Telecom/1996-04-telecom-walnutcreek.iso/back.issues/1992.volume.12/vol12.iss751-800

Text File | 1992-10-24 | 987KB | 23,663 lines

Received: from [129.105.5.103] by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa00637;
          1 Oct 92 17:06 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA16587
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 1 Oct 1992 11:35:58 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA08283
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 1 Oct 1992 11:35:44 -0500
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 11:35:44 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #751

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 1 Oct 92 11:35:45 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 751

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Cellular Phones With Deals Attached (Dan Ganek)
    Re: Cellular Phones With Deals Attached (Andrew Klossner)
    Re: Cellular Phones With Deals Attached (Stephen Tell)
    Re: Cellular Phones With Deals Attached (Steve Forrette)
    Re: Cellular Phones With Deals Attached (Bob Sherman)
    Re: The Smallest US Telephone Company (Gabe M. Wiener)
    Re: The Smallest US Telephone Company (Shrikumar)
    Re: What it Costs to Have the President Over (Barry Mishkind)
    Re: What it Costs to Have the President Over (James VanHouten)
    Re: Two-Line Switching Device (Bob Frankston)
    Re: The Round Table (Roger Theriault)
    Re: Selective Ringing Call Director (Marc Kozam)
    Re: Last GTE Cord Board Removed (John R. Levine)
    Re: Thoughts About WFMT Versus WNIB/WNIZ (Ron Newman)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Dan Ganek <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Cellular Phones With Deals Attached
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 14:38:57 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Corporation, Chelmsford, MA


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

> On page B5 of today's (9/29) {Washington Post}, a place is offering a
> cellular phone for a low price provided you take a one year contract
> with Cellular One.

> In the fine print it notes that "installation and antenna not
> included, must be installed by" the selling company.

> The current price is $9.95 for the phone.

> I know that in places like California and North Carolina, tie-ins like
> this are not permitted so phones sell at list price.

> [Moderator's Note: Cellular One here in Chicago is always running
> deals like you mention. The other day an ad in the paper offered a bag
> phone for a penny (yes, one cent!) provided you signed a contract with
> Cellular One for some period of time. The most nams I have seen in a
> phone was four. That seems to be about the practical, if not
> theoretical limit.    PAT]

Free/cheap cellular phones are the norm here in the NE. I never did
understand why CA made such tie-in's illegal. If I'm running some sort
of service business and offer to subsidize my customer's equipment,
why not?  I'm not REQUIRING them to do it.  For example, I can get a
Mits 1500 transportable for about $200 -- if I sign up for Cell One at
$40 plus $21/month for six months.  What's a Mits 1500 cost in CA?
What are the Cell One minimum sign up and monthly charges?

Get a bag phone or transportable, they don't require an antenna or
installation.  I got a Mits transportable and then installed it
myself. (A great way to learn all about automoble manufacturing
techniques :-)


dan

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

From: [e-mail] (Andrew Klossner)
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 92 13:28:41 PDT
Subject: Re: Cellular Phones With Deals Attached
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Tektronix Color Printers, Wilsonville, Oregon


> does this seem reasonable if you were planning to use the
> particular carrier anyway ..."

Sure.  I would go so far as to say that you should *never* buy a cell
phone without getting a subsidy from a carrier.  They paid $300 of my
phone's cost in exchange for my agreement to a one-year contract.

> "what is the maximum number of nams you've seen for a single
> telephone."

The OKI 900 has five.


Andrew Klossner  ([e-mail])


[Moderator's Note: You say the cell company 'paid $300 of the phone's
cost' but some of us believe the prices of cell phones are
artificially inflated so the cell company can then 'offer them at a
cheaper price.'  In other words, cell phones do not come close to
costing $200-300 to manufacture and distribute (which allowing for
markup would then get the $400-500 retail price were it not for the
cell company offering to 'knock off $300 ...'). Cell phones may cost
$20-30 to manufacture. Like all other electronic items, the cost is
but a tiny fraction of what it was when they first came out nearly a
decade ago. You should be able to buy a good cell phone for $100 or
less regardless of signing up with anyone or not. Cellular One in
Chicago owns a number of dealers including Leader Communications, a
company for whom I have no love lost.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Stephen Tell)
Subject: Re: Cellular Phones With Deals Attached
Date: 30 Sep 92 17:05:18 GMT
Organization: The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill


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

> I know that in places like California and North Carolina, tie-ins like
> this are not permitted so phones sell at list price.

This is no longer the case in North Carolina.  Sometime within the
last six months the ads all changed from "This price not available in
North Carolina" to "Price will be higher without activation.

The lowest price for a bag phone with strings attached I've seen is
$58.  Just for amusement I inquired at Radio Shack and was shown a
copy of the contract with Centel.  There were about five different
plans trading off monthly flat rate for the first X minutes with cost
per additional minute.  Prices did not seem outrageous if you have a
real use for the phone.


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: All the Radio Shack dealers in Chicago were agents
for Ameritech for several years. When I bought my CT-301 a couple
years ago they sold it to me with Ameritech service. When I went in
the other day, they had signs up everywhere saying they are now
Cellular One agents as of a month ago. I asked what happened to people
who had bought phones prior to that time using Ameritech; they said
they'd continue to service them until whatever service contract they
buyer had with Ameritech/Radio Shack expired, then offer the customer
a new contract with Cell One instead.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: Cellular Phones With Deals Attached
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 02:34:26 GMT


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

> Second, for anyone that has an answer, what is the maximum number of
> nams you've seen for a single telephone.  Because of roaming and dual
> carriers, I saw an ad in the {Los Angeles Times} which showed a cell
> phone with QUAD nam capability.

My OKI 900 (also private-labeled by AT&T) has a five NAM capability.
I sleep well at night knowing that I will never run out of NAMs!


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

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

From: Bob Sherman <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Cellular Phones With Deals Attached
Date: 1 Oct 1992 04:01:23 -0400


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

> Second, for anyone that has an answer, what is the maximum number of
> nams you've seen for a single telephone.  Because of roaming and dual
> carriers, I saw an ad in the {Los Angeles Times} which showed a cell
> phone with QUAD nam capability.

At least some of the Technophone (sp?) models offer eight nams, but
that is the most I have ever seen in any unit.


[e-mail]    MCI MAIL:BSHERMAN


[Moderator's Note: I got a Technophone via Leader Communications when
they were offering them for $29 with a tie in to Cellular One (their
parent company) two years ago. It worked for a few months then broke
down. Leader claimed it could not be fixed and offered to sell me a
new phone for $400+ (cheapest one in the store that day) but they
refused to knock off the $300 saying I was not a new Cell One
activation, even though I offered to sign a new upgraded service
contract with Cell One. I told them how badly the whole thing stunk
and dropped by Cell One service the same da, putting both my phones on
Ameritech where the coverage area and roaming agreements are better
anyway.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Gabe M Wiener)
Subject: Re: The Smallest US Telephone Company
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Gabe M Wiener)
Organization: Columbia University
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 15:28:08 GMT


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

> the smallest phone company however. There is (or was) a guy in
> Colorado who owned a telco with *eight* subscribers.

How does he qualify as a telco per se?  How does this differ from any
organization that buys its own PBX?  Or is the distinction that any
call outside of the local equipment is long-distance?

Incidentally, I've always wondered ... hypothetical: someone moves out
to the middle of nowhere ... buys switch and hooks up 30 odd
subscribers to old used SxS ... how does he go about getting long
distance connectivity?


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


[Moderator's Note: I think he qualifies as a telco instead of a 'PBX'
because he has several users who are not associated with each other
through any common affinity group, i.e. not all of the same employer;
not all of the same residential premises, etc. To get long distance
service he cuts a deal with the various carriers. That is how it is
done now days. Anyone can be a telco; anyone can be an LD carrier.  PAT]

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

Date: Wed, 30 Sep 92 23:57:20 -0400
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: The Smallest US Telephone Company
Organization: University of Massachusetts, Amherst


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

> [Moderator's Note: We've discussed Buena Vista here before, and [..] not
 ...
> the smallest phone company however. There is (or was) a guy in
> Colorado who owned a telco with *eight* subscribers. Does anyone
> remember the name of that one?    PAT]

Still on my one track ...

Which is the smallest long distance company ?

I suppose thats an ill-defined question, if ever there was one.

So let's say I mean ...

    Which is the IEC with the smallest turn-over?
    Smallest investment?
    Smallest subscriber base (counting default IEC selection for line)?
     ... and such.


shrikumar ( [e-mail], [e-mail] )

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

From: [e-mail] (Barry Mishkind)
Subject: Re: What it Costs to Have the President Over
Organization: Datalog Consulting, Tucson, AZ
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 92 07:22:51 GMT


TELECOM Moderator notes:

> streets closed off, massive traffic jams on the streets still open,
> and delays in getting phone installation/repairs for two or three days
> before the visit and a couple days afterward while all the phone techs
> are assigned to install all sorts of stuff which will be gone two days
> later. We had the same thing with Reagan, Carter and Nixon. Personally
> I wish those guys would stay away. I don't have any interest in seeing
> them personally and I'd much rather be able to follow my normal routes
> of transportation, etc. I wish someone could tell me why ten percent
> of the phone stuff which gets installed wherever he goes wouldn't be
> adequate. Taxpayers certainly do not owe free phone service to the
> members of the press. Let them put quarters in pay phones like the
> rest of us.  PAT]

I don't think the press gets free anything from the taxpayer, although
I have my suspicion about the amount paid covering the press
bus/plane, etc.  I think the phones are part of the normal overkill
any politician demands due to his inflated opinion of his importance
to history.

I agree with you ... keep 'em out of my neighborhood. Expensive,
inconvenient, and I'd rather not be used as a politician's poster boy.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (James VanHouten)
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 07:57:32 -0500
Subject: Re: What it Costs to Have the President Over



[e-mail] (J. Philip Miller) wrote:

> I have only heard rumors about the bills associated with all of this,
> but it sure seems clear that some combination of the Bush/Quail
> organization and our tax dollars are shelling out real money for a 20
> minute speech.  Anyone got any idea how much the campaigns spend on
> throw away work like this?

> [Moderator's Note: Quite a bit of money is spent and inconvenience is
> endured by people whenever the president comes through town. Whenever
> Bush comes to Chicago the rest of us have to put up with numerous
> streets closed off, massive traffic jams on the streets still open,
  ...

Without going in to great detail, I spent eight years with the White
House Communications Agency providing telecommunications for the
President/VP.  The amount of money spend to support the Chief is
staggering.  You must remember the wireline communications that you
see is also backed up by other alternative communications.

OBTW Pat, I was on a trip to Chicago in '90 I guess.  You are right;
when the President comes to town stay home.  I used to think of all
the people's lives that were put on hold during a Presidential visit.
I guess the most memorable is a few trips to NYC.  The police close
several blocks during the middle of the day.  Boy those New Yorkers
can sure give you some scary looks as you go driving by!!


James Van Houten


[Moderator's Note: Harry S Truman used to take walks alone around
downtown Washington, DC during his term in office. I don't need an
explanation of why that is not feasable these days, but it seems to me
there is a massive overkill of protection and telecom services for the
President.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Two-Line Switching Device
Date: Thu 01 Oct 1992 11:58 -0400


I think that Radio Shack used to and might still sell a device
designed for sharing an answering machine on two lines.  It will
respond to a call coming in on either line.  I presume that the first
line is still the default for outgoing.  Unlike the switch box, it
would be automatic.  Since I never used the device, I might be wrong.

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

From: [e-mail] (Roger Theriault)
Subject: Re: The Round Table
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 92 12:53:33 PDT
Organization: Motorola, Mobile Data Division, Vancouver, CANADA


In a message of <22 Sep 92> by Randy Gellens, he notes that:

> Saw the pilot of the new series {The Round Table} last Friday.  In
> one scene, someone in Georgetown (in the Washington, DC area) makes a
> call from a pay phone.  The pay phone was clearly a GTE style phone,
> not a Bell type, even though the DC area is served by C&P, a Bell
> company.

I haven't seen the show, but our local papers report that this series
is shot here in Vancouver. Possibly it was a BCTel payphone.  As for
the cruiser's plates, anyone's guess ... BC plates are white with blue
letters/numbers (three letters + three numbers for all cars) and our
provincial flag in the middle, and a date sticker (like OCT 92)
centered along the bottom on the rear plate. Vanity plates all have a
special trees and mountains background. But any local antique store can
supply the film crew with any variety of license plate, and quite
possibly a rental phone booth too!


Roger Theriault    Internet: [e-mail]
UUCP: {uw-beaver,uunet}!van-bc!mdivax1!theriaul
CompuServe: 71332,730 (not too often)
I am not a spokesman for Motorola or anyone else besides myself.

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

Date: Wed, 30 Sep 92 19:38:00 EDT
From: mlksoft![e-mail]
Subject: Re: Selective Ringing Call Director


In reference to Paul Schauble's request for a "Selective Ringing Call
Director", I have two starting points:

1.  Home Automation Lab (posted in this newsgroup, in fact).  I called
their number, 1-800-HOMELAB (1-800-466-3522), and they say that they
have such a product.  I am waiting to receive their catalog.

2.  BLACK BOX (R).  Their September 1992 catalog lists a product
called DRD-4 that automatically routes distinctive ring services from
one incoming phone line to up to four devices. $ 139. Phone [phone].

    No personal experience with either product, but I'm
investigating both of them.


Marc Kozam  UUCP: {media,mimsy}!mlksoft!kozam
        Internet: mlksoft![e-mail]

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

Subject: Re: Last GTE Cord Board Removed
Organization: I.E.C.C.
Date: 30 Sep 92 23:37:14 EDT
From: [e-mail] (John R. Levine)


> The first commercial telephone cord board was placed in service in New
> Haven, Conn., in January 1878, creating the first exchange.

Actually, the first cord board was in Bridgeport.  New Haven had the
distinction of the first phone book.  I lived in New Haven in the
1970's and the local phone books had fancy covers commemorating the
centennials of both.


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

PS:  This may have been the same year the phone book had science facts
for filler.  My favorite was "Although the moon is smaller than the earth,
it is also farther away."

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

Date: Wed, 30 Sep 92 18:44:20 EDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Thoughts About WFMT Versus WNIB/WNIZ


Didn't there use to be another classical station in Chicago, WEFM,
Owned by Zenith Broadcasting I think? What happened to them?


Ron Newman   [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: Ah! Don't get me started! A brief history of the 36
years W <E>dward <F.> <M>cCormick was on the air: Owned by the Zenith
Radio Corporation, WEFM went on the air in 1941; I believe it was the
first FM station in the USA, but others say an experimental station in
New York City was first. It was intended as something for the people
who bought Zenith's 'new type radio' -- one with the FM band on it --
to have something to listen to. Prior to then all broadcasting was on
the AM band. After all, why buy an FM radio if there are no FM
stations? The call letters stood for Edward F. McCormick who was the
president of Zenith at the time. It operated as a non-commercial
station playing strictly classical music from 6 AM to midnight daily.
Their only 'sponsor' was Zenith itself. Zenith wanted out of the
operation in the middle seventies and the Metromedia organization
bought the station, intending to change it to rock music.

A lawsuit forced a delay in the change of the format, and Metromedia
was put in the position of having to run a classical music station for
the two years or so the suit was pending. Metromedia finally prevailed
and late in 1977 got permission for the format change. They announced
late one evening that the new format would begin the next day, and as
the final presentation played Beethoven's Fifth Symphony. They stayed
off the air the next day until noon, then came on with with the new
format.  We had three full time classical stations here from 1955 when
WNIB went on the air for 22 years. As part of the lawsuit settlement,
WEFM gave its extensive collection of classical records to (then in
1977 still tiny and struggling) WNIB.  The FCC required them to run a
disclaimer for two weeks following the changeover (hourly the first
two days; then several times daily over the next two weeks) advising
people of the new format. I'm sure it annoyed the new management to
play a cartridge with George Stone (one of the old, classical music
station's announcers) hourly saying:

"The Federal Communications Commission requires WEFM to broadcast this
announcement at intervals. On <date> 1977, the Federal Communications
Commission granted approval for a change in format to station WEFM.
WEFM is owned and operated by Metromedia, <etc>. The Zenith Radio
Corporation is no longer responsible for the contents of broadcasts on
this station. For continued listening to classical music, we suggest
you tune the dial to WNIB at 97.1 or WFMT at 98.6. You are invited to
comment on this station's broadcasts by writing to the FCC at
<address> or WEFM at 120 West Madison Street, Chicago 60602."

So they had to stop the (otherwise non-stop) rock several times daily
and advertise their competitors for two weeks as part of the
settlement of the suit against them by 'Friends of WEFM', a citizen's
organization which had good connections with the FCC at the time.  PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #751
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa01487;
          1 Oct 92 17:19 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA32062
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 1 Oct 1992 13:20:02 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA08199
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 1 Oct 1992 13:19:32 -0500
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 13:19:32 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: ADA Requirements


Here is a permanent addition to your reference files. It was too large for
inclusion in the Digest. Thanks to Michael H. Riddle for sending it along.

PAT

  Date: Wed, 30 Sep 92 10:57:49 -0400
  From: [e-mail] (Michael H. Riddle)
  Subject: Partial Extract -- ADA Telephone Requirments
  Reply-To: [e-mail] (Michael H. Riddle, Esq.)

Since my comments about ADA and the AT&T 2000 generated some comments
and replies, I thought perhaps I should post some of the ADA
requirements.  I don't remember seeing anything along these lines.

I got my files from Compuserve, but there are other sources available.

