that restrict automatic redialing by modems and similar
> devices, to prevent older switch equipment from being overloaded.  But
>  ... a Forbidden Numbers list?  With numbers that stay on it FOREVER??
> Have these people totally taken leave of their senses?  If I dial up
> my local BBS in Zurich, and the system is down, and the modem doesn't
> answer four times, I am Forbidden from ever trying it again?

It's not nearly as bad as you make it out to be.  The "forbidden list"
is flushed by power-cycling the modem. The idea is to keep you from
getting some little old lady out of bed dozens of times because
somebody programmed the wrong number someplace (it doesn't really have
anything to do with switch loading).  They simply require some human
intervention, in hopes that the problem will be recognized and dealt
with. That said, however, I DO agree that it makes it nearly
impossible to get into busy BBS systems!

I should note that this idea of blacklisting numbers did not originate
in V.25bis, _and_ it is not restricted to V.25bis!  These are
regulations of the specific countries noted, not provisions of an
international standard; V.25bis is used in the USA, for example, but
with no blacklisting because the FCC doesn't require it.  AT command
set modems used in the European countries in question must also
enforce blacklisting, if the modems are going to be approved by the
telecom administration.

Of course, a lot of users get around this problem by purchasing US
modems, importing them themselves, and connecting them (in violation
of regulations).  Manufacturers don't encourage such actions, but we
know we can't prevent them, either.

I should note that automatic dialing equipment is about to be more
strictly regulated by the FCC as well, but there is a big loophole for
modems: equipment which is under "external computer control" is
exempted from the restrictions.


Toby Nixon, Principal Engineer      | Voice   [phone]  Telex 401243420
Hayes Microcomputer Products, Inc.  | Fax     [phone]  CIS   70271,404
P.O. Box 105203                     | BBS     [phone]  AT&T    !tnixon
Atlanta, Georgia  30348             | UUCP uunet!hayes!tnixon  Fido   1:114/15
USA                                 | Internet                [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Fred R. Goldstein)
Subject: Re: V.25bis, or: Are CCITT and PTTs Totally Bonkers?
Organization: Digital Equipment Corp., Littleton MA USA
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1992 20:30:42 GMT


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

[complaints about Forbidden Number List]

FWIW, the problem isn't V.25bis, and isn't even part of V.25bis, but
is in the modem in order to get approval for use in those countries.
V.25bis is a rather neat method of doing inband dialing on sync (and
async, via a different option set) lines.  If the modem is clever
enough to autorepeat the call, then it has to meet national
regulations, V.25bis or not.

I suspect that the "forever" rules are based on an expectation that
once the two minutes are up, it is possible that you've forgotten why
you're dialing and thus are expected to request the call again.  I
strongly suspect that being on the Forbidden list doesn't eternally
prevent re-requesting the call.  If it does, then just make sure that
you cancel the request after only _three_ retries!

Some national regs are weird.  V.25bis is catching on; don't blame it
for those regulatory problems.


Fred R. Goldstein   [e-mail]
k1io             or [e-mail]   voice:[phone]
Standard Disclaimer:  Opinions are mine alone; sharing requires permission.

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

From: Louis A. Mamakos <[e-mail]>
Subject: V.32/V.32bis Modems With Direct T-1 Carrier Connection
Date: Sat, 05 Sep 92 01:00:58 -0400


We're considering bringing in a bunch of phone lines to be used for a
modem pool in on T-1 circuite, rather than individual analog circuits.
The idea is to eliminate as much analog junk between the modems and
CO, as well as making management of the lines a bit easier to deal
with.

The usual approach to this sort of thing is to plug your T-1 line into
a D4 channel bank, giving you 24 two-wire voice circuits.  Now, it
certainly seems a shame to take all these perfectly good digitized
audio samples, turn them into an analog signal, only to be digitized
again by an A/D converted hooked to the DSP in a V.32bis modem.

I'm looking for vendors that build V.32/V.32bis modem banks that can
be directly connected to the T-1 circuit bearing the 24 voice
channels.  Does anyone have experience with such a thing?


Louis Mamakos   University of Maryland

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

Subject: Re: Dialback Management
From: [e-mail] (Eric Jacksch)
Date: Sat, 05 Sep 1992 01:20:07 -0400
Organization: Insomniacs' Guild, Toronto, Ontario, Canada


[e-mail] (Bob Ackley) writes:

> To eliminate that type of hacking possibility, it is mandatory that
> the dialback portion of the modem call is originated from a different
> line.

A company that I do custom software work for has yet another solution,
which is now in use at a government site which found callback units
both expensive and unreliable. Caller-ID information from Bell is
compared to a database and only pre-authorized callers even get to the
modem.  In addition, the phone numbers from which unauthozied calls
originate are logged.


Eric Jacksch, [e-mail]

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

Date: Sat, 05 Sep 92 09:49:58 EDT
From: Jerry Leichter <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Voice Message Service


As a general rule, I agree with John Higdon's complaints about LEC use
a regulated, protected base to get into unregulated markets.  However,
his recent tirades about a new Pac*Bell proposal to allow you to have
the system deliver a message if you call from a pay phone and there is
no answer is a bit off the mark.

In response to someone else's comment:

> Around here only the COCOTs offer that leave a message on busy
> service ...

Mr. Higdon remarks:

> Notice how as with the information providing business, the field has
> been tried and tested by true entrepreneurs who had to put up real
> risk capital to try out their ideas. Once a market seems to be viable,
> then the telco muscles its way into the market with its network
> control and ratepayer subsidization.

The first time I saw an example of this service, it was at an
SNET-owned and operated pay phone outside of Hartford, Connecticut
about two years ago.  Since I haven't seen it elsewhere even to this
date, I've always assumed that was a trial implementation.  The
service cost either 25 or 50 cents (I think the former) above the base
cost of the call (in-state calls only).  It was very nicely
implemented.

Unless someone can find an older COCOT implementation, I'm afraid the
points for "innovation" go to the operating companies here.

> Then it offers a better product at a cheaper price, putting the
> competition out of business.

Tell me, as a consumer, am I supposed to be upset about this?  The
traditional anti-monopoly line says "once the competition is out of
the business they'll raise prices and you won't have any alternative
but to pay".  If that's the claim, fine; but if the only complaint is
that:

> Of course it does this with free money and its superior network
> access.

then why should I, as a consumer, care?  Neither "choice" nor the
financial health of entrepreneurs in the telecom business is of
importance to me; product quality and price are what I care about.


Jerry

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

From: [e-mail] (Andrew Klossner)
Subject: Re: Slamming Prevention
Date: 04 Sep 92 19:27:47 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Tektronix, Wilsonville, Oregon


The local GTE (General Telephone of the Northwest) solicited
anti-slamming requests.  Each subscriber got a form that we could sign
and return to prevent a change in default LD carrier without written
instructions.  No charges were involved.

I suppose this could have been mandated by the state.  But, on the
whole, GTE residential service at (503-620) has been quite good to me.
I just built a new house and got outstanding cooperation and visits by
genuinely concerned service techs.  They each handed me their business
cards, complete with pager numbers, and asked me to call them
personally if the need arose.

It wasn't like this a few years ago when I had major problems at
(503-638), just a few miles away.  I wonder what changed ...


Andrew Klossner  ([e-mail])
     (uunet!tektronix!frip.WV.TEK!andrew)

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

Date: Fri, 04 Sep 92 19:33:34 EDT
Subject: Re: How do You Pronounce "#"
Organization: Syracuse University, Syracuse, NY
From: [e-mail] (The Virtual Kid)


In article <[e-mail]> disk![e-mail]
(tony) writes:

> The # sign?  The POUND sign!  <grin>

> At least according to my bank -- they say, "Enter the amount and
> then press the POUND sign."  Well, I know they aren't referring to the
> asterisk ... so IT must be the POUND sign.

Oh, I always thought the "#" sign was an abbrivation of the word
 -number- after all, some address books say "phone #:".


Send all flames to [e-mail]

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

Subject: Re: 2500 Picturephone in the News
From: unkaphaed![e-mail] (Russell Kroll)
Date: Fri, 04 Sep 92 22:38:25 GMT
Organization: Unka Phaed's UUCP Thingy


> 1) Is this a nationwide service, fed from a satellite, so that
> everyone all over the country (or continent, or wherever) is seeing
> the same video at the same time, and there is one master "jukebox"
> feeding these videos in response to te 900-number calls? Or is this a
> localized service in which each region has their own "jukebox", so
> that what I see here in St. Louis may be entirely different from what
> is seen in another region?

Here in the Houston area, there is a similar channel - channel 56.
Every so often, it says something like:

CHANNEL 56
K56DP
K04NW
CH. 04

It's called "The BOX" and it has three 900 numbers -- one for ordering
one video, one for two, and one for three. (I think)

Unfortunately, I can only pick it up if I do some strange things with
the UHF antenna. The main house antenna won't bring it in!


[e-mail] (Russell Kroll)
Unka Phaed's UUCP Thingy, [phone] in Houston, Texas
1200/2400/9600/14400 v.32bis/v.42bis

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

From: [e-mail] (William Degnan)
Date: 05 Sep 92  09:03:15
Subject: Re: Question About PBX Phone


On <Aug 30 00:44> UUCP (Tony Harminc <[e-mail]>) writes to
All:

> The worst case is, as was mentioned recently, if a Princess phone with
> lighted dial was installed at one time, and the dial light transformer
> is still connected to the second pair.  Then you may have a fire.  You
> could easily disconnect and tape the red/black leads inside the phone
> to be safe.

If plugged into a two-line jack (ala RJ-14) it could short line two when
the set is off hook.

But red/black? Wouldn't yellow/black achieve the same purpose but
allow the set to be used?


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

"Well-informed people know it is impossible to transmit the voice over
wires.  Even if it were, it would be of no practical value."
                                    -- Boston Post 1865

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

Date: Fri, 4 Sep 92 12:35:51 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Dick Rawson)
Subject: G.ross!


CCITT Recommendations have identifiers like X.25, Q.931, and so on,
but new recommendations usually don't have official identifiers
assigned until late in their development.  Until then, the Study
Groups may assign a temporary label that has some letters in place of
the unknown digits; usually they know that it will be an X, Q, G, etc.
series Recommendation.

I just came across Contribution 183 to Study Group XV, dated February
1992, giving a revised draft of something that Working Party-5/XV must
have been developing:

  Recommendation G.ross "Characteristics of Regenerative Optical
  Fibre Submarine Cable Systems."


Dick

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #684
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa22188;
          5 Sep 92 13:13 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA04645
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 5 Sep 1992 11:22:03 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA04105
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 5 Sep 1992 11:21:54 -0500
Date: Sat, 5 Sep 1992 11:21:54 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #685

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 5 Sep 92 11:22:00 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 685

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: ANI Long Distance Service: Okay or Beware? (Todd Inch)
    Re: Cellular Mobile Phone Use in Australia (Fred Wedemeier)
    Re: CWA Comments on AT&T Sales Office Closings (John Higdon)
    Re: Telecom Using Power Lines (Wayne Robert Law)
    Re: Finding Exchange Names (Dave Quinn)
    Re: San Francisco Area Exchange Names (John Palmer)
    Re: Is It OK To Leave Cell Phone Battery Charger Plugged In? (R. Greenberg)
    Re: Illinois Bell Now Allows Remote Call Forwarding Changes (L. Weinstein)
    Re: Illinois Bell Now Allows Remote Call Forwarding Changes (Henry Mensch)
    Re: A Bad Time to Fall Asleep (Paolo Bellutta)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Todd Inch)
Subject: Re: ANI Long Distance Service: Okay or Beware?
Organization: Maverick International Inc.
Date: Fri, 04 Sep 92 20:27:47 GMT


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

> I've been approached by a company called ANI (through a man in Chicago
> who apparently is a personal salesman for them, operating out of his
> own space) to change my business long distance service to ANI.  He
> claims that AT&T would still be carrying the calls but that I'd save
> 20% or so (on a $250 or so long distance bill) by using them instead.

> Does anyone know these guys?  Are they okay?

> Does what they said make sense?  Why would AT&T carry my calls for
> 20% below its own ProWatts rates through them?

> What's the catch?

There are actually two possibilities.  Probably ANI is an "aggregator"
a term which apparently only applies to AT&T because their tarrifs are
different than MCI, Sprint, etc.

Another possibility is that ANI has their own switch and gets volume
discounts for their outgoing calls.  In this case, you usually have to
dial the 800 or a local number for the company, then enter your
account number/pin, then enter the destination phone number.  A kludge
indeed.

But, these "resellers" (my term, probably incorrect) usually get the
best price they can and may have trunks to all of the big three, so if
they mentioned AT&T specifically, I doubt this is what you're working
with.

The one reseller who tried to sell me on this tried to act like he was
a IXC (Interexchange carrier, e.g. AT&T, MCI, etc) but when I
specifically asked what his business was classified as and gave
"aggregator" and "IXC" as examples, he was confused and said he was
just a "phone company" -- and he was the sole proprietor, as far as I
could tell!  American Sharecom used to be one of these.

The quality of the reseller's service will be low because they have to
add at least one extra switch between you and your destination.

The reseller salesperson/owner tried to make dialing the 14 or so
extra digits and lack of one-plus dialing (he doesn't have
arrangements with the local telco to offer one-plus dialing) a
"feature" because you can keep your existing long distance company for
"emergencies".  It really spurred him on that soon our company will
have a smart enough PBX to automatically dial the 14 digits for us.

They had some really screwy plans, primarily for residential and
smaller businesses, where you could make up to X number of calls per
month, each up to one hour.  He said you COULD NOT go beyond the
limits of your plan. I didn't ask if the switch would drop your call
after one hour and your billing number was locked out after X calls,
or if he just stung you with enormous "overtime" rates.  He claimed a
lot of residential customers like having a fixed LD phone bill each
month rather than one which always changes depending on the number of
calls, etc.

The final scary straw was that the contract read that you were
responsible for all calls charged to your billing number REGARDLESS of
anything.  It implied that security was so good on their end that if
there was a problem it was your fault.  I didn't even ask about such
amenities as credit for wrong numbers ... I had to hang up on him
mid-sentence when he wouldn't take "no" for an answer.

(Switching gears back to the aggregator now ...)

I did a little research after an aggregator approached our company.  I
found:

AT&T accidentally or otherwise wrote a loophole into their tarrifs such
that a bunch of small companies can form a "co-op" (or some other legal
entity consisting of a loose relationship -- I don't know the proper
term) and volume discounts apply to the co-op's volume rather than the
individual companies volumes, even though the companies are billed
individually and have different AT&T accounts.

The aggregator either is the co-op or at least runs it.  The physical
lines, dialing instructions, and relationship between a company and
AT&T is the same whether businesses work with AT&T directly or are
part of the "co-op".  The aggregator has NO telecom equipment
whatsoever, they just write up contracts and inform AT&T that you're
part of them now.

So, if ANI is an aggregator, and you're already with AT&T, it's not a
matter of changing your LD to ANI, but rather adding ANI in.  Your LD
is still actually provided by AT&T.

In our case, we were warned that our actual sales rep at AT&T may
change because being part of the aggregator/co-op would make us a
different class of business (e.g. change from minor accounts to major
corporate accounts or somesuch) but I was told by both the aggregator
and AT&T themselves that essentially nothing would change except the
rates - billing is still from AT&T.  I can't remember if the
aggregator charges a percentage of total, percentage of savings, or
flat rate, but I recall that in our case the proposed gross savings
would be about 30%, of which we would keep 20% and the aggregator
would keep about 10%.

BUT, the salesperson did mention something offhandedly that caused me
to look at the contract a little closer.  Apparently if the co-op goes
bankrupt, the co-op members may be liable for debts.  I'm a little
fuzzy on this, but I'd have a lawyer look over the aggregator
contract.  Otherwise it looked like a legitimate good deal to me.

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

From: [e-mail] (Fred Wedemeier)
Subject: Re: Cellular Mobile Phone Use in Australia
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: TI Telecom Systems, Dallas
Date: Sat, 5 Sep 1992 06:41:55 GMT


In article [e-mail], [e-mail] (David E A Wilson)
writes:

> At June 30 this year Australia had 441,256 mobile phones in operation,
> up 51% over the previous year. It is not just yuppies either, many
> blue- collar workers are finding it an essential tool of their trade.

Interesting statistics... Can you give us some typical fees, e.g.
monthly service, roaming fees, per-minute cost?

In Dallas, Texas:

Typical monthly: $32 - 39 depending on the contract
        roaming  $3/day
        connect  $.30/min during the day
                 $.10 - .20 evenings/weekends with some contracts
                 free evenings/weekends with two or three year
                 service contract up to $.99/minute when roaming

Thanks.


Fred Wedemeier    pho: 214-997-3213     fax: [phone]
                  timsg: fcw            inet: [e-mail]

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

Date: Sat, 5 Sep 92 00:21 PDT
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: CWA Comments on AT&T Sales Office Closings


[e-mail] (Phillip Dampier) quotes:

> STATEMENT FROM CWA ON AT&T SALES OFFICE CLOSINGS

> "The union has argued against these kind of consolidations and
> re-organizations in the past, because they ultimately work against
> AT&T's best interest."

Not to mention the interests of the CWA members. It is an unfortunate
fact of life that competition requires a company to trim down and
tighten up. Many on this forum have complained that AT&T has not yet
learned how to compete. Maybe, but the company is getting there. And
the truth of the matter is that if the people are not needed, then
there is absolutely no justification for keeping them on the payroll.

Although the point is apparently debatable, IMHO industry is not just
another form of charity for "the people". If personel are not required
to provide a desired level of service, then they are expendable. It
can be argued that AT&T's level of service will suffer, but that is a
matter to be resolved in the marketplace, not in CWA press releases.

And why is AT&T singled out? GTE has planned a similar magnitude of
displacement for its employees in California. Where is the CWA press
release about that? Or are GTE employees not represented by CWA
(meaning of course that they don't count)?

> AT&T will announce next week the closing of six of its fourteen
> customer sales and service offices.  The closing offices employ about
> 860 workers represented by the Communications Workers of America.

This is the technological age. There will be much more of this in the
future. Anyone who fails to keep up with the times and does not keep
his skills current will find himself out on his ear. And there is
nothing the unions can do about it. Job security no longer resides in
union membership, but in the skill and usefulness of the individual.

And it is about time.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Wayne Robert Law)
Subject: Re: Telecom Using Power Lines
Organization: RMIT Computer Centre, Melbourne Australia.
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1992 21:28:49 EST


[e-mail] (SAITOWITZ L S) writes:

> Hi, just a quick question, has anyone ever heard of sending telephony
> down the power lines?

Within Victoria here in Australia, the power authority uses it's high
voltage lines as trunks in it's ETN network.

On it's 500kv, 330kv & 220kv lines rf chokes are used to pass power
but block signals in the range 100kHz to 400kHz. The telephony signals
then appear across capacitive voltage dividers, a tap of which is
isolated and fed from the electrical switchyard to FDM multiplex
equipment. The mux gear is a single channel system.

Each system muxes a 4khz channel made up of a 300Hz - 2.7kHz speech
channel and the balance of capacity is taken up by signalling and
telemetry channels. These channels start at 2820Hz and are spaced
every 120Hz upto 3900Hz. The 3060Hz frequency being used for E/M
signalling.

These telephone trunks are connected to a network of AT&T Dimension
CSS201 PBX's running an adapted software package FP8-SECV which has
been customised to suit some of their operational needs. Two RMATS-1
system are installed to provide maintenance and administration. One in
Morwell and the other in Melbourne.

No doubt other power authorities use similiar systems throughout the
world this should give you some brief details of some of the
possibilities. The power authority also uses carrier quads and optic
fibres imbedded within the earth wire that runs above the lines for
comms as well.


Regards,

Wayne

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

From: [e-mail] (Dave Quinn)
Subject: Re: Finding Exchange Names
Date: 5 Sep 1992 10:24:49 -0500
Organization: Texas A&M University


Exchange names?  As in wire centers?  CLLI codes?  I have not heard
of the term "exchange name" before.  I have been somewhat lucky, in
that each telco I have resided under, they provide wire center
listings in the frontal portion of my business pages.


Dave


[Moderator's Note: Well, the phrase 'exchange name' seems to be used
interchangeably to mean a few things, all of which relate to the
identification of the wire center. Many of the old exchange names in
Chicago from the days when we had names rather than numbers were also
(and are still) the wire center names also. For example, the old
exchange of ROGers Park (now 312-764) was/is in the central office
which is known as Chicago-Rogers Park but then and now it included not
only 764, but AMBassador (262), SHEldrake (743), HOLlycourt (465),
BRIargate (274) and several other recent number-only additions.
Likewise Chicago-Edgewater includes EDGewater (334) but also UPTown
(878), RAVenswood (728) -- sometimes known as PATrick from back in
1967 when my phone number was 728-7425 for a brief time -- LOngbeach,
SUnnyside and others. Chicago-Lakeview included LAKeview (525) as well
as GRAceland (472), BITtersweet (348), DIVersey (248), EAStgate (327),
and others. Everyone here is also served by what the tariffs refer to
as the "Chicago Exchange".  So take your pick!   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (John Palmer)
Subject: Re: San Francisco Area Exchange Names
Organization: CAT-TALK Conferencing Network, Detroit, MI
Date: Sat, 05 Sep 92 09:38:18 GMT


In Detroit, we live in an area where the exchange name used to be
TUXedo (881,882,883,884,885,886). However, the official name of the CO
is DTRT Niagra (DTRTMINICGO -- still a 1ESS). I used to think that the
CO name was the name of a street on which the CO was located (or a
street near the CO), but there isn't a TUXEDO in that area.

Most of our Edison substations are named for the street that they are
either on or close to.


[Moderator's Note: But here in Chicago we had a 'true TUXedo' as in
889. The CO's here were variously named for the street they were
located on or the neighborhood; sometimes an historical person or
event (i.e. HAymarket [riots]; [Mayor Carter] HARrison.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Rich Greenberg)
Subject: Re: Is It OK To Leave Cell Phone Battery Charger Plugged In?
Organization: Hatch Usenet and E-mail.  Playa del Rey, CA
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1992 19:43:07 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(scott.d.brenner) writes:

> I have an OKI 891 transportable cellular phone that has a 12V NiCd
> battery (number RP 9021A/64-21055, if it matters).  The charger for
> this battery (model RP9022A) doesn't have any warnings against leaving
> it plugged in all the time.  My question is: would this be all right
> (leaving it plugged in)?

Depends on how "smart" the charger is.  If it cuts off the charging
current to a tiny trickle after charging, its ok.  If not, it will
cook the battery.  Caution: Some "smart" chargers are a bit stupid in
that if you remove and then replace a fully charged battery, it will
start a full charge cycle all over.  This will NOT do the battery any
good.

> On a related matter, why does my FM radio at work seem to get much
> better reception when the cell phone battery charger is plugged into
> the same power strip?

Most home FM radios use the line cord as the antenna.  By plugging in
the charger, you increase the size of the "antenna".  The portion of
the electrical wireing inside the wall is (usually) inside shielding
(bx, flex, or conduit).


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

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

Subject: Re: Illinois Bell Now Allows Remote Call Forwarding Changes
Date: Sat, 05 Sep 92 09:55:18 PDT
From: [e-mail]


Greetings.  Remote call forwarding, as described, could be a very
handy service.  But a few questions pop immediately to mind:

1) How long is the PIN?  (Four digits is not sufficient!)

2) Can the subscriber change the PIN through some relatively "secure"
   mechanism?

3) Is there any mechanism to notify the subscriber or take other
   actions if there are a large number of incorrect PINs entered
   for a number?  (E.g., by someone with a PC running through the codes
   night after night trying to find someone's PIN?)

4) Can you disable or "opt-out" of the remote feature entirely if you don't
   want it to be available for your number, short of eliminating call
   forwarding from your service entirely?

Let's see how well IBT thought this one out.

 --Lauren--


[Moderator's Note: The remote feature is only turned on if someone
wants to use it; It is only a four digit PIN, however that is a
compromise between convenience and security which seems to work okay
for the majority of subscribers. The number (different for each CO)
that you dial into to use the remote feature *is* equipped to trap
information about who is calling it; I'd be reluctant to change your
call forwarding without permission, have you complain to IBT about it
and have them respond 'oh, it was changed from over at Patrick's house
about three in the morning ...'. All in all, the security is average
and the convenience it affords is above average. A nice trade off.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Henry Mensch)
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 92 11:19:31 -0700
Subject: Re: Illinois Bell Now Allows Remote Call Forwarding Changes
Reply-To: [e-mail]


TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]> writes:

> There is no additional charge for this service. It is being offered
> to all Call Forwarding subscribers.

*no additional charge*

Does this happen routinely with your phone company?  No additional
charge for something *useful*?  I'm astounded.


# henry mensch / booz, allen & hamilton, inc.  / <[e-mail]>


[Moderator's Note: IBT has always been considered a very progressive
and advanced company. After all, ESS started here, in Morris, IL back
in the 1960's ... and we had it routine use in various exchanges as
early as 1974 downtown. We had lots of centrex in use in the 1960's.
The company has always been involved in the community with numerous
charitable donations and services.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Paolo Bellutta)
Subject: Re: A Bad Time to Fall Asleep
Organization: Oregon Health Sciences University
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1992 16:43:29 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Michael Schuh) writes:

> Feyman mentions in one of his books, using the denisty of phone lines
> to find the way back to town.

In 1988 I was driving through NorthWest Territories (Canada) and my
"town detector" was the radio on the car in continuous search mode in
*AM*.  When the radio locked to a station I knew a town was 20-30
miles ahead.


Paolo Bellutta ---------- [e-mail]
B.I.C.C - Oregon Health Sciences University
3181 SW Sam Jackson Park Rd. - Portland, OR
tel: [phone] --- fax: [phone]


[Moderator's Note: Ah yes, what a beautiful place on this planet! I
was very fortunate to ride with a friend the full distance between
Fort Nelson, BC and Seattle, WA down a *long* stretch of very deserted
highway in 1968. Signs said the next place to stop for food, car
service or to make wee-wee was fifty miles away. Talk about desolation!
We'd ride for an hour at a time without seeing another car on the
road. We were going to start from Fort Nelson at 9 PM that night and
were strongly discouraged from doing so; we waited until 6 AM the next
morning when at least *someone* would eventually see us if we got into
trouble with the car, etc. I'd love to return there someday.  PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #685
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa28739;
          6 Sep 92 22:32 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA21897
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 6 Sep 1992 20:39:03 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA28633
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 6 Sep 1992 20:38:54 -0500
Date: Sun, 6 Sep 1992 20:38:54 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #686

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 6 Sep 92 20:39:00 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 686

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Administrivia - 678 Misnumbered as 683 (TELECOM Moderator)
    Latest Cuba - US Telephone Situation (Don Kimberlin, FIDO via G. Thurman)
    New Book: Federal Telecommunications Law (Scott Loftesness)
    US to UK Conversion Hints (John Pettitt)
    Live AT&T Opertaors From Pay Phones (Joe Rice)
    TIE 820 Phone System For Sale or Trade (Jason Galanter)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sun, 6 Sep 1992 09:53:00 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Subject: Administrivia - 678 Misnumbered as 683


The original transmission of 678 failed for some reason. Following issue
683 I was alerted to it and resent 678 to the entire list ... but although
the Digest itself said 678, the envelope said 683 ! ... sorry about
that.  Please take the retransmitted copy of 678 (I assume you did not
get the original) and change the envelope so it reads 678 also. Thanks.


PAT

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

Date: Sat, 5 Sep 92 16:26 GMT
From: George S Thurman <[e-mail]>
Subject: Latest Cuba -- US Telephone Situation


Here is an article from the FIDONET SHORTWAVE ECHO that I thought
TELECOM Digest readers would find of interest ...


 Msg#:14519 *SHORTWAVE*
 09-02-92 21:55:00
 From: DON KIMBERLIN
  To: ALL
 Subj: TECHIE REALPOLITIK


It appears that AT&T has gotten itself into a bit of a bind about
connectivity between the U.S. and Cuba, in a fall from one of the
world's catbird seats into one of its stickier wickets.

Within a week's time, Hurricane Andrew helped the whole matter turn
around.

Back in pre-Castro Cuba, AT&T and ITT had enjoyed a 50/50 split of
ownership of the Cuban-American Telephone Company.  Right up through
the Batista dictatorship, that deal had made Cuba a willing market for
AT&T's Western Electric-made hardware and a willing correspondent for
the international services sold by AT&T and ITT's various telephone
and telegraph entities.

By 1959, the telecommunications bonds between Cuba and the U.S. had
grown through several generations of shortwave radio and a couple of
generations of submarine cable (from Key West reaching 78 miles
underwater to Havana, providing all of 12 voice channels and
supplemented by a Western Union telegraph cable of similar length), to
the point that vastly expanded telephone communications were
reasonable to provide.

In 1959, AT&T and Cuban-American opened up what was at the time, one
of the world's great advances in public dial telephone service -- a
900 Mhz tropospheric scatter over-the-horizon radio system capable of
bearing 960 dial telephone channels...or one video signal. (A similar,
smaller tropo scatter to Nassau, Bahamas also was built operating in
the 2 gHz region.)

Now, both the Bahamas and Cuba had instant, direct-dialed
communications in copious quantity via the U.S. to the world.  Via the
U.S. radio terminals at Florida City, FL just two microwave hops south
of Miami along the route to Key West.  And, both correspondents made
good use of their broadband links to the outside world.  It was indeed
a breakthrough in international communications for 1959.  Florida
City's drive-in movie-like parabolic sections were a showplace on AT&t
publications and in AT&T executive tours.

But, when Fidel Castro toppled the Batista dictatorship in Cuba very
shortly thereafter, the troposcatter between Florida City and Guanabo
(outside Havana), the troposcatter link to the U.S. became both a
prize and a symbolic political thorn for both countries.

First off, AT&T and the U.S. had to keep the link up, and in doing so,
it provided a handly way for Castro and his government to dial Rome,
Paris, Madrid, London -- and even Moscow -- while the hated Americans
had to handle the calls, and wonder when they would get paid for them.
At the same time, incoming calls from the U.S. made it easy for
expatriate Cuban refugees to just dial up relatives and even
counter-revolutionaries from their new homes and offices in the U.S.
Florida City operated that way for more than 30 years, and its traffic
volumes were huge.

It was, in fact, so popular that by 1966, AT&T had to do something
about the gigantic unpaid settlements for years of calls made out of
Cuba to the whole world -- on AT&T's tab with all the world's other
communications entities.  The balance owing AT&T was enormous, and
Castro had no intention of paying.  Obviously, his huge unpaid balance
was simply an item he felt was tit for tat.  It's easy to see how
Castro (and certainly his Russian masters) must have enjoyed the dual
economic "get-back" and embarrassment Florida City was causing the
hated U.S. during the deeper years of the Cold War.

Finally, after years of no successful moves toward settling the
balance, AT&T did something Castro probably never thought they would
do.  AT&T set up a plan and got approval from the government in
Washington to shut down the system ... until Castro would come to
terms.

It was only necessary to to so for a few hours. Obviously, Castro
needed it badly, and all within one day, Florida City was shut down
and restarted after Castro's government agreed that all future calls
had to be paid for from the U.S. end; that is, pre-paid on all calls
to Cuba, and collect on all calls out of Cuba, with the proceeds being
applied to settling Castro's debt to AT&T.  It would seem the hated
Yankees had won, and Florida City operated that way clear up to
Hurricane Andrew.

Things got old and creaky, and circuits got noisy, but continued to
function enough for people to shout on and communicate.  Very early
on, the Cubans shut down one of their two transmitters to save power
and parts, so the link had no diversity, which would show in Florida's
frequently foggy weather.  But, the traffic volumes remained high, and
AT&T must have felt secure.

AT&T may have felt a bit too secure, however, when in 1990 the Cuban
government advertised to the world for someone to provide another
international outlet for Cuba.  AT&T's response was to go ahead and
lay a used fiber optic cable from West Palm Beach down to Cuban
territorial waters and give the Cubans an "opportunity" to let it be
completed to replace the Florida City link.

But AT&T's skills in international competition really are still
neonatal, and they didn't count on any meaningful competition.  The
result was that Castro's government accepted a contract with
ItalCable, Italy's equivalent of AT&T's international division, and
ItalCable built a large satellite earth station linking Cuba to the
world via Rome -- with full world-reaching DDD.  Castro no longer
needed the Florida City link; something AT&T hadn't counted on.
However, by 1990, the "war" between Cuba and Washington had mellowed
to one that permitted Castro to tolerate its existence -- so long as
it didn't become a bother.  AT&T was merely the backup route now, and
Castro had no need for AT&T's "opportunity" which lay dormant under
the tropical ocean.

But, Florida City was becoming another sort of bother for AT&T, which
felt differently, and didn't properly realize it was no longer in
controi of Cuba's international communications destiny.  Florida City
was sitting there occupying frequencies that BellSouth now needed for
its new cellular telephone service.  AT&T was in Washington, regrett-
ing it simply could not shut down one of the U.S.'s links to a foreign
country.

(All along, once the Italian route was opened, AT&T could have set up
an operating agreement to transit calls with Cuba via Rome, but pride
can and does keep politicians and corporations from swallowing bitter
pills without help.  So, even though alternate routes to Havana were
available, AT&T never set up agreements for third-country routes to
Cuba.)

Enter Hurricane Andrew on the scene.  Andrew toppled AT&T's microwave
tower at Goulds, FL, between Miami and Florida City, shutting down
microwave connectivity to both the Florida City tropo station and the
Florida Keys, a route that has to follow a narrow path of semi-dry
land and stepping-stones of islands down to Key West ... there's just
no alternate physical pathway down the Keys, so everything --
electricity, water, telephones -- all run along the narrow roadway and
under the bridges of U.S. 1 leading to Key West.  AT&T lost its
connectivity to Cuba.

The world's telephone network operates internally with far less
control than most outsiders would know.  That lack of control provides
convenience for excess traffic to momentarily "overflow" to other
routes via third nations, and the CCITT standards even allow for
occasional spills of such traffic, requiring each nation to handle
occasional and casual calls for the other partners.  It's also a
weakness that lets phreaks do their thing once they can get into the
innards of their own nation's dial network, because a few calls
transiting each nation are permitted without question.  But, when a
regular liaison is to be set up between two nations, any "transit"
nation is supposed to be paid its share for handling the calls.  A
"transit operating agreement" has to be set up.  So long as Florida
City functioned, AT&T did not have to face the truth of its loss as
the world's prime route to Cuba.  And, the volume of calls between
Cubans on both sides of the political fence made it convenient.

But, Andrew's stoppage of Florida City caused a problem that didn't
reach the nightly national news.  Thousands and thousands of Cubans
still dialed for Havana daily.  AT&T had a particular problem in its
network with those thousands of calls routed to Florida with no place
to go. The traffic spilled out to alternate routes that normally
serviced Madrid, Paris, Rome and other European capitals -- all of
which now focused on Rome as the main route to Cuba.  Congestion
occurred between European cities as the large influx originating in
the U.S. and Canada went across the Atlantic.

By Tuesday, September 1, the Europeans were complaining and
threatening to limit U.S. calls from AT&T into their networks.  AT&T
had no "operating agreements" for them to handle transit traffic to
Rome and Cuba.  (No small part of the problem is a consistent one that
occurs in international transits.  Everbody on the route wants a 50%
share.  That loses money on the first transit, but when a call has to
spill out such that four places are involved, it's downright
expensive, something nobody wants a piece of.

So, by Tuesday:

   a.) Hurricane Andrew's impact had been felt in the European
telephone network, and Europeans were threatening to choke back AT&T
traffic into their nets;

   b.) Competitors like MCI and Sprint were chortling a bit as their
traffic went into Europe unimpeded, since they handled no calls to
Havana, instead dumping their loads at AT&T;

   c.) Stepchild BellSouth was hoping AT&T would give up on Florida
City, so they could open up some cellular channels in that area, and

   d.) AT&T was trying to find a way, without talking directly, to get
Castro to accept use of the fiber cable lying fallow under the ocean.

Now that you know, as Paul Harvey puts it, "The Rest of the Story," I
hope you'll enjoy understanding more fully what bits of news you do
hear about AT&T's loss to Hurricane Andrew at Florida City.  It's
bound to become a political debacle before it's over.


WM v2.04/92-0315
 * Origin: Borderline! BBS Kannapolis,N.C. [phone] (1:379/37)

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

From: [e-mail] (Scott Loftesness)
Subject: New Book: Federal Telecommunications Law
Date: Sun, 6 Sep 92 17:32:24 PDT
Organization: Glenbrook Systems, Inc.
Reply-To: [e-mail]


I am pleased to recommend an excellent new book the subject of the US
telecommunications law.  The book, titled "Federal Telecommunications
Law" (ISBN 0-316-48676-0 published by Little, Brown & Company), was
written by Michael K. Kellogg, John Thorne, and Peter W. Huber.
Kellogg is a partner at Mayer, Brown & Platt; Thorne is Assistant
General Counsel, Bell Atlantic; and Huber is Senior Fellow, Manhattan
Institute, and Of Counsel, Mayer, Brown & Platt.  Huber is also known
for authoring "The Geodesic Network" for the Justice Department a few
years back.

Chapters:

1. An Industry in Transition
2. The Powers of the FCC
3. Antitrust
4. Restructuring the Bell System
5. Equal Access Under the Divestiture Decree
6. The Line of Business Restrictions
7. Interpreting, Enforcing, and Modifying the Divestiture Decree
8. The GTE Decree
9. Pricing
10. Telecommunications Equipment
11. Enhanced Services
12. Long-Distance Service
13. Mobile Telephony
14. Telephony and Cable Television
15. International Issues
16. Privacy

Appendices include the text of the AT&T and GTE Consent Decrees.

I ordered the text in response to a direct solicitation from Little,
Brown and have not seen the text yet in any bookstores locally (San
Francisco Bay Area).

The book is extremely well written and a real delight to read.  It
helps clarify the nuances of US federal telecommunications law.
Highly recommended for readers interested in understanding more about
the current -- and projected -- state of telecommunications regulation
in the US.


Scott Loftesness ([e-mail])
Redwood City, California
Others: [e-mail], [e-mail]

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

Date: Sat, 5 Sep 92 21:17 PDT
From: [e-mail] (John Pettitt)
Subject: US to UK Conversion Hints


Guide to converting things from the US to the UK and back:

1) All things electrical will need some attention befor use in the UK.
Firstly the supply voltage is different (240v instead of 110v) this is
important.  There are two ways to fix this, if your equipment is
switchable you switch it (most computers are - Apple being a notable
exception).  If your equipment is not switchable you need a
transformer.

Low power transformers are easy to buy in `tourist' type shops.
Higher power units can be had from more specialized sources (Radio
Spares in the UK has a good range).

In addition to the voltage difference the line frequency is 50hz
instead of 60hz.  This will cause your clock radio not to work even if
you have a transformer.  Some equipment will not work on 110v 50hz
(which is what your transformer will give you) the change in frequency
has been known to melt power supplies (I have seen this it's not
pretty).

WARNING - unless you know what you are doing don't mess with 240v
supplies -- they bite.  I take no responsibility for your damaged
equipment.  This advise is worth what I charged you for it :-)

2) Your television, VCR etc are junk in the UK.  The UK uses the PAL
system (Phase Alternating Line or Pay for Additional Luxury) where the
US uses NTSC (National Television Sub Committe or Never Twice Same
Color).  Other parts of the world use different versions of PAL (the
sound sub carrier is different) or the french SECAM system.

3) Subject to power requirments your US phone will work just fine in
the UK (you will need to change the plug).  Tone dialing is available
in quite a lot of places, to find out if you have it try it.  It may
help when ordering service from BT (British Telecom) to ask for a
`digital' line.  Where I was (Ascot) there were two switches, one
system X and one older, unspecified analog type.

If you are on a newer switch (call it an exchange if you want BT to
understand you) most nowmal features (three way, memories, call
waiting etc) will be available for a price.  Call completion on the
newer BT switches is VERY fast.  You will get a ring before you have
your finger off the button from the last digit if the other party is
also on a digital switch.  International call setup is also very good
(13 seconds to California is typical).

There is no flat rate local service and calling is expensive by US
standards (although not bad compared to Germany).  The only alternate
long distance provider (mercury) requires you to dial a long code
before each call (you can get phones that will do this for you).

The bad news is that all the things that won't work cost twice as much
in the UK as the US - expect $ = Pound when looking at prices of HiFi,
TV etc (current exchange rate is $2 = 1 Pound).

In the end it comes down to how much mess (transformers etc) you are
prepared to put up with.  We transfered from the UK to the US and left
almost all of our 240v stuff in the UK because it was not worth the
hassle (and replacements are soooo much less expensive in the US).

Hope this helps.  If anybody has specific questions on moving from the
US to the UK or back please feel free to mail me (I have moved both
ways in the last six years).


Regards,

John Pettitt    [e-mail]   Archer N81034  apple!starnet!jpp
Fax:   [phone]   Voice: +1 415 967 UNIX

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: Sun Sep 6 16:54:11 PDT 1992
Subject: Live AT&T Opertaors From Pay Phones


It appears that when direct dialing any LD call from a Pac*Bell pay
phone one now gets a live AT&T operator on the line who announces the
charges and (occasionally) asks if you wish to actually use coins.  As
of only a couple of weeks ago, an automated system was used to recite
the charges.

Does anyone have any information on why this switch has been made?  It
seems to me that it is a waste of resources by AT&T, especially when
they are cutting back their workforce.


Joe Rice     [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Jason Galanter)
Subject: TIE 820 Phone System For Sale or Trade
Date: 06 Sep 92 03:44:47 GMT
Organization: University of Pittsburgh


I have a TIE 820 phone system for sale.  It includes the following
components:

TIE 820 Series-4 KSU
1 ETSU-D Series-3
1 EICU-B Series-4
4 ESTU-C Series-2
1 ESTU-A Series 5
1 ECMU-D Series-5
1 EDTU-A Series-4
2 ECOU-C Series 3
TIE 820 Power supply unit
14 W-820 Telephone sets
1 1236 Display console

The power cable that connects the KSU to the Power supply is missing,
however I assume that this is probably one of the least expensive
components of the system.  No reasonable offer refused.

Contact Jason @ [e-mail] or 412-521-6042

Jason Galanter / N3HNR     [e-mail]
322 Mall Blvd., Suite 306  [e-mail]
Monroeville, PA 15146      [phone]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #686
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa03240;
          7 Sep 92 0:49 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA08971
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 6 Sep 1992 22:57:38 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA06187
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 6 Sep 1992 22:57:30 -0500
Date: Sun, 6 Sep 1992 22:57:30 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #687

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 6 Sep 92 22:57:36 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 687

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Labor Day, 1992 (TELECOM Moderator)
    Announcing the Internet AUDIOTEX Mailing List! (Lauren Weinstein)
    313 to Split to 810 (Jim Rees)
    Loading Auth Codes Into CO Switch (Morris Galloway Jr.)
    Call Forwarding Help Needed For Red Cross Office (Kevin Day)
    900-555-XXXX (Information) (Ralph Hyre)
    Telephone Line "Wink" (Bob Kupiec)
    Rolm PBX Question (Dave Levenson)
    TRT (was Call Home Country Codes from UK and France) (John R. Levine)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sun, 6 Sep 1992 22:19:33 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Subject: Labor Day, 1992


Once again, the end of summer ... and the holiday which has become a
chance for one last fling in the sun but which was originally intended
to celebrate the contributions of working men and women to our
society.

And this year it seems the picture is more gloomy than ever: a high
rate of unemployment in the United States; an economy that is very
sluggish; thousands of newly unemployed people in south Florida whose
places of employment simply up and vanished in Hurricane Andrew two
weeks ago. Yes, many of these folks are finding work in the newly
booming construction industry in what the {Chicago Sun Times} today
referred to as the 'newly formed third-world country of Dade ...'
thousands of working men and women who had everything they've worked
for all their lives taken away in a minute by a violent and angry
Mother Nature ...

It used to be a job with AT&T meant job security for life ... but no
more. How long will it be until the Mother Company has totally
automated *everything* and only the Chairman and a handful of close
associates are left?  Don't say it can't happen ... they said that
about a total conversion to automatic calling back in the 1930-40 era.
Of course back in the 1930's they also said no one would ever unionize
AT&T.  They said it couldn't be done; and the workers of that era who
signed union pledge cards and set about organizing Bell were laughed
at and mocked by supervisors and co-workers alike.

When I started my working career, manual 'cordboard' style
switchboards were in evidence everywhere; we had no terminals for data
entry and very few places had computers of any sort. Hundreds of
clerks sat around all day doing very tedious jobs adding columns of
figures and making entries in ledger books ... there were no handheld
calculators, no home computers, no answering machines, no portable or
cellular phones .. and of course, there was just One System ... one
way of doing things where telecom was concerned.

Well, happy holiday, everyone!  Take a minute and pause to reflect on
the contributions of American workers to our society today.


Patrick Townson

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

Date: Sun, 6 Sep 92 18:28 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Lauren Weinstein)
Subject: Announcing the Internet AUDIOTEX mailing list!


Greetings.  This message is to announce the formation of the Internet
AUDIOTEX mailing list.

The AUDIOTEX list is an Internet discussion forum for topic areas
relating to the field of "audiotex" systems.  "Audiotex" is a general
term covering the broad area of telephone-based information systems of
a wide variety of types.  The distinguishing characteristic of an
audiotex system is usually the use of either recorded or synthesized
voice to output information to the user, with either telephone
touch-tone keys or in some cases voice recognition systems being used
for input.  Voicemail systems, information collection/retrieval
systems, and entertainment services are all examples of audiotex
applications.

All aspects of audiotex systems, including currently deployed systems,
research and development issues, user interface design, applications
concepts, security considerations, etc. are valid topics for
discussion in this mailing list.

At the current time, the AUDIOTEX mailing list is a direct
distribution, non-moderated list with very little traffic.  If traffic
becomes considerable the list will probably be converted to a digest
format.

Subscriptions to the AUDIOTEX mailing list are controlled by an
automated "listserv" system.  To get more information about the
AUDIOTEX list, please send a message to:

    [e-mail]

with the line:

    information audiotex

in the BODY of the message (the "Subject" field of the message is
ignored).  To subscribe, please send a message to the same address
above but with the line:

    subscribe audiotex <your full name>

where <your full name> is replaced by your actual name, for example:

    subscribe audiotex Larry Fine

Thanks much!

 --Lauren--

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

From: [e-mail] (Jim Rees)
Subject: 313 to Split to 810
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: University of Michigan IFS Project
Date: Sun, 6 Sep 1992 17:55:03 GMT


This story appeared in {News & Views,} Michigan Bell's billing insert.
I didn't see any copyright on it, and I assume they would like wide
distribution, so I scanned it in.

        NEW AREA CODE WILL ADD MILLIONS OF TELEPHONE NUMBERS

In 1994, a new area code will be added to southeast lower Michigan --
810.  The new area code is needed because southeastern Michigan is
running out of phone numbers.  The increasing popularity of fax
machines, cellular phones, pagers and computers has used up telephone
numbers at a rapid pace over the past few years.  Establishing the new
810 area code will create more than three million additional telephone
numbers.

Some important things you should know about the creation of the new
810 area code are:

+ It won't raise anyone's rates -- even if you have to dial an area
  code for a number that you didn't have to before;

+ No one's local calling area will change; and,

+ Your basic, seven digit phone number will stay the same.

Who will get the 810 code?

Customers in Oakland, Macomb, Sanilac, Lapeer, St. Clair and Genesee
counties, as well as small sections of Saginaw, Shiawassee and
Livingston counties.

And who will keep the 313 code?  Customers in Wayne, Washtenaw and
Monroe counties, as well as small sections of Jackson and Lenawee
counties.

A seven-member advisory committee spent months studying and talking to
customers before recommending how best to establish the new area code.

The addition of the new area code will affect millions of people, not
just in southeastern Michigan but across the country. But from now
until Aug. 10, 1994 (that's 8-10-94), when the change will occur,
Michigan Bell will carry out a massive program to educate customers.

In the meantime, if you've got a question about the new 810 area code,
just call us toll-free 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. Monday through Friday at 1
800 831-8989.

We're committed to helping you make the transition to the new 810 area
code as smooth as possible.  We're just a call away.

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

From: [e-mail] (Morris Galloway Jr.)
Subject: Loading Auth Codes Into CO Switch
Organization: Clemson University
Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1992 00:23:15 GMT


Hello,

We have 700 to 1000 authorization codes to turn down each spring, then
new codes to be turned up in the fall when students arrive.

Since these codes are in an on-campus computer, I do _not_ want to
print them out and have our local telco key them back in.  Nor do I
want to key them in to the telco's system myself.

I want to put them on a tape or diskette and have them loaded by
Southern Bell.  The CO switch in question is a NT DMS-100.

Is anybody doing something like this?


Morris Galloway Jr.             [e-mail]        [phone]
Dean, Administrative Services   Presbyterian College  Clinton, SC  29325

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

Subject: Call Forwarding Help Needed For Red Cross Office
From: [e-mail] (Kevin Day)
Date: Sun, 06 Sep 92 02:16:26 EDT


The local Red Cross office would like to add a fax number. The problem
is, they can't afford to add a fourth line simply for a fax machine.
Their current setup is:

line 1 (main number, published)
line 2 (hunts with line 1)
line 3 (forwarded to answering service)

When someone calls line 1 outside of office hours, they are instructed
by an answering machine) to call line 3 if they have an emergency.  A
few years ago, when someone was in the office they would disable
forwarding and use line 3 for inbound calls also, but something broke
in the telco and this no longer works.  (The local telco is United
Telephone - draw your own conclusions ;-) So, when someone calls line
3, the office gets a short half-ring and the call bounces out to the
answering service. Call forward-no answer is available from the telco.

What they want to do is use the line 3 for fax AND emergency calls
(the line is almost always unused right now) 24 hours a day.  Is this
possible?  I haven't come up with a way of doing this.  The only idea
I have is to get a fax/voice switch on line 2, and publish that as the
fax number, but the fax switch would have to work well (they get a lot
of traffic for a small town).

Does anyone have any ideas?  The first scenerio would be preferred,
but if that isn't possible (I don't think so) then could someone
recommend a fax/voice switch (remember they're on a tight budget).


Thanks.

[e-mail]

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

From: falcon!cubs![e-mail]
Date: Sun, 6 Sep 92 19:04:31 EDT
Subject: 900-555-XXXX (Information)


> In article <[e-mail]> (Dave Cantor) writes:

>> I tried to get 900 directory assistance tonight from Nashua, NH
>> (603-888).  I got the following intercept:

>> "Due to a change in network architecture, the 900 information number
>> has been disconnected.  This is no further information available
>> at this time."

> I just tried 900 555 1212, and I got an AT&T live operator intercept.

The 555 exchange has apparently been reassigned by BellCore.  It will
be interesting to see if enough PBXes allow 900-555 calls to go
through to make this service worth it to vendors and other information
providers.

                            AT&T TODAY
                         (U.S. Edition)

Thursday, August 27, 1992 -- 11:45 a.m. EDT

AT&T ANNOUNCES *** Businesses looking to offer database information
and technical expertise to other businesses can use a new telephone
"address" on the AT&T network.  AT&T announced yesterday that the
company would dedicate the 900-555 exchange to business-to-business
pay-per-call programs.  Bell Communications Research, which manages
the national telephone numbering plan, assigned exclusive use of
numbers in the 900-555 exchange to AT&T.  Companies today are using
900 numbers to provide services to other businesses, such as
out-of-warranty product support, high-level technical consulting
services, credit verification, facsimile database abstracts and
employee dial-in conferences and training.

Charges for the calls offset the cost of providing prompt, expert
service.  Any PBX that allows six-digit screening can be programmed to
accept 900-555-XXXX calls.  AT&T chose the 555 exchange for
business-to-business 900 service calling partly because so many people
equate 555 with "information."  Information on AT&T MultiQuest 900
Services is available from AT&T sales personnel or by calling
800-243-0900.  [See news story below.]

*** 900 BUSINESS -- AT&T has set up a specialized 900 service for
businesses only, designed for firms that offer database information
and technical expertise to other businesses.  AT&T said it will
dedicate the 900-555 exchange to business-to-business pay-per-call
programs.  Many corporate switchboards are programmed to block access
to 900 numbers.  But the numbers in the 900-555 exchange will be
accessible to those who need them, while still blocking calls to other
900 numbers, AT&T said. [Newark Star-Ledger]

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

Personally, I suspect that this is just something else that Cincinnati
Bell won't be able to deal with, while other RBOCS will.  I'd want my
900 blocking to be disabled for calls to 900-555.

I worry about our model of communications when we have to use a single
phone number to control routing (choice of carrier), content (`clean'
information for business), billing (900 is extra $), and addressing
(actually getting connected to the person or organization you are
trying to reach.)

EasyReach 700 services seems to be a good compromise in this regard.
You can control who calls you for free vs who pays.


Disclaimer: My own opinions.

Ralph Hyre

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

From: olwejo![e-mail] (Bob Kupiec)
Subject: Telephone Line "Wink"
Reply-To: olwejo![e-mail]
Organization: Olwejo - Private UNIX System
Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1992 00:27:38 GMT


What is the cause of telephone line "wink"?  I might guess that it is
TPC's way of monitoring the lines?  I happen to notice it on a
telephone that has "in use" LEDs on it.  One line does it consistently
(almost on a regular schedule, although I have never timed it) and the
second does it once in a while.  This happens while no-one is using
the telephone.  It's kind of disturbing to see the LED flash without
using the phone.  I'm always thinking someone's outside with alligator
clips making calls! ;-)

Another time that the line "winks" is upon hangup.  One line will not
wink when hanging up and one line will.  Can anyone offer an
explanation (or guess at one)?


Bob Kupiec - Amateur Radio: N3MML   UUCP: olwejo![e-mail]
Internet: [e-mail]  !: uunet!widener!olwejo!bob

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

From: [e-mail] (Dave Levenson)
Subject: Rolm PBX Question
Organization: Westmark, Inc.
Date: Sun, 06 Sep 1992 15:53:18 GMT


I need a ROLM PBX expert:

A customer wants to install our interactive voice system behind a ROLM
PBX.  (We normally install on central office lines, and bypass the
customer's switch.)

Our application will terminate and hang up if the caller is
non-responsive to several repetitions of a voice prompt, or if the
caller indicates that the transaction is complete, or if we receive an
open-loop (forward disconnect) signal from the switch.

The ROLM PBX does not provide an open-loop signal.  If the caller
hangs up and we do not, it will transmit dial-tone to us for some
un-specified interval, followed by error-tone.  At that point, it
places our station port in a disabled state, and will refuse to
connect inbound calls until we have re-enabled the port.  We can do
this by going on-hook, then going off-hook and dialing *50, and then
going on-hook again.

This presents us with a serious problem.  If we're playing a lengthy
voice prompt and the caller abandons the call by silently hanging up,
we won't know about it.  Our Dialogic Corp. voice platform can detect
dialtone when it is placing an outbound call, but there appears to be
no way to sense dialtone during an established connection.  We cannot
perform a call-progress analysis while we're playing audio.  When we
stop playing audio, we expect DTMF from the caller, but while we're
expecting DTMF, we're not able to sense dialtone or error-tone (what
is error-tone?).

At the end of any call, we have no reliable way to know whether or not
we're disabled.  If we assume that we are not disabled (the normal
case) we'll just go on-hook and await the next call.  If the switch
has disabled our port, we'll never get another call.

If we assume that we have been disabled, we could, after every call,
go off-hook and dial *50 to re-enable our line.  But if we were
already enabled, this action could result in glare: we could be
answering an inbound call, and sending the *50 toward a calling party.

Does anybody know of a better option?  Can the 'feature' of the switch
that disables our line be disabled, or can the time interval be made
long enough that we'll never see it?  Is there any reliable way to get
forward disconnect information from the PBX?


Thanks!

Dave Levenson        Internet: [e-mail]
Westmark, Inc.        UUCP: {uunet | rutgers | att}!westmark!dave
Warren, NJ, USA        Voice: 908 647 0900  Fax: [phone]

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

Subject: TRT (was Call Home Country Codes from UK and France)
Organization: I.E.C.C.
Date: 6 Sep 92 17:32:56 EDT
From: [e-mail] (John R. Levine)


> [calling from the UK]
> USA (quad)    0800 89 0456     Phone USA (TRT)

> [Submitter's query: Who is TRT?  Used to be the name of AT&T Mail's
> Telex Service.]

TRT was, as I recall, Tropical Radio Telegraph, which started as the
radio department of United Fruit and evolved into one of the IRCs
(international telex carriers) with routes mostly between the U.S. and
Latin America.

The telex business is no longer a great one to be in, as customers
switch to fax as fast as they can, so it makes sense that TRT would be
switching to long distance telephone.  I've never seen any mention of
them as a long distance carrier within the U.S., so they may be
international only.  They're not in the 1990 10XXX list in the telecom
archives, either, so they have gotten into telephony within the past
year.


Regards,

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

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #687
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa04716;
          7 Sep 92 1:37 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA27279
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 6 Sep 1992 23:46:50 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA26783
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 6 Sep 1992 23:46:41 -0500
Date: Sun, 6 Sep 1992 23:46:41 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #688

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 6 Sep 92 23:46:40 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 688

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    The Emperor's New Figleaf (Robert Horvitz)
    Spirit Phones (Joe Smooth)
    Telecom White Pages (Antony Ingram)
    Motorola "Advisor" Pager Question (Steve Bixby)
    Caller ID Box Interface (Joel Robertson)
    Question on How to Get Internet Domain Access (Paul Robinson)
    Working Assets Long Distance (Mark McWiggins)
    Looking for Used PBX/VMX On-Sale Publications/Mags. (Ned M. Kazi)
    Strange MCI Problem (Bill Huttig)
    A/A1 Answer Supervision (Tom Metro)
    Having to Dial 0 + 700 on Calls (Peter Capek)
    Bell Science Series on Video (John Higdon)
    Need Info on Compass Voice-Response Software and Others (Jeff McCartney)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 07 Sep 92 05:28:13 MDT
From: Robert Horvitz <[e-mail]>
Subject: The Emperor's New Figleaf


Adrienne Voorhis recently asked readers of the TELECOM Digest:

> Could someone please explain how the federal government can allow
> you to legally monitor [mobile radio] broadcasts but can stop you
> from disclosing what was heard?

Adrienne said she was disappointed in the answers given.  I was, too,
but hadn't responded to her initial request because I assumed such a
knowledgable group would have a better grasp of the issues.  Let me
take a swing at it now and see if this helps.

Let's start with the distinction between a MEDIUM and a MESSAGE.  In
the case of radio, the public airwaves can be used to send and receive
private messages.  The information content of radio waves can be
owned, and copyrighted, but not the waves themselves.  By the same
token, the user of a radio frequency does not own the frequency.  They
are authorized by a public authority only to use it for a particular
purpose in a certain place for a set period (usually the duration of
the license).  They no more own the channel than a publisher owns the
light reflected by a page in a book that they published.  To come at
this from another angle, a license is needed to broadcast a TV
program.  But no license is needed to produce the program.

The public nature of radio airwaves was first recognized in US law by
the Radio Act of 1912, and has been upheld in all succeeding laws,
even the ECPA.  The ECPA criminalizes the "intentional interception"
of certain radio communications.  It defines "interception" as
"acquiring the contents" of the transmission.  Note that an
alternative definition was proposed by AT&T early in the drafting of
the ECPA: they proposed to define "interception" as "acquiring the
TRANSMISSION of the contents" (emphasis added).  That would have made
it a crime merely to hear the hiss of a DES-encrypted audio
transmission, or look at the garbled snow of a scrambled TV image.  It
would have become illegal to sweep the environment to determine what
kinds of RF radiation your body is absorbing.  Even having the energy
enter your body would pose a legal problem.  (The qualifying adjective
"intentional" was added much later in the drafting.)  Fortunately,
Congress rejected this definition as unreasonable and excessive.  The
distinction between medium and message was preserved: the ECPA is
supposed to protect information, not radio waves.

The Communications Act of 1934 allows you to receive any radio signal
that comes to you.  But when you aren't "authorized" to receive it,
you cannot tell others what you heard or exploit the content for
"gain" (courts usually interpret "gain" as "financial gain").  This
policy was a compromise between the well-understood public nature of
the physical medium, and the idea that for an act to be criminal, it
must BE an act: that is to say, one must act on the information in
some way.  Therefore, exploiting or divulging what you overheard was
criminalized, not mere passive reception.  This was, admittedly, a
legal "figleaf" owing to the practical impossibility of preventing
people from picking up signals intruding into their homes - and a
recognition that it was in fact not their fault that signals were
intruding into their homes.

Speaking on a cellular phone is like using a megaphone.  Anyone in
range can hear you, and the range is farther than the eye can see.  In
such a situation, who should be responsible for protecting the
"privacy" of the communication -- the transmitter, or everyone else
who happens to be in range?  Until passage of the ECPA, it was an
established policy, decades old, that the person (or corporation)
operating the transmitter bears the initial responsibility for
protecting the transmissions.  The person who transmits benefits from
the use of a public resource (radio frequencies), and is in the best
position to protect signal content.  If they take no precautions,
there's not much anyone else can do to compensate for their
carelessness.

Where the ECPA differs from all past US laws is in making it the
responsibility of everyone in range of a wide-area radio signal to
avoid receiving it.  That is why the law is the object of so much
derision even now, so long after its passage.  Its most serious defect
is that it absolves cellular companies of all responsibility for
protecting the privacy of their customers' phonecalls.  Courts, citing
the ECPA, have already dismissed several civil suits by customers who
argued that broadcasting their phonecalls "in the clear" constitutes a
"disclosure" to third parties which violates the Communications Act of
1934.

So rather than protecting the privacy of cellular, as it superficially
appears to do, the ECPA actually eliminated the meager protection
afforded by earlier laws: the Emperor's New Figleaf.

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

From: [e-mail] (Joe Smooth)
Subject: Spirit Phones
Organization: The World
Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1992 03:11:02 GMT


Is there anyway to rewire Spirit phones so that they can work on
normal ring and tip wires? I heard there was someway to build some
kind of interface which can keep the functions intact, too. Anyone
heard of this?

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

From: [e-mail] (INGRAM A)
Subject: Telecom White Pages
Date: 7 Sep 92 03:00:34 GMT
Organization: Computer Centre, Swinburne Univ. of Tech. Melbourne, Australia.


    Hi there, does anyone know where or how I can get access to
the Telecom White Pages over the net. I know I can subscribe directly
for $50 a month but for the amount I would use it, that would be a
waste of money. And if there is an organisation that is connected with
AARnet or ACSnet that has the white pages database. Is there a world
database and not just an Australian one?