These documents are available in the following alternate formats:

          - Braille
          - Large Print
          - Audiotape
          - Electronic file on computer disk and electronic
                         bulletin board [phone]


For additional information on the ADA contact:


          Office on the Americans with Disabilities Act
          Civil Rights Division
          U.S. Department of Justice
          P.O. Box 66118
          Washington, D.C.  20035-6118
          %
          [phone] (Voice)
          [phone] (TDD)
          [phone] (TDD)

For more specific information about ADA requirements affecting
employment contact:

     Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
     1801 L Street NW
     Washington, DC 20507
     800-USA-EEOC (Voice)
     800-800-3302 (TDD)

     For more specific information about ADA requirements affecting
               transportation contact:
     Department of Transportation
     400 Seventh Street SW
     Washington, DC 20590
     [phone]
     [phone] (TDD)

For more specific information about requirements for accessible design
in new construction and alterations contact:

     Architectural and Transportation Barriers
     Compliance Board
     1111 18th Street NW
     Suite 501
     Washington, DC 20036
     800-USA-ABLE
     800-USA-ABLE (TDD)

For more specific information about ADA requirements affecting
telecommunications contact:

     Federal Communications Commission
     1919 M Street NW
     Washington, DC 20554
     [phone]
     [phone] (TDD)


PUBLISHED IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER
JULY 26, 1991

Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)

Accessibility Guidelines
for Buildings and Facilities

U.S. Architectural & Transportation Barriers Compliance Board
1111 18th Street, N.W., Suite 501   Washington, D.C. 20036-3894
[phone] v/TDD    [phone] FAX

   ADA ACCESSIBILITY GUIDELINES FOR BUILDINGS AND FACILITIES

* * *

3.5 Definitions

* * *

Text Telephone.  Machinery or equipment that employs interactive
graphic (i.e., typed) communications through the transmission of coded
signals across the standard telephone network.  Text telephones can
include, for example, devices known as TDD's (telecommunication
display devices or telecommunication devices for deaf persons) or
computers.

* * *

4. ACCESSIBLE ELEMENTS AND SPACES: SCOPE AND TECHNICAL
REQUIREMENTS.

4.1 Minimum Requirements

4.1.1* Application.

   (1) General.  All areas of newly designed or newly constructed
buildings and facilities required to be accessible by 4.1.2 and 4.1.3
and altered portions of existing buildings and facilities required to
be accessible by 4.1.6 shall comply with these guidelines, 4.1 through
4.35, unless otherwise provided in this section or as modified in a
special application section.

   (2) Application Based on Building Use.  Special application
sections 5 through 10 provide additional requirements for
restaurants and cafeterias, medical care facilities, business and
mercantile, libraries, accessible transient lodging, and
transportation facilities.  When a building or facility contains
more than one use covered by a special application section, each
portion shall comply with the requirements for that use.

   (3)* Areas Used Only by Employees as Work Areas.  Areas that are
used only as work areas shall be designed and constructed so that
individuals with disabilities can approach, enter, and exit the areas.
These guidelines do not require that any areas used only as work areas
be constructed to permit maneuvering within the work area or be
constructed or equipped (i.e., with racks or shelves) to be
accessible.

   (4) Temporary Structures.  These guidelines cover temporary
buildings or facilities as well as permanent facilities.  Temporary
buildings and facilities are not of permanent construction but are
extensively used or are essential for public use for a period of time.
Examples of temporary buildings or facilities covered by these
guidelines include, but are not limited to: reviewing stands,
temporary classrooms, bleacher areas, exhibit areas, temporary banking
facilities, temporary health screening services, or temporary safe
pedestrian passageways around a construction site.  Structures, sites
and equipment directly associated with the actual processes of
construction, such as scaffolding, bridging, materials hoists, or
construction trailers are not included.

   (5) General Exceptions.

     (a) In new construction, a person or entity is not required to
meet fully the requirements of these guidelines where that person or
entity can demonstrate that it is structurally impracticable to do so.
Full compliance will be considered structurally impracticable only in
those rare circumstances when the unique characteristics of terrain
prevent the incorporation of accessibility features.  If full
compliance with the requirements of these guidelines is structurally
impracticable, a person or entity shall comply with the requirements
to the extent it is not structurally impracticable.  Any portion of
the building or facility which can be made accessible shall comply to
the extent that it is not structurally impracticable.

     (b) Accessibility is not required to (i) observation galleries
used primarily for security purposes; or (ii) in non-occupiable spaces
accessed only by ladders, catwalks, crawl spaces, very narrow
passageways, or freight (non-passenger) elevators, and frequented only
by service personnel for repair purposes; such spaces include, but are
not limited to, elevator pits, elevator penthouses, piping or
equipment catwalks.

* * *

4.1.3 Accessible Buildings: New Construction.  Accessible buildings
and facilities shall meet the following minimum requirements:

* * *

   (17) Public telephones:

     (a) If public pay telephones, public closed circuit
telephones, or other public telephones are provided, then they
shall comply with 4.31.2 through 4.31.8 to the extent required by
the following table:

Number of each type of telephone provided on each floor;
Number of telephones required to comply with 4.31.2 through 4.31.81.

1 or more single unit
1 per floor
1 bank2
1 per floor
2 or more banks2

1 per bank.  Accessible unit may be installed as a single unit in
proximity (either visible or with signage) to the bank.  At least one
public telephone per floor shall meet the requirements for a forward
reach telephone3.  1 Additional public telephones may be installed at
any height.  Unless otherwise specified, accessible telephones may be
either forward or side reach telephones.

2 A bank consists of two or more adjacent public telephones, often
installed as a unit.

3 EXCEPTION: For exterior installations only, if dial tone first
service is available, then a side reach telephone may be installed
instead of the required forward reach telephone (i.e., one
telephone in proximity to each bank shall comply with 4.31).

     (b)* All telephones required to be accessible and complying
with 4.31.2 through 4.31.8 shall be equipped with a volume control.

In addition, 25 percent, but never less than one, of all other public
telephones provided shall be equipped with a volume control and shall
be dispersed among all types of public telephones, including closed
circuit telephones, throughout the building or facility.  Signage
complying with applicable provisions of 4.30.7 shall be provided.

     (c) The following shall be provided in accordance with 4.31.9:

      (i) if a total number of four or more public pay telephones
(including both interior and exterior phones) is provided at a site,
and at least one is in an interior location, then at least one
interior public text telephone shall be provided.

      (ii) if an interior public pay telephone is provided in a
stadium or arena, in a convention center, in a hotel with a convention
center, or in a covered mall, at least one interior public text
telephone shall be provided in the facility.

      (iii) if a public pay telephone is located in or adjacent to a
hospital emergency room, hospital recovery room, or hospital waiting
room, one public text telephone shall be provided at each such
location.

     (d) Where a bank of telephones in the interior of a building
consists of three or more public pay telephones, at least one public
pay telephone in each such bank shall be equipped with a shelf and
outlet in compliance with 4.31.9(2).

* * *

4.1.6 Accessible Buildings: Alterations.

   (1) General.  Alterations to existing buildings and facilities
shall comply with the following:

* * *

     (e)  At least one interior public text telephone complying
with 4.31.9 shall be provided if:

      (i) alterations to existing buildings or facilities with less
than four exterior or interior public pay telephones would increase
the total number to four or more telephones with at least one in an
interior location; or

      (ii) alterations to one or more exterior or interior public pay
telephones occur in an existing building or facility with four or more
public telephones with at least one in an interior location.

* * *

4.2 Space Allowance and Reach Ranges.

4.2.1* Wheelchair Passage Width.  The minimum clear width for
single wheelchair passage shall be 32 in (815 mm) at a point and 36
in (915 mm) continuously (see Fig. 1 and 24(e)).

4.2.2 Width for Wheelchair Passing.  The minimum width for two
wheelchairs to pass is 60 in (1525 mm) (see Fig. 2).

4.2.3* Wheelchair Turning Space.  The space required for a wheelchair
to make a 180-degree turn is a clear space of 60 in (1525 mm) diameter
(see Fig. 3(a)) or a T-shaped space (see Fig.  3(b)).

4.2.4* Clear Floor or Ground Space for Wheelchairs.

4.2.4.1 Size and Approach.  The minimum clear floor or ground space
required to accommodate a single, stationary wheelchair and occupant
is 30 in by 48 in (760 mm by 1220 mm) (see Fig. 4(a)).  The minimum
clear floor or ground space for wheelchairs may be positioned for
forward or parallel approach to an object (see Fig.  4(b) and (c)).
Clear floor or ground space for wheelchairs may be part of the knee
space required under some objects.

4.2.4.2 Relationship of Maneuvering Clearance to Wheelchair Spaces.

One full unobstructed side of the clear floor or ground space for a
wheelchair shall adjoin or overlap an accessible route or adjoin
another wheelchair clear floor space.  If a clear floor space is
located in an alcove or otherwise confined on all or part of three
sides, additional maneuvering clearances shall be provided as shown in
Fig. 4(d) and (e).

4.2.4.3 Surfaces for Wheelchair Spaces.  Clear floor or ground
spaces for wheelchairs shall comply with 4.5.

4.2.5* Forward Reach.  If the clear floor space only allows forward
approach to an object, the maximum high forward reach allowed shall be
48 in (1220 mm) (see Fig. 5(a)).  The minimum low forward reach is 15
in (380 mm).  If the high forward reach is over an obstruction, reach
and clearances shall be as shown in Fig. 5(b).

4.2.6* Side Reach.  If the clear floor space allows parallel approach
by a person in a wheelchair, the maximum high side reach allowed shall
be 54 in (1370 mm) and the low side reach shall be no less than 9 in
(230 mm) above the floor (Fig. 6(a) and (b)).  If the side reach is
over an obstruction, the reach and clearances shall be as shown in Fig
6(c).


* * *

4.30.7* Symbols of Accessibility.

   (1) Facilities and elements required to be identified as accessible
by 4.1 shall use the international symbol of accessibility.  The
symbol shall be displayed as shown in Fig.  43(a) and (b).

   (2) Volume Control Telephones.  Telephones required to have a
volume control by 4.1.3(17)(b) shall be identified by a sign
containing a depiction of a telephone handset with radiating sound
waves.

   (3) Text Telephones.  Text telephones required by 4.1.3(17)(c)
shall be identified by the international TDD symbol (Fig 43(c)).  In
addition, if a facility has a public text telephone, directional
signage indicating the location of the nearest text telephone shall be
placed adjacent to all banks of telephones which do not contain a text
telephone.  Such directional signage shall include the international
TDD symbol.  If a facility has no banks of telephones, the directional
signage shall be provided at the entrance (e.g., in a building
directory).

   (4) Assistive Listening Systems.  In assembly areas where
permanently installed assistive listening systems are required by
4.1.3(19)(b) the availability of such systems shall be identified with
signage that includes the international symbol of access for hearing
loss (Fig 43(d)).

4.30.8* Illumination Levels.  (Reserved).

4.31 Telephones.

4.31.1 General.  Public telephones required to be accessible by 4.1
shall comply with 4.31.

4.31.2 Clear Floor or Ground Space.  A clear floor or ground space at
least 30 in by 48 in (760 mm by 1220 mm) that allows either a forward
or parallel approach by a person using a wheelchair shall be provided
at telephones (see Fig. 44).  The clear floor or ground space shall
comply with 4.2.4.  Bases, enclosures, and fixed seats shall not
impede approaches to telephones by people who use wheelchairs.

4.31.3* Mounting Height.  The highest operable part of the telephone
shall be within the reach ranges specified in 4.2.5 or 4.2.6.

4.31.4 Protruding Objects.  Telephones shall comply with 4.4.

4.31.5 Hearing Aid Compatible and Volume Control Telephones Required
by 4.1.

   (1)  Telephones shall be hearing aid compatible.

   (2) Volume controls, capable of a minimum of 12 dbA and a maximum
of 18 dbA above normal, shall be provided in accordance with 4.1.3.
If an automatic reset is provided then 18 dbA may be exceeded.

4.31.6 Controls.  Telephones shall have pushbutton controls where
service for such equipment is available.

4.31.7 Telephone Books.  Telephone books, if provided, shall be
located in a position that complies with the reach ranges specified in
4.2.5 and 4.2.6.

4.31.8 Cord Length.  The cord from the telephone to the handset
shall be at least 29 in (735 mm) long.

4.31.9* Text Telephones Required by 4.1.

   (1) Text telephones used with a pay telephone shall be permanently
affixed within, or adjacent to, the telephone enclosure.  If an
acoustic coupler is used, the telephone cord shall be sufficiently
long to allow connection of the text telephone and the telephone
receiver.

   (2) Pay telephones designed to accommodate a portable text
telephone shall be equipped with a shelf and an electrical outlet
within or adjacent to the telephone enclosure.  The telephone handset
shall be capable of being placed flush on the surface of the shelf.
The shelf shall be capable of accommodating a text telephone and shall
have 6 in (152 mm) minimum vertical clearance in the area where the
text telephone is to be placed.

   (3) Equivalent facilitation may be provided.  For example, a
portable text telephone may be made available in a hotel at the
registration desk if it is available on a 24-hour basis for use with
nearby public pay telephones.  In this instance, at least one pay
telephone shall comply with paragraph 2 of this section.  In addition,
if an acoustic coupler is used, the telephone handset cord shall be
sufficiently long so as to allow connection of the text telephone and
the telephone receiver.  Directional signage shall be provided and
shall comply with 4.30.7.

                           -----------

        <<<< insert standard disclaimer here >>>>
[e-mail]        |  Nebraska Inns of Court
[e-mail]        |  [phone] (Data)
Sysop of 1:285/27 @ FidoNet        |  3/12/224/9600 V.32/V42b











Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa02598;
          1 Oct 92 17:42 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA11078
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 1 Oct 1992 12:55:24 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA15258
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 1 Oct 1992 12:55:04 -0500
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 12:55:04 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #752

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 1 Oct 92 12:55:00 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 752

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: AT&T Wants $3 For International DA ([e-mail])
    Re: Funny 800 Number Spelling (Andrew M. Boardman)
    Re: TASI (was AT&T Announces Encryption Security Device) (Terence Cross)
    Re: My Favorite Intercepts (Christopher Lott)
    Re: Internet White Pages ([e-mail])
    Re: Info Needed About "Nationwide Long Distance" Company (Ed Greenberg)
    Re: Delphi via Telnet (John Goggan)
    Re: Additional Thoughts About Voice Mail Systems (David Rivkin)
    Re: Local Battery (Gary Wells)
    Re: Telecom in the MidWest (Ang Peng Hwa)
    Re: Cellular Interception in Private Talk (Jon Gefaell)
    Re: Cellular Phones With Deals Attached (Bill Berbenich)
    Re: Question About Air Phones (Tom Coradeschi)
    Re: N0N/N1N Exchanges and 1+ Dialing (Carl Moore)
    Re: The Smallest US Telephone Company (David G. Lewis)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: AT&T Wants $3 For International DA
Date: 30 Sep 92 05:11:53 GMT


Greetings,

My father is trying to resolve a problem with ATT international DA.
He tried using the service to get a number in Tokyo.  Three times he
tried but eventually was disconnected after about 45 seconds; three
times he was charged $3.  What is the bargain of paying $9 for not
getting a number?  Calling up the AT&T billing number only results in
his being told that a supervisor will return his call, which is never
returned.


[Moderator's Note: An incomplete DA call billed in error should be
handled no differently than any other AT&T call which fails to go
through or aborts prematurely. Usually credit is given instantly by an
AT&T operator or by the business office later. Why was there a need to
get a supervisor involved in the first place I wonder?   PAT]

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

Date: Wed, 30 Sep 92 02:31:34 EDT
From: andrew m. boardman <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Funny 800 Number Spelling


John Higdon writes:

> I know of no number-issuing entity, LEC or IEC, who will refuse to
> give out any number you want if it is available.

New York Telephone.  An associate once went to fairly great lengths to
try to get 914.234.5678, to no avail.  It was neither in use nor in a
reserved block -- through the standard rep and N levels of
supervisors, it was a staunch "we know what's good for you -- you
can't have it."  The only thing I can think of is that it is such an
often wrong number that it was trapped at other 914 switches, but it
later turned out that this was not the case.  (The individual was,
BTW, local to the 234 exchange, and the eventual number received was
indeed in 234 -- but not -5678 ...)


andrew boardman     [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: Although not in a 'reserved block' it still might
have been reserved for a few months by some specific individual. That
can be done here. Or possibly it had recently been disconnected and
not yet available for re-assignment.  PAT]

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

Date: Wed, 30 Sep 92 12:24:34 BST
From: [e-mail] (Terence Cross)
Subject: Re: TASI (was AT&T Announces Encryption Security Device)


In article <[e-mail]> dancer![e-mail]
(22501-sohl) writes:

> I don't know about today, but in the past there was.  A system called
> TASI was used on international cables to make use of the slices of
> silence in each direction.  I suspect it has long since been abandoned
> as circuit capacity has expanded tremendously since the time it was
> used.  The acronym TASI was something like: Time A????? Speech
> Interpolation I think.

Another similar system is called DCME (Digital Circuit Multiplication
Equipment).  This uses digital speech interpolation (which is like
TASI?) and low rate encoding of speech to compress it.

One example of DCME will compress (5:1) and concentrate (2:1) ten 2
Mbit/s trunk lines carrying speech over one 2 Mbit/s (1.5 in the US)
line to another, distant DCME twin.

As you can imagine non-speech data calls through such systems
encounter problems and are not compressed so easily.


Terence Cross

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

Subject: Re: My Favorite Intercepts
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 92 15:45:37 +0100
From: Christopher Lott AGSE <[e-mail]>


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

>> The most boring intercepts are those from Germany (right to the
>> point), the French outer territories (which always seem to be running
>> on the winner of the wow and flutter tape unit award)

Ok, I have my own short story about French Telecom and intercepts.