    Thanks anyone that can help,


Antony   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Motorola "Advisor" Pager Question
Date: Sun, 6 Sep 92 14:02:20 PDT


Hi, folks,

I have a question, and this is the closest place I can find to post
it ...

I am deaf, and have a Motorola "Advisor" pager, which is an
alphanumeric pager -- ie, you call a service number and leave a text
message to be sent to the pager.  In my case, the service number is a
TDD, so deaf folks (or those with a TDD anyway) can send me messages.

Anyway ...

The pager has three contacts on the bottom -- do any of you readers
have any clue how I can find out what these contacts are for?  I'm
guessing they're for programming the thing, but ... I'm hoping they
can be used to sense when the pager goes off, in order to build a
device to flash a strobe light and wake me up at night.

Are there any Motorola (ex-)employees out there that might know how to
get this info for me?  Or anyone else that knows something about this
pager?

I would REALLY APPRECIATE this information, because my company is
pressuring me to find something so that I may be paged at night.

Email is preferred.


Thanks in advance!

  -swb-  (Steve Bixby - [e-mail])

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

From: [e-mail] (Joel Robertson)
Subject: Caller ID Box Interface
Date: 6 Sep 92 16:28:00 GMT
Organization: Robins AFB - LNEW


I bought a Caller ID box this weekend that has a serial RS-232
interface. It's a BellSouth Products Calling Line Identifer (CLI)
Model 20 which is actually made by MHE Systems (MHE20).

There are three modular connectors on the unit. Two are RJ11 line in
and line out. The other is a smaller connector (the same one used by
handset cords) for data. The instruction manual gave precious little
info on the data port other than it's RS-232 1200 BPS 8N1. I called
BellSouth customer service who were no help.

The instruction manual cautions that mis-wiring may damage the unit.
Therefore, the RS-232 circuitry may not be very robust and I hesitate
to "swap wires till it works". If I have to, I'll open it up and trace
wires.

Does anyone have the hardware interface info (pinouts) for this unit?

Does anyone have the address/phone number for MHE Systems?

What are the part numbers for the Motorola and Sierra Semiconductor
Caller ID chips?

Where can I find the definition (physical/electrical) of the various
RJ??  modular connectors?


Thanks in advance.

Joel Robertson  |   Internet: [e-mail]

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

Date: Mon, 7 Sep 92 05:42 GMT
From: Tansin A. Darcos & Company <[e-mail]>
Subject: Question on How to Get Internet Domain Access


I don't have the kind of access to Internet that allows me to find out
where to find this out, so I'll ask it here.

I'd like to find out two things, which I've heard can be done, the
problem is in finding them:

1.  I have heard there are some sites that will register a domain(s)
on Internet for anyone who needs DNS; does anyone know who that is or
where to write? (I have MCI Mail which means I have mail access only
to Internet; I do not have Telnet or News Group access.  I need to
know either the address to post a message to, or the place to ask.)

2.  Does someone know of a low-cost access to send mail into and
receive mail from Internet marked with user addresses within a domain
name that one registers with the Internet Network Information Center?
UUNET Technology of Falls Church, VA wants $30 a month plus $3 an
hour; Digital Express of Greenbelt, MD, will provide internet access
for $15 a month with 1 hour a day free and $1 for each additional
hour; this would be {perfect} except that for them to add a domain
they want at least 50 accounts on that domain!

All I want is some place to handle taking some messages from BBS
users, the way Fidonet does.  (I don't want to use the "fidonet.org"
domain as I am trying to arrange something for people who are not on
Fidonet sites.)

I'd like to find a way to do something for around $10 a month against
$1 an hour or so, that will simply "dump" any mail sent to the
domain(s) I use (if I have to purchase a separate account for each
domain that's acceptable). I'm trying to do this on a shoestring
budget.  It's for transfer of some newsgroups and mail that are
running on some non-internet networks, to allow their newsgroups to
migrate into internet and allow Internet mail (and possibly Internet
news groups) to migrate down to them.  The networks are running on
ordinary computer BBSs run by individuals. If the cost is low enough,
I can foot the bill out of my own pocket as my attempt to contribute
to something I get a lot of enjoyment out of.  If the cost is higher,
then I'll have to find out if the sysops who run these boards want to
participate.

Something in me says I should try to find out if the sysops who are
providing this service to users are willing to foot the bill for this
(or get the users themselves to pay for it.)  I probably will do that,
but what I'd like to do is find out what the best cost I can get for
this service is.  (BBS users are notoriously cheap and it's very hard
to get them to pay much, if anything.)  If it's low enough, I can
"salami slice" the charges out to the individual BBSs that want it,
(or if it's low enough, to all of them) and they don't have to pay a
tremendous amount for this capability.

The point is that trying to explain to someone who has never been
online the benefits involved in it is difficult.  To explain to people
who use non-networked BBSs the benefits of networking is difficult.
To explain to people on networks the advantages of being part of
Internet is also difficult.  (I am currently taking the APL ('A
Programming Language') news list which is sent to me as Internet mail,
so that a local BBS which is related to APL can take this material;
the sysop never realized that when he had some books about APL to sell
for those who'd want them, that he could have me post a message on the
Internet APL news list.  (I had to suggest it to him, and several
people on the list were very interested.)  Until you see the internet
as a resource, you can't know the value of having it.)

I also have to include in whatever it "costs" to get this, the costs
to get to the material.  If I can get free access to Internet to use a
domain name, but I've got to call a site in Alaska, (I'm currently in
the Washington, DC area) that's not much help.

I will appreciate any information that anyone here can pass on to me.


Paul Robinson:  [e-mail]  or [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Mark McWiggins)
Subject: Working Assets Long Distance
Organization: Sierra Geophysics Inc.,  Kirkland, Wa
Date: Sun, 6 Sep 1992 09:10:37 GMT


A friend is considering Working Assets for long distance. Do you have
any experience with this service? Would you do it again?

Thanks in advance for any guidance.


Mark McWiggins           [phone]x377 days      Box 31356
[e-mail]        [phone] hrs.       Seattle WA 98103-1356

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

From: [e-mail] (Ned M. Kazi)
Subject: Looking for Used PBX/VMX On-Sale Publications/Mags.
Organization: Fujitsu Network Switching
Date: Sun, 6 Sep 92 23:04:13 GMT


I am trying to obtain names/addressess/telephone numbers of any
magazines/trade publications/horse traders which would list used
PBX/Voice Mail machines for sale.  I am sure there are some
news-paper-type-format publications which lists telecom equipment
which sre used or on sale etc.etc.  I would appreciate if someone
could supply me with name/addressess/telephone number of such
publications.


Please email:  uunet!mcnc!fns-nc1!nmk
or if unable call 919-790-3393
Thank You.

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

From: [e-mail] ( Bill Huttig)
Subject: Strange MCI Problem
Date: 7 Sep 92 02:28:08 GMT
Organization: Florida Institute of Technology, Melbourne USA


I had a strange thing happen to me tonight. I called my aunt and
after dialing heard nothing; no ringing or noise at all, so I tried
several more times. At first I thought it might be that the speed
dial lost the end of the number so I dialed it (well actually pushed)
the number manually ... still no luck

After several tries I did get through. It turned out that she has been
picking up and saying 'hello' I never heard her. I later tried to call
my other line via MCI and the same thing happened.

Is this what can happen with a SS7 problem? The ringing through but no
voice path getting opened?

Is MCI connecting their SS7's to the LEC's yet?


Bill

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

Date: Sun, 6 Sep 92 4:58:19 EDT
From: Tom Metro <[e-mail]>
Subject: A/A1 Answer Supervision
Organization: Venture Logic, Newton, MA


[e-mail] (Leonard Erickson) writes:

> [e-mail] (Dave Grabowski) writes:

>> I recently obtained a telephone that was used on a private Centrex
>> system. It has a sticker on the back : "Caution: For use only on
>> business lines or risk of electrical short circuit"...

> It's probably set up to do A/A1 answer supervision. That means that
> when you take it off hook, it *shorts* the second pair of wires
> together.

What is the purpose of shorting the second pair of wires? It sounds
redundant to the information you can get by monitoring the loop
current.  Could you explain the purpose of A/A1 answer supervision?


Tom     [e-mail]

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

Date: Sun, 6 Sep 92 11:40:32 EDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Having to Dial 0 + 700 on Calls


I tried to use the AT&T Alliance Conferencing service, whose number is
700-456-1000.  I dialed and got a "cannot be completed as dialed"
message.  I tried 700-555-4141 to confirm that AT&T was still my
default carrier, and it was.  It turned out that for the Alliance
number, one must dial 0 + 700 ... even though the 0 is not necessary
for 700-555-4141 call.  What's going on here?

Is the leading 0 some sort of acknowledgement by me that this is a
chargeable call?  If I dial the 0, is it presented by my LEC to AT&T
in a different way than if I don't dial it?  Also, where was the
message generated? By the LEC or by AT&T?  If the latter, is there a
technical reason why they couldn't easily have figured out what I
wanted and what I was doing wrong, and told me, rather than forcing me
to call around to find out.  (The service worked wondefully, by the
way, once I got through to it ...)


Peter Capek


[Moderator's Note: Zero-plussing generally indicates that you are
requesting the assistance of the operator for some task other than a
straight direct-dialed call. The 'operator' might only be a computer
you deal with (ie. the automated collect calling and third number
billing some telcos use now-a-days), but that is beside the point.
Setting up conference calls is a function of the 'operator', and all
'operator assisted' calls carry a surcharge.   PAT]

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

Date: Sun, 6 Sep 92 16:58 PDT
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Bell Science Series on Video


Those of you who are over forty will remember a series of television
programs sponsored by The Bell System. A product of the fifties, these
were excellent films featuring Dr. Frank Baxter as host explaining
such things as meteorology, time, biology, and physiology. Highly
produced, these programs utilized puppets, animation, and well-written
scripts to inform and entertain young and old alike. Unfortuately,
even I did not own a VCR before 1974.

Browsing at my local video store this afternoon, I discovered that the
series is out on home video. I was able to purchase on CAV laserdisc
the following titles:

Strange Case of the Cosmic Rays (produced, written, directed by Frank
Capra);

The Unchained Goddess (produced by Jack Warner)

The Alphabet Conspiracy (produced by Jack Warner)

Thread of Life (produced by Jack Warner)

Gateway to the Mind (produced by Jack Warner)

Hemo the Magnificent (produced by Frank Capra)

About Time (produced by Jack Warner)

Others may be available but out of stock at this time. Needless to
say, I will be scanning the shelf for other titles. The downside here
is that the source appears to be ordinary 16mm film (optical sound).
This is disappointing to a videophile who has been spoiled with Gone
With The Wind restorations, etc., but finally being able to put one's
hands on these classics is at least something.

And BTW, the quality of the presentation is as good as I remembered it
to be.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (MCCARTNEY,JEFFREY ELWOOD)
Subject: Need Info on Compass Voice-Response Software and Others
Date: 6 Sep 92 18:21:00 GMT
Organization: Georgia Institute of Technology


I'm looking into various voice-response systems.  Would anyone care to
tell me about their experiences with the various manufacturers of such
and the associated software and hardware, especially Compass Software
out of Sarasota FL.

I'm interested in all types:

Touch-tone (DTMF recognition)

Text-to-speech

Synthesized voice


Thank you.

If I get a decent sampling, I'll post a summary.


uucp:      ...!{decvax,hplabs,ncar,purdue,rutgers}!gatech!prism!gt8963a
Internet: [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #688
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa23683;
          8 Sep 92 0:17 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA24867
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 7 Sep 1992 22:20:44 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA26273
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 7 Sep 1992 22:20:35 -0500
Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1992 22:20:35 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #690

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 7 Sep 92 22:18:20 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 690

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    The Role of Usenet in Case of Disaster (M.J. Crepin-Leblond)
    Disasters and Computer Communications (Greg Trotter)
    Re: Misc.Disaster.* Newsgroups (was Disaster Reporting) (Rick Broadhead)
    Re: Disaster Reporting On Usenet (Thor Lancelot Simon)
    Re: Cellular Providers Charge Air-Time Forwarding to Land Line (B Campbell)
    Re: Cellular Providers Charge Air-Time Forwarding to Land Line (E. Sheafer)
    Re: Cellular Providers Charge Air-Time Forwarding to Land Line (M. Solomon)
    Re: V.25bis, or: Are CCITT and PTTs Totally Bonkers? (Wolf Paul)
    Re: V.25bis, or: Are CCITT and PTTs Totally Bonkers? (Harold Hallikainen)
    Re: V.25bis, or: Are CCITT and PTTs Totally Bonkers? (Fred R. Goldstein)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1992 22:46:06 +0100
From: Olivier M.J. Crepin-Leblond <[e-mail]>
Subject: The Role of Usenet in Case of Disaster


Someone (sorry - I inadvertently deleted the message) suggested that
Usenet would be used to a further extent in cases of disasters such as
the one in Florida, with hurricane andrew.

Well, we do receive here a group called alt.hurricane.andrew , and the
feed is indeed pretty long (it has to go through five or six sites
before reaching me here in London, and that's from UUNET only!).  I
would be surprised if this group wasn't available in U.S.A.!


Cheers,

Olivier M.J. Crepin-Leblond, Digital Comms. Section, Elec. Eng. Department
 Imperial College of Science, Technology and Medicine, London SW7 2BT, UK
      Internet/Bitnet: <[e-mail]> - Janet: <[e-mail]>

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

From: [e-mail] (Greg Trotter)
Subject: Disasters and Computer Communications
Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1992 17:59:40 GMT
Organization: A Planet Of His Own


I need some information regarding methods of emergency data
communications.  Imagine a disaster team in a crisis area, with a
laptop computer and no electricity or phones. What is readily
available (hardware-wise) to facilitate this? Any suggestions are
appreciated; I'm guessing some type of sattelite system.

I would appreciate any replies by mail.


Greg Trotter -- Norman, Oklahoma    [e-mail]

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

Date: Mon, 07 Sep 92 01:08:21 EDT
From: Rick Broadhead <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Misc.Disaster.* Newsgroups (was Disaster Reporting on Usenet)


First of all, I'd like to clarify that I am *not* suggesting that
Usenet be used to *coordinate* disaster assistance.  I realize this
contradicts an earlier statement I made in TELECOM Digest.  For many
of the reasons already stated here in the Digest, it would not be
practical nor feasible to coordinate disaster relief activities on
Usenet, and it was never my intention to do so.  I clarified my
proposal and submitted it to news.groups.  I apologize for any
confusion.

What I am suggesting is a MISC.DISASTER.* group to disseminate
information on disasters, whether they be man-made or natural.  During
catastrophes/calamities, such a group would be a place where reports
could be posted, and information could be exchanged.  And, as I have
already pointed out, a misc.disaster.* group would be used to publish
the addresses and phone numbers of agencies accepting donations and
enquiries from the public, enquiries about the welfare of friends and
relatives, for example.  The point that was made about this group not
being a good place to ask about specific people is well-taken, and I
agree.

One need look no further than TELECOM Digest itself to see the need
for a disaster group.  Not one disaster has slipped by without
requests from readers for updates and information.  And similar
requests appeared on other Usenet groups too (i.e. soc.culture.caribbean
for Hurricane Andrew).  I am proposing that we create a newsgroup
devoted to this type of traffic.

The success of disaster newsgroups does not depend on communication in
and out of the affected areas.  First of all, not everyone has access
to the same sources of information.  Remember that Usenet is carried
nationally and internationally.  Information that you may have may be
information that someone else is looking for.  Secondly, it is evident
 from TELECOM Digest and elsewhere on the net that you don't have to
be directly in the disaster area to share information and/or report on
how the disaster has affected you personally.

I am aware of alt.hurricane.andrew.  But many people are not.  More
importantly, such alt.* groups are created *after-the-fact*.  For a
disaster group to be effective, it has to be in-place and ready-for-use.
This means having a permanent group on Usenet devoted to disaster
traffic, and not creating temporary groups to deal with separate
crises, groups which would only be created *after* a hurricane,
earthquake etc. hits, and removed several months later.  Note that a
disaster group could also deal with emergency preparedness and related
issues.

I am not worried about the slow propagation of articles to some sites.
I have posted articles to Usenet and had responses arrive less than an
hour later.  Take a look at any Usenet group to see that replies are
often posted within 24 hours of the date of the original article (and
these are only the *public* replies).  This is really a weak argument.

I truly believe that the Usenet community would benefit from one or
more newsgroups that would act as a clearinghouse for disaster
information, but it won't happen (at least not right now), unless
someone picks up this idea, and carries it through the various stages
of the Usenet group-creation process.  If I didn't have classes
starting next week, I would take it on myself.

Thanks to those people who took the time to send me their comments.


Rick Broadhead                        [e-mail]    (Internet)
Faculty of Administrative Studies     ysar1111@yorkvm1         (Bitnet)
York University                    ...!bitnet!yorkvm1!ysar1111 (UUCP)
Toronto, CANADA

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

From: [e-mail] (Thor Lancelot Simon)
Subject: Re: Disaster Reporting On Usenet
Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1992 08:00:05 GMT
Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix & Internet, NYC


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

> I am surprised that Usenet, as powerful a medium as it is, has not
> been more widely used to coordinate disaster relief activities.  For
> example, I am sure there would be great support for a group such as
> misc.disaster.coordination and/or misc.disaster.reports, which could

In this vein, has anyone got a copy of Brian Reid's article from
waybackwhen which argues the case that the Usenet would withstand, in
working order, any concievable disaster up to and including a nuclear
war?

I think using the net to coordinate disaster relief efforts is a fine
idea; especially because large computer installations often have
backup power.  And better still, I believe the contracts with the
telcos for much of the NSFnet backbone specify multiple geographically
diverse wires, don't they?

Perhaps it's worth bringing this up somehow with an appropriate
organization such as the Red Cross?  What'd it take, a 386 box in
their national headquarters to run things from?  Probably worth the
money!


Thor Lancelot Simon     [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: Actually, it would be quite easy. If someone wants
to donate the 386 and the required UUCP software, I'd set it up in the
Chicago Red Cross or else my own office.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Bill Campbell)
Subject: Re: Cellular Providers Charge Air-Time Forwarding to Land Line
Organization: Celestial Software, Mercer Island, WA
Date: Mon, 07 Sep 1992 15:13:44 GMT


In <[e-mail]> infmx![e-mail] (John
Galloway) writes:

> I was very disappointed to find that both Cellular-One and GTE charge
> normal air time rates for calls that are made to your cellular number,

> I had planned to get a cellular, then only give out that number.  When
> I get to an office or am at home, I just forward the cellular to the
> number where I am -- simple.  I only give folks one number and it
> either goes to where I am, or to my home phone with an answering

This is exactly how I work.  My cellular number is the one I use for
my business and it is on call-forwarding most of the time.

I also have the message center service on the cellular for those times
it's not call forwarded and I cannot answer the phone.  This service
costs about $5.00/month plus air time if I call for messages on the
cellular.  There's no charge if I call in for my messages from a land
line.

US-West cellular in the Seattle area doesn't charge for the land-line
forwarding.  US-West doesn't charge for calls to busy signals either.
I had an account with Bell Atlantic for a while and it really annoyed
me that they would charge me $0.10 for busy calls.


Bill

INTERNET:  [e-mail]   Bill Campbell; Celestial Software
UUCP:   ...!thebes!camco!bill   6641 East Mercer Way
             uunet!camco!bill   Mercer Island, WA 98040; [phone]


[Moderator's Note: Not only does Ameritech Mobile not charge for calls
forwarded to a land line number, they gave us free service all day on
Labor Day!  A full page ad in the papers on Sunday said everyone with
Ameritech cellular service was invited to use their cell phones as
much as desired at no charge today, long distance and local telephone
company surcharges not included.  That was a nice gift from them!  PAT]

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

From: David E. Sheafer <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Cellular Providers Charge Air-Time Forwarding to Land Line
Date: 7 Sep 92 20:03:26 GMT
Organization: Merrimack College, No. Andover, MA, USA


In article <[e-mail]>, infmx![e-mail]
(John Galloway) writes:

> I was very disappointed to find that both Cellular-One and GTE charge
> normal air time rates for calls that are made to your cellular number,
> (Call your cellular carrier and complain TODAY! :-)

> [Moderator's Note: *Which* Cellular One? *Which* GTE?  Cellular One in
> Chicago does not charge for forwarding calls to landline numbers, nor
> does Ameritech, the 'B' carrier here.  And regards forwarding of
> calls, Illinois Bell now allows us to *remotely* change our forwarding
> at no additional cost. I will comment more on this in the next issue.  PAT]

   Both, Nynex Mobile Communications New England and Cellular One
Boston charge regular airtime rates for fowarding calls to landline
numbers.

   I've never understood why Nynex charges as they are the local phone
company, yet I can understand why Cell One charges as they have to pay
for using the Nynex (New England Telephone) network.


David E. Sheafer
internet:  [e-mail]   or  uucp:      samsung!hubdub!nin15b0b
GEnie:     D.SHEAFER             Cleveland Freenet:    ap345

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

Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1992 13:57:33 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Cellular Providers Charge Air-Time Forwarding to Land Line


> [Moderator's Note: *Which* Cellular One? *Which* GTE?  Cellular One in
> Chicago does not charge for forwarding calls to landline numbers, nor
> does Ameritech, the 'B' carrier here.  And regards forwarding of
> calls, Illinois Bell now allows us to *remotely* change our forwarding
> at no additional cost. I will comment more on this in the next issue.  PAT]

Cellular One/Boston charges airtime for calls forwarded to land lines
or answered by Message Plus.

They don't charge any monthly fees for call waiting, call forwarding
(including no-answer transfer), three-way calling, or Message Plus.

The forwarding can be canceled or changed only from the cellular phone.

It is not possible to have call forwarding and Message Plus enabled
simultaneously since they both use the forwarding mechanism.


Monty Solomon / PO Box 2486 / Framingham, MA  01701-0405
[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Wolf Paul)
Subject: Re: V.25bis, or: Are CCITT and PTTs Totally Bonkers?
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Wolf N. Paul)
Organization: Alcatel Austria - Elin Research Center, Vienna
Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1992 12:14:08 GMT


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

Commenting on V.25bis Delayed & Forbidden Numbers lists, and the term
"stay on this list forever" used in the Multitech Modem manual:

> OK, I can see that a PTT might want to have some reasonable
> regulations that restrict automatic redialing by modems and similar
> devices, to prevent older switch equipment from being overloaded.  But
> ... a Forbidden Numbers list?  With numbers that stay on it FOREVER??
> Have these people totally taken leave of their senses?  If I dial up
> my local BBS in Zurich, and the system is down, and the modem doesn't
> answer four times, I am Forbidden from ever trying it again?

> I assume that either I am not reading something right, or that V.25bis
> is optional/voluntary, or outdated, or something, but I really can't
> imagine what reasonable thoughts were occurring in the heads of the
> people that thought up this scheme.  Does anyone have any ideas about
> what CCITT was trying to accomplish here?

Well, the purpose of this feature is not so much to prevent line
overloading, but rather to prevent harrassment of voice phone
customers.

Thus, in my experience, also with Multitech modems, "failure to
connect" means the phone is answered, BUT NOT BY A MODEM. If there is
no answer at all, the feature does not kick in. If the phone is
answered but there is no modem tone it does. Imagine a slightly
mistyped phone number in a UUCP L-sys entry which gets called every
fifteen minutes ...

"Forever" is also relative ... the list is cleared by turning the
modem off and on again. The point is, it requires manual intervention.
Otherwise some people would put the software command to clear the
"forbidden list" into their modem reset sequence at the beginning of
each dial command ...

I agree however that the wording in the Multitech manual is unclear
and rather drastic.


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)


[Moderator's Note: A sad thing happened here several years ago when a
FIDO site kept trying to connect with another FIDO site several times
nightly for about *two weeks* ... only to reach the voice number of a
70-year old woman in error. IBT tracked the fellow down and handed him
a seven word ultimatum: "The BBS goes offline today. Permanently. Period."
Either that or he could risk having the Illinois Commerce Commission
order IBT to disconnect his service, since the lady had already filed
a complaint and made a big stink with all concerned.  He turned off
the BBS for several months until things quieted down.  Then there was
the First National Bank of Chicago's infamous FAX machine which kept
calling a family in Germany at 3 AM German time for awhile. Bundespost
got AT&T involved; AT&T backtracked it to IBT and the bank. IBT gave
the bank some good old-fashioned hell in return. FNB/Chicago is so
incompetent -- remember, that's the bank that the $5 per hour wire
transfer clerk ripped off for twenty million dollars! -- that a month
later when their long distance bill showed several dozen one-minute
calls to Germany, some clerk in the bank's telecom department had the
nerve to call IBT to get the charges removed 'due to some billing
error by AT&T ...'  Then a telco supervisor really blasted them!  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Harold Hallikainen)
Subject: Re: V.25bis, or: Are CCITT and PTTs Totally Bonkers?
Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo
Date: Mon, 07 Sep 1992 18:13:58 GMT


    A previous post listed the redial limitations in various
countries, including a "forbidden number list" where numbers of calls
that were failed several times were stored.  The modem would then
refuse to dial the forbidden numbers.

    I had heard of this regulation before (I think in the
documentation to Xtalk mk 4).  I am reminded of one of our customers
who put a wrong phone number in one of broadcast transmitter control
systems.  Instead of dialing the network control point, it called some
invalid number every couple minutes all night long.  They got a call
from AT&T in the morning wanting to know what was going on.

    I imagine this regulation (for the US) is in part 68.  My copy
of part 68 seems to be deep in some pile of paper here ...


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Fred R. Goldstein)
Subject: Re: V.25bis, or: Are CCITT and PTTs Totally Bonkers?
Organization: Digital Equipment Corp., Littleton MA USA
Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1992 20:30:42 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Michael
C. Berch) writes about Forbidden Numbers and redial limits.

FWIW, the problem isn't V.25bis, and isn't even part of V.25bis, but
is in the modem in order to get approval for use in those countries.
V.25bis is a rather neat method of doing inband dialing on sync (and
async, via a different option set) lines.  If the modem is clever
enough to autorepeat the call, then it has to meet national
regulations, V.25bis or not.

I suspect that the "forever" rules are based on an expectation that
once the two minutes are up, it is possible that you've forgotten why
you're dialing and thus are expected to request the call again.  I
strongly suspect that being on the Forbidden list doesn't eternally
prevent re-requesting the call.  If it does, then just make sure that
you cancel the request after only _three_ retries!

Some national regs are weird.  V.25bis is catching on; don't blame
it for those regulatory problems.


Fred R. Goldstein   [e-mail]
k1io             or [e-mail]   voice:[phone]
Standard Disclaimer:  Opinions are mine alone; sharing requires permission.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #690
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa23905;
          8 Sep 92 0:23 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA26047
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 7 Sep 1992 22:24:49 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA18617
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 7 Sep 1992 22:24:12 -0500
Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1992 22:24:12 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #689


TELECOM Digest     Mon, 7 Sep 92 21:02:00 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 689

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Volume of Telecom Question (Dr. Ross Alan Stapleton)
    New Phone Number Intercept (Rupa Schomaker)
    Fast, Cheap Async Short-Haul Modems? (Thor Lancelot Simon)
    Ending Automated Calls (G. Brendan Reilly)
    How to Wire Telephone Into Audio System? (Milovan Djilas)
    ISDN And Dialing 911 (Martin McCormick)
    Need Advice on Sending Voice Over Modem (Patrick Connor)
    Cordless Phone Recommendations Wanted (Eric Benson)
    Real Legislation, or Hoaxes? (Michael A. Covington)
    The Bell Science Series on Video (Update) (John Higdon)
    Why Do Several Answering Machines Hang Up Early? (Jeffrey R. Millar)
    "911" as an Area Code? (Will Martin)
    Information Wanted on CPC Pulses (Tom Metro)
    Cordless Telephone Schematics Wanted (Arlindo Filho)
    Information Wanted on E&M Signaling Technology (Yee-Lee Shyong)
    When Did France go to Eight Digit Numbers? (Carl Moore)
    Finding Your Own Number - a Few Canadian Updates (David Leibold)
    Advance Notice of Report On Telecommunications - 8 Sept. (David Leibold)
    Oops, Lost The Reporter (Carl Moore)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Volume of Telecom Question
From: [e-mail] (Dr. Ross Alan Stapleton)
Date: 7 Sep 1992 20:56 MST
Organization: University of Arizona MIS Department


For a paper I'm writing on export controls and information, I'd like
to present a quick summary of the growth of telecommunications over
the past several decades.  I've seen some overview articles (there was
a two-pager in the {Whole Earth Review} a few issues back), but could
someone from this most august forum provide some referenced figures
(or pointers to where I could find them) on:

  - Growth in number of domestic calls completed (US);

  - Growth in number of international calls (either with the US and
    rest of the world, or total internationally, or both);

  - Growth in bandwidth or calls completed to interesting places like
    Moscow, or Cuba, or Iran, etc.

I apologize if this is contained in a FAQ file (and I'm scanning
around on my hard disk for the FTP address for the archives ... darn
this Internet murkiness), and I look forward to responses.


Ross


[Moderator's Note: The Telecom Archives are available using anonymous
ftp lcs.mit.edu.  When connected, you would 'cd telecom-archives'. But
to answer your question, I do not believe any files there at this time
have the information you are seeking.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Rupa Schomaker)
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Date: Mon, 07 Sep 1992 14:19:00 -0600
Subject: New Phone Number Intercept


I'm in the process of getting another line, and the conversation here
about different and unusual intercepts made me think.  What would
happen if I dialed my new number before SWBT put it in?

The intercept goes:

We're sorry, <insert number here>, is a working number.  Please try
your call again later.

So, if it is a working number, why don't I get to use it until Thursday?  :)


UUCP -> [e-mail]     FidoNet ->  1:106/1024



[Moderator's Note: Here it says, "the number you have dialed <number>
may not yet be connected. Please try your call again later." Or
sometimes an intercept will say <number> "is being tested for trouble.
Please try again later." Usually the only instance of an intercept
which says <number> "is a working number, please hang up and dial
again" is when you misdial and reach some place where the equipment
cannot detirmine what number you dialed so a live operator has to come
on and ask what you (think) you dialed; then bubble it in so the
equipment can respond. If the equipment had known what you dialed, it
would have responded <number actually dialed> "is not a working
number" rather than <number you told the operator you thought you
dialed> "is in service please try again."  Logic dictates that if
<number> is in service, you would have been connected to it.

Speaking of live operator intercepts, are there still any of those
situations where the operator responds but cannot hear the caller
because the LD carrier does not open the mouthpiece until the call has
supervised, which it will never do with an operator?  To get around
that, the Bell telcos had to use an intercept recording which the
operator started manually when she realized she could not hear the
caller: "Under some circumstances, callers using alternate long
distance carriers may not be able to speak with local telephone
company operators. Please ask your long distance carrier for
assistance."  Are all the OCC's opening the talk path now?   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Thor Lancelot Simon)
Subject: Fast, Cheap Async Short-Haul Modems?
Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1992 11:09:52 GMT
Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix & Internet, NYC


I'm looking for some inexpensive short-haul modems that will go
38400bps on async RS232.  I've seen fairly inexpensive models in the
Black Box and South Hills catalogs (well, inexpensive for the catalogs
in question) that will go up to 19200 async, and some that will go
38400 synchronous, but nothing that will go 38.4 async.  I only need
to traverse about a half-mile stretch of two-pair, so though it's too
far for RS422, even the el-cheapo low-power models seem to offer
enough in that respect.  Can anyone suggest a reputable, fairly
inexpensive source for what I'm looking for?  Alternately, if nobody
builds any that wil do 38.4K async, a cheaper source than the
aforementioned catalogs for a model that will work at 19.2K would be
appreciated!


Thor Lancelot Simon     [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (G. Brendan Reilly)
Subject: Ending Automated Calls
Date: 7 Sep 92 14:23:13 GMT
Organization: University of Pennsylvania


It seems that if you wanted to end automated calls you would simply
have to get the exchange of the cellular phone in Washington DC and
start bombarding them with automated calls.  I'm sure that when the
congressional staffers and such have to put up with this crap they'll
decide "something must be done in the public interest."

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

From: [e-mail] (milovan djilas)
Subject: How to Wire Telephone Into Audio System?
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Parts of the University of Chicago
Date:Mont, 7 Sep 1992 13:20:37 GMT


I need to connect a dead (i.e., not connected to a line) telephone
into an audio system (via a mixing console) for a play I'm doing sound
design on.  Unfortunately, I'm not as knowledgeable about telphony as
I would like to be, although I've done some hacking on phones
connected to a line before.  I previously connected a live phone into
an audio setup at home, but I'm not sure how to go about it without
having the line attached.  I read something once regarding small
intercom systems using telephones which said something about putting
9VDC through one of the wires, but I don't even remember which wire it
was supposed to be.

What I need to know is:

1) What do I need to do to power the phone?
2) What effect will this have on the rest of the system?

In case it's relevant, the idea is to use the telephone as both prop
and mic on the stage, feeding the mic input into a mixer channel to be
sent out to four to six house speakers, along (of course) with signals
from other audio components.  Would this require changes to the signal
strength from the phone, or is it a standard mic level?

Thanks for any help.  Post or E-Mail replies; I'll post a summary if
it's wanted.


[e-mail]

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

Subject: ISDN And Dialing 911
Date: Mon, 07 Sep 92 08:11:30 -0500
From: [e-mail]


The latest on the case of the Tulsa physician whose wife died of a
heart attack while her husband tried to call 911 for help is that Dr.
Homer Hardy, the physician, is suing Southwestern Bell for 35 million
dollars.

    The original story was not that a dial-tone was unavailable,
but that callers to the Tulsa area 911 system got a busy signal.


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


[Moderator's Note: In times of grief, people will do a variety of
irrational things such as the doctor, but his complaint is with either
the operators of the 911 service or the people who jammed the system --
not with SWBT. Suppose a patient calls the doctor and his line happens
to be busy. Could the patient then sue the telco or the doctor?   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Patrick Connor)
Subject: Need Advice on Sending Voice Over Modem
Date: 7 Sep 1992 23:33:18 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Patrick Connor)


As part of a project I am working on, I need to send two-way voice
communication over a modem line.  Are there any products on the market
that will do this easily?  The ideal box will have a telco jack and an
RS-232 port, so I can just insert it between phone and modem.

If such a box does not exist, how easy would it be to build?

Please respond by email.


Thanks,

pc

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

From: [e-mail] (Eric Benson)
Subject: Cordless Phone Recommendations Wanted
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Lucid, Inc., Menlo Park, CA
Date: 7 Sep 92 15:09:14


I'm looking for recommendations on cordless phones.  Basically,
everyone I know who owns a cordless phone hates it.  The sound quality
is terrible.  Is this just something one lives with?  I've noticed a
few recent models in the stores claiming to work in the 900 Mhz band.
Are these really better than the 49 Mhz models?  They are a lot more
expensive, like $300-400 instead of $70-150.  Spending that much isn't
out of the question, but I'm wary of new technology.  They claim to
have greater range, but I'm not so concerned with range, I'm more
concerned with the irritating, constant buzz on the line.  Also, I'd
like to have one that's comfortable to hold, and most cordless phones
are very bulky.  A few of them have the "flip-out" shirt-pocket
cellular style.  This is more convenient for transportation, but how
is it in actual use?  Has anyone tried connecting a hands-free headset
to a cordless phone?

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

From: [e-mail] (Michael A. Covington)
Subject: Real Legislation, or Hoaxes?
Organization: University of Georgia, Athens
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1992 03:36:00 GMT


I've been told that the following two pieces of legislation are before
the Senate, but cannot identify them from Congressional Record and
similar references.  Can anybody fill me in?

(1) A ban on radio receivers that can tune cellular phone frequencies.
(Listening is already illegal but the receivers themselves aren't.)

(1) A ban on private consulting in electronics, "S. 1706," recently
mentioned by a letter writer in Robert Pease's column in Electronic
Design.  (There is a S. 1706, but it deals with import duties on
certain industrial chemicals.)


Michael Covington - Artificial Intelligence Programs - U of Georgia - USA
Unless otherwise noted, these are private opinions, not official statements.


[Moderator's Note: What is this 'ban on private consulting in electronics'?
Please tell more. When does private become public or legal?   PAT]

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

Date: Mon, 7 Sep 92 17:14 PDT
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: The Bell Science Series on Video (Update)


For video enthusiasts, it appears that only the Capra-produced
episodes are transfered from 16mm film. The Warner-produced programs
are from 35mm film. The difference is, of course, remarkable.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Jeffrey R. Millar x7047)
Subject: Why Do Several Answering Machines Hang Up Early?
Organization: Sanders Associates
Date: Mon, 07 Sep 92 21:55:07 GMT


I have two answering machines which hang up on callers. The problem
apparently began in May ... but we didn't notice it because it
manifested itself as intermittent loss of the latter part of messages.

We recently got a second line for business, so ... performing a few
tests resulted in the following information.

    - counting in a loud (very) voice kept the machine on
    - talking in a normal voice resulted in a hang up in just
      a few seconds.

I have two machines that do this, now.  One was bought just to replace
the machine I thought was broken.

It seems like the line audio level might be low ... resulting is the
VOX failing to hold the line.  However there is no audible difference
between "before the problem" and "after the problem" in levels on the
other telephones in the house.

I tried disconnecting other phones, modems, surge protectors, etc ...
it made no difference.

Could someone in telco-land either suggest something to try on my own
or maybe suggest what to tell the repair people about my problem.  (I
am afraid to get charged just for them to test the line and tell me it
must be my fault or my equipment ... which I don't think it is.)


Thanks in advance,

jeff millar [e-mail]
Jeffrey R. Millar   Lockheed Sanders, Inc    603-885-7047

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

Date: Mon, 7 Sep 92 10:36:17 CDT
From: Will Martin <[e-mail]>
Subject: "911" as an Area Code?


The area-codes lists that have been put out on Telecom always note
that "911" is not used as an area code, but is reserved. I suppose
that it would be *possible* to use "911" as an area code, since it
should always be preceeded by a 1 or a 0 in making a call, and thus be
distinguished from the emergency-call 911 service, but I also suppose
having it as a regular area code would cause false or misdialed 911
calls and thus the telcos keep it reserved.

So what I'm wondering about -- our toll-call list that is generated by
our NEC NEAX 2400 phone system came out with an entry for a call from
one of our office phones to "911-572-4000", a one-minute call on May
7th at 10:30 AM.  We're reviewing old logs because our phone people
are fighting with the vendor over billing, having been charged for
multiple one-minute calls to the same number at the same wallclock
time (probably uncompleted redial attempts) and for 800-number calls.
Anybody have any possible legitimate excuse for a call to
911-572-4000, or does this sound like garbage generated by the
billling or accounting software?  Anybody else getting similar stuff
showing up on their logs?


Regards,

Will   [e-mail] OR [e-mail]

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

Date: Mon, 7 Sep 92 4:54:57 EDT
From: Tom Metro <[e-mail]>
Subject: Information Wanted on CPC Pulses
Organization: Venture Logic, Newton, MA


What does a CPC pulse "look" like? What type of circuitry is typically
used to detect it? What are the timing specifications for when it
should occur with respect to the call termination? And what simple
test can I perform to see if my phone service provides CPC pulses?


Thanks,

Tom    [e-mail]

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

Date: Mon, 7 Sep 92 15:34 GMT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Cordless Telephone Schematics Needed


Hello!

Does anybody knows how can I get a schematic for cordless telephones
such as Broksonic, Cobra, Sony, etc? Thanks for helping me!


ARLINDO RIBEIRO DE LOYOLLA FILHO
PY2-LOY   TECNICO EM ELETRONICA
CENTRO DE PESQUISA E
DESENVOLVIMENTO   TELEBRAS - CAMPINAS
BRASIL    FONE (0192)39-6733   FAX  [phone]
[e-mail]

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

Date: Mon, 7 Sep 92 21:19:40 CST
From: [e-mail] (Yee-Lee Shyong)
Subject: Information Wanted on E&M Signaling Technology


What's the usage of E&M signaling technology in the subscriber line?
When do we use the two-wire E&M or four-wire E&M? Is anybody out there
who could tell me where the CEPT/ETSI is published?  Why do
telecommunication professionals always say -48Vdc not +48Vdc?

When the trunk equipment is linked with the signaling circuit, what's
the effect of E&M signaling between them?

I am eager to know the answer to the above questions. Thanks!

Apollo

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

Date: Mon, 7 Sep 92 10:48:10 EDT
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject: When Did France go to Eight Digit Numbers?


There is a note in the archives about France going over to eight digit
telephone numbers.  Does someone have a date available for it?  The
archives only say "a few years ago", and the passage of time will make
this obscure.

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

Date: Mon, 07 Sep 92 03:56:57 EDT
From: David Leibold <[e-mail]>
Subject: Finding Your Own Number - a few Canadian updates


During a recent vacation through the west (I won't mention in too much
detail the disastrous attempt to meet the Moderator in person :-() I
encountered a few more ANI numbers which may not be in current lists:

204 (Manitoba) area: dial 644 or 644.xxxx (where the xxxx digits don't
matter) and get your number read back ... one habit of the device is
that the seven digits will be spoken, then the first digit is spoken
again before the thing cuts off. 644 didn't seem to work in Churchill,
though.  (As a side note, Churchill recorded messages like to end with
the code "CHHL", presumably part of the CLLI designation (common
language) that represents the CHurcHiLl, Manitoba exchange).

In 403, at least in Edmonton (run by Ed Tel, as opposed to AGT in the
rest of Alberta), 311 should read the number back. Three years ago, in
some cases, 999 would also do this function.

I forgot what the code was in British Columbia, but it was one of the
N11 type codes ... 311 or 511.

More vacation details may follow, considering the holiday isn't quite
over yet.


[e-mail]

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

Date: Mon, 07 Sep 92 00:05:51 EDT
From: David Leibold <[e-mail]>
Subject: Advance Notice of Report On Telecommunications - 8 Sept.


The national newspaper in Canada, {The Globe And Mail} is expected to
have another of its Report on Telecommunications tomorrow, Tuesday,
8th Sept.  More stuff on long distance competition, what Unitel might
be up to, etc. should be expected.


[e-mail]

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

Date: Mon, 7 Sep 92 9:14:39 EDT
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject: Oops, Lost the Reporter


Friday morning (Sept. 4), I had KYW news-radio (1060 AM in
Philadelphia) tuned in.  Al Novak was reporting live from Cherry Hill
(nearby in New Jersey) and then I heard a dialtone for a few seconds.
The woman who was the "anchor" back at the station then broke in and
said "Oops, I think we lost Al Novak."  I guess Mr. Novak was using a
telephone?  What kind of telephone could he have been using?


[Moderator's Note: Apparently a regular dialup line, or perhaps a
cellular phone on his end to a regular POTS line in the studio.   PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #689
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa26225;
          8 Sep 92 1:22 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA25510
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 7 Sep 1992 23:28:11 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA27694
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 7 Sep 1992 23:28:01 -0500
Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1992 23:28:01 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #691

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 7 Sep 92 23:28:07 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 691

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Illinois Bell Now Allows Remote Call Forwarding Changes (John Higdon)
    Re: Call Home Country Codes from UK and France (George Mitchell)
    Re: Calling 911 From a Cellular Phone ([e-mail])
    Re: GTE Cordless/Cellular Service in Tampa FL (John R. Levine)
    Re: Telecom Using Power Lines (Jim Haynes)
    Re: Cellular Providers Charge Air-Time Forwarding to Land Line (S Forrette)
    Re: Cellular 911 Equivalent in Chicago (John Perkins)
    Re: Radios in Die Hard (Pat Turner)
    Re: Radios in Die Hard (John Gilbert)
    Re: Baby Bells and States (Hans Mulder)
    Re: Baby Bells and States (David G. Lewis)
    Re: Baudot Codes (Kevin J. Barth)
    Re: Baudot Codes (Rich Greenberg)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 7 Sep 92 12:48 PDT
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: Illinois Bell Now Allows Remote Call Forwarding Changes


On Sep 5 at 11:21, TELECOM Moderator writes:

> [Moderator's Note: IBT has always been considered a very progressive
> and advanced company. After all, ESS started here, in Morris, IL back
> in the 1960's ... and we had it routine use in various exchanges as
> early as 1974 downtown. We had lots of centrex in use in the 1960's.
> The company has always been involved in the community with numerous
> charitable donations and services.  PAT]

Just a little plug here for Pacific Bell. Before divestiture, Pacific
Telephone was the lowliest step child of AT&T. It was the last of the
Operating Companies to get any technological advancement. No crossbar
until the mid-fifties. No touch tone until the late-sixties. No ESS
until the early seventies. Virtually every other BOC was at least a
half-decade ahead of anything that Pacific Telephone was allowed to
do.

Since divestiture, it has been playing a very successful game of
"catch-up". It has virtually eliminated all mechanical switching
throughout its system. It is right up to speed (technically) with ISDN
and other specialized services. It is CLASS-capable, although the
technoweenie-controlled PUC is making sure that customers cannot
benefit. I would put post-divestiture Pacific Bell up against most of
the other operating companies in the country.

Pacific Bell is a major supporter of the arts and charities. You will
find its name as sponsor on many worthwhile charitable projects in
California. It has a most progressive employment policy. It regularly
provides its services for charitable events at no charge. And with all
of this manages to deliver local service about 20% cheaper than GTE,
who has no noticable community involvement whatsoever.

Yes, IBT is a very progressive company. It should be; it was the
favored son of the former Bell System. It had a tremendous head start.
Pacific Bell has gone from being one of the most backward telcos to
its current position in less than a decade. Not a bad endorsement for
divestiture, if you ask me.


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


[Moderator's Note: Has anyone ever noticed how many senior management
people at AT&T came there from Illinois Bell? A former chairman of
AT&T held the same position at IBT for several years. In another angle
to this thread, Lauren Weinstein posed some questions about possible
risks involved with remotely programmed call forwarding. I responded
and then another message which unfortunatly seems to have gotten lost
here commented on the ease with with people could anonymously use pay
phones to illegally change the call forwarding of someone else. I am
sorry I don't have the message for some reason; I have looked high and
low for it here. The answer is yes, there will always be some risks
involved with any telephone connection to computers.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (George Mitchell)
Subject: Re: Call Home Country Codes from UK and France
Organization: Test Systems Strategies, Inc., Beaverton, Oregon
Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1992 15:37:15 GMT


[e-mail] (Fred E.J. Linton) writes:

> USA (quad)    0800 89 0456     Phone USA (TRT)
> [Submitter's query: Who is TRT?  Used to be the name of AT&T Mail's
> Telex Service.]

TRT = Tropical Radio Telegraph, one of the oldest International Record
Carriers (i.e. telex companies).


George Mitchell ([e-mail]

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

Subject: Re: Calling 911 From a Cellular Phone
Date: Mon, 07 Sep 92 11:27:26 MST
From: [e-mail]


> Incidentally, the rep that programmed my phone said that even if the
> service is disconnected, 911 calls still go through. I never had my
> service disconnected so I don't know if he was right or not.

I am an A carrier subscriber, and once needed to call 911 in an area
with only B carrier service. I switched the phone to B and called 911,
and the call went through without any problems.

So, this is probably true, unless there is some way to "black-list" an
ESN so that it can't be used at all.


Kevin

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

Subject: Re: GTE Cordless/Cellular Service in Tampa FL
Organization: I.E.C.C.
Date: 7 Sep 92 17:39:19 EDT
From: [e-mail] (John R. Levine)


In article <[e-mail]> is written:

> I heard a report on the radio (WMAL in Washington DC) that GTE is
> testing a new service in Tampa FL area.  This unnamed service would
> permit you to use a cordless phone like a cellular phone. ...

This sounds a lot like the British Telepoint system, with small cheap
cordless phones that could be used to make outgoing calls when within
a small radius of a base station, uses digital coding so the
connection is quieter than cellular, and which have been a complete
flop.  {The Economist} had an analysis of them a few weeks ago.  They
point out that if they're outgoing only, their main competition is
with pay phones, not cellular phones.  The Telepoint carriers priced
the phones around $300, as much as a cheap cellular phone, and the
airtime was also about the same as cellular.  Not surprisingly,
customers stayed away in droves.

More recently the Telepoint carriers dropped the prices of the phones
and the air time substantially and got permission to sell combined
pagers and Telepoint phones so you can tell when someone wants to talk
to you, but it's too late.  Something called PCN (which may be digital
cellular but the article wasn't detailed enough to be sure) is on its
way which will be technically as good as cellular and cheaper.


Regards,

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

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

From: [e-mail] (Jim Haynes)
Subject: Re: Telecom Using Power Lines
Date: 7 Sep 1992 22:02:19 GMT
Organization: University of California; Santa Cruz


A long time ago when you went to a telephone business office there
would be a rack of brochures and booklets, including at least one that
explained how telephones work (in terms of electromagnets and carbon
granules and all that kind of stuff that isn't used anymore).  I
believe it was in one of these that I saw mention of a rural telephone
carrier system that used the power line for transmission.  There was a
picture of a farmhouse and a power pole next to it, and a high voltage
capacitor that ran from the high voltage power line to a box that had
the telephone electronics in it.


[e-mail]    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: Cellular Providers Charge Air-Time Forwarding to Land Line
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 01:11:40 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> infmx![e-mail]
(John Galloway) writes:

> I was very disappointed to find that both Cellular-One and GTE charge
> normal air time rates for calls that are made to your cellular number,
> when you have your number forwarded to a land line.  This seems like a
> real rip off since in this case the only resources being used are the
> land line connected switches, which likely have plenty of bandwidth,
> there is no cellular communication occuring (that I can see anyway, am
> I mistaken?).

Cellular One of Seattle does not do this.  When I lived in California
and asked for an explanation for this practice, I was told that
forwarded calls actually go "over the air," thus the charge.  I guess
they use a different type of switch in Seattle.  :-)

> I had planned to get a cellular, then only give out that number.  When
> I get to an office or am at home, I just forward the cellular to the
> number where I am -- simple.  I only give folks one number and it
> either goes to where I am, or to my home phone with an answering
> machine.  But, as I now realize, this would be very expensive.

That's exactly what I do now, and it works great!  The only problems
I've run into is that on a few occasions, my cellular number has been
out of service due to switch upgrades, software upgrades, etc.
Cellular One of Seattle is pretty good about doing this sort of thing
in the middle of the night on weekends, but they don't realize that
many of us actually use the telephone during those hours and consider
100% uptime a reasonable expectation.  "Real" telephone companies
manage to upgrade their switch software without causing loss of
service -- at least I've never been deprived of service from a
landline carrier for this reason.


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (John Perkins)
Subject: Re: Cellular 911 Equivalent in Chicago
Organization: Rosemount, Inc.
Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1992 21:29:14 GMT


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

> I've called *999 several times on the highways around Chicago to
> report drunk drivers and stranded motorists...

It's been possible to dial 999 from almost any telephone in the UK to
get emergency help since at least the 1940's (when I was a kid).  I've
often thought it would have been nice if this had been adopted as a
world-wide standard and it puzzles me why AT&T chose to use 911 when
they must have been aware of the UK system.

Conversely the US Zip code scheme, which was established first,
appears to be a lot more straightforward than the crackpot British
system.  It almost seems that there's a nationalistic desire to be
different that has spoiled the chance for a lot of useful world
standards.


John Perkins

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: Mon, 7 Sep 92 01:32 EDT
From: rsiatl![e-mail]
Subject: Re: Radios in Die Hard


> not quite. Start with the idea that airplanes are somehow "stuck" at
> the outer marker when the radio goes down, continue through the idea
> that a pilot of a commercial passenger airplane would try to land
> without visual on the runway lights, and end with the idea that you
> can tap into and simulate an airport control tower by attaching
> alligator clips (or equivalent) to the cables and then hacking through
> them with an ax.

Being somewhat familiar with FAA telecommunications, I think you only
scratched the surface.  For one thing control lines for runway lights
would never leave the airport, although packet radio links are
sometimes used.  There also exist several redundant layers of ground
to air communications.  Primary communications would most likely be
from a RCAG (Remote Communications Air to Ground) site or the
equilivent.  If this link fails, there are BUEC (Backup Emergency
Communications) sites that utilize diverse links.  If the RCAG is on a
telco leased line, then an effort would be made to place the BUEC on a
microwave link.  If both of these sites fail there is backup
equipment in the tower building.  If all this fails most towers are
equipped with portable units in the tower cab.

If for some reason all of this fails, the nearest center could vector
traffic away from the airport with their RAGS or BUEC's.  The tower
would be connected to the center with either leased lines or microwave
links.  If these fail, VHF and HF radio nets are in place across the
country linking major airports with the centers and FAA offices.  Hams
would drool over the computer controlled radios, high gain Log
Periodic antennas and PK-232 TNCs, often located in screen rooms for
EMP protection.

The part about planes landing without any visual contact is valid, as
long as the plane and airport have the right equipment.  If there is
enough RVR (Runway Visual Range) the pilot can land blind.  I beleve
this is called either a Cat. III or Cat. I landing, I forget which,
I'm not a pilot.  The towers at some airports are equipped with surface
radar for observing planes on the surface of the airport when they are
not visable from the tower cab.


Disclaimer: The above is my opinion only.
Pat Turner   KB4GRZ   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (John Gilbert)
Subject: Re: Radios in Die Hard
Organization: Motorola, Inc. Land Mobile Products Sector
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 04:11:55 GMT


My favorites from the Die Hard movies were:

In the first movie where the portable two-way radios talk to the bad
guys inside the building, but when taken to the roof talk to the
police on the same frequency. (These are those fancy full-duplex
two-way radios). Not a very good choice of frequencies by the bad
guys, or very wise placement of voting receivers by the police.

In the second movie in one scene the DTMF keypad activates the
"scrambler code."  In another scene the thumbwheel frequency switches
on top (same radio) are used for this function.

It is always fun to see how many times the actors talk into the wrong
side of the microphone, use a phone without a cord or a radio control
head without any control cable.

Back a few years ago, Motorola made dummy portable radios for
Hollywood.  Just a regular radio, battery and antenna -- minus all the
guts.  Some of the production line workers got autographed pictures of
the cast who used their radios. On the other hand there were other
shows that just stuck a telescopic antenna on a pager for their
two-way radios.


John Gilbert    [e-mail]

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

Date: Mon, 7 Sep 92 16:14:16 +0200
From: [e-mail] (Hans Mulder)
Subject: Re: Baby Bells and States


In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Laird P.
Broadfield) writes:

> Judge Greene:  "Okay, how many little companies?"
> AT&T attorney: "Ummm, how about, ahhhhh... ... one?"

Actually, it went more like:

Judge Greene:    "Okay, imagine you're representing Snow White.
         How may dwarves will your client need?"

> Hee hee.


Hans Mulder    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (david.g.lewis)
Subject: Re: Baby Bells and States
Organization: AT&T
Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1992 15:25:12 GMT


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

>> [Moderator's Note: Actually, I believe one thing Greene did NOT say
>> was how many holding companies there had to be or how many telcos
>> would be assigned to each. I think AT&T was allowed to decide.  PAT]

> Judge Greene:  "Okay, how many little companies?"
> AT&T attorney: "Ummm, how about, ahhhhh... ... one?"

> Hee hee.

Not so hee hee.  EOBS says, quoting directly from the MFJ, "nothing in
this Modification of Final Judgment shall require or prohibit the
consolidation of ownership of the BOCs into any particular number of
entities."

I read this to mean that it would have been perfectly valid for AT&T
to spin off the 22 BOCs into a single holding company, say, American
Local Telephone and Telegraph, *provided* there was *no* corporate
relationship between that holding company and AT&T.

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

From: [e-mail] (Kevin J. Barth)
Subject: Re: Baudot Codes
Organization: University of Maryland, College Park
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 01:22:54 GMT


There are actually several Baudot codes.  The more-or-less standard
one (dubbed the "U.S. Military version" in the ITT Handbook) is
commonly used by amateur radio operators and can be found in the
Amateur Radio Handbook published by ARRL, among many other sources.
There is also a European standard, a weather standard, and probably a
couple of others I've forgotten about.  They all differ primarily in
the shifted characters, i.e., the punctuation.  Alphanumerics are the
same.

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

From: [e-mail] (Rich Greenberg)
Subject: Re: Baudot Codes
Organization: Hatch Usenet and E-mail.  Playa del Rey, CA
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 04:22:44 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(thomas.e.lowe) writes:

> I need the five bit codes (mark/space) for the baudot protocol.  If
> anyone has them, I would appreciate a copy.

Find an electronics store with a good selection of amateur radio
books.  Look for one on amateur RTTY.  Most amateurs use (used to
use?) Baudot.  (Some (many?) now use ASCII.)


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

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #691
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa27733;
          8 Sep 92 2:04 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA09980
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 8 Sep 1992 00:09:07 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA06860
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 8 Sep 1992 00:08:57 -0500
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 00:08:57 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #692

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 8 Sep 92 00:09:10 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 692

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Bad Connection to MCI (Alan L. Varney)
    Re: Bad Connection to MCI (Rolando Vinluan)
    Re: Weird Intercept (John Higdon)
    Re: What Number am I Calling From? (Elizabeth Fong Wah Chan)
    Re: PC-Based Automated Messaging Systems Information Request (E. Chan)
    Re: Telephone Directories? (Brendan Kehoe)
    Re: Summary: Tapeless Answering Machines (Michael Schuster)
    Re: Distinctive-Ringing Decoder (Harold Hallikainen)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 7 Sep 92 12:10:15 CDT
From: [e-mail] (Alan L Varney)
Subject: Re: Bad Connection to MCI
Organization: AT&T Network Systems, Lisle, IL


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail].
umn.edu (John M. Sullivan) writes:

> A friend of mine just moved to a new apartment yesterday, here in
> Minneapolis.  Her phone was connected by US West on schedule.  She
> requested MCI Dial-1 service ...

{Summary: 1 + ten-digit dialing lead to regular Vacant Code
announcement with "2EB" appended.  So did 1+ 700-555-4141.  10222 + 00
worked, but 10222 + 1 + ten-digit didn't.  10XXX to AT&T/Sprint with
ten digits worked.}

   I have an explanation at the end, but you'll need the material
below to understand it.

> This, and the "2EB" code in the message, led me to believe that the
> problem was MCI's.  ....  {Placed 3-way call between MCI and USWest.}
> ....  They were both agreeing that my problems were due to
> USWest not having put in the Dial-1 choice properly, and I couldn't
> convince them otherwise.

    I'll side with MCI here (and that's not frequent) -- Vacant Code
is USUALLY from three possible points on an inter-LATA call:

  - the originating CO when it finds a routing error on the call,
    and the error isn't due to 10XXX, 1+, 0+, or international
    prefix digits; (Classic case is the NPA-NXX does not exist.)

  - the first switch reached in the terminating LATA determines that
    it's not the proper IC delivery point for that NPA-NXX; or

  - an IC switch believes the NPA-NXX doesn't exist -- in other
    words, there is no LATA that owns the NPA-NXX.

   Some ICs alter the wording somewhat from the Bellcore suggested
Vacant Code announcement, allowing this case to be distinguished from
the LEC cases.  The second one (terminating LATA) can be detected
(until SS7) by the time delay in getting to the LATA.  90% of the
time, it's a customer dialing error and/or CO routing error detected
at the originating CO.

> At one point the conversation went:

> USW: Is your pick code two-twenty-two?
> me:  Yes.
> USW: Is she [MCI] still on the line?
> me:  I don't know.
> MCI: Oh.  What?
> USW: Is your pick code two-twenty-two?
> MCI: What's a pick code?
> me:  You know, like one-oh-two-two-two.
> MCI: Oh, I've never heard it called a pick code. [Neither had I]

> Does anyone out there know what's going on here?

   Correct non-lingo version of conversation:

USW: (to the IC) Is your Carrier Identification Code two-two-two?
MCI: Yes it is.

   Carrier Identification Code (CIC): The XXX (or XXXX, soon) digits
that select a particular Carrier.  CIC can also mean Circuit
Identification Code (labels a particular trunk in SS7); those
documents that refer to both have started using TCIC for the latter.

   Carrier Access Code: The code dialed by a customer to select a
particular Carrier (10XXX or 950-WXXX today).

   PIC (pronounced "pick"): Pre-subscribed InterLATA Carrier -- the
value of the CIC you have selected (if any) to carry Inter-LATA calls
dialed without a Carrier Access Code.

   ICs are not familiar with the term PIC because it is typically used
only by people who deal with IC pre-subscription in the CO.

> What message should I hear when dialing 1-700-555-4141 if no carrier
> is selected for Dial-1?

   The announcement for "10XXX Omitted when Required" is:

   "We're sorry, a long-distance company access code is required for
the number you have dialed.  Please dial your call with the access
code."

   But an (option) allows regular Vacant Code to be used, and many COs
pick that option.

> (If I dial 10-xxx-1-700-555-4141 for a random choice of "xxx", I hear
> a very long pause with some touchtones in the background, and finally
> "doo-wee-dee Your call failed.  Please try again".)

   This is not consistent with your claim that 10288 and 10333 would
complete ten-digit calls.  Nor is the announcement consistent with the
selection of an invalid XXX value.  Maybe you picked XXX values for
ICs that don't support "700-555-1212" identification.

                            ------

   So here's my analysis (with the help of a couple of Interconnect
experts):

   10XXX + ten digits works for other carriers, so your line has not
   been denied all InterLATA calls.

   10222 + 00 works, so you are not totally denied FG-D access.

   You implied 10222 +0 + ten digits didn't work.
   Answer -- there is a "feature" called Selective Carrier Denial
   (SCD) that prevents all access to an IC (or list of ICs) except
   for 10XXX + 00 and 1 + 800 calls.  (Actually, I believe 00 also
   works if your PIC is one of the denied Carriers).

   I'd give this a 75% chance of being the root cause.  How much more
do you want for free?


Al Varney -- remember, just MY opinion.

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

From: Rolando Vinluan <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Bad Connection to MCI
Organization: Cornell Univ. CS Dept, Ithaca NY 14853
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 01:55:12 GMT


[e-mail] (John M. Sullivan) writes:

> A friend of mine just moved to a new apartment yesterday, here in
> Minneapolis.  Her phone was connected by US West on schedule.  She had
> requested MCI Dial-1 service, and had told MCI about her new number so
> that her account billing and F+F circle, etc would be transferred
> over.

> But she couldn't dial 1 + area + number yesterday.  I suggested trying
> 10222 + 1 + area + number, but this behaved exactly the same way.
> After a ring or two, we heard the message "Your call cannot be
> completed as dialed.  Please check the number and dial again.  2EB"
> (no doo-wee-dee tones at the beginning). This same message was heard
> when dialing 1-700-555-4141.  I then tried placing a long distance
> call with ATT (10288) and Sprint (10333).  Both of these worked fine.