First, when you call a number from a pay phone, you have to endure a
45-second advertisement for French Telecom, how wonderful.  When
you're trying to get through to a busy number and it takes one minute
just to dial and get a ring (I timed it), this is NOT acceptable.
Paying for a service and then getting hit with an ad that makes the
service basically an order of magnitude slower really infuriated me.

Second, about an intercept.  We were trying to dial Paris from the
French countryside.  Dialing 16 is necessary, but we didn't know.  So
for half an hour we kept trying the Paris city code (1) because each
time we called (after enduring the ad) the phone gave just the busy
signal.  No voice, not reorder, just the exact same signal you get for
a genuine busy.  Cute, huh?  I'll take the German "boring and to the
point" anytime.


Christopher Lott    [e-mail]    [phone], -3331 Fax
Post: FB Informatik, Bau 57/525, Universit"at KL, 6750 Kaiserslautern, Germany

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

Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 12:08:18 -0500
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Internet White Pages


> [Moderator's Note: I received a few others like this regards the
> Internet White Pages message. The information is repeated below.  PAT]

> [e-mail] (Ian Evans) wrote:

>> I'm sorry, I missed your original posting on this.  Could you please
>> send me the (corrected) information.

> RFC 1202 states that ANYONE with an Internet Mail address is entitled
> to have that address listed in the Internet white pages, provided they
> send in an application to the registrar with their E-Mail address.

[stuff deleted]

I sent in a message and they told me that I couldn't be in the
directory because they were low on resources. I could only be in there
if I was a site coordinator. Anyone have any info on this?


mlb


[Moderator's Note: This seems to be an ongoing controversy here in
recent days: can one, or can one not be listed in the 'white pages'?
Maybe someone from the 'white pages' will give a definitive answer.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Ed Greenberg)
Subject: Re: Info Needed About "Nationwide Long Distance" Company
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 17:10:37 GMT


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

> I am very satisfied with Cable & Wireless (10223) and have had them
> for almost a year now.  Data connections are always good and voice
> quality is on a par with the "big three."

I am moderately happy with Cable and Wireless.  I got them entirely
for use as a calling card carrier, since they don't have a CC
surcharge, although the rates for such calls are higher.  I dunno if
the savings really worked out, although I THINK it did.

Here are some side comments:

1.  They slammed both my lines even though I never asked them too.
Nonetheless, it could have been an honest mistake, and Pacific Bell
has charged the switching charges back to them.

2.  Call setup time is longer than AT&T.

3.  No complaints about circuit quality for either voice or data use.

4.  Direct dial rates seem higher than AT&T. by a few cents per minute.

5.  They don't seem to be charging me the $5/month.
    (yet.)


Ed Greenberg         Home: [phone] | [e-mail]
P. O. Box 28618        Work: [phone] | DoD#: 0357
San Jose, CA  95159    Fax:  [phone] | KM6CG (ex WB2GOH)

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

Organization: Central Michigan University
Date: Wednesday, 30 Sep 1992 13:48:24 EDT
From: John Goggan <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Delphi via Telnet


Delphi began allowing incoming telnet connections (to delphi.com)
about six weeks ago.  At that time, there was no surcharge at any time
(peak or off-peak) for a telnet connection.  About four weeks ago, I
heard talk about possibly moving to a $2.00/hour (at any time)
surcharge for telnet, but that had not yet been decided upon (since
they were still doing a lot of testing with the gateway and
everything).  I haven't been on Delphi since that time (four weeks
ago), so I don't know any more than that.


John Goggan  ([e-mail] or [e-mail])

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

From: [e-mail] (David Rivkin%Kollman)
Subject: Re: Additional Thoughts About Voice Mail Systems
Organization: Computer Graphics Laboratory, UCSF
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 18:22:20 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> jdgretz@northridge.
witchcraft.com (John D. Gretzinger) writes:

> I thought I would add some details to the Voice Mail discussions
> currently underway.

> Most (I used to say all, but after talking to John Higdon have to
> revise that) PC based voice servers require the system to be brought
> out of service when any service is required.  This includes backup of
> data, retrieval of billing information, replacement of components,
> etc.

> GTE uses a mixture of machines in it's COs, but the primary machine is
> from Digital Sound Corportation.  DSC is not interested in small
> sites, and thus does not have a machine for the small business.  Also,
> their IVR capability is severely limited at this time.  They have
> announced capabilities for next year that other players have available
> now.

> If I had my choice, I would buy anything else.  My first choice would
> be Centigram, then Octel.  I really like Centigram's approach to
> business, machine management, and IVR development tools.  This is not
> to say Octel is not real close.  Simply my impression and choice.

> If you currently want to do IVR with DSC, you need to be very good
> with low level C code, 'cause that's what you got now.

1.  Do you have good contacts you can refer me to at Centagram and
Octel (Phone, Fax, e-mail)?

2.  I agree that most developers of PC based Voice Mail have not
looked into the aspects that you mention, but that does not mean that
everyone has not.  In designing Winfon, Because it is run from a
multitasking environment like Windows, OS/2 or X on Unix, such backups
were included and allowed to happen while the system was still taking
calls.  Currently we are making the system be admined and user
controled over a LAN (even WAN) via e-mail facilities.

We have, however, found very little interest in these features that we
feel are so very important to how things are done.  The Voice Mail
industry seems reluctant to get things moving toward integrated
information "At your fingertips".  We have the solution today, but
no one is interested.

Just wanted to put in my two cents.


David Rivkin   UCSF   Winfon Engineering   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Gary Wells)
Subject: Re: Local Battery
Organization: Percy's mach, Portland, OR
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 19:54:28 GMT


Out here in the wilds of Ore-e-gone, they had teen-aged boys who drove
a horse and wagon around from house to house and changed out the dry
cell every month.

After a while, with good behaviour, etc, they were generally promoted
to installers, etc.  Used to work with a guy who started out that way.

Weird, but it worked.


[e-mail]

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

Date: Thu, 01 Oct 92 10:22:54 SST
From: Ang Peng Hwa <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Telecom in the MidWest


Pat noted:

> Even twenty years ago, Tulsa, OK, was considered an ideal place for
> telemarketers as was Omaha, NB. Why? Because they had the least
> expensive WATS costs of anywhere in the USA. After all, the most you
> can go in any direction from Tulsa is 2,000 miles or less,....

I was told that the reason telemarketers chose the MidWest was that they
had the most "neutral" accents. Nebraska was said to have been pitching
that. I'm told by a Nebraskan that she thinks the accent is neutral
except for Washington, which they pronounced "Waa-shington."


[Moderator's Note: This is also true. Telemarketers have enough to do
trying to get people to stay on the line; listen; and buy their
product without worrying about the prejudices people have who they
call. Some people might get turned off by the accent.  PAT]

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


From: [e-mail] (Jon Gefaell (KD4CQY))
Subject: Re: Cellular Interception in Private Talk
Organization: The Turing Project, Charlottesville Virginia.
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 03:28:44 GMT


> [Moderattor's Note: We have touched upon this several times recently.
> Cellular calls are quite easy to intercept on a scanning radio which
> covers the 800 mh range of frequencies. The 'technical problems'
> consist of sometimes having to make a small modification in the radio
> itself. Conversations cannot easily be followed between cells.   PAT]

I must disagree here. Cellular telephone conversations can certainly
be relatively easily followed as the radios switch cells.

Frequencies are laid out according to a plan across the cells in any
region. By scanning frequencies allocated in cells immediately
adjacent to the cell the conversation was last heard in one can reduce
the number of seeks required to re-intercept the communications. In
practice, one can locate a conversation again following a cell
transfer within a few seconds.

I suppose the keyword is 'relative' IF you're interested in sitting
back in your armchair and hearing conversations without interuption,
it's not likely you'll be entirely successful. However, if you're
properly motivated, with a little effort and research you can maintain
succesful survielance of cellular telephone communications.

Of course, I have no practical experience with any of this, and am
speaking purely theoreticaly. It is a violation of federal law to
intercept cellular telephone communications. Your mileage may vary.

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

Subject: Re: Cellular Phones With Deals Attached
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 92 11:24:48 BST
From: Bill Berbenich <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]


Many Audiovox cellular phones have an unlimited number of NAMs.  It is
not a pre-programmed, automatic thing, however.

All one has to do to change NAMs is to enter the five-digit system ID
and ten-digit phone number for the new NAM, then press Func-6.  The
new NAM will be in effect until it is changed.  This works an
unlimited number of times.

Granted, one must keep track of system IDs and phone numbers, but
anyone who uses more than four NAMs would probably be able to keep
that sort of thing straight anyway.


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


[Moderator's Note: I'd think that unless one was *constantly* in
various cities around the USA and almost always 'roaming' somewhere
there would be a point at which maintaining several accounts with
different cell companies (to make the use of multiple nams possible)
would exceed the cost of paying for roaming calls. Really, about the
only reason for more than one nam is to be able to use the phone in
'local' service in more that one area. At some point the financial
bottom line would tip the other way, I'd think. Maybe at four?   PAT]

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

Date: Thu, 1 Oct 92 11:58:19 EDT
From: Tom Coradeschi <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Question About Air Phones
Organization: Electric Armts Div, US Army ARDEC, Picatinny Arsenal, NJ


[e-mail] (Tdarcos) writes:

> In a movie I saw last night on TV, a woman wanted to call someone and
> saw an airplane telephone.  She "swiped" her credit card through the
> mag card reader, removed the card, then took the handset away.

> Is this correct?  She ended up with both the handset and the credit
> card (she did put the handset back).  I thought that the base unit
> required that it retain the credit card to prevent someone from
> (accidentally or intentionally) walking off with the handset.

It sounds weird. The cordless AirFones (typically two to four per
plane) capture your credit card. The permanently wired ones (you'll
find it in the back of the seat in front of you, typically one fone
per three seats) allow a swipe of the credit card, but are, as I said,
permanently wired.


tom coradeschi    <+>    [e-mail]

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

Date: Thu, 1 Oct 92 12:40:37 EDT
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: N0N/N1N Exchanges and 1+ Dialing


>> In New York and New Jersey, you dial 1+ before an area code.

> Not quite correct.  Area code 516 which adjoins area code 718 does
> not require 1+ dialing for any type of call.  It's N0X/N1X-NNX-XXXX
> for out of area code and NNX-XXXX.

Strictly speaking, it should be N0X/N1X-NXX-XXXX for out of area code;
and the NNX-XXXX shown above is within area code (516 not having N0X/
N1X prefixes that I know of).  This applies to 516 and also to
southern part of 914 (another part of country code 1 still having this
method is the San Jose part of area 408 in California).  The rest of
New York state, as far as I know, has 1 (+area code, if different from
where you're calling) + 7D for long distance.  I guess that N.Y.state
outside of NYC would change to the NYC method (7D within area code and
1 + NPA + 7D for other area codes) to prepare for NXX area codes.

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

From: [e-mail] (david.g.lewis)
Subject: Re: The Smallest US Telephone Company
Organization: AT&T
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 16:54:44 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Gabe M Wiener) writes:

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

>> the smallest phone company however. There is (or was) a guy in
>> Colorado who owned a telco with *eight* subscribers.

> How does he qualify as a telco per se?  How does this differ from any
> organization that buys its own PBX?

To which PAT answers:

> [Moderator's Note: I think he qualifies as a telco instead of a 'PBX'
> because he has several users who are not associated with each other
> through any common affinity group, i.e. not all of the same employer;
> not all of the same residential premises, etc.

Additionally, in some (or many) states, one would have to register
with the Public Service Commission (or equivalent) as a "registered
common carrier", indicating that one is willing to abide by all the
laws and regulations which apply in the state to telecommunications
common carriers.

Depending on state regulations, one may also be required to file
tariffs, etc.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #752
******************************











Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa03179;
          2 Oct 92 9:58 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA07335
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 2 Oct 1992 07:53:18 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA24294
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 2 Oct 1992 07:53:07 -0500
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 07:53:07 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #753

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 2 Oct 92 07:53:00 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 753

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Canada to Mexico Link Now Under Teleglobe (Global Connections; D. Leibold)
    Teleglobe Inaugurates Direct Service With Ukraine (David Leibold)
    TPC-4 Cable Nearly Ready (Canada, U.S., Japan Traffic) (David Leibold)
    MCC First Cities in Dallas (Bruce Klopfenstein)
    Centel of Florida Merging With Sprint Corp. ([e-mail])
    Corporate Internal Networks - Ownership and Maintainance (Sashidhar Reddy)
    First Night Looking For Multi-Line System (David Leibold)
    Switch to Connect/Disconnect Phone Line (Richard Tjoa)
    Recommendations for an Emergency Phone System (John A. Romano)
    DC Taxi Licenses (Andrew Klossner)
    Pen Registers (Ray Normandeau)
    Non-Air Air-Phone (Christopher Wolf)
    Need PC Programming Software for American Tele (Fujitsu) Focus (C. J. Lord)
    Ridiculous Prices For Phone Call (John R. Levine)
    Re: New 540 Scam (Carl Moore)
    Re: Two-Line Switching Device (Doug Sewell)
    My Favourite 'Stupid' Intercept (David M. Miller)
    Re: Favorite Intercepts (Lauren Weinstein)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Thu, 01 Oct 92 18:39:43 EDT
From: David Leibold <[e-mail]>
Subject: Canada to Mexico Link Now Under Teleglobe


 From the Aug-Sep '92 {Global Connections} publication from Teleglobe:

Teleglobe to carry Canada-Mexico traffic:

As of September 1, Teleglobe Canada has carried international
telephone traffic between Canada and Mexico. This is the result of an
interconnection agreement between Teleglobe and Telmex, Mexico's
carrier, and a companion agreement between Teleglobe and Stentor,
which represents Canada's domestic telephone companies.

Canada-Mexico traffic was traditionally carried by the domestic
Canadian telephone companies via American carriers' networks. The
agreements will lead to benefits for Canadians such as acceptance of
Canadian calling cards in Mexico. Negotiations are under way for a
wider variety of services, and the agreements give Teleglobe, Stentor,
and other Canadian carriers more flexibility in rate setting, which
will likely improve rates for consumers.


[e-mail]

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

Date: Thu, 01 Oct 92 18:49:47 EDT
From: David Leibold <[e-mail]>
Subject: Teleglobe Inaugurates Direct Service With Ukraine


 From {Global Connections}, Aug-Sept 1992:


In mid-July, the Ukrainian Ambassador to Canada officially placed the
first phone call from Canada to Ukraine which was not routed through
Moscow. The telephone call was made during a two-way videoconference
between the Ambassador in Montreal and government officials in Kiev.

Telephone traffic volume, currently almost 30,000 minutes a week, is
expected to triple by year-end; the new direct telephone circuits to
Ukraine will be tripled or quadrupled accordingly.


[e-mail]

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

Date: Thu, 01 Oct 92 18:47:01 EDT
From: David Leibold <[e-mail]>
Subject: TPC-4 Cable Nearly Ready (Canada, U.S., Japan Traffic)


 From Teleglobe's {Global Connections}, Aug-Sept 1992

New cable knits Teleglobe's network together:

On June 11, the C.S. {Global Sentinel} began laying the shore end of
the TPC-4 fiber-optic cable just off Port Alberni, British Columbia.
Laying of the 9800 km cable was completed in mid-August. The
fiber-optic system will connect Teleglobe's Port Alberni Cable Station
with Point Arena (California) and Chikura (Japan) starting October 31,
1992.


[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Bruce Klopfenstein)
Subject: MCC First Cities in Dallas
Organization: Bowling Green State University B.G., Oh.
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 23:14:56 GMT


I'm told that at a panel at SIGGRAPH, Bruce Sidran from a company
called MCC First Cities described an effort to test a
video-to-the-home service.  Apparently, several communities are going
to be used as test sites for varied approaches to providing digital
telecommunications/ video to the home.

I'm interested in learning more about this project (and other projects
like it around the country) as well as anything about this particular
company.

Thanks for any help.


Bruce C. Klopfenstein              [e-mail]
Department of Telecommunications   [e-mail]
322 West Hall                      [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Centel of Florida Merging With "Sprint Corporation"
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 92 19:36:57 EDT


Quarter-page advertisement on page 9A in the Thursday, October 1, 1992
edition of the {Tallahassee Democrat}, Tallahassee, Florida:

    "Notice to Customers of Central Telephone Company of Florida

  "Notice is hereby given that Centel Corporation and Sprint
Corporation have entered into an Agreement and Plan of Merger which,
if consumated [sic], will indirectly transfer the majority operational
control of Central Telephone Company of Florida to Sprint Corporation.
Centel Corporation, Central Telephone Company, Central Telephone
Company of Florida and Sprint Corporation have filed a joint petition
with the Florida Public Service Commission for approval of the
acquisition of the stock of Centel Corporation by Sprint Corporation
and thereby indirectly transfer the majority organization control of
Central Telephone Company of Florida to Sprint Corporation.

  "The joint petition does not propose a change to the rates of
services in effect for Central Telephone Company of Florida."

Ok, I'll admit I have no idea whether the "Sprint Corporation"
mentioned is the same as US Sprint, the IXC we all know and toward
which some of us are ambivalent.  If it isn't, though, wouldn't the ad
have made that clear?  If it is, what next?  Merger of AT&T with
BellSouth?  I just don't get it.


[Moderator's Note: I think the Sprint Corporation is one of the
various subsidiaries of US Sprint, which itself is a subsidiary, etc.
Suffice to say, Central is being bought by Sprint. That's all you need
to know; guess who will provide Central's LD service in the future!  PAT]

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

Date: Thu, 01 Oct 92 19:33:42 EST
From: Sashidhar K. Reddy <[e-mail]>
Subject: Corporate Internal Networks - Ownership and Maintainance


I have one simple question.

Roughly what percentage of corporate internal networks are

   *  maintained by the carriers;
   *  owned completely by the companies themselves.

 If you think this is too trivial, reply to me by email.


Thanks,

sashidhar
BITNET: kondared@purccvm  INTERNET: [e-mail]

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

Date: Thu, 01 Oct 92 23:11:05 EDT
From: David Leibold <[e-mail]>
Subject: First Night Looking For Multi-Line System


First Night Toronto is looking for a multi-line telephone system, with
capability to work with ten or more lines. The intent is to have the
system in place to field inquiries and various calls.

It appears that what they would be looking for is something of a call
distributor type system, more than an extension-based system per se
(although they may want separate lines for separate departments or
desks). I don't know if they want to go the full "on-hold" or "press 1
for this, press 2 for that, press 0 for actual civilisation", etc, but
variable numbers of volunteers to field calls can be expected.

By way of introduction, First Night is a New Years Eve community
celebration whose main emphasis is the lack of alcohol. It started in
Boston years ago and became a huge success in other cities, and now
Toronto (the first Toronto First Night was held last New Years Eve).
Much of the event depends on corporate donations and the like, and if
anyone out there should know of some lonely inbound call equipment
(used and usable should be okay), or would like more information on
what exactly is needed, or on anything else above, please call First
Night Toronto at +1 416 362.3692 (voice). Do not post to the Digest;
direct inquiries to First Night are preferred; contact me via net mail
as a secondary resort (they don't have e-mail ... yet.)


Thanks folks,

[e-mail]    [e-mail]

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

Date: Wed, 30 Sep 92 23:30:13 -0700
From: [e-mail] (Richard Tjoa)
Subject: Switch to Connect/Disconnect Phone Line


I was in the process of making a switch for a friend of mine with a
speech impairment that would disconnect his TDD when he was just using
it to communicate with people in the room.  When he turns on and
starts typing on his TDD, it renders the phone line busy.  What he
wants me to do is to put in some kind of switch that will disable or
enable the device to communicate over the phone line.

So, my question is: What is the best wire to install the switch on?
Red?  Green?  Both?


Richard


[Moderator's Note: You could split the connection on either the red or
green wire or you could use a double-pole double-throw switch and
break both wires which might be best if there are other extensions
which might want to use the phone when the TDD is not. Either way
would probably work fine.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (John A. Romano)
Subject: Recommendations for an Emergency Phone System
Organization: University of Maryland, College Park
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 18:23:33 GMT


Hi!

I am looking for recommendations/information on campus-wide emergency
phone systems.  Right now at the University of Maryland we have a
proprietary AT&T system which has been less-than-reliable and terribly
time consuming and costly to upgrade.  I would like to evaluate some
alternative systems which provide the following features:

    -Display of off-hook and trouble conditions
      (Some sort of Auto Circuit Assurance);

    -Monitoring software that runs on a PC;

    -Easy administration (doesn't require a rocket
     scientist or a call to the vendor to add a phone);

    -Remote notification of system trouble;

    -Ability to handle at least 200 phones;

    -Either readily available off-the-shelf
     parts or the availibility to purchase
     a maintainence contract with 24 hour turn
     around time.

Any and all information would be most helpful. Thanks in advance!


John Romano      UMCP Communication Services
[e-mail]    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Andrew Klossner)
Date: Thu,  1 Oct 92 16:10:05 PDT
Subject: DC Taxi Licenses
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Tektronix Color Printers, Wilsonville, Oregon


> "... the "H" series plates always have five digits after them.
> They have to.  They're for taxicabs."

> "Your implication is there are at least 10,000 taxi cabs ..."

Not any more so than an implication that 10^16 VISA cards exist.
There's no reason to assume that a numeric tag space will be densely
filled, and in fact it's a good idea *not* to fill the space.  If
taxicab licenses were unique in their first four digits and the fifth
digit acted as a check digit, single-digit errors in reading the
plates could be detected.

I wish the North American telephone numbering plan used redundant
digits.  This would cut way down on completed calls to wrong numbers.


Andrew Klossner  ([e-mail])
     (uunet!tektronix!frip.WV.TEK!andrew)

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

Subject: Pen Registers
From: [e-mail] (Ray Normandeau)
Date: 1 Oct 92 01:20:00 GMT
Organization: Invention Factory's BBS - New York City, NY - 212-274-1243v.32bis
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Ray Normandeau)


The following is from the PHONES SIG of Invention Factory BBS.

> Those of you who have seen the latest DAMARK catalog may have
> noticed the Galaxis Call Register.

> These are better known by three other names:

> 1. (old )Pen Register
> 2. (just as old) pen recorder
> 3. (the current name) Dialed Number Recorder (DNR)

> I've just received the unit ... Stay tuned for details.

As more information becomes available I will post here.

In the meantime, Damark can be contacted at:

800-729-9000 orders   800-729-4744 Product Information  Fax [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (CHRISTOPHER WOLF)
Subject: Non-Air Air-Phone
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 92 8:52:26 EDT


When I took the ferry across Lake Michigan from MI to WI this summer,
there was a phone or two on board that looked like the phones on
air-planes.

How does this work being only 100ft off the ground, in the middle of a
lake?


Christopher Wolf   [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: Maybe they were not Airphones but were operated
like marine radios.   PAT]

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

From: Charles J. Lord <ecsvax![e-mail]>
From: [e-mail] (Charles J. Lord)
Subject: Need PC Programming Software For American Tele (Fujitsu) Focus
Organization: Triangle R&D Corp,RTP,NC
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 14:45:52 GMT


I am searching for the PC (as in "IBM") software package that American
Telecom (or Fujitsu) supposively sold as the "Enhanced Database
Support System Package" or EDSS.  This software allowed you to program
the Focus 50/100/200 hybrid EKS/PBX with a common PC rather than the
overly expensive console ... all calls have been a dead end, as Sales
doesn't deal in obselete equipment like the Focus, and Service doesn't
want to give up a cash cow in providing every little programming
change at $100/hr.  Anyone heard of this beast?


Thanks!

C. Lord     [e-mail]

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

Subject: Ridiculous Prices
Organization: I.E.C.C.
Date: 1 Oct 92 11:59:27 EDT (Thu)
From: [e-mail] (John R. Levine)


> [A] 540 number, with a $225/minute charge.

Only in New York City would regulators let a telco try to collect
$225/minute.  Sheesh.

On a slightly related note, what's the most expensive real phone call
one can make in the U.S.?  My candidate is Inmarisat satellite phones,
at $10/minute via AT&T or a low, low $9.99 via MCI or Sprint.

And how does Inmarisat plan to compete with Iridium, whose rates have
been proposed down in the $1/minute range?


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

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

Date: Thu, 1 Oct 92 13:43:14 EDT
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: New 540 Scam


This apparently refers to calls in NYC and New York suburbs.  Do the
same numbers on 540 prefix work from all such area codes, or is it
possible to have a 540 number working in some but not other such area
codes?

$225/hour looks VERY steep, even though I have seen late-night ads for
"900" numbers.  Doesn't anyone review such charges before the numbers
on 540 are turned on?

As for the scam: Be strict about identifying visitors (for example,
phone company people who need to visit homes or businesses have to
carry phone company photo ID), and make sure only authorized people
place or accept calls (you could offer to make the call yourself, but
you'd want to block 540 and/or remember what 540 is).

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

From: [e-mail] (Doug Sewell)
Subject: Re: Two-Line Switching Device
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 20:50:38 GMT


[e-mail] writes:

> I think that Radio Shack used to and might still sell a device
> designed for sharing an answering machine on two lines.  It will
> respond to a call coming in on either line.  I presume that the first
> line is still the default for outgoing.  Unlike the switch box, it
> would be automatic.  Since I never used the device, I might be wrong.

They sense an incoming call on either line (it takes the two-line --
RJ14? -- input and sends output to an RJ11 ... RS also has the 2xRJ11
to one RJ14 cords).

Outgoing calls are placed on the line that most recently received an
incoming call.

They're only $9.95, but I've had two of them fail already (the second
one was a replacement for the first one).  They seemed ideal for an
answering machine or a cordless phone, but they just don't seem to
work very well, after a while they refuse to answer one of the lines.

I got a cheap answering machine for the second line (it's a
listed/data line anyway, without a phone on it) instead, and have been
much more satisfied.


Doug Sewell, Tech Support, Computer Center, Youngstown State University
[e-mail]       [e-mail]    <internet>!cc.ysu.edu!doug

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

Subject: My Favourite 'Stupid' Intercept
Date: Thu, 01 Oct 92 20:21:43 -0500
From: [e-mail]


As some readers may know, the second telecommunications carrier
(Optus) is currently setting up shop in Oz.  The international access
code for Optus is 0099 (versus the "normal" 0011), with service
currently to New Zealand only.

When one dials 0099 + any country code besides New Zealand, the
intercept is:

   Optus service to the country you have dialed is not yet
   available.  Please try again, and if unsuccessful call the
   operator on 0100.  This is a Telecom announcement.

While I appreciate the speed with which the industry progresses,
I somehow doubt the message was well thought out ...


Best regards,

David M Miller     Internet:    [e-mail]
PO Box 695         CompuServe:  100032,341
Hornsby NSW 2077   Australia

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

Date: Thu, 1 Oct 92 19:25 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Lauren Weinstein)
Subject: Re: Favorite Intercepts


Greetings.  There's no question about my all time favorite telco
intercept recording.  In the early 70's, a Culver City, CA (213-836
plus other prefixes at that time) intercept drum failed and resulted
in the playback:

"I am sorry.  This is a recording."

It ran that way for months.


 --Lauren--

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #753
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa02086;
          3 Oct 92 2:29 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA07488
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 3 Oct 1992 00:14:15 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA20978
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 3 Oct 1992 00:14:04 -0500
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1992 00:14:04 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #754

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 3 Oct 92 00:14:00 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 754

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Centel of Florida Merging With "Sprint Corporation" (Fred R. Goldstein)
    Re: Centel of Florida Merging With "Sprint Corporation" (Syd Weinstein)
    Re: Centel of Florida Merging With "Sprint Corporation" (John R. Levine)
    Re: Centel of Florida Merging With "Sprint Corporation" (Bill Huttig)
    Re: Centel of Florida Merging With "Sprint Corporation" (Robert McMillin)
    Re: Internet White Pages (Otis Brown)
    Re: Internet White Pages (Page Carter)
    Re: Internet White Pages (James Deibele)
    Re: Cellular Phones With Deals Attached (John McHarry)
    Re: Cellular Phones With Deals Attached (Phydeaux)
    Re: Question About Air Phones (Armando P. Stettner)
    Re: Question About Air Phones (Gordon Hlavenka)
    Re: Question About Air Phones (Henry Mensch)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Fred R. Goldstein)
Subject: Re: Centel of Florida Merging With "Sprint Corporation"
Organization: Digital Equipment Corp., Littleton MA USA
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 22:28:32 GMT


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

>  "Notice is hereby given that Centel Corporation and Sprint
> Corporation have entered into an Agreement and Plan of Merger which,
> if consumated [sic], will indirectly transfer the majority operational
> control of Central Telephone Company of Florida to Sprint Corporation.
> Ok, I'll admit I have no idea whether the "Sprint Corporation"
> mentioned is the same as US Sprint, the IXC we all know and toward
> which some of us are ambivalent.  If it isn't, though, wouldn't the ad
> have made that clear?  If it is, what next?  Merger of AT&T with
> BellSouth?  I just don't get it.

Sprint was originally Southern Pacific Railroad Internal
Telecommunications, and began public services in the mid-1970s.  It
was then sold to GTE, who then sold part of it to United
Telecommunications, a major holding company for "independent"
(non-Bell) telcos.  GTE's interest kept dwindling, until last year
when UT bought the rest.  Then UT, whose local telco operations were
smaller than Sprint long distance, changed its corporate name to
Sprint Corp.  They still operate "United Telephone" in many states,
though.  And the LD operations are separate from the local ones.

So Centel's local telephone operations were bought by the United
system, which renamed itself Sprint last year.  BTW, the "small"
telephone company that serves Disney World, "Vista United Telephone",
is (or was) a joint venture of United (now Sprint Corp.) and Disney.


Fred R. Goldstein   [e-mail]
k1io             or [e-mail]   voice:[phone]
Standard Disclaimer:  Opinions are mine alone; sharing requires permission.

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

From: [e-mail] (Syd Weinstein)
Subject: Re: Centel of Florida Merging With "Sprint Corporation"
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Datacomp Systems, Inc.  Huntingdon Valley, PA
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 19:44:42 GMT


TELECOM Moderator notes:

> [Moderator's Note: I think the Sprint Corporation is one of the
> various subsidiaries of US Sprint, which itself is a subsidiary, etc.
> Suffice to say, Central is being bought by Sprint. That's all you need
> to know; guess who will provide Central's LD service in the future!  PAT]

No, let me set the 'Parentage Straight' ...

United Telecom, which does its Local Excange Service under the name
United Telephone, recently bought out GTE from the US Sprint Limited
Partnership.

At that time, the decided to change the name of United Telecom to
Sprint, as it has a wider recognition.  All the shareholders had to
vote on it (as if that mattered, the big blocks decided it I am sure)

So:

United Telecom became: Sprint Corporation;

US Sprint Limited Partnership died as of the buyout and is now just
Sprint United Telephone; well, it sounds like they may be moving those
to the Spirnt name soon also ...


Sydney S. Weinstein, CDP, CCP          Elm Coordinator - Current 2.3PL11
Datacomp Systems, Inc.                 Projected 2.4 Release: Oct 1,1992
[e-mail] or dsinc!syd      Voice: [phone], FAX: [phone]

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

Subject: Re: Centel of Florida Merging With "Sprint Corporation"
Organization: I.E.C.C.
Date: 2 Oct 92 12:34:39 EDT (Fri)
From: [e-mail] (John R. Levine)


> [a plan to] transfer the majority operational
> control of Central Telephone Company of Florida to Sprint Corporation.

> Ok, I'll admit I have no idea whether the "Sprint Corporation"
> mentioned is the same as US Sprint, ...

Last spring, US Telecom finally bought out GTE's share of Sprint long
distance (which according to its bills is the "Sprint Communications
Company Limited Partnership".)  At that time, US Tel changed its name
to Sprint Corp.  This makes Sprint the only company in the U.S. to
have a significant presence in all three of the local, long distance,
and cellular markets.  Their press releases use the word 'synergy' a
lot.  I don't know whether they'd be allowed to switch customers to
Sprint long distance -- as far as I know, only the RBOCs and GTE are
required to provide equal access.


Regards,

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

Cheap shot:  There were several messages about this in the Digest, but I
guess all that Wagner blasting away has addled poor Pat's memory. :-)


[Moderator's Note: Ahem ... (just waking up) ... did I hear my name
taken in vain?   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] ( Bill Huttig)
Subject: Re: Centel of Florida Merging Wiith "Sprint Corporation"
Date: 2 Oct 92 15:02:30 GMT
Organization: Florida Institute of Technology, Melbourne USA


Just a short history on Sprint since PAT missed the change of owner.

Sprint was founded by some railroad company and stood for Southern
Pacific Railway(?) Internal Network (something like that) They sold it
to GTE ... GTE also owned GTE Telenet (packet net).

Another company called US TELECOM was owned by United Telephone which
owned Unitel (packet net).

Back in July, 1986 they merged the four subsidaries into US Sprint
Ltd.  and used the names US Sprint for the IXC and Telenet for the
Packet it was 50% owned by United and 50% by GTE ... over the years
GTE sold it percent to United and finally sold the rest this year at
that time United Telephone Changed its name to Sprint.

Then Sprint decided to merge with Centel ...

(I saw a few United Telephone Compnay of Florida Trucks with the
Sprint logo on instead of the United logo.)


Bill


[Moderator's Note: US Telecom should not be confused with Telecom*USA
which merged with MCI several months ago. And Sprint was the Southern
Pacific Railroad's internal telecom operation. When they upgraded it
they decided to sell the excess capacity to the public probably since
they had so many phreaks among the public using it anyway; why not
make some money from it. :)   PAT]

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

Date: Fri, 2 Oct 92 07:25:06 -0700
From: [e-mail] (Robert L. McMillin)
Subject: Re: Centel of Florida Merging With "Sprint Corporation"


[stuff deleted about Sprint buying out Centel of Florida]

US Sprint used to be a subsidiary of United Telecom.  This latter
organization renamed itself after its largest operating entity,
namely, Sprint.  The "US" was dropped about a year or more ago as
being too parochial for a business involved in international telecom
services, whatever quality those on c.d.t may find them to be.


Robert L. McMillin                     | Voice:    [phone]
Hughes Aircraft/Hughes Training, Inc.  | Fax:      [phone]
Los Angeles, CA                        | Internet: [e-mail]

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

Subject: Re: Internet White Pages
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 92 0:54:16 GMT
From: Otis Brown <[e-mail]>


PAT et al,

Having just tried to register in the White Pages, the following is the
result ...

Dear Internet User,

Sorry, but we prefer not to register Internet users in the whois
database unless they are administrators or contact points for domains,
networks, hosts, or ASNs.  This policy change has been recently
instituted per NSF instructions because, with millions of users on the
Internet, a single central directory is no longer feasible.  Instead,
local sites are encouraged to establish their own whois database.

If you are a valid point of contact for an Internet entity and must be
registered, please resubmit your data to us with a brief explanation.
If you need the user registration template, you may obtain it by
anonymous FTP from nic.ddn.mil.  It is in the netinfo directory,
filename user-template.txt.