> Does anyone out there know what's going on here?

    I don't exactly what was wrong in your case (though I have a
suspicion) but I have a similar experience (horror story, IMO):

    I switched to MCI last May. I do a lot of long-distance calls,
and they were cheaper, though their international lines suck compared
to AT&T.

    Last July, I was out of the country for the whole month. When
I got back early August, I found my long-distance wouldn't work!  My
NYT phone bill wasn't due till a couple of days from the time I got
there, but evidently, they thought I couldn't pay and cut off my line!
Which is pretty strange to me ... because here I am giving them a LOT
of business, and then they cut me off. I pay my bill that week, and I
expect them to get it on back. No dice. 1022 doesn't work, even asking
NYT to get me MCI doesn't work -- nothing works.

        I get almost the same message you got, but with a "2CY." I
call Customer Service. They say there's no problem with my account,
and we try to call NYT to get a three-way connection, but it's the
start of the schoolyear and we can't get through. The operator says
she'll put my problem in and handle it. I wait a week ... it's still
dead. I call NYT (up to now, I thought it was their problem), and they
say their's nothing wrong with my account at their end, it's MCI's
problem.  I call MCI again, and the operator says my account is okay,
so he'll make a "Trouble report" or whatever on it right away.

After three days, still no long distance. By this time, I really
would've switched to AT&T, if only switching didn't take so long -- I
needed it by next week, you see. So, I call MCI again, and FINALLY the
operator tells me that "oh, there's a block on your line" EVEN when I
paid them over three weeks ago AND I'd kept asking them the previous
times to double-check this fact. She says, it's gonna be turned on in
48 hours. It was turned on in 72 hours.

    MCI is pretty incompetent, in my experience. If they didn't
have that Northwest tie-up, I'd never have gotten them. As soon as
AT&T starts offering a competitive Frequent-Flyer program (their
current one is still lousy), I'll definitely switch back.

    Maybe somebody from MCI is listening. Talk to me again when
your company's gotten your act together.

    (Oh, and about that "suspicion": In my first call, when I told
the operator my problem, I guess one of the things that prevented her
from checking out my *real* situation was that she immediately assumed
that my local carrier was USWest. So, I guess a lot of people ended up
in your situation.)


Randy

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

Date: Mon, 7 Sep 92 10:11 PDT
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: Weird Intercept


MPA15AB![e-mail] writes:

> In this case, GTE has an airtight alibi: the intercept only occurs
> when I try it from my office (in PacBell land) as a normal, 1+ call.
> If I place it over our long-distance network, or via a major LD
> carrier, it goes through fine.

Ah, a PBX. Are you quite positive that there are no GTE FX circuits
available as routes to the ARS? And of course, you cannot be sure
exactly what a PBX may be appending or prepending to what you dial (as
set up by the system administrator).

I realize that problems are not GTE's fault 100% of the time, but I
would like to make absolutely sure. After all, GTE blames most of its
own screwups on Pac*Bell. Figure that one out.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Elizabeth Fong Wah Chan)
Subject: Re: What Number am I Calling From?
Organization: Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, B.C., Canada
Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1992 08:34:05 GMT


In Vancouver, B.C., Canada, we can pick up the phone and press 211;
the phone number belongs to the phone that you are using will be echo
back.  Try this, it may work for you at your part of the world.

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

From: [e-mail] (Elizabeth Fong Wah Chan)
Subject: Re: PC-Based Automated Messaging Systems Information Request
Organization: Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, B.C., Canada
Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1992 08:40:53 GMT


Get a copy of {Voice Processing Magazine}. You may call them at
800-638-1376.


Good luck,

Louie


[Moderator's Note: *Why* should we get a copy of the magazine? Was
there some article of particular interest?  Were we to obtain any
certain issue?   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Brendan Kehoe)
Subject: Re: Telephone Directories?
Date: 7 Sep 92 07:34:11 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Cygnus Support, Palo Alto, CA


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail].
edu (Jonathan Magid) writes:

   In article [e-mail], cb705@cleveland.
Freenet.Edu (Jason K. Green) writes:

> Does anyone know if there are any telephone directories on line?
> (Not electronic-address directories)

I  would check out WAIS sources (list of servers) at think.com.

Many universities have their phone lists available through wais
(UNC does, for instance), so if the person you are looking for
is at enlightened university :), you may be lucky.

I think Jason was asking about your conventional phone-company
supplied directory, not faculty directories and such.

But, unless you're just curious about this sort of thing, this is the
sort of thing that old fashioned tools (like the phone company's
directory service) are suited to.

Uh-uh, don't go limiting it.  I'm sure a few years ago many people
said exactly that about making airline reservations.

An idea I had, but never followed through with, was to approach
leading carriers (Bell Atlantic, Pacific Bell, NYNEX, etc) about
making their directories accessible over the Internet.  It would
probably involve creating search software (WAIS isn't well-suited to
the kinds of lookups necessary for normal directory assistance), as
well as convincing upper management that it would be in their best
interest.  (Doing so in an area where there's a per-call charge for
directory assistance would be uniquely difficult, though.)

Another problem would be abuse of the system, by doing mass searches
for "everyone named Mary," or using it for destructive purposes.
Those issues would have to be properly addressed, as well.

To use an example from my own experience, I began investigating what
might be needed for Bell of PA to make such a thing available on
PrepNet.  I didn't get too far (it was more of a problem of "who do I
talk to?" than being turned away).  Perhaps someone else, with better
resources, might find their attempts more fruitful than I.


Brendan Kehoe    [e-mail]
Cygnus Support, Palo Alto, CA    [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Michael Schuster)
Subject: Re: Summary: Tapeless Answering Machines
Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1992 12:38:51 GMT
Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix & Internet, NYC


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

> Panasonic KX-T8000

Here are some further comments after owning one for a few weeks.

> maybe has remote selective deletion of messages

Yes, it does. You can delete the current message or all messages using
the *4 or *5 key combinations. There is a minor timing problem though;
on long hang-up calls (i.e. when the caller hangs up just after the
beep; too late to be dumped by the CPC detector) it is impossible to
hit *4 fast enough to selectively delete that message remotely.  All
message delete will remove it remotely, and the selective delete
button on the console will get it locally.

The skip/forward buttons also work remotely: you can go back and forth
between stored messages with a keypress.

Complaints: voice quality is actually better over the phone than
through the speaker. Digital voice is okay, better than the SONY, but
still lacking in treble. Nobody has complained or, for that matter,
even noticed that I changed machines.

Some features on cheaper Panasonic analog machines ( e.g. dual
outgoing messages, priority message) are not present on this model.

Remote delete does not =say= "DELETED", it just plays a staccato of
beeps at you. Since it uses voice for everything else, I consider this
a design flaw.

Also has rapid playback (no Mickey Mouse) on either local or remote
playback of messages. Can be toggled remotely too.

The above minor niggles notwithstanding, this is rapidly becoming my
all-time favorite answering machine.


Mike Schuster
NY Pub. Access UNIX/Internet: [e-mail] | [e-mail]
The Portal (R) System: [e-mail]   | MCI Mail,GEnie: MSCHUSTER

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

From: [e-mail] (Harold Hallikainen)
Subject: Re: Distinctive-Ringing Decoder
Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo
Date: Mon, 07 Sep 1992 16:54:02 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> Alan TC Penn <[e-mail]>
writes:

> I am going for a distinctive-ringing decoder or demultiplexer. The
> function of this device is to route the incoming phone message
> directly to either an answering machine or a modem.

    Seems that the telecom device companies (modem manufacturers,
fax machine manufacturers, phone manufacturers, etc.) ought to put the
distinctive ringing decoder inside their machines.  It should "be just
software".  Are there standards for distinctive ringing (standard
cadence, etc.).  I guess we could handle some of it in software by
watching the RI line on modems.


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

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #692
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa10836;
          8 Sep 92 9:00 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA05746
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 8 Sep 1992 06:47:41 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA09516
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 8 Sep 1992 06:47:33 -0500
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 06:47:33 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #693

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 8 Sep 92 06:47:34 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 693

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: American Phone on British Phone System (Nigel Roberts)
    Re: Voice Message Service (John Higdon)
    Re: V.25bis, or: Are CCITT and PTTs Totally Bonkers? (John Nagle)
    Re: How Can I Splice Telephone Wires Without an Overkill? (M. McCormick)
    Re: Motorola "Advisor" Pager Question ([e-mail])
    Re: Automated Hate Calls in Minnesota (Leonard Erickson)
    Re: Working Assets Long Distance (James Hartman)
    Re: New Book: Federal Telecommunications Law (Leonard Erickson)
    Re: Real Legislation, or Hoaxes? (Harold Hallikainen)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Nigel Roberts)
Subject: Re: American Phone on British Phone system
Date: 7 Sep 92 09:36:10
Organization: IC Software AG (on contract at DEC)


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Nancy J
Airey) writes:

> Some time ago I picked up a phone connector at an electronics gadget
> store that is supposed to "convert" an American "modular" phone to a
> British modular plug.  The American end is the "typical" one I'm used
> to seeing.  The "British" end is somewhat larger but has a similar
> type of "push in" connection.  (Love the technical terms!)

That's actually a pretty accurate description. I have a similar
adaptor for American plug to TAE (new German) sockets.

> I am planning on giving a "nice" phone to some friends over there for
> Christmas.

Depends why you want to do this. If it's simply that your friends
would appreciate a nice phone, then the optimum way to do this would
be to order a phone by telephone from a supplier somewhere in the
U.K., pay by credit card and have them deliver it. That way, you and
your friends will get no hassles over the lack of BABT approval (it's
against the law to connect any phone which does not have BABT
approval, even if it has FCC approval).

On the other hand, you may simply want to send them a fun phone which
is not available in the U.K. In that case don't forget that they will
have to pay duty (5%??) and then Value Added Tax (17.5%) to Customs
and Excise, unless you simply smuggle it in with on a visit.  (You are
limited to bring in not more than approximatly $50 worth of goods).

> Now I know that I could not select any phone that has features
> requiring electrical connections and expect a direct connection, but
> what is the likelihood that making a connection for the other end is

Actually, most phones which need electrical power run off low voltage
DC (e.g. 9v or 12v). It's usually no hassle to get a replacement power
supply with 240v AC input (instead of 110v AC) for between $5-$10.

> going be a hassle?  Are modular wall outlets common?

The are almost universal nowadays -- they started to be introduced
over ten years ago.

> For any British folks reading this -- what would be a "nice" feature
> set on a phone for you to get as a gift? I haven't been in a lot of
> private homes, and am not sure if things like programmable speed
> calling, speakerphone etc. are appealing -- or would the cutesy phones
> (Mickey Mouse, Kermit the Frog) be more appreciated?

Most ordinary people (i.e. non-DIGEST readers) in the U.K. aren't too
worried about such things. I know what *I'd* like for Xmas -- that'd
be a standard Bell System 2500 set.

One thing to bear in mind is that if your friends use Mercury long-
distance service, you will need to make sure the phone you give them
has at least one memory button which can store mixed pulse and tone
numbers up to 16 digits long. Many phones sold in the U.K. are sold as
"Mercury compatible" phones and have an extra blue memory button for
this purpose.

> Is this going to work on touchtone -- or will it have to be set to
> dial-pulse?

Depends on the area code. I think that over half of the country has
been converted to digital exchanges which understand either TouchTone
(a trademark of BT in the UK) or pulse (There are no extra charges for
TT).  The rest can only understand loop disconnect (pulse) dialing.

Hope the above helps.


Nigel Roberts       | [e-mail]      | Tel. [phone]
European Engineer  | P O Box 49,Manningtree,CO11 2SZ |  &   [phone]
G4IJF           | "Life is but a tale . . . "     | FAX  [phone]

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

Date: Mon, 7 Sep 92 10:44 PDT
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: Voice Message Service


Jerry Leichter <[e-mail]> writes:

> The first time I saw an example of this service, it was at an
> SNET-owned and operated pay phone outside of Hartford, Connecticut
> about two years ago.

> Unless someone can find an older COCOT implementation, I'm afraid the
> points for "innovation" go to the operating companies here.

There have been COCOTs doing this in some areas for well over two
years. Of course, they are only able to do this on long distance calls
since the COCOT operator has absolutely no local access other than
dial tone. The LEC has interim access and can manipulate the call,
local or not.

>> Of course it does this with free money and its superior network
>> access.

> then why should I, as a consumer, care?  Neither "choice" nor the
> financial health of entrepreneurs in the telecom business is of
> importance to me; product quality and price are what I care about.

And if you have no choice, how do you know that either the quality or
the price is as good as it COULD be?

This is an exceedingly short view of the industry. The engine that
drives innovation is the expectation of ultimate rewards. The
financial health of entrepreneurs in the telecom business should
bloody well be of concern to you because if they die, you can kiss
innovation goodbye and you will have whatever the LECs in their
infinite wisdom decide to provide to you. Period.

You do not think that the LECs will raise the price on that which it
has a monopoly (after putting the original entrepreneur out of
business)? I direct your attention to a very substantial rate
restructuring that will shortly be approved by the CPUC. It calls for
rate reductions on virtually every service for which the LECs have
competitors and hefty rate increases on everything for which there is
no competition (yet), such as small business and residential dial tone
service.

It irriates me greatly to hear people say that it matters not who
tramples over whom as long as they get a good product cheap (in the
short run). With that philosophy, may I suggest that you start doing
business with the mob; it provides some great deals on certain items?
It manages to stay in business and put others out of business using
tactics not much different than the LECs (captive customers, etc.).

The LEC says, "Let us do all of this shell-game marketing and we will
provide you with wonderous services cheap." It looks like you fell for
it.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (John Nagle)
Subject: Re: V.25bis, or: Are CCITT and PTTs Totally Bonkers?
Date: Mon, 07 Sep 92 19:12:28 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest)


Toby Nixon <[e-mail]> writes:

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

>> OK, I can see that a PTT might want to have some reasonable
>> regulations that restrict automatic redialing by modems and similar
>> devices, to prevent older switch equipment from being overloaded.  But
>>  ... a Forbidden Numbers list?  With numbers that stay on it FOREVER??
>> Have these people totally taken leave of their senses?  If I dial up
>> my local BBS in Zurich, and the system is down, and the modem doesn't
>> answer four times, I am Forbidden from ever trying it again?

      If it works reasonably, this is a useful feature.  If you call a
number, and it is busy, some countries require that you not call it
again for a period of time.  South American countries with
underconfigured COs (notably Brazil) have required this for years.  So
that's the mandatory delay.

      Busy numbers shouldn't be added to the Forbidden Numbers list,
and numbers that answer and present modem tones won't be.  Only
numbers that answer, but don't present modem tones, should end up on
the Forbidden Numbers list.  This makes sense; if a number is
answering but not attached to a modem, there probably isn't a modem
there and the calling end should stop calling and annoying somebody.

      If the receiving system is down, that's OK.  Either the modem
doesn't answer the phone, or it answers the phone and brings up a data
connection, even if no data can be transmitted.  The only real problem
comes with some old systems where, when the system went down, a voice
message was switched on.  But that's rare today.


John Nagle

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

Subject: Re: How Can I Splice Telephone Wires Without an Overkill?
Date: Mon, 07 Sep 92 07:15:50 -0500
From: [e-mail]


Regular NO22 or NO24 gauge station wire can be spliced by using just
about any kind of common splicing device.  Of course,if the wire is
going to be exposed to the elements, the splices must be air and water
resistant, but in-doors, one could use anything from wire nuts to
crimp terminals as well as solder and tape.  Another variation is
solder and heat-shrinkable tubing.  Some heat-shrink tubing is even
rated for out-door use.

     Several years ago, we had a tremendously bad period of rain which
flooded the cable tunnels under the Oklahoma State University campus.
The telephones were out because water had breached the outer covering
on a 2400 pair cable and converted it into a 2400 channel audio mixer.
After the technicians had found the internally soggy cable, they
replaced it.  While I have no idea what method was used to splice each
pair of wires, I do know that the technicians were seen taking whole
tubes of RTV silicone rubber caulk, cutting the bottom of the tubes
open with a pair of tinsnips and stuffing large bundles of spliced
connections into the tube so that they would eventually be encased in
a capsule of hardened rubber.  It seemed pretty down-to-Earth and
practical when you consider that this practice probably saved a lot of
man-hours.


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

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

Organization: The American University - University Computing Center
Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1992 11:04:56 EDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Motorola "Advisor" Pager Question


Steve,

To answer your question concerning the Motorola Alphanumeric pager
I'll make a couple assumptions; the pager is a PMR2000, and your
service is a for-profit company. BTW - I am not an Motorola empployee.

The PMR2000 has three small holes on the bottom of the unit that look
like contacts for something ... well the PMR2000 has a couple optional
devices; a printer, and charger, and a printer charger. As to which
does what I cannot help you, but I am confident that someone at the
paging company can; if its a local "Ma and Pa" company you are likely
not to get any help, but if its a larger service (ie: Bell Operating
Co like PacTel, Bell Atlantic, NYNEX, etc) or one of the larger
private services like MetroComm, PageNet or even the national company
called SkyTel (MTel) you can expect that *someone* knows how the thing
works.

If you still are not satisfied I would snag the local yellow pages (or
OneBook) and find the nearest MOTOROLA SALES office (not a dealer).
If your not close to one email me ... I'll see what I can do; no
promises or timelines.

A long time ago I helped some people at a non-profit agency in Glen
Burnie, MD called Volunteers for Medical Engineering (VME) with
similar, but unique challenges ... haven't spoken with anyone since
moving away.  Again, no promises.

Also, your friends that have PC's and modems can alphanumerically page
you as well using commercial software; I have a *demo* copy for ONE
alpha USER and ONE paging service I'd be happy to pass on.

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

From: [e-mail] (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Automated Hate Calls in Minnesota
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: SCN Research/Qic Laboratories of Tigard, Oregon.
Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1992 16:33:57 GMT


[e-mail] (Andrew Klossner) writes:

> TELECOM Moderator notes:

>> What would you rather have, a phone call like that or the Jehovah
>> Witnesses coming to your door at 9 AM on Saturday morning like they do
>> mine?

> I'll take the visit.  Then I know who it is, and they react so nicely
> if I open the door unclothed.  :-)

> JWs are supposed to keep files on area households.  Tell them firmly
> that you have your own faith, are definitely not interested in theirs,
> and ask that they please never visit you again, and (if the system
> works) they'll leave you alone.  (However, they'll deny that any such
> file exists.)

This explains the why a friend's "solution" worked. He merely invited
some friends over and had what appeared to be a full fledged Black
Mass going on in the background when answered the door (in a cowled
robe).

I've never been bothered by them at home, and on the bus mall
downtown, they are the *only* religious types that will just nod and
walk on when given a polite "No, thank you." response to the offer of
their literature.


Leonard Erickson              [e-mail]
CIS: [70465,203]             [e-mail]
FIDO:   1:105/51     [e-mail]
(The CIS & Fido addresses are preferred)


[Moderator's Note: Not only that, hotels all over the USA bid for the
JW annual convention. They are the one group which leaves the meeting
hall cleaner than they found it when they got there. A janitor at the
Hilton here said he couldn't believe how *little* cleanup there was to
do after the JW convention a few years ago.   PAT]

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

Subject: Re: Working Assets Long Distance
From: unkaphaed![e-mail] (James Hartman, Sysop)
Date: Mon, 07 Sep 92 20:30:14 GMT
Organization: Unka Phaed's UUCP Thingy


[e-mail] (Mark McWiggins) writes:

> A friend is considering Working Assets for long distance. Do you have
> any experience with this service? Would you do it again?

I do not personally have any experience, but a friend of mine who was
originally trying to get me to switch (for those not in the know,
Working Assets channels the money you spend on long distance into
contributions to various groups doing good things -- for example, you
could have your money go to Greenpeace) told me not to switch, because
she said she suddenly got a HUGE phone bill.  Apparently, Working
Assets raised their rates or changed their agreement with whatever LD
company they worked with and didn't bother to tell her (or did and she
didn't read her bill correctly).  Either way, she wound up with a bill
over twice what she thought it should be.  She cancelled with Working
Assets very quickly (after paying the bill).


[e-mail] (da sysop)

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

From: [e-mail] (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: New Book: Federal Telecommunications Law
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: SCN Research/Qic Laboratories of Tigard, Oregon.
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 01:42:48 GMT


[e-mail] (Scott Loftesness) writes:

> I am pleased to recommend an excellent new book the subject of the US
> telecommunications law.  The book, titled "Federal Telecommunications
> Law" (ISBN 0-316-48676-0 published by Little, Brown & Company), was
> written by Michael K. Kellogg, John Thorne, and Peter W. Huber.

One minor detail is missing. What's it *cost*?


Leonard Erickson              [e-mail]
CIS: [70465,203]             [e-mail]
FIDO:   1:105/51     [e-mail]
(The CIS & Fido addresses are preferred)

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

From: [e-mail] (Harold Hallikainen)
Subject: Re: Real Legislation, or Hoaxes?
Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo
Date: Tue, 08 Sep 1992 03:40:48 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Michael A. Covington) writes:

> I've been told that the following two pieces of legislation are before
> the Senate, but cannot identify them from Congressional Record and
> similar references.  Can anybody fill me in?

> (1) A ban on private consulting in electronics, "S. 1706," recently
> mentioned by a letter writer in Robert Pease's column in Electronic
> Design.  (There is a S. 1706, but it deals with import duties on
> certain industrial chemicals.)

    As I recall, the legislation in question (which I think may
have gone through several years ago) has to do with the IRS
determining whether a worker is a contractor or an employee.
Companies often use "job shops" as technical temp agencies to hire
engineers for fixed term projects.  These may last several years.
Under these circumstances, the worker is an employee of the job shop,
which is a contractor to the "end customer".  Many engineers would
like to work something similar, being contractors instead of
employeess while not having part of "their pay" going to the job shop.

         Actually, this seems pretty reasonable to me, though I have
not studied it thoroughly.  One is a consultant and contractor if one
provides that service to several customers, maintains an office where
a substantial portion of that work is done, set the hours and
conditions and provides the tools.  If someone goes to work 9 to 5
every day at someone elses premises, and that someone else provides
the tools, it sure looks like employment to me!

    There are, of course, several other questions to consider in
offering "consulting engineering" services.  One major issue is state
licensing.


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

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #693
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa12185;
          8 Sep 92 9:38 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA26163
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 8 Sep 1992 07:34:21 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA11829
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 8 Sep 1992 07:34:12 -0500
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 07:34:12 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #694

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 8 Sep 92 07:34:00 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 694

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Calling Card Changes For SNET in CT (Howard Pierpont)
    Are Wireless-Tapping Laws in England so Loose? (H. Shrikumar)
    Information Wanted on GTD-5 Centrex (Joseph Bergstein)
    T1 Interface for PC/Workstation (Looking for Product) (Chang Hyeoungkyu)
    Eavesdropping on the British Royal Family (Charlie Mingo)
    Financial World Sept. 15 on Telecom (Bruce Klopfenstein)
    Clients, Cheats, Crooks (Richard Nash)
    Re: AT&T 'Buying' Back Customers (Gerald Ruderman)
    Re: AT&T 'Buying' Back Customers (Joe Trott)
    Re: Unadvertised SW Bell Offering (Charles Mattair)
    Re: Modem Access From Europe to North America (Julian Macassey)
    Re: Calling 911 From a Cellular Phone (John Lebert)
    Information Wanted About Clearing Houses (Sharon Kroo)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 7 Sep 92 16:35:29 PDT
From: HOWARD PIERPONT <[e-mail]>
Subject: Calling Card Changes for SNET in CT


The August issue of SNETnews "A telecommunications newsletter for
Connecticut residents" has an article under the heading "Free for
fall" SNET Calling Cards.

Starting in September, all customers who have ever ordered SNET
Calling Cards will receive new cards in the mail. This scheduled
reissuance will be completed by November.

Changes in the Cards. A few changes have been made recently:

  - Only a four-digit security number appears on the card. Your phone
number is no longer on it, so it's more secure to use and carry.

  - There's a new 800 information number on the back of the card for
customers with questions on how to use the SNET Calling Card.

  - The magnetic strip on the back is fully activated.

Easy-to-use. The SNET Calling Card is still easy to use wherever you
go because it's based on your easy-to-remember home phone number AND
it requires no complicated access codes when calling in North America.
Look for the new card in the mail soon.

Wellllllllll.  If someone steals my wallet, they will know my address.
Seems that they can call DA and get the home number tied to the card.
It will slow down the shoulder surfers. My dad likes having a card
that only has four numbers on it.

If the mag stip is "fully activated" seems that the person who should
not have your card could just pass the card thru a mag reader phone
and still get through.


Howard Pierpont   DEC, Hudson MA   Standard disclaimers apply.


[Moderator's Note: But if a person stole your wallet wouldn't they
likely have your address anyway from your driver's license and other
documents in your wallet? And with the old telephone cards showing
your full phone number they did not have to search out anything. So
what is the solution?    PAT]

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

Date: Mon, 7 Sep 92 18:54:29 -0400
From: [e-mail] (H.Shrikumar{[e-mail]})
Subject: Re: Monitoring of Broadcasts
Reply-To: [e-mail] (H.Shrikumar)
Organization: University of Massachusetts, Amherst


[e-mail] (Laurence Chiu) writes:

>> Then I wonder if those laws apply in England. For those who are not
 ...
>> the cell-phone frequencies.  The last news report I saw indicated that
>> the UK authorities had decided not to take any action against him.

In article <[e-mail]> Charlie.Mingo@p4218.f70.
n109.z1.fidonet.org (Charlie Mingo) writes:

> From what I gather from the British papers, there is no prohibition
> on eavesdropping on cellular or cordless calls.  There is some sort of
> restriction on "using" material heard over the air, but it is not
> being enforced in this case.
  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

> British laws concerning wiretapping in general seem to be rather
> loose.  Recently, members of the press recorded conversations between
> the Minister of National Heritage (David Mellior) and his mistress, by
> tapping into an extension socket at the flat the mistress was using.
> They apparently had the *landlord's* permission, but not that of
> either party to the conversation.  According to the {Sunday Times},
> this activity broke no laws.
                ^^^^^^^^^^^^^

   Funny, and makes me provoke a comment ...

   Not too long ago, perhaps a year and a half at the most, someone
most likely a British, had described the UK as a "police state" when
discussing (if I remember right) "wireless waves coming in my own yard
anyway".

   Has *the* Great Britain changed ?? :-)


shrikumar ([e-mail])

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

From: [e-mail] (Joseph Bergstein)
Date: Tue, 08 Sep 1992 01:37:08 -0500
Subject: Information Wanted on GTD-5 Centrex


Would like to know if anyone has any information on a GTD-5 Centrex
Central office switch?  Believe manufactured by G.T.E.?  In particular
need information on processing S.M.D.R. data from such a switch.  If
anyone has information or knows where to obtain it, please respond.
Thank you.

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

From: [e-mail] (Chang Hyeoungkyu)
Subject: T1 interface for PC/Workstation (Looking for Product)
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 92 10:46:32 KDT


Dear netters,

I want product information that can interface T1 line with PC or Unix
Workstation. Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Why do I need this ?  I want to connect "Computer" to "Switch".  The
computer would do voice synthesis, voice recognition, and optionally
image processing.  Yes, it is IP!


Name:    Chang Hyeoungkyu
Phone:    [phone]
Fax:    [phone]
E-mail:    [e-mail] or [e-mail]
Mail:    Chang Hyeoungkyu
    Switching Services Section, TDX Division
    ETRI, Daeduk Science Town, P.O. Box 8
    Daejeon, 305-350, Republic of Korea

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

From: [e-mail] (Charlie Mingo)
Date: Mon, 07 Sep 1992 20:28:13 -0500
Subject: Eavesdropping on the British Royal Family


   In a previous posting, I had remarked that it did not appear to be
illegal to eavesdrop on cellular or cordless calls in the United
Kingdom.  An article in the September 2nd {International Express} (an
affiliate of the London {Daily Express}) appears to indicate
otherwise.

   The article quotes a spokesman from the British Home Office that a
prosecution under the 1985 Interception of Communications Act may lie
against a ham radio operator who eavesdropped on and recorded a
wireless telephone conversation reportedly between the Princess of
Wales and an admirer.

   "A Home Office spokesman said: 'Under the 1985 Act a conviction at
crown court could mean two years imprisonment plus unlimited fines.

   "'The criteria for bringing a charge are met when a person
intentionally intercepts a communication message in the course of its
transmission.

   "'The only time it is legal to intercept a call is if one of the
parties involved agrees.  To my knowledge, there is no time limit for
bringing a prosecution under the Act.'"

   The conversation was reportedly recorded by Cyril Reenan, a retired
bank manager, who has a large radio installation in his L 200,000 home
in Oxford.

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

From: [e-mail] (Bruce Klopfenstein)
Subject: Financial World Sept. 15 on Telecom
Organization: Bowling Green State University B.G., Oh.
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 04:39:59 GMT


Most of the September 15 issue of {Financial World} is devoted to
"Telecommunications: A Global Report."  I have yet to read it, but
among the topics covered in separate articles are US West/ TCI (cable
TV); British Telecom; British Cable & Wireless; Newspapers vs. Baby
Bells; U.S. Sprint; Nynex; Telco in Former USSR; Privatization;
Alcatel; Japan Telecom in U.S.  Market; and a Table of the "World's 50
Largest Telecom Companies."


Bruce C. Klopfenstein             |  [e-mail]
Department of Telecommunications  |  [e-mail]
322 West Hall                     |  [e-mail]
Bowling Green State University    |  [phone]; 372-2224
Bowling Green, OH  43403-0235     |  fax [phone]

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

Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1992 09:53:01 -0600
From: [e-mail] (Richard Nash)
Subject: Clients, Cheats, Crooks


 From a recent item in {The Edmonton Sun} sometime in early August
that I had ripped out of the newspaper and had been carrying around in
my wallet for a month, page 6 "News";

    Clients, Cheats, Crooks.

[] Refreshing to see some blunt truth in advertising.  Private Lines
Inc. contacted {The Edmonton Sun} to flog its service that allows you
to make phone calls without having your number traced.  It could be a
popular service now that Call Trace and Call Display services are
widely available.  The company advertises its service by saying it's
meant for those who want to:

    o  Cheat on their wives.
    o  Fudge an expense account.
    o  Bet with a bookie.

A news release from the Beverly Hills company says its creator, lawyer
Will Dwyer II apologizes for the suggested uses.  But you can bet he's
not apologizing for making money from people who use the system that
way!


Richard Nash   Edmonton, Alberta Canada T6K 0E8
UUCP:         trickie![e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Gerald Ruderman)
Subject: Re: AT&T 'Buying' Back Customers
Organization: Rational Systems, Inc.
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 02:53:44 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Justin Leavens) writes:

> 'You may already have won').  Strangely enough, this was a real check
> for $40 made out to me, marked 'Endorsement indicates your acceptance'

I got one for only $20 earlier in the summer. Since I did not switch,
you are the beneficiary of them increasing the amount. No if you
hadn't switched the next check would have been for $80 and then if ...