Regards,

[e-mail]

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

Otis Brown

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

From: [e-mail] (Page Carter)
Subject: Re: Internet White Pages
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 92 10:47:27 PST


This is to try to clarify, for the moment, the policy on the
registration of Internet users at the NIC. The NIC, at the direction
of the National Science Foundation (NSF), no longer accepts
registration of Internet users, unless they are contact persons for
registered networks, domains, hosts, etc. The following is from a
recent statement circulated on the "comm-priv" forum by Stephen Wolff,
director of the NSF:


 Subject: Re: the NIC ( aka: "those jokers in the NIC")
 Date: Tue, 29 Sep 92 14:12:56 EDT
 From: Stephen Wolff <[e-mail]>
 Status: OR

The NIC's been taking a lot of undeserved heat for what was an NSF
decision.

DISA has the NIC under contract to serve the DDN.  They have augmented
the contract to supply **some** services to the rest of the Internet
community; this augmentation is paid for by NSF by transferring funds
monthly to DISA.

When we were negotiating the terms and conditions (and cost) of this
augmentation, we said "Don't register hosts, and don't register
people."  One reason was to save a little money, but the primary
reason (as has been alluded to already on this list) is that without
central **control** over which hosts and which people use the Internet
no one but a fool would accept the (centralized) **responsibility** of
keeping such a "registry" up to date.  Only a decentralized directory
("registry" sounds too big-brother-ish) of people makes sense.

DARPA and NSF have jointly supported the Field Operational X.500 (FOX)
experiment, with participation of USC-ISI, SRI, Merit, and
Nysernet/PSI.  This work has been regularly reported to IETF, and a
number of IDs and RFCs have been issued.  The experiment is still
rather small-scale, as together with the European X.500 trials still
(I believe) fewer than a million people are registered worldwide.  For
a sample, telnet to wp.nyser.net and login as fred.

Recently, the NSF conducted a competitive solicitation for
Registration/ Information/Directory services for the NREN program and
the Internet.  This process has nearly run its course, and we hope
soon to be able to offer much more comprehensive whois/white_pages
service than ever before.  Stay tuned.

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

From: [e-mail] (James Deibele)
Subject: Re: Internet White Pages
Organization: TECHbooks of Beaverton Oregon - Public Access Unix
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 01:35:57 GMT


[e-mail] writes:

> [Moderator's Note: I received a few others like this regards the
> Internet White Pages message. The information is repeated below.  PAT]

> RFC 1202 states that ANYONE with an Internet Mail address is entitled
> to have that address listed in the Internet white pages, provided they
> send in an application to the registrar with their E-Mail address.

There's been an ongoing discussion of this on the com-priv (think
that's right) mailing list, which is devoted to the commercialization
of the Internet.  The NIC doesn't want to register anyone except
people who are responsible for administering hosts because of the
overhead involved in keeping the database up-to-date.  If you insist,
they'll do it, but they don't really want to.  (Somebody from NIC said
it's less trouble to enter somebody than to argue with them. )

This was once much simpler than it is now.  It's been asserted several
times that the Internet is still growing exponentially, which is
probably true.  With millions of people out there, it's like trying to
keep the New York City or Chicago phone books up-to-date.

Discussion now is about the prospects of anyone being able to provide
an accurate directory of Internet users -- where would it be, who
would pay for it, how could you update it as needed, how could you
stop people from playing games with other peoples' listings, etc.


[e-mail]    Voice: [phone]
PDaXs gives free access to news & mail. [phone] - 1200/2400, N81

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

From: [e-mail] (John McHarry(J23))
Subject: Re: Cellular Phones With Deals Attached
Organization: The MITRE Corporation
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 19:02:12 GMT


> [Moderator's Note: You say the cell company 'paid $300 of the phone's
> cost' but some of us believe the prices of cell phones are
> artificially inflated so the cell company can then 'offer them at a
> cheaper price.'

Last I knew, what was going on was that the cellular provider was
paying cell phone retailers a bounty for new subscribers.  The going
rate was about $250.  Since the phones are standardized and made by a
number of companies, I don't think the carriers have much control over
the equipment pricing strategy.

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

Date: Fri, 2 Oct 92 12:44:55 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Phydeaux)
Subject: Re: Cellular Phones With Deals Attached


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

> On page B5 of today's (9/29) {Washington Post}, a place is offering a
> cellular phone for a low price provided you take a one year contract
> with Cellular One.

> [Moderator's Note: Cellular One here in Chicago is always running
> deals like you mention. The other day an ad in the paper offered a bag
> phone for a penny (yes, one cent!) provided you signed a contract with

I'll be moving from Chicago to NYC/NJ shortly.  I'm looking at getting
a second number added to my phone, as well as getting an additional
phone in the NYC/NJ area.  In my travels it seems that none of the
dealers are particularly excited or even interested in signing me up.
It's like this is the price, here's the contract, sign it if you want.
I've been trying to figure out which company (Bell Atlantic or Cell
One) has better service, rates, coverage, etc.  None of the dealers
even care to discuss this.  Does anyone have an opinion as to which
carrier is better?

In Chicago Ameritech will give you something like $150 of credit if
you have a phone and sign up with them. Some dealers have giveaways to
customers who have phones and sign up with them. Is there any similar
deal in the NYC market?


reb
-- *-=#= Phydeaux =#=-* [e-mail]  or  [e-mail]
ICBM:  41.55N 87.40W  h:828 South May Street  Chicago,  IL 60607  312-733-3090
w:reb Ingres 10255 West Higgins Road Suite 500 Rosemont, IL 60018 708-803-9500

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

From: [e-mail] (Armando P. Stettner)
Subject: Re: Question About Air Phones
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 18:21:33 GMT


There are basically two types of "public airphones:" The older phone
is the one on the wall of the cabin (typically up front or in the back
of the cabin, by the bathrooms).  These units require one to put a
credit card into a slide and the card is held while the uncorded
handset is released.  The newer airphones can be found at your seat,
typically in the back of the middle seat in front of you.  You use
your credit card to unlatch the corded handset.  You then swipe the
card on the card-swipe unit which is on the seatback.

The prices have gone down and the quality is much better though I
suspect it has little if anything to do with the actual units.


armando

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

From: [e-mail] (gordon hlavenka)
Subject: Re: Question About Air Phones
Organization: Vpnet Public Access
Date: Fri, 02 Oct 1992 00:45:13 GMT


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

> In a movie I saw last night on TV, a woman wanted to call someone and
> saw an airplane telephone.  She "swiped" her credit card through the
> mag card reader, removed the card, then took the handset away.

> Is this correct?

There are two types of telephones being operated on airplanes by GTE.
One of these is a cordless unit which captures your credit card and
returns it when the handset is replaced.  The second type is a
seatback unit with a cord.  The seatback unit does not capture your
credit card.

The telephones installed by In-Flight Phone Corp. are also seatback
mounted and have cords.  They do not retain your credit card either.

Often, Hollywood modifies reality a bit in order to make the
screenplay a little easier.  Another glaring example is the fact that
upward calling to a commercial airplane just does _not_ exist.  (Yet,
but that's another post.)


Gordon S. Hlavenka  [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Henry Mensch)
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 92 14:18:01 -0700
Subject: Re: Question About Air Phones
Reply-To: [e-mail]


[e-mail] (Tdarcos) wrote:

> Is this correct?  She ended up with both the handset and the credit
> card (she did put the handset back).  I thought that the base unit
> required that it retain the credit card to prevent someone from
> (accidentally or intentionally) walking off with the handset.

When the "base unit" is in the seat back you get your card back since
the handset is wired to the seat ...

(And yes, they still work poorly.  I tried one a few weeks ago.  What
a rip.)


# henry mensch / booz, allen & hamilton, inc.  / <[e-mail]>

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #754
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa03813;
          3 Oct 92 3:27 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA07237
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 3 Oct 1992 01:15:26 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA05722
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 3 Oct 1992 01:15:16 -0500
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1992 01:15:16 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #755

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 3 Oct 92 01:15:15 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 755

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Wash Post Buys Cable Channel (Washington Post via Paul Robinson)
    Exchange Codes Near Area Code Boundaries (Philip Gladstone)
    Port Authority Workers Vote CWA Representation (Phillip Dampier)
    What's in a NAM (John Gilbert)
    British Call Waiting (Richard Cox)
    Cable Companies Shutting Down For Maintainence (Richard Cox)
    French Telecom Pay Phones (was: My Favorite Intercepts) (Eric Tholome)
    Network Installation Box Installation Rules (David Ofsevit)
    Living in the Past (Bob Frankston)
    SYSLAW: A Review (Mike Riddle)
    Help Needed With Modem Problem (Dale Leonard)
    References Wanted to Government Telecom Expenditures (Bert Cowlan)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
Date: Fri, 02 Oct 1992  20:24:26 EDT
Subject:  Wash Post buys Cable Channel (Wash Post via Paul Robinson)


Business Digest, {Washington Post}, October 1, 1992, Page D13

Washington Post Buys Cable Channel.

   The Washington Post Co. said it has purchased the Pro Am Sports
System, a Michigan sports cable television channel, from Tom Monaghan,
the founder of Domino's Pizza.  The company did not disclose details
of the sale agreement.  PASS has 760,000 subscribers in the state.

Other news in the same issue:

GSA Re-awards FTS 2000 in same percentages.

   The GSA re-awarded the government-phone service contract called
FTS-2000 to AT&T and Sprint, the two long-distance carriers that have
been providing service to the government since 1988, when the contract
was first awarded.  AT&T will continue to handle 60 percent of the
government's voice, data and video network, with Sprint accounting for
the other 40 percent.  The value of the contract over 10 years is
estimated at $25 billion.  Separately, AT&T said the federal
government's long-distance telephone rates will be reduced by 24
percent under the contract.

Hughes sells two satellites.

   Hughes Communications International won a $258 million contract
from the Arab Space Communications Corp. for two satelites to be
launched on France's Ariane rocket.

Intelsat buys two satellites.

   Intelsat, the communications consortium, will pay $165 million for
two GE Astro-Space satellites under a new contract.

US West buys digital cellular equipment.

   US West agreed to buy equipment for its Seattle cellular network
that uses digital technology from Nortel, a joint venture of Northern
Telecom and Motorola.  The purchase is the first commercial
application of the technology.  Terms were not disclosed.


Opinions not necessarily that of this account owner.

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

Date: Fri, 02 Oct 92 20:00:09 EDT
From: Philip Gladstone <[e-mail]>
Subject: Exchange Codes Near Area Code Boundaries


While I was in Sioux Falls, South Dakota recently, I looked at the
local phone book and I observed an interesting phenomenon. The town of
Valley Springs is divided into three parts (all with zip code 57068):

        Valley Springs, SD in area code 605
        S. Valley Springs, IA in area code 712
        E. Valley Springs, MN in area code 507

The phone book listed three different exchange codes (755, 757, 777)
for Valley Springs. However, the listings did not indicate where the
person resided [in fact the most common addresses were (absent) and
'RR'] The phone service is provided by Sioux Valley Telephone Co.

The dialing instructions were:

        From Sioux Falls (list of exchanges) dial just seven digits.
        From any part of Valley Springs, you dial seven digits (for
          local calls).
        From non-local towns, you have to dial the area code for
          exchange 755 (a/c 507) and for exchange 777 (a/c 712).

This all implies to me that these exchange codes are allocated in each
area code, and somehow all point to the same exchange. Further, it
seems that allocating new exchange codes in this area would use up
exchange codes in multiple area codes. I realise that in that part of
the country, there is probably a lot of free number space -- but is
this a typical approach?


Philip Gladstone    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Phillip Dampier)
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Date: Fri, 02 Oct 1992 16:29:09 -0500
Subject: Port Authority Workers Vote CWA Representation


PORT AUTHORITY WORKERS VOTE CWA REGISTRATION
Communications Workers of America

NEW YORK -- Nearly 1,000 clerical and technical employees of the Port
Authority of New York and New Jersey have voted to join the
Communications Workers of America in one of the largest labor
organizing battles of the year.

"This is a significant victory," CWA Vice President Jan Pierce said,
"We are looking forward to building a strong union at the Port
Authority."

Final results of the September 25th election were released today,
following a count of challenged ballots, showing a vote of 422 to 355
in favor of CWA representation.

According to Anne Janks, assigned by CWA Local 1032 to the organizing
project last October, the union expects the Port Authority Employment
Relations panel to certify the results on Tuesday, October 6.

"We're very proud of our members in CWA Local 1032 to the organizing
project last October, who are determined and dedicated to making life
better for working people," said CWA President Morton Bahr.  "We
congratulate them, and our new members, on their victory."

The organizing drive began last October, after some Port Authority
workers expressed interest in union representation.

"They were concerned about lack of raises, fair promotion standards,
restrictions on the use of sick time, out of title work without
compensation and possible loss of health benefits," Janks said.

"Dozens of courageous workers in the female-dominated clerical and
technical staffs get the credit for this victory," Janks said.  "They
kept the campaign alive, by talking up the union, handbilling,
answering questions, and conducting workplace meetings."

The newly-represented workers are assigned to such diverse locations
throughout the greater New York City area as the World Trade Center;
the Port Authority Bus Terminal at 42nd Street and Eighth Avenue; the
Newark, LaGuardia, and JFK airports; the Lincoln and Holland tunnels;
George Washington bridge; two office complexes in Jersey City; and
several other small locations. Their wages range from $15,000 to
$35,000, with titles running from "junior clerk" to "supervising
office assistant."

The Port Authority is a quasi-public "stand alone" agency that was
created to facilitate economic development throughout the greater New
York City area, and is supported through rents, fees, and tolls.

CWA filed a petition for the election on June 21, 1991 with the Port
Authority Employment Relations panel, composed of appointed
representatives of both states.

Blue collar workers and police at the Port Authority already enjoy
union representation but another 2,500 Port Authority workers --
administrative and professional employees -- are still unrepresented,
Janks added.

In five years, Local 1032 has grown from 3,760 to 5,813 workers,
exclusive of the Port Authority win.  "We made a year-long commitment
to this project," President Pete Cerenzo noted. "Without that kind of
commitment, this kind of project wouldn't be possible."

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

From: [e-mail] (John Gilbert)
Subject: What's in a NAM
Organization: Motorola, Inc. Land Mobile Products Sector
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 22:33:05 GMT


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

> Many Audiovox cellular phones have an unlimited number of NAMs.  It is
> not a pre-programmed, automatic thing, however.

> All one has to do to change NAMs is to enter the five-digit system ID
> and ten-digit phone number for the new NAM, then press Func-6.  The
> new NAM will be in effect until it is changed.  This works an
> unlimited number of times.

I wonder what Audiovox does about the "access overload class,"
"Systems Station class mark," and "Systems group ID mark" fields that
are normally part of a NAM?  These fields are normally programmed by
the dealer when a phone is put on service.


John Gilbert  [e-mail]

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

Date: Fri, 2 Oct 92 22:25 GMT
From: Richard Cox <[e-mail]>
Subject: British Call Waiting
Reply-To: [e-mail]


Alan M. Gallatin <[e-mail]> writes:

>>  The British have won my award for best call waiting handling anywhere.
>>  However, if you're going to do it, at least do it with style!

And Pat added:

>>  one that IBT could have charged another dollar a month for!  :)

In the UK, Call Waiting is currently on promotion, and is therefore
offered free of charge.  Touchtones here have always been (and will
always be) free!


Richard Cox

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

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

Date: Fri, 2 Oct 92 22:24 GMT
From: Richard Cox <[e-mail]>
Subject: Cable Companies Shutting Down For Maintainence
Reply-To: [e-mail]


John Higdon ([e-mail]) asks:

>>  when was the last time your telephone went dead for several hours for
>>  "maintenance", even in the middle of the night?

Mercury, the only "other" LD carrier in the United Kingdom, (an
off-shoot of Cable and Wireless) has indeed shut down parts of its
network without warning for maintenance, at night and weekends.  It is
very unpopular when it does this.  Unfortunately parts of the Mercury
network have also been shut down during peak traffic times for reasons
that they seem reluctant to discuss  ...!


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] (Eric Tholome)
Subject: French Telecom Pay Phones (was My Favorite Intercepts)
Date: 2 Oct 92 09:47:49 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Eric Tholome)
Organization: ESF Headquarters, Berlin, FRG


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Christopher Lott AGSE) writes:

> First, when you call a number from a pay phone, you have to endure a
> 45-second advertisement for French Telecom, how wonderful.  When
> you're trying to get through to a busy number and it takes one minute
> just to dial and get a ring (I timed it), this is NOT acceptable.
> Paying for a service and then getting hit with an ad that makes the
> service basically an order of magnitude slower really infuriated me.

Well, Christopher, I've spent quite a long time in France (around 22
years) and made extensive use of pay phones, and I have no idea what
you are talking about. What kind of advertisement? I can only think of
the little recording that you get when you call a 05- (the French
equivalent to 1-800) number that tells you that the receiver of the
call is paying for it (but this is no advertising, is it?), or maybe
the "on hold" tunes that you can get for minutes when you call an
overloaded service, but this isn' t general at all.

Regarding the time it takes to connect, before France went to tone
dialing, it would take some time to generate the pulses, but this
wasn't special to pay phones. Now that most French pay phones use tone
dialing, your number is sent in a couple of seconds, and it usually
takes no more that five or six seconds to get the ring. Not a
minute ...

When did you experience this? (twenty years ago?) On how many calls
are you building these statistics? (one, two, ten, a hundred, ...?).
Please be more specific, so that we can try to understand what
happened, but really, your complaint doesn't reflect AT ALL France
Telecom's service quality.


Disclaimer: my only relation with France Telecom is as a former
(usually satisfied) customer.

Eric Tholome  ESF Headquarters       internet: [e-mail]
              Hohenzollerndamm 152   UUCP:     [e-mail]
              D-1000 Berlin 33       Ph.:      [phone]
                           Germany   Fax:      [phone]

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

Date: Fri, 2 Oct 92 09:01:11 PDT
From: David <[e-mail]>
Subject: Network Installation Box Installation Rules


    I just had a second phone line installed in my home, and the
Network Interface Box was installed on the outside of the house.  This
strikes me as a problem, since it leaves the box open to weather,
vandalism, and theft of service.  Also, my phone number is written
inside the box (which does have a hole for a padlock, but which is
made of flimsy plastic).

        When I discussed this with the foreman, he told me that this
was standard procedure and mandated by the Mass. Department of Public
Utilities.  The justification is that they need access to the box for
test purposes.  I don't seem to have any option to have it installed
inside the house.

        Is this proper?  Is this practice universal?  Have I worked in
computer security too much, and am I just too paranoid??


David Ofsevit

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Living in the Past
Date: Fri 2 Oct 1992 16:32 -0400


One frustrating thing about Telco is that they don't understand
anything beyond POTS.  For example, when installing a line next door,
they took out one of my pairs and claim they can't promise to repair
it till 5pm tomorrow.  I asked them to busy out the line in the
interim since anything more complicated would utterly confuse them.

But one would think that after a quarter century of ESS service there
would be something better than just busying out a line.  Why can't I
ask for an interecept to say "A problem has been reported on this
line, please call back later".  Even better would be the ability to
record my own interim message.  Naah, that would require a company
that has a modicum of understanding a competitive marketplace.  After
all, if car drivers had no choice but to buy buggy whips, why improve
them.

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

Date: Fri, 02 Oct 92 16:42:40 CST
From: [e-mail] (Mike Riddle)
Subject: SYSLAW: A Review
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Inns of Court, Papillion, NE


                        SYSLAW, 2nd Edition
                 A Legal Guide for Online Services

First, an announcement:

> Newsgroups: misc.int-property
> From: [e-mail] (Lance Rose)
> Subject: SysLaw, 2nd ed. - Legal Guide for Online Service Providers
> Date: Thu Oct  1 16:27:51 1992

>            NEW SYSLAW BOOK! MASSIVELY REVISED AND EXPANDED!

> SysLaw, Second Edition: The Legal Guide for Online Service
> Providers
>                     by Lance Rose, Esq., and Jonathan Wallace, Esq.

> SysLaw provides BBS sysops, network moderators and other online
> service providers with basic information on their rights and
> responsibilities, in a form that non-lawyers can easily understand.
> Subjects covered include the First Amendment, copyrights and
> trademarks, the user agreement, negligence, privacy, criminal law,
> searches and seizures, viruses and adult materials.  SysLaw not
> only explains the laws, it gives detailed advice enabling system
> operators to create the desired balance of user services, freedom,
> and protection from risk on their systems.

> SysLaw is available from PC Information Group, 800-321-8285 or 507-
> 452-2824, and located at 1126 East Broadway, Winona, MN 55987.  You
> may order by credit card or by mail.  Price is $34.95 plus $3.00
> shipping and (if applicable) sales tax.  Price is subject to change
> after January 1, 1993.  For additional information, please contact
> publisher Brian Blackledge at 800-321-8285.

Second: I have the book at my office, and (third?) have actually read
it.  Messrs. Rose and Wallace have done an excellent job in explaining
the law as applied to BBSes, including the places where the law is
"unsettled."

In the places where the law is unsettled, they do a good job
explaining the legal, social and sometimes moral considerations that a
court would consider if the question arose.  They sometimes tell you
what they think the result might be, or what they think it should be.
They caution at the start that until courts consider several cases,
and/or until we get appellate decisions, the users and operators incur
some degree of risk in engaging in certain activities, such as
XXX.GIF.

Overall, well worth the cost.


      <<<< insert standard disclaimer here >>>>
[e-mail]   Nebraska Inns of Court
[e-mail]   [phone] (Data)
Sysop of 1:285/27@Fidonet     3/12/24/9600 V.32/V.42bis
Ybbat (DRBBS) 8.9 v. 3.13 r.3
inns.omahug.org  [phone]  (1:285/27.0)

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

From: [e-mail] (Sky Striker)
Date: 30 Sep 92  18:08:23
Subject: Help Needed With Modem Problem


Is anyone out there using a Macintosh and a MultiTech MultiModemV32
(9600 baud)?  I'm trying to figure out what I should have the dip
switches and the settings at.  I have the book on the modem but for
some reason I just can't get it setup right.  I will connect fine
except when it connects and says "Connect 9600 LAPM" then it will run
fine for awhile then it will aways with out warning drop carrier on
me.  Any help any one could give on figuring out what I'm doing wrong
would be greatly appreciated.  Thanks ...


Sky Striker
Dale Leonard

The above comments are mine only and not those of fquest.fidonet.
org.  Any flames should be sent to alt.flames as we don't get that
here.  And no, we have no IP address.

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

Date: Fri, 2 Oct 92 06:20:54 PDT
From: Public Service Telecommunications Consortium <[e-mail]>
Subject: References Wanted to Government Telecom Expenditures


In connection with a research project I am seeking statistics on the
(preferably worldwide; I'd be happy finding just U.S.) expenditures
for telecommunications (telephone, fax, e-mail, telex, data) by the
public sector.  For my purposes, public sector includes government,
the UN and its agencies, foundations, public health and safety
administrators/providers, those concerned with disaster warning/
assistance/relief, etc.

To my surprise, more than a dozen calls to various U.S. government
repositories of statistics turned up no one who could even tell me
what the government's bill is.  Would anyone be able to (a) provide
figures or, (b) point me to public sources?  I am also interested in
educational organizations expenditures.  In short, the costs for
telecommunications for that sector of society, sometimes called the
public service sector, which provides, for fee or for free, social
services.  Many thanks.


Bert Cowlan.  Public Service
Telecommunications Corporation/International, <pstc> on IGC.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #755
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa05582;
          3 Oct 92 4:18 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA03821
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 3 Oct 1992 01:55:40 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA16008
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 3 Oct 1992 01:55:31 -0500
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1992 01:55:31 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #756

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 3 Oct 92 01:55:28 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 756

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    13 Firms Plan Multimedia Consortium (Washington Post via Paul Robinson)
    Comments on the Multimedia Article (Paul Robinson)
    Global Connections Subscriptions Available (David Leibold)
    Lost in Translation (Rich Greenberg)
    Files Available For Download: 1992 FCC Modem User's Fees (James Leonard)
    Manufacturers of Phone Patches Wanted (Thomas David Kehoe)
    Information Needed: IOM-2 Interface (Yee-Lee Shyong)
    Statistics Needed: How Many PBX's? (Paul Cook)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
Date: Fri, 02 Oct 1992  20:27:04 EDT
Subject: 13 Firms Plan Multimedia Consortium


13 Firms Plan Multimedia Consortium

By John Burgess, Washington Post Staff Writer
{Washington Post} October 1, 1992, Pg D13

   A diverse group of 13 U.S. technology companies plans to announce
next week that the firms will work together to bring to American homes
an array of new electronic services, including movies on demand,
electronic newspapers, picture telephones and others, according to
industry sources.

   The "First Cities" consortium will bring together such companies as
Apple Computer Inc., Eastman Kodak Co. and Corning Inc., under the
auspices of the Microelectronics and Computer Technology Corp., a
computer industry group in Austin, Tex., that operates with the
approval of the U.S. Government.

   The joint effort reflects heightened momentum toward a merger of
disparate computer, entertainment and communications technologies into
a new form of sound-and-sight service known broadly as "multimedia."

   The 13 companies plan to study jointly the technological barriers
that continue to block such services and to examine what types of
services Americans want and how much they are willing to pay for them.

   "It's a classic chicken versus egg problem," said Tim Regan, vice
president and director of public policy for Corning.  "We don't know
what services will develop until we build the network itself."

   Though some sources described the venture as being limited to
research, Regan said the long-term goal is to wire about 200,000 homes
in 10 to 20 American cities as a test.  The homes would be connected
so that residents served by the network could communicate with each
other in radical new ways.  For example, they might be able to
transmit exceedingly sharp color photographs of their families.

   For years, visionaries have talked of an era in which every
American home would be equipped to receive a wide range of video,
education and shopping services.  TV sets, computers and telephones
would merge into one unit that might be connected to the electronic
services by a fiber-optic cable into the home.

   Individuals would "interact" with the system by pressing buttons on
a hand-held control device.

   But before they invest in the services, companies want a better
understanding of the problems that remain.  For example, most homes
are now equipped only with copper phone lines or a television cable
capable of receiving a few dozen channels -- not sufficient for
handling two-way transmissions of huge amounts of data of the kind
envisioned in the future.

   Many feel that for the market to take off, the country must have a
new communications network capable of opening a video circuit between
any given point and another -- just as today's telephone network does
for calls.

   Highly complex software also will be needed to control and manage
new networks capable of carrying large amounts of digital data.

   Telephone companies such as GTE Corp. already are conducting
experiments with early versions of "video on demand."

   Regan said the consortium hopes to create common technical
standards to make for ease of use by customers.  But questions remain
about whether Americans will want these services.

   Many Americans are still intimidated by computers, but optimists
note that companies such as CompuServe and Prodigy have made inroads
into American homes by providing on-line information services.

   International Business Machines Corp. wants to set up a nationwide
system that would use cable TV lines, and is discussing this
possibility with the nation's largest cable operators, including Time
Warner Inc. and Tele-Communications Inc., industry executives have
said.

   Kodak views an interactive communications system as a way to send
photos around the country.  Apple is developing hand-held "information
appliances" that may be linked to a communications network, according
to the Associated Press.  Corning is the world's largest maker of
fiber-optic cable.

Staff writer Paul Farhi contributed to this report.

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

Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
Date: Fri, 02 Oct 1992  20:44:04 EDT
Subject: Comments on the Multimedia Article


> to study jointly the technological barriers that continue to
> block such services

  People want low-cost means of communicating.  BBS systems grew for
the same reason mushrooms do: the territory is fertile.  Calling BBSs
can be quite fun and running one can be exciting.  The services have
to be special to get people to pay for them, and the demand has to be
there.  Charge people more than alternatives or provide worse service
and you might as well not offer the facility in the first place.

> to examine what types of services Americans want and how much they
> are willing to pay for them."

First figure out what you are going to offer, discover how much it
will cost, then offer the services and drop that which is uneconomic.
Some things that I know there is a demand for can be gotten into
inexpensively, such as internet mail, telnet, FTP, reduced cost
long-distance data services for networks to transfer mail,
commercialization of the internet backbone, and cheaper means for
people to call long distance BBSs.  It doesn't take a whole lot (for a
large telecommunications company) to offer these services, just
patience like the mushroom factor: you plant the seeds and you have to
wait for them to grow.  But it will take time to see what will work
and what won't.  And you have to go with the flow of the market.
Shoving something down people's throats won't work even if it is
superior technology, and it definitely won't work if it isn't.

> TV sets, computers and telephones would merge into one unit
> that might be connected to the electronic services by a fiber-
> optic cable into the home."

The problem we have is that we have copper wire (or that cheap
substitute I can't remember the name for, DXC, DGC or something) which
can't handle large bandwidth.  When people switched from outhouses to
indoor plumbing, they had to rip holes in their houses to accomodate.

The simple fact is that if we continue as an industrial and
information-driven society, there will be higher demand for more
bandwidth.  If communications companies are going to make money
servicing this demand, the only answer we have is to tear out the
wires and put fiber in.  We will buy the capacity as we want it.  Just
have the capacity there and have it low enough cost to allow anyone
who can afford a phone now to get in on this stuff.

Note to anyone working for a telephone company: Do us all a favor and
oversupply capacity!  You should build for a factor of one hundred
times current capacity, the equivalent of running a small PBX into
each house.  I believe that 10 fiber optic (FO) cables are the size of
one twisted pair, and one FO cable is the equivalent of something like
5,000 phone lines or 20 tv channels.  Figure sending 1/2 of the
capacity of a FO cable per house, and you can expect to cover the
bandwidth demands of the future and several years from now.  You can't
go wrong overestimating capacity; if one party doesn't use it, someone
else will.

> Individuals would "interact" with the system by pressing buttons on
> a hand-held control device.

Or create decent menus and make the response {fast}.  The worst thing
about Prodigy is not the ads, nor their censoring mail, nor all the
other things they've done.  It's their torturously slow response time
and painfully inadequate menuing system.  I've seen cheap BBS systems
that had better traversing capability.

> Many feel that for the market to take off, the country must have
> a new communications network capable of opening a video circuit
> between any given point and another -- just as today's telephone
> network does for calls.

"Video Dial Tone".  You can get it now, it's just too expensive.  What
we need to do is either increase the bandwidth of the individual users
or of major corporate users.  If the ability to do this becomes
available, it will be because someone figured out that they could make
money by selling part of the bandwidth.

Question: Is being able to call someone from New York to Los Angeles
in full color full motion video (FCFMV) worth $1 a minute?  Yes; the
demand at that price would overwhelm capacity.  Is it worth $20 a
minute?  Depends on who is buying.  Current rates are about $30 a
minute if I remember correctly ($1800 an hour, three hour minimum,
plus setup and teardown charge).  Bring the price down to $5 a minute
and a ten minute call could save $500 in plane fees.  Bring the price
down to $1 a minute and anyone can use it.  Let's stop thinking in
terms of what people use the space for and instead simply allocate
them a block of frequency.  If they buy 6MHZ space, they can do FCFMV
or they can transmit 500 simultaneous telephone calls.  What is
expensive is the switching equipment.  But it can be done.

I'll give someone a very valuable hint.  In New York, travel is almost
impossible by roads.  There is a place where you could sell local
FCFMV telephone calls at $1 a minute.  Charge someone $300 to install
his line on a finance basis, say over a ten month period.  Charge $100
a month for the service.  If he uses it on a regular basis, it's more
productive than trying to schedule meetings he can't get through the
city to do.  Toss in three additional phone-size channels with it, so
he can have a separate phone line for a conference call and a fax
machine running both ways.  As there is more demand, the volume will
allow you to provide the service for less and still make money at it.

At first it'll be like a toy as advertising agencies and large
companies sign up for it.  Make a promise of at least 1,000 customers
signed up before the customer has to pay anything.  Make it an
alternative to local dial tone since you can also allow him to connect
into the phone lines too if the call is off-network to a voice line.

> Highly complex software also will be needed to control and
> manage new networks capable of carrying large amounts of digital
> data.

I believe this to be true; it therefore behooves all of us that the
systems be done small and simple; it makes failures less dangerous.

> Telephone companies such as GTE Corp. already are conducting
> experiments with early versions of "video on demand."

"Is there something wrong with this picture?"  :)

> Regan said the consortium hopes to create common technical
> standards to make for ease of use by customers.  But questions
> remain about whether Americans will want these services.

To reuse an overworked quote from a movie I've never seen, "If you
build it, they will come."  If the capacity is there, people will find
ways to use it that the inventors would never even dream of.  When the
PC had only 64K, a 640K limit was huge and unreachable.  Today,
they're talking about 64 MEG of memory for some machines.

> Many Americans are still intimidated by computers, but optimists
> note that companies such as CompuServe and Prodigy have made
> inroads into American homes by providing on-line information
> services.

Compu$erve charges an arm and a leg and Prodigy has so many problems
that it's no more fun bashing it because it's problems are so well
known that you can't surprise anyone.

> Kodak views an interactive communications system as a way to
> send photos around the country.

When people were buying video cameras, Kodak was {still} working on
still photography.  They essentially all but gave away the 35MM market
and now they're trying to catch up, with 1940s ideas.

*This* is the reason these systems fail: Overpriced and underpowered.
We need new ideas and we need to think of new ways to use the
technology and the capacity we have.  We did not, when steel was
invented, build metal copies of wooden bridges; we have new
technology, we need new ideas.


Paul Robinson
These are my opinions, no one else is responsible for them.

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

Date: Fri, 02 Oct 92 21:03:06 EDT
From: David Leibold <[e-mail]>
Subject: Global Connections Subscriptions Available


Here is the info on how to request free subscriptions to Teleglobe
Canada's {Global Connections} which comes out every two or three
months, and describes various Teleglobe successes, new services and
other relevant developments. A few of the articles have been posted
in TELECOM Digest recently.

Contact:    Patricia Kirby, Editor,
            Global Connections
            Teleglobe Canada Inc
            1000 de la Gauchetiere St West
            Montreal, Quebec, Canada  H3B 4X5
            +1 514 868.7118

Be careful to specify how many copies of each issue are to be sent. I
just got a significant wad of G.C. copies this week, and now have to
figure out where to distribute them all.


[e-mail]

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

Date: Fri, 2 Oct 92 22:37:45 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Rich Greenberg)
Subject: Lost in Translation


Pat, I recently got an old laptop from work for use as a portable
terminal.  Looking thru the tech manual, I came across a listing of
the pinouts of the several external connectors.  The description of
the pinouts for the RJ-14 jack for the internal modem is so far
off-the-wall that I would like to share it with the other TELECOM
Digest readers.

        ------------------------------------------------------
        PIN          SIGNAL
        NUMBER       NAME            DESCRIPTION
        ------------------------------------------------------
         1 - 2       -----           Not Connected.
         3           RING            Ring.  This line carries
                                     the ring signal.
         4           TIP             Tip.  This line carries
                                     the voice or data signal.
         5 - 6       -----           Not Connected.
         -----------------------------------------------------


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


[Moderator's Note: That's it?  That is pretty incredible!    PAT]

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

Subject: Files Available For Download: 1992 FCC Modem User's Fees
From: [e-mail] (TraderX)
Date: Fri, 02 Oct 92 22:37:26 PDT
Organization: The Dark Side of the Moon +1 408 245 SPAM


The files FCCMODEM.ZIP, HR3515.ZIP, HR3515LT.ZIP on my system all
concern CURRENT legislation on Telecommunications and Modem Users
Fees. FCCMODEM contains, origin, text, sample letters, plus
addresses/fax numbers of commissioners and senators. Addresses are
pre-addressed, and includes replies received by me from Senators Ford
and Kerry.  If you need help locating these files contact me on my
voicemail 4O8-236-37O6, leave name and data number of your computer or
local BBS.  I will download anywhere at my expense.