Gerald Ruderman     [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Joe Trott)
Subject: Re: AT&T 'Buying' Back Customers
Organization: U.S Dept. of Transportation
Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1992 18:21:59 GMT


[e-mail] (Justin Leavens) writes:

> I heard someone else mention this briefly before, and I didn't
> understand what they were talking about then, but it seems as though
> AT&T is offering customers $40 to switch to AT&T. I received a mailing
> from AT&T, and I was immediately annoyed by this check-looking thing I
> saw inside (it looked like one of those things that are usually marked
> 'You may already have won').  Strangely enough, this was a real check
> for $40 made out to me, marked 'Endorsement indicates your acceptance'
> or something like that. Anyway, I guess the deal is that if you cash
> the check, you agree to switch over to AT&T. I'll take $40 over my MCI
> totebags and Sprint AM/FM radios anyday ...

> For $40, I'd switch my _mother_ to AT&T.

Are you sure this is a bona-fide _check_, and not a voucher?  AT&T was
offering a number of switch-back programs, but so far the only ones
I've heard about involved them "paying" in _future_ long distance
service discounts; not actual cash.  Of course, if it's real, and I
get one, I'll probably switch too.  I am not satisfied with MCI's line
quality on long distance modem calls between Baltimore, MD and
Atlanta, GA.


JTT

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

Date: Mon, 7 Sep 92 15:26:12 CDT
From: [e-mail] (Charles Mattair)
Subject: Re: Unadvertised SW Bell Offering
Organization: Synercom Technology, Inc., Houston, TX


> [Moderator's Note: IBT offers forward on busy/no answer and likewise
> they do not market it to residential users but will sell it if you ask
> for it. The only problem is that it is not user programmable: it is
> turned on at all times to one selected number which must be another
> number in the same CO.  So they say.    PAT]

I called SWB back on the user-programmability of forward on busy/no
answer.  They are selling it in the same way you describe.  The
service rep did indicate they would be willing to change the
forwarding on customer request but I would suspect this to fall in the
"between 8 and 5 tomorrow" category.  This feature is definitely
intended for Call Notes (SM).


Charles Mattair                  (preferred) [e-mail]
Fast, Cheap, Good.  Choose Two. (anon)           (or)    [e-mail]
Any opinions offered are my own and do not reflect those of my employer.

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

From: [e-mail] (Julian Macassey)
Subject: Re: Modem Access From Europe to North America
Date: 7 Sep 92 21:04:22 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Julian Macassey)
Organization: The Hole in the Wall  Hollywood California U.S.A.


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail].
ucalgary.ca (ROM M. KIEFFER) writes:

> One of our employees will travel to the Netherlands in the near future
> from where he will need to access various computing devices back at
> the office in Canada, with his Macintosh powerbook and built-in modem.

> This gives rise to several questions:

> - since European jack wiring is different from North American
> standards, what kind of cable will I need to build/acquire to make
> ends meet?

    Yes, you need an adapter to allow your Bell standard RJ line
cord to plug into the Dutch jack. This question is asked about once a
month -- when are the modem manufacturers going to cover it in their
manuals?

    You can make up a "works anywhere modem kit", I have posted
this before -- I will email to interested parties. For the fumble
fingered, you can buy adaptor kits. There is a fellow in the U.K that
sells them. Not cheap, but if you have screwdriver, voltmeter phobia,
they will do the job.

    He is: Teleadapt
    P.O. Box 169
    Pinner
    Middlesex HAS 5QW
    England

    Phone: [phone]

    He has a range of kits. He offers a Europak for 100 pounds and
a Netherlands kit for an unspecified sum.

    I have never seen his products let alone tested them. But they
are a solution.

> - is it legal in to connect private modems to the public carrier?

    Who cares? Do you seriously believe the modem policde are going
to come knocking?

> - and, are the European digital dial tones the same as the North
> American ones?

    "Digital dial tones"? Lemme see, rotary dial, that's digital.
Touch Tone that's analogue. But I spose the question is: "Is TouchTone
the same in other countries? To all intents and purposes, yes. Yes I
know the CCITT Spec is different than the Bell spec; don't ask me
why. What about pulse dial? Well, yes, pretty much the same all over
the world -- New Zealand and Sweden being exceptions. There is a
difference in the make break ratio, but a good modem can change this.

    Busy tones etc may be different, as are dial tones -- the
noise you hear when you pick up the phone.


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

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

From: forthd!johnl (John Lebert)
Subject: Re: Calling 911 From a Cellular Phone
Date: 7 Sep 92 19:54:15 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Fourth Dimension, Portland OR


In article <[e-mail]>, jhenderson@pomona.
claremont.edu writes:

> I live in the LA area, and use Pac Tel for my cellular service.

> Calls to 911 are free, and you're connected to a CHP dispatcher (I
> assume that most calls for help in this area are from stranded
> motorists). This dispatcher will connect you to other agencies as
> needed.

> Incidentally, the rep that programmed my phone said that even if the
> service is disconnected, 911 calls still go through. I never had my
> service disconnected so I don't know if he was right or not.

I got a cellular phone in with a bunch of computer equipment I got at
an auction here in Portland, Oregon.  I found that 911 *does* work
without being connected to service. This is great, because that is all
I would ever need it for.


John Lebert    johnl@espace

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

Date: Mon, 7 Sep 92 15:02:51 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Sharon Kroo)
Subject: Information Wanted About Clearing Houses
Organization: Bell Northern Research Montreal, Canada.


Would anyone have some info on clearing houses?

They are used in order to simplify the billing and administration
between various telecommunications service providers.  I know of some
clearing houses in Europe but none in North America.

Any general or detailed info would be greatly appreciated!

e-mail me directly at [e-mail]


Sharon


[Moderator's Note: This was previously handled in the USA by a
department within AT&T called 'Separations and Settlements'. Who is
doing it within this country now?   PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #694
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa27162;
          9 Sep 92 10:19 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA03336
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 9 Sep 1992 00:23:10 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA25663
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 9 Sep 1992 00:23:02 -0500
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 00:23:02 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #695

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 9 Sep 92 00:23:00 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 695

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: "911" as an Area Code? (Andrew Klossner)
    Re: "911" as an Area Code? (Alan L. Varney)
    Re: "911" as an Area Code? (John Higdon)
    911 Emergency Service Instead of 999 (Richard Cox)
    Re: 911 on Jerry Springer Show (John Higdon)
    Re: Calling 911 From a Cellular Phone (Ron Dippold)
    Re: Cellular 911 Equivalent in Chicago (Carl Moore)
    Re: A/A1 Answer Supervision (Leonard Erickson)
    Re: A/A1 Answer Supervision (Jack Adams)
    Re: A/A1 Answer Supervision (Stephen Tell)
    Re: Volume of Telecom Question (Jack Adams)
    Re: Volume of Telecom Question (Jon Sreekanth)
    Re: How do You Pronounce "#" (Tony Goulding)
    Re: How do You Pronounce "#" (Bob Denny)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Andrew Klossner)
Subject: Re: "911" as an Area Code?
Date: 8 Sep 92 20:12:21 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Tektronix, Wilsonville, Oregon


> "I suppose that it would be *possible* to use "911" as an area
> code, since it should always be preceeded by a 1 or a 0 in
>making a call ..."

Maybe not.  My mother-in-law once started a call to Kansas at 913-780,
but she aborted the call after punching 1-9-1.  A 911 operator called
her and asked if she'd tried to dial 911.  She is convincing when she
says that she's sure she dialed 1-9-1 and not some other sequence.

It would be interesting to know just what key combinations her CO (in
Albuquerque, 505-898) routes to 911.


Andrew Klossner  ([e-mail])
  (uunet!tektronix!frip.WV.TEK!andrew)

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

Date: Tue,  8 Sep 92 15:43:13 CDT
From: [e-mail] (Alan L Varney)
Subject: Re: "911" as an Area Code?
Organization: AT&T Network Systems, Lisle, IL


In article <[e-mail]> Will Martin <wmartin@STL-
06SIMA.ARMY.MIL> writes:

> The area-codes lists that have been put out on Telecom always note
> that "911" is not used as an area code, but is reserved. I suppose

   Actually, 911 is assigned a non-NPA function, so it's not
"reserved" any more than any other N11 code.

> that it would be *possible* to use "911" as an area code, since it
> should always be preceeded by a 1 or a 0 in making a call, and thus be
> distinguished from the emergency-call 911 service, but I also suppose
> having it as a regular area code would cause false or misdialed 911
> calls and thus the telcos keep it reserved.

   Bellcore's LSSGR (and common sense) says that 1 + 911, 0 + 911 and
911 preceded by 10XXX should ALL route as if only "911" was dialed.

> So what I'm wondering about -- our toll-call list that is generated by
> our NEC NEAX 2400 phone system came out with an entry for a call from
> one of our office phones to "911-572-4000", a one-minute call on May
> 7th at 10:30 AM.

   I can't (or won't) comment on NEC products.  What did your REAL
telephone bill say for that call?


Al Varney -- just MY opinion.

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

Date: Tue, 8 Sep 92 23:08 PDT
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: "911" as an Area Code?


Will Martin <[e-mail]> writes:

> I suppose that it would be *possible* to use "911" as an area code,
> since it should always be preceeded by a 1 or a 0 in making a call,

Except in those places where it is not required. Such as here. Those
places would have to be set up for a "dial 1" requirement and then
followed by an appropriate grace period, followed yet by another
buffer period to get "non-dial 1" users whipped into shape. I am
always getting stung when I use a San Francisco telephone where a '1'
is required after being used to my own phone where a '1' is not
required (and never has been -- ever).

I am afraid that in the San Jose area, there would be an awful lot of
unintentional '911' calls if 911 was to become an area code.


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

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

Date: Tue, 8 Sep 92 15:06 GMT
From: Richard Cox <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: 911 Emergency Service Instead of 999
Reply-To: [e-mail]


John Perkins writes:

>>  It's been possible to dial 999 from almost any telephone in the UK to get
>>  emergency help since at least the 1940's (when I was a kid).  I've often
>>  thought it would have been nice if this had been adopted as a world-wide
>>  standard and it puzzles me why AT&T chose to use 911 when they must have
>>  been aware of the UK system.

Well, you'll get an embryonic World standard when Europe adopt a new
code, 112, to replace the UK's 999 and all the other country
variations in Europe.

Will Bellcore follow suit?  I doubt it.  112 is one of the easiest
codes to MISdial ... a very bad choice made for what may be political
reasons.


Richard Cox

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

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

Date: Tue, 8 Sep 92 12:08 PDT
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: 911 on Jerry Springer Show


On Sep 4 at  0:39, TELECOM Moderator writes:

> A stolen car or a home which was burglarized several hours previous
> to being discovered are not what I would term emergencies.  PAT]

But does it not seem a little unreasonable to expect citizens to
correctly make judgment calls on emergency/non-emergency situations
when there are cases when the 911 dispatcher cannot even make that
distinction? I refer, of course, to the celebrated case in San
Francisco where a young man called 911 from a pay phone to report that
he was being robbed by some thugs who were after his car. The
dispatcher passed the call off as "non-emergency" and did not issue a
code response.

The young man's body was found more than a day later.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Ron Dippold)
Subject: Re: Calling 911 From a Cellular Phone
Organization: Qualcomm, Inc., San Diego, CA
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 17:53:40 GMT


I've written the user interface for our new cellular phones, and can
confirm that 911 is definitely an exception case.  For instance, if
the phone is locked, it sits there waiting for the four-digit lock
code to unlock the phone.  However, if the person enters 911 and then
hits send, I have to bail out of the lock state, actually do an
origination with 911, then go back to lock state when the call is
over.

Regardless of call restrictions on the phone, 911 works -- we try to
originate if we can.

The rest of it is up to the carrier -- they can indeed flag an ESN as
bad in several different ways, the most common being someone trying to
make a call with a mismatched MIN and ESN, probably fraud.  There are
even two centralized massive databases (one run by EDS) which
coordinates these records between different phone companies, so that
an ESN/MIN pair marked as bad in one service area gets marked bad the
others.

I do not know whether all carriers allow 911 even from a phone marked
as bad.  I would suspect so, because of liability issues, and it's not
likely that someone calling 911 is trying to engage in phone fraud.


[Moderator's Note: I don't see how there could be any liability issues
in a total denial of service to a delinquent or non-existent account.
When landline telcos cut your service, the phone goes dead. Period.
Some may leave dial tone there but refuse to process anything. Telco
is not required to connect calls between a delinquent (or non-existent)
subscriber and anything. Emergencies are unfortunate occurances, but
that is why telephone service is so valuable to the average person.
But if telco cannot force payment (or subscription) any other way
except by denial of service, then that's what they have to do. Ditto
for cellular customers.  PAT]

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

Date: Tue, 8 Sep 92 17:33:34 EDT
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Cellular 911 Equivalent in Chicago


999 is in use in some areas in the U.S. as a local prefix.

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

From: [e-mail] (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: A/A1 Answer Supervision
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: SCN Research/Qic Laboratories of Tigard, Oregon.
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 01:34:42 GMT


Tom Metro <[e-mail]> writes:

> [e-mail] (Leonard Erickson) writes:

>> It's probably set up to do A/A1 answer supervision. That means that
>> when you take it off hook, it *shorts* the second pair of wires
>> together.

> What is the purpose of shorting the second pair of wires? It sounds
> redundant to the information you can get by monitoring the loop
> current.  Could you explain the purpose of A/A1 answer supervision?

I really don't know much about it. It seems to have been the default
for all the old multiline office phones. I rather suspect that it was
simpler to run the power for the lights in such a way that they got
turned on when the line got picked up.

Personally, I doubt that the old key systems were up to monitoring
loop current in a reliable way.


Leonard Erickson              [e-mail]
CIS: [70465,203]             [e-mail]
FIDO:   1:105/51     [e-mail]
(The CIS & Fido addresses are preferred)

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

From: vixen![e-mail] (26070-adams)
Subject: Re: A/A1 Answer Supervision
Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 92 12:19:38 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, Tom Metro <tmetro@ds5000.
dac.northeastern.edu> writes:

> [e-mail] (Leonard Erickson) writes:

>> [e-mail] (Dave Grabowski) writes:

>> It's probably set up to do A/A1 answer supervision. That means that
>> when you take it off hook, it *shorts* the second pair of wires
>> together.

> What is the purpose of shorting the second pair of wires? It sounds
> redundant to the information you can get by monitoring the loop
> current.  Could you explain the purpose of A/A1 answer supervision?

The A and A1 leads originate with Key Telephone Systems where their
function was to operate {Can you say "A" Relay :-)!} relays in the Key
System (Those grey colored boxes of various sizes which hung on walls
or lurked in closets).  The timing of these lead closures in relation
to the presence of loop current is what operated the "Hold" feature of
key systems.


Jack (John) Adams        Bellcore RRC 4B-259
[phone] {Voice}        [phone] {Facsimile}
[e-mail]   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Stephen Tell)
Subject: Re: A/A1 Answer Supervision
Date: 8 Sep 92 13:12:40 GMT
Organization: The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail].
northeastern.edu (Tom Metro) writes:

> What is the purpose of shorting the second pair of wires? It sounds
> redundant to the information you can get by monitoring the loop
> current.  Could you explain the purpose of A/A1 answer supervision?

Since I don't see an answer yet, I will ... one more time, shorting
the second pair is used to let a single-line phone (or other device)
work properly on a 1A2 type key system.  ("A" and "A1" come from the
signal-naming conventions in that system.)  Key systems do monitor
loop current, but here are some reasons why one couldn't do this only.

Breaking A/A1 before loop current puts the line on hold. You want to
be able to keep the line open without there being loop current
present, like when the CPC pulse comes in, or when you push the little
button on some key sets to break the loop to flash or get a new CO
dial tone.

Remember, the original key system was a simple, robust, relay-based
system (that used a lot of multipair cable!).  I'm not sure when it
was first introduced; I'd guess the 40s or 50s.  Anyone?


Steve Tell       [e-mail] H: 919 968 1792  | #5L Estes Park apts
UNC Chapel Hill Computer Science W: 919 962 1845  | Carrboro NC 27510


[Moderator's Note: Multi-line phones were first in use in New York
City in the middle 1920's. Does anyone remember the old three line
phones with six buttons? There was a hold button for each line. I
think they were manufactured by Automatic Electric in the 1940-50
period. GTE used them for multi-line business customers back then.  PAT]

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

From: vixen![e-mail] (26070-adams)
Subject: Re: Volume of Telecom Question
Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 92 12:28:47 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail].
arizona.edu (Dr. Ross Alan Stapleton) writes:

> I've seen some overview articles (there was a two-pager in the
> {Whole Earth Review} a few issues back), but could someone from this
> most august forum provide some referenced figures (or pointers to
> where I could find them) on:

>   - Growth in number of domestic calls completed (US);

>   - Growth in number of international calls (either with the US and
>     rest of the world, or total internationally, or both);

>   - Growth in bandwidth or calls completed to interesting places like
>     Moscow, or Cuba, or Iran, etc.

An excellent source I used (unfortunately, its a book) for a course I
developed on the business aspects of telephony was a book published by
AT&T entitled "The World's Telephones".  It is published yearly (Most
good libraries keep back issues so your information should be easy to
extrapolate) and has enormous amounts of easily understandable
statistics ... precious little telephoneeze!


Jack (John) Adams        | Bellcore RRC 4B-259
[phone] {Voice}        | [phone] {Facsimile}
[e-mail]    | [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Jon Sreekanth)
Subject: Re: Volume of Telecom Question
Organization: The World
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 15:10:14 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail].
arizona.edu (Dr. Ross Alan Stapleton) writes:


For a paper I'm writing on export controls and information, I'd like
to present a quick summary of the growth of telecommunications over
the past several decades.  I've seen some overview articles (there was
a two-pager in the {Whole Earth Review} a few issues back), but could
someone from this most august forum provide some referenced figures

{Wall Street Journal}, Oct 4, 91, had a special section on telecomm.
Lots of interesting articles, and figures too.


Jon Sreekanth

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

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

From: [e-mail] (Tony "Salty Dog" Goulding)
Subject: Re: How do You Pronounce "#"
Organization: Retix, Santa Monica CA
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 18:39:26 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (The
Virtual Kid) writes:

>> The # sign?  The POUND sign!  <grin>

No, this is a pound sign...     _
                   / \
                               |
                  -|-
                   |
                   |
                 __|__

What you're referring to is a 'hash' symbol...


Tony [All views expressed are mine - if anyone is to blame its me]

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

From: [e-mail] (Bob Denny)
Subject: Re: How do You Pronounce "#"
Date: Sun, 6 Sep 1992 20:05:37 GMT
Organization: Alisa Systems, Inc.

> messages suggesting "POUND" or "number" sign

The only internationally recognized name for "#" is "sharp" as in
music notation. So it's a "sharp sign". A pound sign in England is
quite different, for example, and I'm not sure if # is used as a
number prefix in very many written languages.


Robert B. Denny      voice: [phone]
Alisa Systems, Inc.  fax: [phone]
Pasadena, CA         ([e-mail], ..uunet!alisa.com!denny)

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #695
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa27770;
          9 Sep 92 10:41 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA29091
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 9 Sep 1992 01:44:05 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA25647
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 9 Sep 1992 01:43:57 -0500
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 01:43:57 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #696

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 9 Sep 92 01:43:53 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 696

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Standardized Exchange Names (George L. Sicherman)
    Re: Cell Phones in the Air (Anthony J. Stieber)
    Re: Real Legislation, or Hoaxes? (Michael A. Covington)
    Re: Bell Science Series on Video (Leonard Erickson)
    Re: New Phone Number Intercept (John Higdon)
    Re: Why Do Several Answering Machines Hang Up Early? (Andrew G. Minter)
    Re: Strange MCI Problem (Jack Adams)
    Re: Ending Automated Calls (Wolf Paul)
    New "Call Completion" From Cinci Bell (Isaacson
    First ESS was in New Jersey (was Illinois Bell Allows) (David G. Lewis)
    First ESS Was Not in Morris (Dave Levenson)
    Re: V.25bis, or: Are CCITT and PTTs Totally Bonkers? (Leonard Erickson)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Tue,  8 Sep 92 11:57:32 EDT
From: [e-mail] (George L Sicherman)
Subject: Re: Standardized Exchange Names
Organization: AT&T


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

> I think "FAirfax may be a "standard" name of some sort, as the 32x
> exchanges in Spokane used that in the 60's.

The generic name for 32 in Buffalo was FAirview.  Buffalo had some
special names like DElaware and HUmboldt, but "Fairview" had no
special meaning there.  If there's enough interest, I'll post the
whole list.


Col. G. L. Sicherman [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Anthony J Stieber)
Subject: Re: Cell Phones in the Air
Organization: Computing Services Division, University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 21:17:07 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(gordon hlavenka) writes:

> Exactly.  No uplink calling on Airfone.  Never had it.  Possibly never
> will, for political rather than technical reasons.  Imagine an
> insurance salesman or 12-year-old prankster (or terrorist!) calling up
> to random airplanes. Now try and find a _cost-effective_ way to
> prevent these calls.

The only reason to be able to do uplink calls would be to call someone
back after leaving a message or something similar.  Simply have the
phone number of the Airfone change, and have that number be current
only for that flight.  Phones from which calls are not made are
totally inaccesable.  Several digit extensions would probably be
needed to prevent someone from randomly dialing Airfone extensions and
stumbling across an active line.


Anthony Stieber     [e-mail]   uwm!uwmcsd4!anthony

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

From: [e-mail] (Michael A. Covington)
Subject: Re: Real Legislation, or Hoaxes?
Organization: University of Georgia, Athens
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 05:04:20 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Michael A. Covington) writes:

> I've been told that the following two pieces of legislation are before
> the Senate, but cannot identify them from Congressional Record and
> similar references.  Can anybody fill me in?

> (1) A ban on radio receivers that can tune cellular phone frequencies.
> (Listening is already illegal but the receivers themselves aren't.)

I've been told that this is part of the FY 92 funding for the FCC, but
have not yet confirmed it.

> (2) A ban on private consulting in electronics, "S. 1706," recently
> mentioned by a letter writer in Robert Pease's column in Electronic
> Design.  (There is a S. 1706, but it deals with import duties on
> certain industrial chemicals.)

> [Moderator's Note: What is this 'ban on private consulting in electronics'?
> Please tell more. When does private become public or legal?   PAT]

I've been told that this has to do with amending section 1706 of the
Internal Revenue Code, and that a "ban on consulting" is not exactly
what's involved ... but have yet to confirm this or get the details.
At least now I have a scent to follow.


Michael Covington - Artificial Intelligence Programs - U of Georgia - USA
Unless otherwise noted, these are private opinions, not official statements.

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

From: [e-mail] (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Bell Science Series on Video
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: SCN Research/Qic Laboratories of Tigard, Oregon.
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 01:41:12 GMT


[e-mail] (John Higdon) writes:

> Those of you who are over forty will remember a series of television
> programs sponsored by The Bell System. A product of the fifties, these
> were excellent films featuring Dr. Frank Baxter as host explaining
> such things as meteorology, time, biology, and physiology. Highly
> produced, these programs utilized puppets, animation, and well-written
> scripts to inform and entertain young and old alike. Unfortuately,
> even I did not own a VCR before 1974.

I'm only 37 and I remember them well. I remember one from TV, and the
rest from seeing the 16mm film version in junior high science classes.

Now if they only have them in Beta ... :-(


Leonard Erickson              [e-mail]
CIS: [70465,203]             [e-mail]
FIDO:   1:105/51     [e-mail]
(The CIS & Fido addresses are preferred)

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

Date: Tue, 8 Sep 92 23:20 PDT
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: New Phone Number Intercept


On Sep 7 at 22:24, TELECOM Moderator writes:

> Speaking of live operator intercepts, are there still any of those
> situations where the operator responds but cannot hear the caller
> because the LD carrier does not open the mouthpiece until the call has
> supervised, which it will never do with an operator?

> Are all the OCC's opening the talk path now?   PAT]

It was AT&T that (exclusively?) participated in this practice, and it
began some years ago. It was put in place to prevent the practice of
"black boxing" and also to protect itself from itself. It seems that
many of the AT&T PBXes sold and installed by none other than AT&T had
misprogrammed DID circuits that never supervised. Any call made to
such lines was a "free" call.

And we are not talking about just a few systems. This mishandling was
rampant. AT&T was losing big bucks on long distance because of the
incompetence of its own installers and that of its contractors. Also,
there were a few unscrupulous customers who intentionally programmed
DID circuits to never supervise. The fix was to not enable caller to
callee audio until the circuit was supervised. This way the caller
could hear call progress tones, but no two-way communication could
take place.

A complaint from a customer describing this condition would result in
the dispatch of service personnel to reprogram the System 75, 85, or
whatever.

To my knowledge, the OCCs never bothered with this practice. And I
believe AT&T is still doing it.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Andrew G. Minter)
Subject: Re: Why Do Several Answering Machines Hang Up Early?
Organization: BNR Europe Limited, Harlow, GB
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 10:01:45 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail].
lockheed.com (Jeffrey R. Millar x7047) writes:

> I have two answering machines which hang up on callers. The problem
> apparently began in May ... but we didn't notice it because it
> manifested itself as intermittent loss of the latter part of messages.

I had *exactly* the same problem with once of these fancy new
Audioline answering machines (forget the number) here in the UK. On
some days the machine recorded for longer than others. Interestingly,
I discovered that if I disconnected the answering machine and let the
line ring for a really long time (1-2 minutes) and reconnected the
machine it worked perfectly for several hours. British Telecom visited
three times (we got a young engineer who proudly told me he had just
joined the company and finished the training course). Eventually they
gave up, insisting that the machine must be faulty.  However, thanks
to a helpful retailer, we tried several identical machines with same
result.

After a couple of weeks of messing around (and losing messages) I gave
up and spent some more money on a really nice Panasonic. I get the
impression that Panasonic address a global market and assume that
their machines will be connected to antique phone systems with really
lousy lines. At any rate, our machine seems to be bomb proof!


Andrew G. Minter            | Email: [e-mail]
Principal Research Engineer | Phone: [phone]
BNR Europe Limited          | Fax:   [phone]
London Road, Harlow         | ESN:   742-3165
Essex  CM17 9NA             | Telex: 81151 BNR HW G

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

From: vixen![e-mail] (26070-adams)
Subject: Re: Strange MCI Problem
Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 92 12:13:16 GMT


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

> I had a strange thing happen to me tonight. I called my aunt and
> after dialing heard nothing; no ringing or noise at all, so I tried
> several more times. At first I thought it might be that the speed
> dial lost the end of the number so I dialed it (well actually pushed)
> the number manually ... still no luck

> Is this what can happen with a SS7 problem? The ringing through but no
> voice path getting opened?

Not according to what I've read.  Call set up protocol with SS7 (By
the way, I strongly doubt you were SS7 connected) currently utilizes
"distant end" ring back which is a strong indication that all went
well with YOUR LEC and MCI, but the ball was dropped by the distant
LEC, when your aunt answered.  The good news is that since "cut
through" did not occur, a billing record was never completed either ...
whew!

> Is MCI connecting their SS7's to the LEC's yet?

Not officially yet, full SS7 connectivity between LEC's and IXC's is
on a lottery basis for priority of who gets connected first.  However,
there is much testing of interworking of networks at all levels which
is going on and must be completed before such interconnections are
turned up to live traffic. (Hint ... if the post dialing delay is in
the order of four to six seconds, your are not yet SS7 connected
between your LEC and IXC ... that's about the length of time it takes
to transmit FG-D data over Multi Frequency trunks up to the IXC and
back to the far end LEC).


Jack (John) Adams        | Bellcore RRC 4B-259
[phone] {Voice}        | [phone] {Facsimile}
[e-mail]    | [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Wolf Paul)
Subject: Re: Ending Automated Calls
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Wolf N. Paul)
Organization: Alcatel Austria - Elin Research Center, Vienna
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 13:44:05 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(G. Brendan Reilly) writes:

> It seems that if you wanted to end automated calls you would simply
> have to get the exchange of the cellular phone in Washington DC and
> start bombarding them with automated calls.  I'm sure that when the
> congressional staffers and such have to put up with this crap they'll
> decide "something must be done in the public interest."

Except that I wouldn't trust the congressional staffers to get it
right, whatever they decide to do in the "public interest".

They might just decide that ANY calls initiated by a machine should be
illegal -- bye-bye dial-up UUCP, SLIP, PPP, FIDO, etc., not to mention
auto-redialling FAX machines or network FAX servers ...


Regards,


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)

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

Date: Tue, 08 Sep 92 09:45:33 EDT
From: Alec Isaacson <[e-mail]>
Subject: New "Call Completion" from Cinci Bell


I was listening to the radio last night and I heard a commercial from
Cincinnati Bell offering a service called "Call Completion".  The
commercial went on to say that if you call 555-1212 (rather than 411)
for directory assistance you can hit a touch tone 1 after the number
is looked up and be connected to that number.  (Then it went on to
rave about how you will never need to fumble for pen and paper again :)
The verbal "fine print" said this service cost $0.35 a pop, fee waived
for busy numbers, not available in certain areas or on rotary phones.


Alec D. Isaacson
AI4CPHYW @ miamiu.acs.muohio.edu
isaacson @ rogue.acs.muohio.edu (NeXt Mail)
Miami University, Oxford, OH

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

From: [e-mail] (david.g.lewis)
Subject: First ESS Was in New Jersey (was Illinois Bell Now Allows ...)
Organization: AT&T
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 13:57:01 GMT


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

> [Moderator's Note: IBT has always been considered a very progressive
> and advanced company. After all, ESS started here, in Morris, IL back
> in the 1960's ...

Sorry, wrong answer ... "The first application of electronic local
switching in the Bell System occurred in May 1965 with the cutover of
the first 1ESS switch in Succasunna, New Jersey." [EOBS, P413]

(EOBS = Engineering and Operations in the Bell System, 2e)


dave

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

From: [e-mail] (Dave Levenson)
Subject: First ESS Was Not in Morris
Organization: Westmark, Inc.
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 01:35:24 GMT


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

> [Moderator's Note: IBT has always been considered a very progressive
> and advanced company. After all, ESS started here, in Morris, IL back
> in the 1960's ... and we had it routine use in various exchanges as
> early as 1974 downtown. We had lots of centrex in use in the 1960's.
> The company has always been involved in the community with numerous
> charitable donations and services.  PAT]

Morris, IL was the test site for an early electronic switching system
that used gas-filled triodes as its switching fabric.  The system was
found to be unreliable, and it was never deployed elsewhere.

The first of the AT&T switches to be called ESS (which actually used
magnetic reed-relays, but were software-controlled) was installed in
1965 in Succasunna, New Jersey.


Dave Levenson        Internet: [e-mail]
Westmark, Inc.        UUCP: {uunet | rutgers | att}!westmark!dave
Warren, NJ, USA        Voice: 908 647 0900  Fax: [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: V.25bis, or: Are CCITT and PTTs Totally Bonkers?
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: SCN Research/Qic Laboratories of Tigard, Oregon.
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 17:11:47 GMT


[e-mail] (John Nagle) writes:

> Busy numbers shouldn't be added to the Forbidden Numbers list,
> and numbers that answer and present modem tones won't be.  Only
> numbers that answer, but don't present modem tones, should end up on
> the Forbidden Numbers list.  This makes sense; if a number is
> answering but not attached to a modem, there probably isn't a modem
> there and the calling end should stop calling and annoying somebody.

> If the receiving system is down, that's OK.  Either the modem
> doesn't answer the phone, or it answers the phone and brings up a data
> connection, even if no data can be transmitted.  The only real problem
> comes with some old systems where, when the system went down, a voice
> message was switched on.  But that's rare today.

Actually, there's another problem. Take USR modem. Put X5 in the
Initialize string. Now call a Telebit that puts the PEP tomes first.