FCCMODEM contain's text of Jim Warren's User's Bill of Rights. You may
also post E-Mail to me <[e-mail]>.


Sincerely,

James Leonard/SearchNet International BBS


[Moderator's Note: Well Mr. Leonard, I am happy to post this for you
in the event people are seeking the files you have available, but I
certainly hope you have NEW and CURRENT information and are not just
rehashing the old rumors and stories of a few years ago. If anyone
gets copies of your files, I'm sure they will report back here.  PAT]

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

Date: Fri, 2 Oct 92 12:29:56 -0700
From: [e-mail] (Thomas David Kehoe)
Subject: Manufacturers of Phone Patches Wanted


I'm developing a product for stutterers that will process speech when
talking on the telephone.  To connect the processor to the phone, I
bought a "phone patch" for ham radios, the MFJ Telepatch II, for
$69.95.  It works fine, but if I get this working well I'd like to
sell them.  I'd like to find a cheaper phone patch, without the ham
radio features I don't need.

Are there other manufacturers of phone patches? I have the schematic
for the MFJ unit, but if other phone patch schematics are available,
I'd appreciate a reference.

All I need is audio in and audio out.  My processor unit will have
volume controls for both.  I suppose I should have something to keep
the outgoing level below -20dBm, as I understand that the phone
company doesn't want levels over this.

I don't think I need the microphone or speaker jacks, null adjustment,
etc., that the MFJ unit includes.  I don't need the circuits to switch
between sending and receiving voice, as telephones do both at the same
time.

Lastly, if I sell more than 20-30 of these, I'll have a complete
circuitboard designed with a phone patch on it.  If it connects to the
handset jack, not the phone line, can I avoid FCC Part 68
certification?  I understand that certification costs about $20,000.
Will the phone patch circuit be substantially different?


Thomas David Kehoe   [e-mail]   [phone]

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

Date: Fri, 2 Oct 92 16:35:15 CST
From: [e-mail] (Yee-Lee Shyong)
Subject: Information Needed: IOM-2 Interface


Does anyone know who defined the IOM-2 interface? It also known as
ISDN-Oriented Modular rev. 2.2 or GCI ISDN bus.  Is it an interna-
tional standard or proprietary definition of vendor?


Thanks!

Apollo

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

Date: Fri, 2 Oct 92 18:43 GMT
From: Proctor & Associates <[e-mail]>
Subject: Statistics Needed: How Many PBX's?


My boss presented me with some goofy list of statistics he wants me to
come up with.  Does anyone have any idea where I can find the
following numbers, without buying some expensive market research
report?  I need approximations only, but some source that I can
reference.

Here are the categories.  Email suggestions would be appreciated.

1.  How many PBX's are installed in the USA?

2.  Of these, how many are over 500 stations?  (another statistical
    point for "large" systems, such as 700 stations or whatever is
    OK too.)

3.  Of these, how many are AT&T System 75, System 85 or Definity
    systems?

Well, thats the telecom part of the list.  The rest is a count of
hospitals, colleges and hotels/motels in the USA.


Paul Cook                         206-881-7000
Proctor & Associates         MCI Mail 399-1080
15050 NE 36th St.            fax: [phone]
Redmond, WA  98052-5317    [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #756
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa16269;
          4 Oct 92 2:25 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA11694
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 3 Oct 1992 23:58:34 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA25401
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 3 Oct 1992 23:58:25 -0500
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1992 23:58:25 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #757

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 3 Oct 92 23:58:30 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 757

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: BU Phone Rates Go Up -- Advice Sought (Joseph Malloy)
    Re: BU Phone Rates Go Up -- Advice Sought (Henry Mensch)
    Re: N0N/N1N Exchanges and 1+ Dialing (Leonard Erickson)
    Re: N0N/N1N Exchanges and 1+ Dialing (Don Lynn)
    Re: N0N/N1N Exchanges and 1+ Dialing (Curt Lammers)
    Re: 800 Numbers Restricted by NYTel? (Henry Mensch)
    Re: 800 Numbers Restricted by NYTel? (Richard Nash)
    Re: Two-Line Switching Device (Susan Hagan)
    Re: Two-Line Switching Device (Mike Gordon)
    Re: Non-Air Air-Phone (Ed Greenberg)
    Re: Non-Air Air-Phone (Gordon Hlavenka)
    Re: What it Costs to Have the President Over (Arthur L. Shapiro)
    Re: What it Costs to Have the President Over (Charles Mattair)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Joseph Malloy)
Subject: Re: BU Phone Rates Go Up -- Advice Sought
Organization: Hamilton College - Clinton, NY
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 02:19:51 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Dipesh
Navsaria) writes:

> Over the summer, Boston University had contracted with New England
> Telephone to modernize BU's phone system.  The results of the deal
> were as follows:

[details omitted]

> I ask, what sort of ludicrous mess is this?  I absolutely refuse to
> pay extra to help subsidize these uneeded services or the modernization
> ...  it appears BU has a habit of making massive changes without
> consulting the people who will be paying for it in the end.

You mention that the current rate for this phone is $14/month and
while I can understand your objections to having to take this (pretty
good) rate (i.e., you have no choice) despite the included special
features (call waiting, three-way, etc), I must say it sounds like a
good deal.  And if you can't access a LD carrier other than AT&T, it's
quite possible illegal.

OTOH, your beef isn't with NEtel, in my opinion, but with the
university administration who made these decision.  After all, NE Tel
didn't (presumably!) force themselves on the university!

I do envy your rates and features, though!  A plain touch tone line
here (NYTel in the boonies) is about $24/month ...


Joe

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

From: [e-mail] (Henry Mensch)
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 92 14:16:23 -0700
Subject: BU Phone Rates Go Up -- Advice Sought
Reply-To: [e-mail]


[e-mail] (Dipesh Navsaria) wrote:

> I called New England Telephone and discovered that their measured
> service rate has _not_ changed ... but since I am a BU student, my
> dorm phone service is now more expensive.  (I have lived in the same
> room through the summer and into this academic year, and therefore
> have had the same phone number.)

The answer is to move into off-campus housing ... you'll save money on
your housing costs as well as your telephone bill.


# henry mensch / booz, allen & hamilton, inc.  / <[e-mail]>

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

Date: Thu, 01 Oct 92 14:10:37 PST
From: [e-mail] (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: N0N/N1N Exchanges and 1+ Dialing


I'm going to add to the confusion *again*.

Here in Portland (and as far as I know, all of Oregon) we have the "1
means toll" setup.

Calling Vancouver, WA (just a few hundred yards acroos the Columbia
River, and in the same LATA) requires 1-206-NNX-XXXX. Calling local
calls is NNX-XXXX. Toll calls in NPA 503 (regardless of LATA) are
1-NNX-XXXX.

Note that there *are* a few points in Oregon where local calls can be
made to exchanges in 208 or 708. They are *also* made with NNX-XXXX
dialing. And those exchanges cannot be used anywhere in NPA 503
because of this! (I found that out a few years back when I asked about
the notation "PROT NPA 208" and "PROT NPA 708" on an exchange list I
got from someone at the phone company.

Apparenlty due to some sort of technical considerations, we'd have to
go to universal ten-digit dialing to allow the use of such office
codes (BTW, we currently have only about 50 left, *including* the
"protected" ones.

I think that a new feature is needed. A code that can be dialed before
a number (much like the cancel call waiting code) that will instruct
the switch to fail the call if the number is toll. Sort of a "one
call" toll restriction. Perhaps even add it to regular toll
restriction. So you'd have four possible line types: 1) no toll
restriction (current default). 2) no toll restiction with per call
blocking. 3) toll restriction with per call override. 4) toll restricted
(currently available).

I'd be willing to pay a small charge for such a feature, just so I'd
*know* that my BBS isn't going to make toll calls without my
knowledge. (I just discovered that I'd gotten incorrect information a
year or so back, and I had an exchange marked as local, that was
actually halfway across the state!)

True, similar features can be achieved with "toll blockers" or (in the
case of a BBBS or the like) with proper toll tables and software. But
those solutions depend on the availability of *accurate* exchange
lists. And keeping them updated. It'd work much better on the switch.

If anybody at Bellcore is reading this, I hope it gets passed along.


uucp: uunet!m2xenix!puddle!51!Leonard.Erickson
Internet: [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: If you just discovered you had received incorrect
information from a year earlier, I have to wonder if you bother to
reconcile your phone bills each month or check the toll charges on
each statement, etc.  Did it go unnoticed there for a year?   PAT]

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

Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 12:50:53 PDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: N0N/N1N Exchanges and 1+ Dialing


There was some partial truth and a "non-operative" statement (a lie,
although it used to be the truth) in my previous message explaining 1+
and 0+ dialing in the Los Angeles area, which was first to get N0X/N1X
exchanges.

I mentioned that Pac Bell in the LA area has for many years used
timeout after 0 + seven digits to distinguish, for example 0-312-3456
(a number in West Los Angeles) from 0-312-345-6789 (probably a number
in Chicago).  They changed the dialing instructions in the phone books
for this three years ago, without any publicity that I saw.  The
change is to always dial the area code on 0+ calls, while previously
you dialed the area code only when different from your own.  The
change avoids that need to time out.  I suspect that 0 + seven digits
still times out and works in some or all areas, but I hardly ever make
0+ calls to check that.  The 0+ change occurred in area codes 213,
714, and 818, probably all at the same time.

I have to recant on the claim of no N0X/N1X in 714 (area code
southeast of LA).  Anaheim got the first (and only so far) N0X prefix,
which is 802, according to the May 92 phone book.  This is a long time
after Pac Bell forced us 714 inhabitants to change our 1+ dialing
habits (which I explained in my previous message) to open up the use
of N0X/N1X prefixes.  That 1+ change occurred somewhere in the area of
1980 to 1984; I'm afraid I can't pin it down better than that.


Don Lynn

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: 2 Oct 92 18:15:00 UT
Subject: Re: N0N/N1N Exchanges and 1+ Dialing


I think the main reason that a 1 is prefixed first is because that was
the only way a mechanical switch knew to send you to a cama trunk and
there are still a lot of mechanical switches left.  When these were
changed to a digital switch, the dialing plan was left intact to not
cause confusion.


Curt Lammers


[Moderator's Note: This message was sent by Curt Lammers but for some
reason was sent under the account of Jim J. Murphy. I wish the people
at gte.sprint.com would quit using the accounts of Gloria Valle (and
now Jim Murphy!) to send messages here and would use their own
accounts instead or at least include a return address in their mail so
I could adjust the headers manually. Curt gave us no return address
for himself.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Henry Mensch)
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 92 13:09:25 -0700
Subject: Re: 800 Numbers Restricted by NYTel?
Reply-To: [e-mail]


[e-mail] (Robert Cohen) wrote:

> Could this be a new 'revenue enhancement' scheme?

I'd think it would only be revenue enhancement if I didn't take a
sledgehammer to the phone.

Winkey smileys, of course.

[e-mail] wrote:

> Phones block 800 service for a number of reasons.  AOS's do it because
> 800 calls do not generate any revenue.  AOSs don't want callers using
> their resources to make free calls, when they typically charge $3 to
> $4 for a three minute local call.

I know about AOS's; I don't use their phones if I can help it.  They
never work in the conventional ways, and my time and money are better
spent elsewhere.

> Blocking 800 is sometimes done for fraud prevention.

Then why don't they mark the damned phone "no 800 calls" ... is this
too much to ask?


# henry mensch / booz, allen & hamilton, inc.  / <[e-mail]>

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

Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1992 06:54:47 -0600
From: [e-mail] (Richard Nash)
Subject: Re: 800 Numbers Restricted by NYTel?


Laird P. Broadfield wrote:

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

>> Blocking 800 is sometimes done for fraud prevention.  One example is
>> street drug dealers.  They often use payphones as their "office
>> phones."  Clients usually contact their dealers through a pager, and
>> paging companies often use 800 numbers.  This may not be a big issue
>> any longer, since most pagers display the caller info.  Payphones in
>> high crime areas often have both calling card blocked, and 800
>> blocked, about the only thing callers can do is to drop in coins or
>> call collect.

> Wandering a little from the subject, but I'm confused by this.  Who
> exactly is being "defrauded"?  The 800 carrier gets paid by the paging
> company, which is happy to do so because they are paid by the paging
> customer for the service they provide.

> I'm missing something here ...

Reading the above description of using a payphone for illegal
activities doesn't include anything on how a payphone is used
fraudulently. The fraud occurs when telecommunications services are
obtained by intentional methods which prevent one or more of the
telecom providers from collecting their share of revenue. This
fraudulent activity tends to occur in high crime areas. Certian
telecom services (such as 800, credit cards) are most commonly
targetted for fraud use.


Richard Nash   Edmonton, Alberta Canada T6K 0E8
UUCP:       trickie![e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Susan Hagan)
Subject: Re: Two-Line Switching Device
Date: 2 Oct 92 13:19:23 GMT
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.


[e-mail] writes:

> I think that Radio Shack used to and might still sell a device
> designed for sharing an answering machine on two lines.  It will
> respond to a call coming in on either line.  I presume that the first
> line is still the default for outgoing.  Unlike the switch box, it
> would be automatic.  Since I never used the device, I might be wrong.

Panasonic makes a couple of "Two-Line Answering Machines".  They are
available from office supply catalogs.  We used to have one in the
department I used to work in.  I don't know the specific model number
of the unit but I can find out if there is a real interest.

You can set the machine to answer either line or both.  All the
messages are recorded on one tape and a voice imprint system records
the day and time of the call and what line it came in on.


Susan R. Hagan ([e-mail])
Publications Coordinator - User Services
Rutgers University Computing Services

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

From: [e-mail] (Mike Gordon)
Subject: Re: Two-Line Switching Device
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix at U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 92 18:35:03 GMT


> They sense an incoming call on either line (it takes the two-line --
> RJ14? -- input and sends output to an RJ11 ... RS also has the 2xRJ11
> to one RJ14 cords). Outgoing calls are placed on the line that most
> recently received an incoming call.

   Does anyone know of a way to modify this device so that you can
select which line you want to call out on?  I'm thinking of a button
for each line that would send a momentary voltage on that line's input
to trick the switch into thinking that there was just a call on that
line, and flip to it.


Mike Gordon  [e-mail]

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

Date: Fri, 2 Oct 92 12:16:59 -0700
From: [e-mail] (Ed Greenberg)
Subject: Re: Non-Air Air-Phone
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest)


I think they were credit card operated cellular.  I saw this on the
Port Jefferson-Bridgeport ferry, but I must have missed it on the
Manitowoc-Ludington Ferry.

Too bad, I had a call to make.  Oh well.


Ed Greenberg         | Home: [phone] | [e-mail]
P. O. Box 28618        | Work: [phone] | DoD#: 0357
San Jose, CA  95159    | Fax:  [phone] | KM6CG (ex WB2GOH)

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

From: [e-mail] (gordon hlavenka)
Subject: Re: Non-Air Air-Phone
Organization: Vpnet Public Access
Date: Sat, 03 Oct 1992 16:56:29 GMT


> When I took the ferry across Lake Michigan from MI to WI this summer,
> there was a phone or two on board that looked like the phones on
> air-planes.

> [Moderator's Note: Maybe they were not Airphones but were operated
> like marine radios.   PAT]

When I was at GTE Airfone, (from their infancy until exactly three
years ago) they had ongoing projects to install payphones on Amtrak
trains, airport limousines, and west-coast ferryboats.  These systems
used cellular links to provide the service.

It wouldn't surprise me if they used the Airfone cordless handset
systems with cellular transceivers to provide ferry service.  It's
technically not a difficult leap.


Gordon S. Hlavenka   [e-mail]

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

From: MPA15C![e-mail]
Date: 03 OCT 92 16:10
Subject: Re: What it Costs to Have the President Over


This may be straying a bit from telecommunications, but it's an
interesting thread.  I lived in Santa Barbara during the Reagan years;
his mountain retreat was atop Refugio Road, a miserably steep (I'm a
bicyclist) road a few miles north of town.  Whenever he sullied our
town, there was the requisite traffic inconvenience, but there was one
interesting other effect.  All over, garage doors would mysteriously
go up and down either constantly or sporadically.  The appropriate
folks in the President's entourage consistently denied any connection,
but it got so that people had to disconnect electricity to their
openers when a presidential visit was scheduled!  I suspect there was
enough of an electronic blanket over Santa Barbara that it's a wonder
we all didn't keel over from acute cancer.


Arthur L. Shapiro      [e-mail]
Software Engineering
Unisys Corporation     Speaking as a civilian, rather than for
Mission Viejo, CA      Unisys, unless this box is checked: [ ]

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

Date: Fri, 2 Oct 92 13:52:26 CDT
From: [e-mail] (Charles Mattair)
Subject: Re: What it Costs to Have the President Over
Organization: Synercom Technology, Inc., Houston, TX


> [Moderator's Note: Harry S Truman used to take walks alone around
> downtown Washington, DC during his term in office. I don't need an
> explanation of why that is not feasable these days, but it seems to me
> there is a massive overkill of protection and telecom services for the
> President.   PAT]

Totally off the subject of telecom but Barbara Bush decided to take a
walk in Hermann Park (the largest park in Houston proper) during the
Economic Summit a couple of years ago.  They cleared the park.