Result? The USR reports a result code of VOICE almost immediately and
hangs up!

This was true of a USR dual standard bought a couple of years ago. I
don't know if it is still true.

So even if a modem answer, it has to answer in a way that the
*calling* modem recognizes.

Then you get into situations like the one I saw mentioned recently.
Supposedly, US modems think that Australian ring signals are busy
signals!  (Anyone know the truth about this?)


Leonard Erickson              [e-mail]
CIS: [70465,203]             [e-mail]
FIDO:   1:105/51     [e-mail]
(The CIS & Fido addresses are preferred)

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #696
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa24159;
          10 Sep 92 2:30 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA31385
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 10 Sep 1992 00:05:15 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA00312
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 10 Sep 1992 00:05:00 -0500
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 00:05:00 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #697

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 10 Sep 92 00:05:00 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 697

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: When Did France go to Eight Digit Numbers? (Olivier Giffard)
    Re: When Did France go to Eight Digit Numbers? (Richard Cox)
    Re: Having to Dial 0 + 700 on Calls (Bob Frankston)
    Re: Motorola "Advisor" Pager Question (Bob Frankston)
    Re: Information Wanted About Clearing Houses (Don Ford)
    Re: Having to Dial 0 + 700 on Calls (David G. Lewis)
    Re: Clever Phone Fraud by 900 Line (Justin Leavens)
    Re: Distinctive-Ringing Decoder (Chris Schmandt)
    Re: Cellular Providers Charge Air-Time Forwarding to Land Line (A Klossner)
    Re: Information Wanted on CPC Pulses (Steve Forrette)
    Re: Weird Intercept (Jeff Garber)
    Re: Modem Noise on Line (Jeff Garber)
    Re: Information Wanted on E&M Signaling Technology (John Zambito)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Olivier Giffard)
Subject: Re: When Did France go to Eight Digit Numbers?
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 23:17:00 GMT


All phone numbers in France were changed to eight digits on October
23, 1985 at 2300 hours.

The actual switching was done in less than a minute and you could a
real time display of the change on a special news broadcast on TV
after the Minister of PTT pushed "the" button.  The change was
advertised to the general public about a year before it took place.

The previous numbering scheme was on the form (AC) XX XX XX or (A) CXX
XX XX. The number in parentheses was the area code.  Paris had area
code 1 with seven digits numbers.

Since the change there are two dialing zones: the Paris Region
and the rest of the country.

Numbers outside the Paris region became (no area code) AC XX XX XX
Numbers within the Paris Region became (1) AC XX XX XX
Numbers for the city of Paris became (1) 4X XX XX XX

Example: A number in Rouen that was (35) 71 84 00 is now 35 71 84 00
         A number in Lyon that was (7) 342 45 67 is now  73 42 45 67
         A number in Versailles that was (3) 237 89 01 is now (1) 32 37 89 01
     A number in Paris that was (1) 787 11 11 is now (1) 47 87 11 11

During the first few days we would have a recording instead of a
dialing tone reminding us to dial eight digits.  Then for a few month,
if you dialled only six or seven digits there would be a timeout and a
recording.

Plans currently exist to eventually have all numbers in France be of
the form (Z) XX XX XX XX. (ie to implement more zones.)

To reach someone in the same zone you just dial eight digits. to reach
someone in another zone you dial 16 + zone code (ie now 1 for Paris,
nothing for the rest) + eight digits. You have to wait for a second
low-pitched dial tone after 16. (It comes immediately on digital
exchanges and with a delay of 1/2 to two seconds on analog exchanges.)


Olivier Giffard    Chorus Systems, Inc.   [e-mail]

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

Date: Tue, 8 Sep 92 15:07 GMT
From: Richard Cox <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: When Did France go to Eight Digit Numbers
Reply-To: [e-mail]


C. Moore at BRL.MIL asks when France went to eight digit numbers.  I
can look up the exact date if no one else beats me to it!  Of course
before France went to eight digit numbers, they used a two + six
approach: two digit area code and six digit local number. So, to anyone
calling from outside France, the change made no difference -- the
caller still dialed the country code and eight digits.

Paris was different -- indeed it still is.  Effectively it has nine
digits (an area code of 1, with eight digit local numbers).  Before
the change Paris had two separate single digit area codes for
different "zones", and seven digit local numbers in each zone.  The
plan was for there to be four [or five] zones from 1995, each with a 1
digit area code (prefixed by a "0", instead of "16", when dialing
from other zones). However this plan is being reviewed because users
have said that they would prefer to have standard nine digit national
numbers that can be dialed unchanged from anywhere within France.

Fred Gaechter at Bellcore has said he sees a similar future for the
NANP: dialling ten digits for ALL calls irrespective of whether
they're local, toll, or outwith your NPA. Do other Digest readers
think this would be acceptable?


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]
Subject: Re: Having to Dial 0 + 700 on Calls
Date: Tue 8 Sep 1992 11:53 -0400


0+ing as another, unintended side effect.  It allows you to make a
call from some restricted phone systems.  At some resorts, for
example, you cannot make a call charged to your phone.  But the phone
are smart (OK, the network behind them) and permit some local calls as
well as 1-800 and 0-xxx calls since the latter could be charged to a
credit card.  I'd also assume that human operators might even get an
indication that the calls must be billed to a card.

Of course, 0-700 calls are still charged to the caller.  Actually, I
didn't test this since I wanted to be nice and not present strange
charges to the owner.  Even worse, with something like 1-800-CALL-ATT
you can place any call this way!

Since I wanted to be nice and not bill calls to the resort owner, I
didn't really test this.  Are there protocols that would control this?

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Motorola "Advisor" Pager Question
Date: Tue 8 Sep 1992 11:55 -0400


Might be trivial, but how about using the vibrate mode and detecting
it.  Perhaps something as simple as a change of state of a microswitch
that it would rest on?

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

From: [e-mail] (Don Ford)
Subject: Re: Information Wanted About Clearing Houses
Date: 8 Sep 92 17:19:02 GMT
Organization: U S WEST NewVector Group, Inc.


Sharon Kroo ([e-mail]) wrote:

> Would anyone have some info on clearing houses?

> They are used in order to simplify the billing and administration
> between various telecommunications service providers.  I know of some
> clearing houses in Europe but none in North America.

> [Moderator's Note: This was previously handled in the USA by a
> department within AT&T called 'Separations and Settlements'. Who is
> doing it within this country now?   PAT]

The North American Exchange Carrier Association, NECA, handles this on
the wireline side.  NECA is closely tied to BELLCORE, but not a part
of BELLCORE.  On the cellular side similar functions are provided by
several "clearing houses" such as GTE Telecomm Services and EDS.


Don Ford     U S WEST NewVector Group, Inc.    [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (david.g.lewis)
Subject: Re: Having to Dial 0 + 700 on Calls
Organization: AT&T
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 18:28:00 GMT


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

> I tried to use the AT&T Alliance Conferencing service, whose number is
> 700-456-1000.  I dialed and got a "cannot be completed as dialed"
> message.  I tried 700-555-4141 to confirm that AT&T was still my
> default carrier, and it was.  It turned out that for the Alliance
> number, one must dial 0 + 700 ... even though the 0 is not necessary
> for 700-555-4141 call.  What's going on here?

> Is the leading 0 some sort of acknowledgement by me that this is a
> chargeable call?  If I dial the 0, is it presented by my LEC to AT&T
> in a different way than if I don't dial it?

Yes; that's the key.  0+/0- calls can be (and are, in the case of
AT&T) presented to the IXC on different trunks than are DDD calls.
Calls to an AT&T operator are routed over OSPS access trunks (OSPS =
Operator Service Position System); OSPS trunks provide different
capabilities than do FG-D access trunks.  The additional capabilities
are required to handle such things as coin traffic.

I don't know if such things as calling card, collect, and in
particular Alliance(tm) teleconferencing service specifically require
OSPS trunks.  However, these access trunks may terminate on different
switches with different capabilities than do FG-D access trunks, and
the service may only be implemented on switches with OSPS access
trunks (OSPS switches, natch).

> Also, where was the message generated? By the LEC or by AT&T?

I'm not sure; I could postulate how it could be either.

> If the latter, is there a technical reason why they couldn't easily
> have figured out what I wanted and what I was doing wrong, and told
> me, rather than forcing me to call around to find out.

If the latter, probably because there are any number of 700 numbers
that could be dialed by the user that can not be completed if dialed
1+, some of which can be completed if dialed 0+ and some of which that
can not be completed regardless of whether dialed 0+ or 1+, and given
the rapidly changing nature of the number space, the DDD network
elements may not know at any given point in time whether a given 700
number is valid, but only dialable as 0+, or invalid.  And I'm
guessing it's better to give a "cannot be completed as dialed"
announcement upfront, than to give a "must be preceded by a 0"
announcement for a 1+ dialed call, and then give a "cannot be
completed as dialed" announcement for a 0+ dialed call to the same
number.

Disclaimer: Even though my group is called "switching and ISDN
implementation", I'm just hypothesizing.  I don't know enough about
LEC routing (or, for that matter, AT&T's routing) to say categorically
one way or the other.  I just know enough to get myself into
trouble ...


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Justin Leavens)
Subject: Re: Clever Phone Fraud by 900 Line
Date: 8 Sep 1992 11:49:53 -0700
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA


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

[a story about how some probably now ex-employees of AT&T tried to use
a 900 number to rip off AT&T]

> (No, none of us think rip-offs are good.  Yes, all of us expect 'most
> large company phones to be blocked against outgoing 900 calls.)

Blocking 900 numbers outright is a tough proposition for some people
like me, since more and more computer vendors are adopting 900 numbers
for customer support past warranty periods. My phone is blocked for
900 numbers but we have at least one vendor who doesn't want to
support me unless I call their 900 number (product out of warranty).
I'm doing battle with that right now, no one can understand why any
employee would need to call a 900 number.


Justin Leavens    Microcomputer Specialist  University of Southern California

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

From: Chris Schmandt <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Distinctive-Ringing Decoder
Organization: MIT Media Laboratory
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 18:36:13 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Alan TC Penn)
writes:

> I am going for a distinctive-ringing decoder or demultiplexer. The
> function of this device is to route the incoming phone message
> directly to either an answering machine or a modem.

Some modems have this built in, I hear.  For what you want, this may
be the cheapest way to go.  I recently got a "selective ring
processor" listed in the AT&T Sourcebook (800-451-2100).  They sell a
two number version for $100 and a three number version for $130.  I'm
happy with the three number version I'm using.  It has (switch
enabled) lockout so you can prevent one device from going on the line
if another is offhook.  I have found this useful to prevent me from
accidently barging in on an incoming fax, as I have the ringer turned
off on the fax machine.

Incidently, this approach was suggested by several comp.dcom.telecom
readers in response to my query about voice/fax switches last month.


chris

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

From: [e-mail] (Andrew Klossner)
Subject: Re: Cellular Providers Charge Air-Time Forwarding to Land Line
Date: 8 Sep 92 20:19:56 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Tektronix, Wilsonville, Oregon


Bill Campbell writes about US West cellular service in Seattle:

> "This service [voice mail] costs about $5.00/month plus air
> time if I call for messages on the cellular.  There's no charge
> if I call in for my messages from a land line."

What fun.  GTE Mobilnet, the wireline carrier down the road in
Portland Oregon, does just the opposite: I can retrieve my messages
for free from my cell phone, but it costs money to retrieve them from
a land line.

They charge airtime for calls forwarded to a landline, but at about
1/3 the usual rate.

They don't charge for "uncompleted calls."  It turns out that they
don't do this via call supervision -- they just charge for any use of
airtime that lasts a minute or more.  If you let that call ring for
more than a minute, you pay.


Andrew Klossner  ([e-mail])
 (uunet!tektronix!frip.WV.TEK!andrew)

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: Information Wanted on CPC Pulses
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 00:47:23 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail].
northeastern.edu (Tom Metro) writes:

> What does a CPC pulse "look" like? What type of circuitry is typically
> used to detect it? What are the timing specifications for when it
> should occur with respect to the call termination? And what simple
> test can I perform to see if my phone service provides CPC pulses?

A CPC pulse is just a momentary interruption of line current.  Thus,
the line goes "dead" for a period of time.  I think common durations
are in the 500-1000 msec range.

Here's a question of my own: Are there any modems that detect the CPC
signal?  A common problem with our Hayes Ultra 9600's that we have for
dialup are that if the 9600 bps negotiation fails for some reason such
that "NO CARRIER" is returned instead of a fallback to 2400, the modem
at the host end is apparently still trying to negotiate, and remains
offhook for another 30-45 seconds.  This means that if you immediately
retry the connection, you get a busy signal.  It would be nice to have
the modem immediately reset when it sees the CPC indicating that the
caller has gone away.  I've never seen this in any modem (not that
I've looked very hard), and wonder why it is not a standard feature.
It would seem to me that detecting loss of loop current would not be
an expensive feature to engineer.  And if a line doesn't give CPC,
then the modem would act as it does now anyway.


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

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

Date: Wed, 9 Sep 92 02:27 GMT
From: Jeff Garber <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Weird Intercept


In article <[e-mail]> Mike Morris wrote:

> Also 714-259-0020 thru 0029 are nonbilling intercepts.

These numbers go into the Centrex at Pacific Bell's Edinger (Tustin,
CA) offices. These three buildings contain a central office (Santa
Ana-Tustin), a business office, an engineering department, and two
separate TOPS (operator) offices (Tustin I and Tustin II).

I was a TOPS operator in Tustin II in 1988. I believe Tustin I handles
calls from 213 and 818 (and now probably 310) area codes, while Tustin
II handles 714 calls from LATA 730 (Los Angeles) and 619 calls from
LATA 730 and LATA 732 (San Diego). The interesting thing about LEC
operators handling calls from different LATAs is that obviously they
cannot connect calls between the two LATAs. Often I'd tell a Los
Angeles area customer that San Diego was out of my service area and
then turn around and complete calls within San Diego for other
customers.

Since 619 exists in both LATAs, it was difficult to decide if calls
within 619 were in the same or different LATAs, and if calls from 714
to 619 and vice-versa crossed LATA lines. The TOPS terminals, of
course, wouldn't allow calls to be completed between the LATAs. I
wonder if any other LECs have the same operators serving multiple
LATAs or if this is fairly uncommon.

Note: I no longer work for Pacific Bell (so don't blame ME :)


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

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

Date: Wed, 9 Sep 92 02:29 GMT
From: Jeff Garber <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Modem Noise on Line


[e-mail] (Julian Macassey) writes:

> The big question is "Why are people still doing installations
> with quad wire?"

Among other reasons previously cited, quad usually can be easily
obtained in a beige jacket. I recently had a heck of a time trying to
paint the outside jacket of some twisted pair I bought because it was
dark grey.  Some of the wire had to be exposed, and grey would have
stood out too much so I painted it beige to blend better with the
wall. I was really tempted to resort to using the quad instead since
it was already the right color (I have tons of it), but since it was a
fairly long run I decided instead to hassle with painting the twisted
pair.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (John Zambito)
Subject: Re: Information Wanted on E&M Signaling Technology
Organization: Performance Technologies, Incorporated
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 14:21:14 GMT


[e-mail] (Yee-Lee Shyong) writes:

> Why do telecommunication professionals always say -48Vdc not +48Vdc?

According to Bellcore:

"Because of corrosion problems, the use of supply potentials that are
positive relative to ground reference is not recommended."


John Zambito, Performance Technologies Incorporated    [e-mail]
315 Science Parkway, Rochester, New York 14620    uupsi!ptsys1!jvz

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #697
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa25322;
          10 Sep 92 3:14 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA32324
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 10 Sep 1992 01:03:26 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA04781
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 10 Sep 1992 01:03:16 -0500
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 01:03:16 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #698

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 10 Sep 92 01:03:16 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 698

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Working Assets Long Distance (Robert Woiccak)
    Re: ANI Long Distance Service: Okay or Beware? (Gerald Ruderman)
    Re: Oops, Lost the Reporter (Scott Fybush)
    Re: Latest Cuba -- US Telephone Situation (Gerald Ruderman)
    Re: Disasters and Computer Communications (Pat Turner)
    Re: Disaster Reporting On Usenet (Tom Coradeschi)
    Re: Disaster Reporting On Usenet ([e-mail])
    Re: How do You Pronounce "#" (Chris Cox)
    Re: How do You Pronounce "#" (John M. Sullivan)
    Re: Help With Motorola Advisor (Ben Black)
    Re: Illinois Bell Now Allows Remote Call Forwarding Changes (Guy Sherr)
    Re: 911 as an Area Code? (Carl Moore)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Tue, 08 Sep 92 23:12:15 EDT
From: Rob Woiccak <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Working Assets Long Distance


I received a mailing from Working Assets the other day advertising
their services. It's a pretty slick-looking advertisment too, offering
you a free pint of Ben and Jerry's Ice Cream as well as 30 free
minutes of calls once and free calls to select business and political
leaders once a month.

They advertise their long distance rates as "guaranteed to be lower
than AT&T, MCI and Sprint." (though one wonders in lieu of the earlier
post that someone made regarding the huge initial phone bill). There
is a men- tion of up to 15% off on volume discounts and a 20% discount
on calls to other Working Assets subscribers.

Services include:

- 100% fiber-optic sound
- Convienent "dial 1" calling
- Low, competitive rates
- Volume discounts
- 24-hour operators
- Free calling cards
- Direct international dialing
- Friendly customer service

The Guarantee: "If you're not completely satisfied with Working Assets
Long Distance after three full months of service, we'll pay to switch
you back to your original carrier."

The Catch: "By signing this coupon, I authorize Working Assets Long
Distance to be my primary long distance carrier. I understand that my
local phone company may apply a small, one-time fee and that to help
offset this cost, (whether or not it is applied), Working Assets will
give me a credit equal to 30 minutes of free interstate calling. The
credit will be at the 3,000 mile night/weekend rate and will be issued
after my third full month of service. Offers void where prohibited.
Guarantee offer valid for one year from start of service. Free Speech
Day calls limited to four three-minute calls per month. Rate
comparisons effective 8/1/92 and subject to change."

On the surface, it doesn't *look* like a bad deal and the idea of
having 1% of your phone bill going to a good cause (they contribute to
Planned Parenthood, Greenpeace, Rainforest Action Network, Oxfam
America, Amnesty Inter- national, National Coalition for the Homeless,
and Fund for a Free South Africa among others) is a nice one. I do
wonder how much the rates are raised to defray the operating costs
after the contributions are made. I'd be interested in hearing from
any other subcribers as well.

Environmentalists will be happy to know that WALD says they use 100%
recycled paper and soy-based inks (when possible) for their bills and
that they plant 17 trees for every ton of paper used.


Rob Woiccak - [e-mail] - Exxon Engineering - Disclaim! Datclaim!


[Moderator's Note: I got a mailing from them today with the same
information you mention above. My only complaint is there are a couple
of organizations they support which I would never under any conditions
want to receive my money (since I disagree with their stated goals and
principles); otherwise I might give them one of my lines just to see
how good they are. Now if they allowed one to choose from a list of
several organizations, and check off those one wished to support, that
would be different. Its the same reason I give direct to organizations
of my choice rather than through United Way.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Gerald Ruderman)
Subject: Re: ANI Long Distance Service: Okay or Beware?
Organization: Rational Systems, Inc.
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 03:33:40 GMT


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

> The reseller salesperson/owner tried to make dialing the 14 or so
> extra digits and lack of one-plus dialing (he doesn't have
> arrangements with the local telco to offer one-plus dialing) a
> "feature" because you can keep your existing long distance company for
> "emergencies".

When I lived in an area served by GTE with only two connections
between the CO and the long distance network I found the "emergency"
feature of a reseller very handy. Their conection to the outside world
was always working when my 1+ connection was blocked by failure or
overloading.


Gerald Ruderman                                   [e-mail]

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

Date: Tue, 8 Sep 92 20:42 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Scott Fybush)
Subject: Re: Oops, Lost the Reporter


Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]> writes:

> Friday morning (Sept. 4), I had KYW news-radio (1060 AM in
> Philadelphia) tuned in.  Al Novak was reporting live from Cherry Hill
> (nearby in New Jersey) and then I heard a dialtone for a few seconds.
> The woman who was the "anchor" back at the station then broke in and
> said "Oops, I think we lost Al Novak."  I guess Mr. Novak was using a
> telephone?  What kind of telephone could he have been using?

> [Moderator's Note: Apparently a regular dialup line, or perhaps a
> cellular phone on his end to a regular POTS line in the studio.   PAT]

I work at one of KYW's sister stations, and I assume the equipment we
use is similar to what KYW uses.

At WBZ, reporters in the field usually file from bag phones.
Sometimes they do live shots from the bag phones, other times they
feed reports in advance.  When they do live shots, they dial into one
of two direct lines into the newsroom (as opposed to one of the
newsroom's four PBX extensions -- we've found the PBX doesn't deliver
sound quality quite as good as New England Tel service delivered
directly from the switch.) Each of the two dial-in lines is connected
to a pot on the anchor's board through a Gentner digital hybrid which
can feed station audio (pre-delay) back through the phone line.  I
should mention that most of the live reports actually are fed not from
the bag phones themselves, but from separate cellular phones mounted
in the station news cars.

Reports from the State House are fed back to the station through a
dedicated, high-quality 15kHz line.  Weather reports are fed by phone
from State College, PA using a two-line Comrex frequency extender to
give frequency response out to about 10 kHz or so.  Sometimes the
Comrex doesn't work properly and the audio sounds tinny and distorted.
This is a common problem.

Reports from other Group W stations in New York, Philadelphia,
Chicago, Pittsburgh, LA, and Sacramento arrive via a satellite hookup.
It's designed very oddly ... the station having something to feed
dials up a number in Washington DC via an ordinary POTS line, enters a
DTMF code to signal certain stations or all of the Group, then feeds
the audio.  It's a kludge that doesn't produce much better audio than
feeding the stations directly via POTS, but it is more expedient than
feeding each station individually.

As for reliability, if the cell phone sounds bad when the reporter
calls in to do a live shot (reporters always call in a minute or two
before air and talk to an editor before going on air), the editor may
decide not to go live after all.  Calls being dropped on air are rare.
It happens, though.  At one special event here, the Tall Ships Weekend
a few months back, all our cell phones in the field went dead.  It
turned out the cell phone company hadn't charged the batteries before
giving us the phones for the day :-( Fortunately, our reporters also
carry two-way radios, so they filed over those instead.  We've had
better days than that one :-)

All in all, it's a lot easier to get a report from a remote location
for radio than it is for TV, and for every time the cell phone goes
dead on the air, there's another time when rain fade or something else
gets in the way of a TV live shot (anyone remember the correspondents
for TV trying to send live pictures over Ku-band during Hurricane
Andrew?)


Scott Fybush -- [e-mail]
These opinions are mine only and do not reflect those of WBZ or
of Group W Broadcasting.

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

From: [e-mail] (Gerald Ruderman)
Subject: Re: Latest Cuba -- US Telephone Situation
Organization: Rational Systems, Inc.
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 04:58:54 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> George S Thurman
<[e-mail]> writes:

> It was, in fact, so popular that by 1966, AT&T had to do something
> about the gigantic unpaid settlements for years of calls made out of
> Cuba to the whole world -- on AT&T's tab with all the world's other
> communications entities.  The balance owing AT&T was enormous, and
> Castro had no intention of paying.  Obviously, his huge unpaid balance
> was simply an item he felt was tit for tat.  It's easy to see how
> Castro (and certainly his Russian masters) must have enjoyed the dual
> economic "get-back" and embarrassment Florida City was causing the
> hated U.S. during the deeper years of the Cold War.

I recall reading a while ago that it used to be common for Cubans to
call the US collect and that quite a large amound of money accrued to
AT&T this way and that Castro (at least once upon a time) did not owe
ATT any money.  This article makes me think I remember this backwards.


Gerald Ruderman   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 92 06:24 EDT
From: rsiatl![e-mail]
Subject: Re: Disasters and Computer Communications
Reply-To: [e-mail]


> I need some information regarding methods of emergency data
> communications.  Imagine a disaster team in a crisis area, with a
> laptop computer and no electricity or phones. What is readily
> available (hardware-wise) to facilitate this? Any suggestions are
> appreciated; I'm guessing some type of sattelite system.

I can think of a couple of things;

1) VSATs (Very Small Aperture Terminals) use a .5 to 1 m dish
   with a 3w PA, and will do voice, ISDN, DS0 and DS1 as well
   as downlink video.  CA Dept of Forestry uses them in
   emergencies.

2) Imarsat: Small earth stations similar to VSAT, except use
   lower frequencies.  World wide coverage.  Very popular with
   news organizations and disaster relief groups.  Will do digital
   and analog transmission.

3) Cell phones and modems.  Many carriers use microwave links
   to the MTSO, and have backup power.

4) Packet Radio on VHF, UHF, and HF freq's.  AX.25 is the most
   available protocal.  Standard land mobile radios can be used.
   See my earlier note about the FAA's use of PK-232 TNC's for
   their emergency nets.

5) If your the telco, just haul in a portable C band microwave
   link and aim it at existing antennas.  This is used by Bellsouth
   in a "DMS-100 on wheels". Three frequencies and two polarizations
   are available for several thousand VF circuits.

6) For real bandwidth call Alascom :-).

7) Point to point microwave links are available, but two towers or
   high buildings would be required.


Pat Turner KB4GRZ   [e-mail]

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

Date: Wed, 9 Sep 92 17:35:45 EDT
From: Tom Coradeschi <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Disaster Reporting On Usenet
Organization:  Electric Armts Div, US Army ARDEC, Picatinny Arsenal, NJ


[e-mail] writes:

> I am surprised that Usenet, as powerful a medium as it is, has not
> been more widely used to coordinate disaster relief activities.  For

> Are there any folks out there who have experience in creating a new
> newsgroup, and are willing to moderate a discussion and run a vote for

I'm not sure that this is such a great idea. The propagation delay
thru Usenet (due to the nature of the beast) is such that news tends
to travel rather slowly. Sure some very well connected sites (anyone
hanging off UUNET, for example) will get news quickly, but many of the
rest of us are in veritable backwaters. Not really the greatest way to
get out timely or critical information.

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Disaster Reporting On Usenet
Date: 8 Sep 92 20:35:16 GMT
Organization: The Hebrew University of Jerusalem


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Thor
Lancelot Simon) w rites:

> Perhaps it's worth bringing this up somehow with an appropriate
> organization such as the Red Cross?  What'd it take, a 386 box in
> their national headquarters to run things from?  Probably worth the
> money!

> [Moderator's Note: Actually, it would be quite easy. If someone wants
> to donate the 386 and the required UUCP software, I'd set it up in the
> Chicago Red Cross or else my own office.  PAT]

The National Headquarters of the American Red Cross in Alexandria VA
seems to be on the Internet as: red-cross.org

If I'm not mistaken, I think there *is* a BITNET/Internet moderated
list on network emergency response planning called HELPNET which I
think is available from Listserv@ndsuvm1


Josh    [e-mail]

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

From: ramrod![e-mail] (Chris Cox)
Subject: Re: How do You Pronounce "#"
Organization: LaserMaster Technologies, Minneapolis, MN  USA
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 18:57:00 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (The
Virtual Kid) writes:

> Oh, I always thought the "#" sign was an abbrivation of the word
> -number- after all, some address books say "phone #:".

I believe that he only truly international pronunciation of the '#'
character is the sharp sign - as in music.  It seems that that is how
Sun Microsystems describe it.  I'm not saying that they are linguistic
experts, mind you!

Certainly in REAL English (as opposed to American English) it is NOT a
symbol for the word pound.

You are correct, however, in stating that it is commonly used to
denominate the word number.


Chris Cox  W0/G4JEC          [e-mail]
LaserMaster Technologies     Tel: [phone]
7156 Shady Oak Road          Fax: [phone]
Eden Prairie, MN  55344

    ----- For mail of a more social nature, please use -----
[e-mail]  -or- [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (John M. Sullivan)
Subject: Re: How do You Pronounce "#"
Organization: Geometry Center, Univ. of Minnesota
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 19:05:48 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (The
Virtual Kid) writes:

>> The # sign?  The POUND sign!  <grin>

> Oh, I always thought the "#" sign was an abbrivation of the word
> -number- after all, some address books say "phone #:".

Well, I certainly pronounce it that way, as in "number-include
stuh-die-oh dot h", but around here "hash" (for "hash mark") seems
quite popular.  It is called the "pound sign" because it has been used
for centuries as a symbol for pounds avoirdupois (as opposed to pounds
sterling).  You can probably find it marking the weight of many large
shipping boxes.


John Sullivan

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

Date: 08 Sep 92 19:58:43 EDT
From: Ben Black <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Help With Motorola Advisor


If you can't find help locally, try the Broadcast Professionals forum
on Compuserve. There is quite a bit of message traffic there about
pagers, plus the man who designed many of Motorola's paging products
hangs out there.


Ben

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

Date: Wed, 9 Sep 92 05:02 GMT
From: Guy J. Sherr <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Illinois Bell Now Allows Remote Call Forwarding Changes


Bell Atlantic has had Remote Call Forwarding in Maryland (that's C&P
of Maryland) for quite some time.  Since I am a resident of DC though,
it was not offered to me until this month.

In this neck of the woods, it runs $.74/month more than regular Call
Forward and the two services are mutually exclusive.  To get it, I
broke up the service package that included forwarding to get this
product (it is known as Ultra Call Forward here).  It is something of
a nuisance to have to dial a ten digit number, a four digit PIN, 72#
and the target number when I am at home.  It does not ring the new
station, and it works right away.

Also, there is a different access number if I am calling in long
distance.  In this area, it is getting really hard to know which is
which before I get a bill ...

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

Date: Wed, 9 Sep 92 13:01:06 EDT
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: "911" as an Area Code?


Most of the 516 area (Long Island, NY) and part of 914 (Westchester
County, NY) currently don't require the leading 1 in front of an area
code, nor does at least the San Jose part of area 408 in California.
I guess this would change later in preparation for NNX area codes.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #698
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa11436;
          11 Sep 92 2:23 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA12600
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 11 Sep 1992 00:11:20 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA13998
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 11 Sep 1992 00:11:11 -0500
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 00:11:11 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #699

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 11 Sep 92 00:11:00 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 699

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    FCC Requests Additional Comments on Docket 89-79 (Mike Riddle)
    I-Net Awarded Air Force Contract (Montgomery Gazette via Paul Robinson)
    Vermont Payphones (Tony Harminc)
    ISDN Messaging and Answering Demonstration (Steve Rogers)
    X.25 Communication With EPABX (Vishwas Joglekar)
    Variations in Dialing Standards (Richard Cox)
    Need List of Future 210-NXX Codes (Alan Toscano)
    GTE Community Involvement (Steven Lichter)
    Telepath Problem (Paul Botts)
    Why Four-Digit Carrier Identification Codes? (Bohdan Tashchuk)
    Automated Calls (Ben Black)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Thu, 10 Sep 92 07:14:26 CST
From: [e-mail] (Mike Riddle)
Subject: FCC Requests Additional Comments on Docket 89-79
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Inns of Court, Papillion, NE


The FCC has taken some action to reconsider some aspects of the access
charge pricing issue within its Open Network Architecture proceedings.
Here's a copy of the press release from the FCC:

                  ADDITIONAL COMMENTS SOLICITED
                  WITH RESPECT TO ISSUES RAISED
                IN PETITIONS FOR RECONSIDERATION
                    OF THE PART 69/ONA ORDER

                         CC DOCKET 89-79

                                   Released:  August 14, 1992

"On July 16, 1992, the Commission adopted a Memorandum Opinion & Order
on Second Further Reconsideration, FCC 92-325, released Aug. 6, 1992.
That decision addressed the Docket 87-313 price cap new services test
issues raised in petitions for reconsideration of the Part 69/ONA
Order, 6 FCC Rcd 4524 (1991).  It did not address the other issues
raised in the petitions for reconsideration of the Part 69/ONA Order.
These issues include the pricing standard for basic service elements
(BSEs), the elimination of bundled feature groups, and maintenance of
the status quo with respect to access charge treatment of enhanced
service providers (ESPs).  Before acting on the remaining issues
raised by the petitions for reconsideration, we give parties an
opportunity to update the record in light of intervening events, such
as the effectiveness of federal ONA tariffs.

"Interested parties should file comments on the request by September
30, 1992, and reply comments by October 30, 1992, with the Secretary,
FCC, 1919 M Street, N.W., Washington, D.C.  20554.  A copy should also
be sent to Mark S. Nadel, Common Carrier Bureau, FCC, Room 544, 1919 M
St., N.W., Washington, D.C.  20554, and to the Commission's contractor
for public service records duplication: Downtown Copy Center, 1114
21st Street, N.W., Washington, D.C.  20036.  Copies of the petitions
can be obtained from the Downtown Copy Center at [phone].

"We will treat this proceeding as non-restricted for purposes of the
Commission's ex parte rules.  See generally, 47 C.F.R.  1.1200-
1.1216.  For further information contact Mark Nadel, Policy and
Program Planning Division of the Common Carrier Bureau, at (202) 632-
6363.

                              "- F C C -"


My comments:

The Open Network Architecture Basic Service Element Pricing scheme,
adopted on July 11, 1991, as part of docket 89-79, will require
usage-based access charges be imposed on the enhanced service
providers using the new, unbundled, "basic service elements" of open
network architecture.  This will be a per-minute charge that is paid
by the ESP to the LEC and will not be any form of a "tax" levied
directly upon the end user.

ESP's are folks like GEnie, Compuserve, PC Pursuit, and Starlink, to
name the ones the common modem user might be concerned with.  Since
these companies are in business to make money, the increased access
charge will be ultimately passed on to the end user -- the public.
But again, it's /not/ a tax, and it doesn't go to the government.  It
is a federally mandated charge that goes to the local exchange
carrier.

My personal assessment is that this change is ill-conceived and should
not be implemented.  As long as the charge is cost-based, the LEC is
going to do okay financially, and the public will not be gouged.  But
it seems to me that the FCC, particularly with its relaxation of the
accounting rules in several "ONA price cap" decisions over the last
year, has demonstrated its fondness for the telcos rather than the
public.

While it is true that the "current exemption for ESPs has been
retained," that is, the ESPs may continue to use the bundled feature
groups to buy the services they need and not pay increased charges, an
obscure part of the 1991 ruling requires "feature groups to be
eliminated at a future date."

When that future date arrives, the ESPs will be forced to buy the
Basic Service Elements they need, at a much higher price, which will
be passed on to consumers.

The impact will also be to non-modem users, since these charges affect
data systems used a lot more widely than might be imagined.  For
example, the credit card verification terminals use data-packet
networks that involve local dial-ins, and thus will incur the higher
charges.  Exactly how that charge will be distributed among the
carriers, the credit card companies, the service bureaus, and the
stores is open to conjecture, but you're probably safe in assuming the
consumer will hold the bag when it's all over.


Mike    inns.omahug.org   [phone]  (1:285/27.0)

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

Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 92  18:33:32 EDT
Subject: I-Net Awarded Air Force Contract


Montgomery County [Maryland] {Gazette},  Sept 9, 1992 page A-40

By Bill Borda, Staff Writer

   Bethesda-based I-NET, Inc. has won a contract worth nearly $40
million from the Air Force for telecommunications and computer
services.

   The contract call for I-NET "to enhance (the Air Force's)
telecommunications systems through computer applcations," said Jeff
Rosolio, the company's vice president of administration.

   Rosolio said the contract covers a broad range of services,
including systems engineering, technical, logistic and management
services.

   The contract calls for I-NET to do work on the telecommunication
systems at Scott Air Force Base, Ill., Gunter Air Force Base, Ala.,
and Tinker Air Force Base, Okla., he said.

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

Date: Thu, 10 Sep 92 20:30:10 EDT
From: Tony Harminc <[e-mail]>
Subject: Vermont Payphones


I spent a few very pleasant days of vacation in Vermont, and noticed a
couple of curious things making calls from payphones:

1) I didn't see a single COCOT.  Are they illegal in the state?

2) A very high proportion of NETel payphones had rotary dials.  Tone
service was clearly available to residence and business customers,
but I didn't see a single payphone with keypad in Stowe or surrounds.

3) The NETel payphones seem to have several different default LD
carriers.  I would have thought the LEC would sign up with a single
carrier for all its phones.  Sometimes the default was AT&T for both
1+ and 0+ calls; in other cases it was AT&T for 1+ and (say) USSprint
for 0+.

4) While making a calling card call from one of the rotary dial phones
with USSprint as default, I had some problems: I dialed 0 416
745-xxxx, waited *forever* (i.e. 20-25 seconds :-) ), got a Sprint
message asking me to key in my calling card number or hit 0 for an
operator, waited *forever* for the timeout, got the Sprint operator
who seemed slightly surprised that all I wanted to do was make a
calling card call, gave the card number to him, waited a short
*forever* (about 10 seconds), he said "there -- just validating your
card, it's going through now", and I was dumped into a ringing tone
followed by "the card number you have entered was not valid -- please
try again".

Grump!  Of course by this time the operator was long gone, and I had
no way of rekeying the number.  I started the whole thing again, this
time told the operator what had happened and asked him if my Bell
Canada calling card (old format number) should work and to please stay
on the line until validation.  He said it should, and he would.  He
didn't, and it didn't.

I dialed 10288, told AT&T all about it, and was connected in a few
seconds.

So who was right?  Should my Bell card number work with Sprint?
Do US LEC cards work with Sprint ?


Tony H.

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Rogers)
Subject: ISDN Messaging and Answering Demonstration
Organization: EDS Technology Architecture, Dallas
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 18:38:10 GMT


[Received in the mail, and passed along to the Digest.]

Dear Telecommunications and Messaging Industry Professionals:

We are pleased to invite you to attend the October 28, 1992 meeting of
the North American ISDN Users' Forum (NIUF) Messaging and Answering
Group.  This meeting is part of the October 26-30, 1992 NIUF being
held at the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) in
Gaithersburg, Maryland.  The NIUF has created a strong user voice in
the implementation of geographically consistent ISDN and ISDN
applications and has helped to ensure that the emerging ISDN
environment meets users' application needs.  More specifically, the
NIUF Messaging and Answering Group focuses on how messaging and
answering applications can be realized in an ISDN environment.
Applications include defining ISDN interfaces for Voice Mail,
Electronic Mail and Fax Mail, Transparent Networking of Voice Mail
Systems (VMS), Centralized VMS, Unified Message Retrieval, and Unified
Message Notification.

At this meeting you will have an opportunity to preview a prototype
ISDN application which provides an integrated desktop, including a
single user interface for notification and retrieval of voice, email
and fax messages.  This service demonstrates functionalities addressed
in the following NIUF applications:

Unified Message Retrieval (Application #160009.0) and Unified
Message Notification (Application #810035.0).  Included as one of the
TRanscontinental ISDN Project 1992 (TRIP '92) applications, this
service is being developed specifically for use with standardized ISDN
utilizing X.25 packet messaging over the ISDN D-channel.  TRIP '92
will bring together members of the telecommunications industry to
showcase real life uses of ISDN and the national scope of the ISDN
network.

We encourage participation from messaging vendors, enhanced service
providers, RBOCs, and businesses with their own messaging needs.  With
your involvement, we can make these and other ISDN applications a
reality.

For more information about the North American ISDN Users' Forum and
registration material, please contact Dawn Hoffman, National Institute
of Standards and Technology, Building 223, Room B364, Gaithersburg, MD
20899, at 301-975-2937.


Sincerely,

Glenn Ehley, Siemens Stromberg-Carlson
Chair, NIUF ISDN Implementors' Workshop

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

Steve Rogers    [e-mail] DS  Dallas, Texas

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

From: [e-mail] (Vishwas Joglekar)
Subject: X.25 Communication With EPABX
Organization: Department of Computer Science,IIT, Bombay
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 12:51:11 GMT


I am working on some data communication project. We have Oki iox 1200
EPABX I would like to know how to use this exchange in getting X.25
network connectivity.

We also have Digital Multi Key Telephone Instrument (MKT DTE-II BE)
which has an RS 232 port.

Please mail to me directly. I will summarise.

Thanks in advance.


Vishwas Joglekar   I.I.T. Powai,
Bombay 400 076.   India.
Internet : [e-mail]

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

Date: Thu, 10 Sep 92 15:43 GMT
From: Richard Cox <[e-mail]>
Subject: Variations in Dialing Standards
Reply-To: [e-mail]


Julian Macassey, [e-mail]  writes:

>>  What about pulse dial? Well, yes, pretty much the same all over the world
>>  New Zealand and Sweden being exceptions. There is a difference in the
>>  make break ratio, but a good modem can change this.

Don't forget that the digit mapping (number of LD pulses versus number
keyed or dialled, does vary.  In New Zealand if you DIAL 7, the phone
sends THREE disconnects. In some other countries it would send EIGHT!
The work around is to "translate" the digits before you ATD them.


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]
Date: 10 Sep 92 20:03:21 GMT
Subject: Need List of Future 210-NXX Codes


Does anyone have a list of NXX codes which will be making the move
from NPA 512 to 210, later this fall? I've made several phone calls to
Southwestern Bell, but haven't yet found anyone with an "official"
list of prefixes. They only seem to have a list of cities. With the
split only two months away, I would think a list of prefixes should be
available by now. (Perhaps an automated 800 number like Illinois Bell
had for the 312/708 split.)

If any reader has such a list, or knows where I might obtain one,
please send email to: <[e-mail]>.


A Alan Toscano     Voice:  [phone]     AT&T Mail:  atoscano
<[e-mail]>   CIS:   73300,217   ELN: 62306750

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: 10 Sep 92 20:36:00 UT
Subject: GTE Community Involvment


Well Mr. Higdon you failed to check your facts on that one.

For years GTE has supplied its people to work with the LA Raiders on
its Food Day game. Each year well over 500 GTE people are at the GTE
sponsered GTE West Golf Classic which is used to support a shelter for
battered wives. It sponsers Public TV programs and many other local
community events in its service areas. If you were to contact your
area public affairs office they could tell you more.

We were also involved with over 1000 volunteers in the 1984 Olympics
in LA. We were at the Super Bowl in Pasadena and will be there again
for public service. 'GTE People' is not very well known. It is the
volunteer group over 1500 strong within the company volunteering when
needed. Maybe we should blow our horns more often, but we are more
interested in just doing our community service and not caring if
anyone really knows about it since we do and that is all that really
counts.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Paul Botts)
Subject: Telepath Problem
Organization: Chinet - Public Access UNIX
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 21:29:57 GMT


My new Gateway 2000 Telepath fax/modem works fine except for one big
problem: I can't get it to work with software (games) or bbs's that
don't use the data compression and error-correction protocols (MNP5,
v.42, and etc.). The software and bbs in question both work just fine
with my generic el cheapo 2400 internal modem, and with the old Hayes
2400 external at the office. But they won't work with the Telepath.

The guy that runs the BBS said I need to turn off the datacompression
and error correction stuff, but I can't find a way to do it. I've had
long conversations with Gateway, and they've suggested different
initialization strings to use, but they haven't worked (one of them
actually disabled the damn thing altogether! The other just didn't
change anything).  My comm software, by the way, is Crosstalk for
Windows, which has no provisions to accomplish this, either. Haven't
any of these people ever heard of "backward compatibility"? Am I just
out of luck? Do I have to waste a second slot on the old modem, just
to communicate with this BBS and software and anybody else not using
the modern protocols???

Help! Any informed input MOST welcome!


Paul Botts     [e-mail]

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

Date: Thu, 10 Sep 92 16:35:48 -0700
From: sequent!islabs!fasttech![e-mail] (Bohdan Tashchuk)
Subject: Why Four-Digit Carrier Identification Codes?


Several recent messages have mentioned there will soon be a change
from three-digit to four-digit long distance carrier identification
codes.  Why is this change necessary?

I've only ever had a use for three different codes: 10222, 10288, and
10333.  I'm sure that sophisticated users need many more than this,
but are four digits really necessary? Is there a reluctance to re-use
old codes freed up because of mergers, bankruptcy, etc?

How soon will this change occur? Will it be in an upward-compatible
fashion?  Will I still be able to dial 10ATT when I need to avoid AOS
scum?

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

Date: 10 Sep 92 19:58:38 EDT
From: Ben Black <[e-mail]>
Subject: Automated Calls


Since you're directing the teleslime toward the DC cellular prefix,
why not word the message like this ...

"I am an automated message delivery service. I am calling you today to
solicit your support for ___________ legislation. If you are a member
of the House, press 1. If you belong to the Senate, press 2."


Ben Black

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #699
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa14172;
          11 Sep 92 4:09 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA18990
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 11 Sep 1992 01:44:57 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA22260
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 11 Sep 1992 01:44:47 -0500
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 01:44:47 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #700

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 11 Sep 92 01:44:52 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 700

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Contel and Spanish (United Press International / LANTRA via Jeff Garber)
    New AT&T Fax Mailbox ([e-mail])
    Develswitch RS232 Connectivity Product (Ben Armstrong)
    Fax-> Email, Fax-> Fax Services Anywhere? (Simon Streltsov)
    USWest - Helloooo, is Anyone in There? (Andrew Burt)
    Here We Go Again ;( (Jack Winslade)
    Leased Line From Hell (Pat Turner)
    SONET Rings (Butch DeLaVega)
    Cellular Frequencies (Jeff Garber)
    Need Information on NEC "Electra 616" KSU (Jim Miller)
    Telephone Radio Link Wanted ([e-mail])
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Thu, 10 Sep 92 03:56 GMT
From: Jeff Garber <[e-mail]>
Subject: Contel and Spanish


I saw the following article in the LANTRA list, where topics relating
to natural language translation are discussed, and I thought the
article would be of interest to TELECOM Digest readers.

   Begin posted article:

 From UPI:

Contel Agrees to Change Spanish Language Requirement
 By WILLIAM D. MURRAY

     SAN FRANCISCO (UPI) _ Contel of California Inc., which provides
phone service to the Central Valley, agreed Monday to change its
practice of forcing Hispanic workers to use their Spanish language
skills on the job.

     The announcement ended years of litigation over the policy that
forced Hispanic customer service representatives to speak Spanish,
despite the fact that many were American-born and had limited
bilingual skills.

    "This settlement takes a major step towards ending discrimination
against Hispanic workers," said Morton Bahr, president of the
Communications Workers of America, the union that pressed the suit.
"By forcing Hispanic employees to use Spanish, Contel got many
benefits while subjecting the workers to discriminatory burdens on the
job."

     Anna Esqueda, one of the five women named as plaintiffs in the
suit, said she felt embarassed when explaining services because of her
limited Spanish skills.

    "I knew that I couldn't adequately explain the service choices and
so did Contel," the American-born Esqueda said.  "I tried my best, but
if it had not been for the mandatory language policy and my being
Mexican, I would never have been placed in this embarassing position."

     Esqueda said when she took the job with Contel, she was not
informed that she would have to speak Spanish.

    "I wasn't ever told when I was applying for the job that I would
have to speak Spanish," she said.  "And even though we were told to
speak Spanish on the phone, the company did not allow us to speak
Spanish to each other."

    The latter was the focal point of the CWA lawsuit, which was filed
in September, 1990.

    "Without being told when hired that they had to provide
translation, without receiving any training, our members would be
pulled away from their work to assist customers who did not speak
English," said CWA District 9 Vice President Janice Wood.  "To add
insult to injury, Contel not only didn't pay them for doing special
work, they penalized them for making fewer calls."

    The consent decree signed by U.S. District Judge Ronald Whyte also
listed a set of standards that Contel had agreed to follow under the
direction of the court for the next three years, including the posting
of jobs that are specifically designated for Spanish-speaking customer
service representatives and training classes in bilingual skills.

    However, the decree did not list monetary compensation for the five
women plantiffs. When asked, attornies for the women said they could not
comment on that aspect of the case.

    The CWA said compensation for future use of Spanish on the job
would likely be written into any new collective bargainning agreement.

    Esteban Lizardo, the Director of Language Rights for the Mexican-
American Legal Defense and Education Fund, said the decree could set a
precedent within the state.

    "This happens over and over in a number of companies in
California," Lizardo said.  "Hispanic workers are forced to speak
Spanish simply because of their nationality and are not compensated
for it. This could set a precedent within this state and end this
practice."

   Contel could not be reached for comment.

End posted article.

Perhaps Contel will do what Pacific Bell has done and start a
translation center. If a business office representative or operator
gets a non-English speaking customer on the line, they conference in
the translation center where representatives are specifically hired to
interpret (it's ALL they do ALL day long).


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

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: 10 Sep 92 12:13:21 GMT
Subject: New AT&T Fax Mailbox


I thought this may be of some interest to TELECOM Digest readers.


Dave

NEW AT&T CALLING CARD FEATURE

*****PRESS RELEASE*****

FOR RELEASE WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 9, 1992

BASKING RIDEGE, NJ -- AT&T today announced AT&T Fax Mailbox, a new
service that will allow travelers to receive faxes whenever and
wherever they travel.

With AT&T Fax Mailbox any AT&T cardholder can establish a mailbox
number to which faxes can be sent at any time and stored up to eight
days.  Like voicemail, the mailbox is personalized with the owner's
name, assuring senders that they've reached the right party.  In
addition, senders can leave a 45-second voice memo along with each
fax.

Mailbox owners can access thier messages via an 800 number from any
touchtone phone or fax machine by inputting their AT&T Calling Card
number or AT&T Universal Card calling card number.

There is no monthly subscribtion fee for maintaining a mailbox,
enabling customers to pay for this service as they use it.  The cost
to receive a domestic fax is $.70 per page; each voice memo is $.35;
and all charges are billed to the AT&T card.

"Sending and receiving faxes while on the road have become almost as
common as calling the office, and now AT&T makes it almost as easy,"
said Lila Goldstein, AT&T Market Manager, Fax Mailbox. "When business
travelers give their AT&T Fax Mailbox number to their clients or
employees, they can selectively retrieve their faxes at their
convenience and in a confidential manner.  They pick the time and the
place, and time zone differences no longer matter.  In addition,
people sending business travelers faxes no longer have to be concerned
with detailed itineraries to ensure that materials get to the right
place at the right time."

AT&T Fax Mailbox customers are able to scan messages and determine
when a fax was sent and the number of pages.  They can retrieve the
fax immediately, send it to a fax machine in another location, save it
for a later time or delete it.  In addition, most customers with
pagers can be "beeped" at no charge, when faxes come through to their
mailbox.

International travelers also can take advantage of AT&T Fax Mailbox by
using AT&T's USADirect (R) Service.  If a customer is accessing the
mailbox from a non-U.S. location, he or she pays USADirect charges,
the fax charge of $.70 per page printed or directed to another fax
located in the U.S. and $.35 for each voice note.  If an international
user directs the fax to another international location, the charges
will include USADirect costs as well as international fax charges,
which range form &.70 to $3.70 per page.

Customers will receive a separate bill from AT&T for Fax Mailbox
charges.  People interested in signing up for this service can call
1-800-446-2452.

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

From: Ben Armstrong <[e-mail]>
Subject: Develswitch RS232 Connectivity Product
Date: 10 Sep 92 14:40:40 AST
Organization: Dymaxion Research Limited, NS, Canada


Is anyone out there still using a Develswitch (manufactured by
Develcom Electronics)?  For those not 'in the know' the Develswitch is
an RS232 connectivity product.

We have a five-shelf unit, which when fully populated with boards
could handle up to around 256 RS232 connections.  We want to know if
there are any remaining in production as we are considering replacing
ours.

Please respond via E-Mail to [e-mail] or call the number
below and ask for Rod Regier (pronounced re-GEER).


Ben Armstrong, Software Development        bus: [phone]
Dymaxion Research Ltd.,                    fax: [phone]
Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada B3J 1R2  Internet: [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Simon Streltsov)
Subject: Fax-> Email, Fax-> Fax Services Anywhere?
Date: 10 Sep 92 13:53:09 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Simon Streltsov)
Organization: Boston University


I'm looking for a service; someone who can receive my fax and route it
to me by e-mail as a TIFF file or after running a character
recognition program.

I saw sometime ago someone on panix(?) was offering it, but I was
unable to find a reference.

Please, e-mail, I'll summarize.


Simon Streltsov,    Boston University    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Andrew Burt)
Subject: USWest - Helloooo, is Anyone in There?
Organization: University of Denver, Dept. of Math & Comp. Sci.
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 92 16:02:52 GMT


I'd like to talk to someone at USWest about this deal I've been
reading about in the paper, some sort of on-line directory /
cooperative thing with the French -- can someone suggest a contact at
USWest I could talk to who's involved in this?

Today I just read in the {Rocky Mt. News} that it will be $15/month +
$.15/minute for -- are you ready -- nothing more than an on-line
phonebook.  (You get software, or for $300 flat or $12/month more, a
simple terminal.)  Supposedly just unveiled for Minneapolis.

Excuse me, but have we entered the 1970's yet?

Unless people are awfully gullible (I hope not), or this is a whole
lot better than it sounds (I hope so), this ain't gonna fly.

Reason #1: Maybe at $.50/month it would work.  Geez, I pay $14/month
for one phone line!  Your average person is not going to shell out
this much when phone books are virtually free (and mostly easier to
use).  How often do you REALLY look things up in the phone book or
call directory assistance?  If it were worth $.10 to look something up
(about what it's worth to me on-line), this implies I need to look up
150 items a month.  And if one search takes a couple minutes (to wade
through the clunky menus) this is already at $.30 a search.  If I use
this "a lot" and look up 100 items a month, I'm looking at $45/month
for this!  Fubar.

Reason #2: Services that DO get away with charging $15/month offer one
whale of a lot more, e.g., even lowly old Prodigy is a better deal.
I'd sooner spend my bucks on Compu$erve.  (And if you've followed my
posting history, you know I think they charge too much, considering
how much is available on the Internet for much less, e.g., via Nyx for
$0, or CSN at $2/hr.) [Let me admit my prejudice here is that
information should be and can be cheaply (if not freely) accessible;
and that information access is a necessity, not a luxury.]

Reason #3: Videotex.  Blech!  I think MS-windows and X have proven
that even non-computer-geeks can read decently small size fonts on
screens; we don't need to regress to the middle-ages here with 40
character wide screens (which the picture showed; or is it 32?).  (As
for the "transmission speed" argument, I'd rather it be just a
straight ASCII text interface; either that, or use it as grounds to
justify ISDN for homes.)

Reason #4: Another Propietary Program.  Presumably we won't be able to
dial in with Procomm, or telnet in via the internet.  Bag it right
there.  It'll be too limited for real use (as they always are), buggy,
clunky ...

Reason #5: Limited access.  How are folks in LA going to look up my
phone number in Denver?  They can telnet or dial into our public
library card catalog for free, mind you.  [telnet pac.carl.org]

My recommendations are:

1) Make it free initially, raise to $.50/month, even $1/month later.
   Forget any hopes of selling it for more than 1/10th the price
   of a phone line.

2) Use modern methods of connection, such as telnet or a simple
   dialup; or use X.  If you want to offer videotex, offer the others
   first.

3) Find some competent people who know how existing services work,
   especially the internet; I'm guessing by the choice of videotex
   and pricing that someone involved in this is highly incompetent.

Ok, flames on ...

Andrew Burt     [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: Actually, you are not the only person with some
serious questions/complaints about this service. By sheer coincidence
I received another article on the same topic today from Jack Winslade
and it appears next. I'm sure to get REplies and will run them over
the weekend as space permits.  PAT]

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

Date: Thu, 10 Sep 92 23:02:46 CST
From: [e-mail] (Jack Winslade)
Subject: Here We Go Again :-(
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: DRBBS Technical BBS, Omaha


Well, gang, it's HWGA time.  Will U.S West EVER Learn ??

Tonight, one of the stories on TV news (KETV, ABC affilliate) was US
West starting Yet Another electronic yellow pages service (with other
information services coming Real Soon Now) in Minneapolis.  Yes, they
are using that Minitel 'High-tech French method'.  The demo looked
like the resolution of an Atari 2600 video game.

Here's the good part.  There's a $.15 per minute charge to use the
service.  IMAO, I can't see why anyone would pay a per-minute charge
to look up info on a system when they can simply flip through the good
(??) old-fashioned tree-wasting, bicep-building, landfill-clogging
yellow pages, now available in two competing editions.

I sure wish Ma Bell would cure herself of this case of anal-cranial
inversion and realize that it would be MORE PROFITABLE in the long run
to offer the service to consumers for free and save the
money/trees/effort it takes to print and distribute directories.  (It
must be at least a couple of bucks each for something the size of
Omaha Metro.  Anyone know for sure ??)

For some reason, I can't imagine people are gonna beat down the doors
of US West in anxious attempts to use this service.

Good day.        JSW


[Moderator's Note: Jack, meet Andy Burt ... Andy, meet Jack! Maybe the
two of you can start something going and convince USWest of the error
of its ways ...  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 92 20:12 EDT
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Leased Line from Hell


The following are notes concerning the local exchange carrier's
portion of several leased lines in TN. Three of the lines were AT&T's
and four MCI's.  AT&T tended to pressure SCB to fix the problem; MCI
wasn't quite as aqgressive.  AT&T notified the customer about the
problem, who then alerted MCI.  Anyway, the names of the customer and
of the contractors have been deleted.

Day 1: at 3:44 PM SCB contractor X was digging a trench to lay new
fiber when the ground gave way under the backhoe.  The backhoe sank 5'
into the sinkhole? and crushed the cable.  Cable was back in service
at 6:35 PM.

Day 2: at 8:20 AM contractor X was digging a trench aproximately one
mile farther down the cable route when the backhoe cut the cable.  SCB
said the the cable was improperly marked (probably a loop of excess
cable) at this spot.  Cable was back in service at 12:00 noon.  25 of
27 miles of the fiber had been trenched.  All work was stopped to
allow SCB to remark cable over weekend.

Day 6: Contractor X cuts newly marked cable at 2 PM.  Line was out for
at least 3:55 hours.  AT&T and MCI pitch fit.  AT&T says hand dig
remaining mile.  MCI says have SCB personnel on site during any
construction.

Day 15:  Contractor Y cuts same cable in different location at 9:45 AM.
Cable was back in service at 2:15 PM.

Wonder how much work the first contractor gets these days.


Pat Turner KB4GRZ   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Butch DeLaVega)
Subject: SONET Rings
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Butch DeLaVega)
Organization: Pacific * Bell, San Ramon, CA
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 23:57:40 GMT


Hi, I'm new to this newsgroup and have two questions:

1) Could somebody explain uni-directional and bi-directional SONET
rings?

2)  What is the relationship between SONET and ATM?

Thanks in advance ...


Butch DelaVega

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

Date: Fri, 11 Sep 92 02:34 GMT
From: Jeff Garber <[e-mail]>
Subject: Cellular Frequencies


I ask the following questions with no radio knowledge whatsoever.  I
understand that cellular frequencies are in the 869-894 MHz range.  I
also understand that scanners now block this range, but one can hear
cellular conversations over the 895-920 MHz range with the cellular
user sounding more faint than than the land user (it seems to me that
one should be able to hear the RADIO user better with a radio
scanner).

I'm wondering if it is illegal to listen in on these frequencies. In
other words, does the law say it is illegal to listen in on cellular
calls, or does it specifically mention 869-894 MHz.  Why isn't 895-920
MHz blocked on scanners since you can overhear cellular?  Also, why
would the party on the other end of a cellular call sound stronger
than the cellular user?


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


[Moderator's Note: Actually, cellular is at 824-851 megs and 869-895
megs more or less. The one group is base to cellphone; the other is
cellphone to base. In both instances, it is over the airwaves, but the
transmission from the base, or tower is going to usually be stronger
than the other way around. The cellphone transmits to the tower/base/
landline and the tower/base/landline sends this back to the cellphone
along with whatever the (landline) caller is saying. The towers are of
course fixed in one location while the cellphones are moving around.
If you happen to overhear a frequency used by a tower that is close to
you it will always be active, loud and clear. Other frequencies may be
for a tower several miles away ... it won't come in as well. In the
group which is cellphone to base, you will only hear those that are
close to you to start with -- usually loud and clear. Once their
signal starts to get weak, they'll shift to another tower and the
scanner will start cycling again. One 'problem' (smirk!) reported by
people who illegally monitor cellular conversations via their scanner
is that one never gets to hear the *entire* conversation from start to
finish. The scanner will be cycling -- searching for something -- and
lock in on a conversation in progress. As one listener put it, " ...
about the time the conversation started to get juicy -- really
interesting to listen to -- the vehicle moved out of range and the
tower dropped the call, giving it to another tower somewhere. I tried
stepping quickly around the band manually, but never could find it. "

Ahhh -- too bad! It is illegal to listen to cellular calls, period. It
is also quite easy to do the mods required on most scanners with 800
megs capability to bring those frequencies in. Some Radio Shack
dealers sell the PRO-34 scanner (my model) with a straight look on
their face then on your way out the door hand you a crudely photocopied
sheet of paper with pictures of the circuit board telling you to pull
diode D-3 and D-4 to recover the full band ... but only to be done
when the scanner is being exported outside the USA, of course ... of
course!  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Jim Miller)
Subject: Need Info on NEC "Electra 616" KSU
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 92 22:36:25 EDT


Hello,

   I am doing some consulting work for a local company that has an
"Electra 616" key system manufactured by NEC. This system has the
capability for six trunks with eight (I believe) extensions.

   This KSU was installed by a business that is long gone from the
building, therefore there is no documentation of any type to be found.
I need to find out why one of the extensions is not allowed to dial
out, but is allowed to take inward calls and to use the intercom.

   Is anyone familiar with this system? If so, could you point me to a
source of documentation and/or a supplier of extension sets for it?  I
believe I saw a system identical to this a while ago at a flea market
with a GTE logo on it; maybe other companies repackage the 616 and
sell it as their own.

Any help you could provide would be much appreciated.


Jim Miller    [e-mail]

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

Subject: Telephone Radio Link Wanted
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 92 23:24:12 -0400
From: [e-mail]


I'm looking for a telephone radio link, to provide a telephone link
between two houses, one currently with phone service and one without.
I want something that works just like a two-conductor cable but is
cheaper, over a range of about 3300 feet (1 km).  There is a clear
line of sight between the two points (over water).

Could anyone suggest a way of doing this?  (Cellular service is not
available.)  I can think of three approaches, of varying cost:

1. Buy a consumer-type cordless phone and fit a directional
   antenna on it. (cheap)

2. Buy a professional system designed for such applications. ($$)

3. Give up and run underwater telephone cable ($$$).

I'll be grateful if anyone can give me advice on this or pointers to
suppliers of appropriate equipment.  Thanks in advance.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #700
******************************