The convention wasn't too bad although the area around the Dome became
somewhat of a Ptomkin village with all the cleanup.

Kinda makes you think of the blessing for the Tsar from "Fiddler on the Roof."

"May the Lord bless and keep the Tsar.  Far away from Me."


Charles Mattair         [e-mail]
Any opinions offered are my own and do not reflect those of my employer.


[Moderator's Note: Whatever happened to government of the people, by
the people and for the people?  Surely she could have walked in the
park, perhaps with an agent or two and been perfectly safe without
causing all that annoyance to everyone else who was using the park.  PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #757
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa14197;
          4 Oct 92 16:38 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA14308
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 4 Oct 1992 13:52:39 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA18776
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 4 Oct 1992 13:52:27 -0500
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1992 13:52:27 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #758

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 4 Oct 92 13:52:30 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 758

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Update on U.S. Cable TV Re-Regulation Bill (Nigel Allen)
    More on Cable TV and Radio Stations (Garrett Wollman)
    Re: Digital Cable Radio / DMX (Kris Harris)
    Re: Digital Cable Radio (Bill Pfeiffer)
    Re: Thoughts About WFMT Versus WNIB/WNIZ (R. Kevin Oberman)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Update on U.S. Cable TV Re-Regulation Bill
Date: Sun 4 Oct 92 2:57:05 EDT


[Moderator's Note: The Sunday papers said Bush vetoed the cable bill
Saturday afternoon.   PAT]

Here is a press release from the National Association of Broadcasters.

 Consumer Federation, National Association of Broadcasters Update

Status of Cable Bill

 Contact: Gene Kimmelman, 202-387-6121, of Consumer Federation of
          America;
          Eddie Fritts or Lynn McReynolds, 202-429-5350, of the
          National Association of Broadcasters; or
          Bob Chlopak, 202-296-2777

   News Advisory:

   The fate of the cable TV bill will be determined this weekend or
early next week at the latest.  Here are the most recent developments:

   -- President Bush must sign or veto the bill by midnight Saturday.
If he fails to act the bill will automatically become law on Sunday.
The Senate will vote first to override a presidential veto, and the
vote could come within hours of a veto since both houses are expected
to work through the weekend.

   -- Stories in the 10-2-92 {New York Times} and {Washington Post}
claim that the White House does not appear to have the votes to
sustain a veto.  The Times reports that the administration may be
reconsidering its position.  If the president vetoes the cable bill,
he could be overriden for the first time in 34 tries.

   -- The White House lobbying effort has focused on Republican
senators with a goal of changing nine votes.  The Post reports that
the president is making a straight forward request for party loyalty
in personal meetings and phone calls with target senators.  It also
reports that the president is asking senators to change their votes
while he is unwilling to change his position and is making an issue of
Gov. Clinton's alleged flip-flops.

   -- Opponents of the bill may try to filibuster the override vote in
the Senate in the hope of killing the bill by delaying tactics at the
end of the session.  Such tactics would be unprecedented; there has
never been a filibuster of an override veto.

   -- Finally, the latest indication of the momentum building for the
cable bill came yesterday from an unlikely source, the National
eligious Broadcasters.  These conservative allies of the president
urged him not to veto the bill and pledged to work for a veto override
if it was necessary.

   Following is the {Washington Post} article of Friday, Oct. 2: "Key
Group Opposes Bush on Cable Bill" by Ann Devroy, staff writer:

   The National Religious Broadcasters group, ally of President Bush
on family values and abortion issues, has told him that it will work
against him on legislation to overhaul the cable industry.

   This adds to burdens that Bush must overcome on what aides said
could be Congress's first successful veto override in his
administration.

   In a letter to the White House yesterday, the broadcasters
contended that cable operators arbitrarily exclude Christian stations
from cable systems, seriously undercutting their audiences.

   The broadcasters have mounted what they call an "all-out campaign"
against an intensive White House effort in the last week to persuade
nine Republican Senators to switch votes and side with Bush in an
override fight.

   With little public notice and no fanfare, Bush, White House Chief
of Staff James A. Baker III, and others in the administration have
taken aim primarily at the nine Republicans.  A senior administration
official said their argument is "pure loyalty.  If the president loses
his first override in four years three weeks before Election Day, it
will add another nail to his political coffin."

   The cable bill, which Bush must sign or veto by midnight Saturday,
reregulates basic cable rates and equipment, provides certain minimum
customer-service standards and promotes competition in the cable
industry.  After House passage by a wide margin, the Senate passed the
legislation Sept. 23, 74 to 25, a veto-proof margin unless nine votes
switch.

   Consumer representatives said the wide margins in both chambers
were indicative of public discontent with cable industry pricing and
service records.  Since 1986, when prices were deregulated, household
cable rates have increased an average of 56 percent.

   Bush opposed the legislation as imposing "a wide array of costly,
burdensome and unnecessary requirements" on the industry and
government regulators.  Consumer rates will increase, Bush said,
because of such burdens.

   The president pledged in a formal letter to veto the legislation,
and many of his aides are saying he is in what one called "a real
box."  This is the case, aides said, because while Bush cannot switch
to the pro-consumer side of the dispute without being accused of
flip-flopping, he is asking senators to change their votes in
deference to his reelection problems.

   According to administration officials, Bush met last Friday with
five Republican senators, and he and Baker have called each at least
once and in some cases more often to make the loyalty plea.

   Sen. James Jeffords (R-Vt.), one of those being lobbied, said he
told the White House that, "out of deference to the president," he
would reconsider his vote but that "it is hard to turn around on this
one."

   Jeffords said Bush and Baker had made the "obvious political case"
that "to lose a veto for the first time in four years right before the
election would be unfortunate."

   In their letter to Bush, the religious broadcasters said, "We
prefer not to oppose you in a veto override" but "we will support an
override if it is necessary."

   Pat Robertson, a member of Bush's religious-broadcasting coalition,
is on the other side of the issue, according to administration
officials, and has asked Bush to stick to his veto.  Robertson and his
son are principal owners of cable's Family Channel and are seeking to
buy into another cable operation.

   If Bush fails to gain nine vote changes, it will mark the first
time in his presidency that he could not muster the one-third of votes
needed to stop a congressional action.

   The veto has been a major Bush tool.  On 34 separate battles about
highly charged issues ranging from family leave to abortion to China
policy, the president has always been able to make a persuasive case
to his own party members and avoid an override.

   White House officials said major lobbying campaigns for and against
cable legislation have raged all year and have been escalated in
recent days as the veiws of both sides appeared in television
advertising.

   Cable-system owners and the motion-picture industry are the major
opponents of the legislation.  Consumer groups, unions and local
government associations have been major supporters.

   Following is the {New York Times} article of Friday, Oct. 2:

"Bush Considers Signing Cable TV Bill" by Edmund L. Andrews:

   WASHINGTON, Oct. 1 -- Confronted with the likelihood of a defeat in
Congress, White House officials are exploring the possibility that
President Bush should reverse himself and sign a bill regulating cable
television prices.

   Mr. Bush has vowed to veto the legislation, which passed the House
and Senate by veto-proof margins, contending that it would impose
costly, burdensome and unnecessary regulations on the cable industry.
But some advisers are almost certain that he will be overridden, and
they have been looking at options.

   On Tuesday, a White House official called the Republican Mayor of
Jefferson City, Mo., Louise Gardner, to discuss what she called the
"possibility" of a signing ceremony for the bill in her city.

   Campaign Battleground

   In 1989, Jefferson City was among municipalities that battled cable
companies to restrain prices or stimulate competition.  Missouri is
the state of Senator John C. Danforth, a Republican who is one of the
bill's sponsors, and it is a battleground in the Presidential
campaign.

   "It was discussed, the possibility of a signing ceremony," Mayor
Gardner said, emphasizing that she had been given no indication that
Mr. Bush had decided to sign the bill.  She said the call came Tuesday
from Jim Snyder, a special assistant to the president.

   Democrats have used the cable television issue to charge that Mr.
Bush is indifferent to consumers and a prisoner of corporate
interests.  But switching positions on the cable bill would expose Mr.
Bush to charges that he is indecisive and weak, and the potential
political costs are so high that a veto remains very likely.

   "As of right not, senior advisers are still recommending a veto,"
said Laura Mellilo, a White House spokeswoman.

   Another White House official, who spoke on the condition that he
not be identified, said the Administration was trying to craft a veto
message that might open a new debate on the issue.  The official said
the President would propose allowing telephone companies to compete in
the cable television business, hoping that the prospect of a new bill
would persuade enough lawmakers to reverse their earlier votes.

   Most lawmakers say the administration has only a slim chance of
preventing Congress from overriding a veto of the cable bill, which
would be the first time it has overridden a veto by Mr.  Bush.  The
President has successfully vetoed nearly three dozen bills since
taking office, but in both houses, the cable television measure
received more than the two-thirds majorities needed to override.

   Mr. Bush put his reputation on the line two weeks ago, vowing to
veto the bill in a letter to Senator Bob Dole of Kansas, the minority
leader.  Denouncing the measure as full of "costly, burdensome and
unnecessary regulations," Mr. Bush said it would restrain innovation,
cost jobs and drive prices up rather than bring them down.

   F.C.C. Pricing Formula

   He must send the bill to Congress by midnight Saturday, or it
becomes law without his signature.

   The bill would require the Federal Communications Commission to
establish a formula by which local governments can set the price for a
basic package of cable channels.  The bill also prohibits large cable
companies that produce popular programming from refusing to license
their shows to rival distributors, like satellite companies.

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

Date: Sun, 4 Oct 92 13:24:27 -0400
From: [e-mail]
Subject: More on Cable TV and Radio Stations


Two items:

Last Wednesday, there was a power outage that affected most of the
city of Burlington (Vermont), my building excepted.  I, of course,
didn't know about it until I called my cable company to complain about
loss of signal, and they told me that there was a power outage in
Burlington. My response, of course, was, "That's odd, I'm in
Burlington and I have power ..."  As it turned out, it was only
eastern parts of the city (the "Hill Section") that was affected, but
it was enough to snow out cable service throughout the entire city.
It seems clear that if the cable companies ever want to compete with
the existing telco, they will have to adopt the same paranoid attitude
that telcos have towards other utilities that they could potentially
depend on.

On a completely different subject ... this area is one of the few
television markets in the country where a good half of the audience is
located in Canada.  This has the interesting result that during many
of the more popular TV programs, our local stations run ads for
Canadian (mostly Montreal) companies intended for Canadian (mostly
Montrealer) consumers.  Recently, a Montreal radio station, calling
itself "MIX 96", started a new ad campaign of the Joe Isuzu variety,
where an unseen announcer tells viewers how wonderful this station is,
and various subliminal messages flash by in the video portion.  I was
able to catch some of these messages: "The best bare naked Twister and
free bagels" was one, and another was "Send in-laws to Chibougamau."


Interesting sales technique ...


Garrett A. Wollman   [e-mail]
uvm-gen!wollman      UVM disagrees.

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Digital Cable Radio / DMX
Organization: Drake University, Des Moines, Iowa, USA
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1992 01:55:25 GMT


The recent article describing Digital Cable Radio (DCR) sounds exactly
like Digital Music Xpress (DMX) that is run by International
Cablecasting.  Our system (A recent TCI acquisition, formerly Heritage
CableVision of Des Moines) got it last June.  I started subscribing
this August when I got back to school, and I too think it is
excellent.  It is nice being able to listen to just music, and leave
the DJ's in the car radio.

There are, however a few differences between DCR and DMX.  DMX has 30
channels, as opposed to 29.  There is no toll free number to find out
what is playing, but the optional remote has an LCD display on top
which will tell you everything.  Point the remote to the tuner and
press view.  An infa-red signal is sent FROM THE BOX, TO THE REMOTE
with the song title, album name, composer name, and record label/ID
data.  It will then display all the info on the display.  The remote
can also control most popular cable television tuner boxes (SA, Tocom,
Jerrold, Oak, Zenith)

The tuner box is Scientific Atlanta, and not only has left and right
line-leval RCA type outputs, but also has direct digital output, for
newer AMPs that have their own D/A coverters.  (I do not know if DCR
uses similar equipment.)

Prices are a bit high here, but what can you expect from TCI??

Service   - $5.00/month
Tuner Box    4.95/month  or purchase for $95.00
Remote       2.95/month  or purchase for $29.95

I suppose I should mention that a simple remote is included with tuner
box rental, but does not display any info, nor controls cable
television tner boxes.  It just turns unit on/off, mutes, and changes
channels.

I have nothing to do with any cable company, nor am I trying to sell
the DCR or DMX service.  I am just sharing my experience.


Kris Harris - PO BOX 2410 - Des Moines, IA  50311-0410 - [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Bill Pfeiffer)
Subject: Re: Digital Cable Radio
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 92 10:16:17 CDT


In a recent TELECOM Digest, [e-mail] (John Higdon) writes:

> mc/G=Brad/S=Hicks/OU=[e-mail] writes:

>> * a 24-hour toll free number to call to get the current selection and the
>> two previous selections on any of the channels, listing artist, selection
>> title, CD title, and publisher.

> The system on my cable provides the current selection information
> (title, composer, artist, record label and number) right on the remote
> control in real time.

That service is called DMX (Digital Music Xpress) and although our
slouch cable company will not offer it, I agree, it is superior to DCR
for the very reason John mentions.  The ability to 'see' the selection
playing.

DMX is affiliated with TCI who runs the cable system 'across town' and
I belive that is why our cable company (Prime Cable of Chicago) does
not carry it.  I think this type of system is great and would gladly
subscribe if I could.

If there IS a ghod, let him/her/it bring me DMX.


William Pfeiffer
Moderator - rec.radio.broadcasting - Internet Radio Journal
To subscribe, send e-mail to [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Thoughts About WFMT Versus WNIB/WNIZ
Date: 4 Oct 92 17:01:42 GMT


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

> [Moderator's Note: Ah! Don't get me started! A brief history of the 36
> years W <E>dward <F.> <M>cCormick was on the air: Owned by the Zenith
> Radio Corporation, WEFM went on the air in 1941; I believe it was the
> first FM station in the USA, but others say an experimental station in
> New York City was first.

I can explain this. WEFM was the first FM station in the country using
the current FM system. FM was invented by Armstrong and he won
approval to start broadcating in the 1930s. David Sarnoff (RCA) had a
VERY strong dislike for Armstrong (a former employee) and he put
intense pressure on the FCC to withdraw approval for the Armstrong
system. The FCC went along with RCA and approved an almost identical,
but incompatable system using the current FM band. While Armstrong
could have easily modified his transmitter for the new system, that
would have left all of the receivers sold by Armstrong Radio obsolete.

Sarnoff also formed a consortium of manufacturers (including Zenith)
who all refused to pay Armstrong any royalties for his FM patents.
Armstrong spent most of the rest of his life fighting Sarnoff and
deForrest over patents rights, went broke paying legal fees and
committed suicide.

This information is mostly from a recent PBS program on the pioneers
of radio.


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

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

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #758
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa03234;
          5 Oct 92 1:27 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA06759
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 4 Oct 1992 22:31:47 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA27041
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 4 Oct 1992 22:31:38 -0500
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1992 22:31:38 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #759

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 4 Oct 92 22:31:40 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 759

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: AT&T Public Phone 2000 (Henry Mensch)
    Re: AT&T Public Phone 2000 (Roy M. Silvernail)
    Re: Telecom in the MidWest (Dave Niebuhr)
    Re: Quick New York Telephone Repair (Sort Of ...) (Andrew C. Green)
    Re: About the Internet White Pages (Paul Robinson)
    Re: ADA Requirements (Tony Harminc)
    Re: British Call Waiting (was My Favorite Intercepts) (Laurence Chiu)
    Re: Funny Phone Behaviour ... Restatment of Problem (Brent Capps)
    Re: A Good Way to Play a Micro Tape Over the Phone? (Jon Sreekanth)
    Re: Funny 800 Number Spelling (John David Galt)
    Re: LD Transmission Quality Comparison (John David Galt)
    Re: A Good Way to Play a Micro Tape Over the Phone? (Laird Broadfield)
    Re: Local Battery (Richard Cox)
    Re: Modem <-> Digital Telephone System (Eric Jacksch)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Henry Mensch)
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 92 14:14:14 -0700
Subject: Re: AT&T Public Phone 2000
Reply-To: [e-mail]


[e-mail] (Steve Forrette) wrote:

> The bill for the call comes in two parts: One for the call, which
> appears on your regular calling card bill, and a separate bill for the
> terminal rental.

Nope ... the calls and the terminal rental appear on the same bill (in
my case), which comes from that special place Chosen Just for This
Purpose.


# henry mensch / booz, allen & hamilton, inc.  / <[e-mail]>

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

Subject: Re: AT&T Public Phone 2000
From: cybrspc![e-mail] (Roy M. Silvernail)
Date: Sun, 04 Oct 92 19:43:14 CDT
Organization: Villa CyberSpace, Minneapolis, MN


[e-mail] (Edwin G Green) writes:

> The Public Phone 2000, when equipped with a keyboard, can be (and
> almost always is) a Telecommunications Device for the Deaf (TDD).

That makes me wish I had had the time to further explore the features.
I didn't notice a TDD option on the LAX or Salt Lake City phones, but
it may well have been offered from a menu page I didn't inspect.  A
pat on the back for AT&T.

You say "when equipped with a keyboard" ... are there installations
that do not include keyboards?  What might be the rationale?  (I have
only seen the keyboard-equipped model, and not in Minnesota.)


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

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

Date: Sun, 4 Oct 92 15:47:54 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Dave Niebuhr)
Subject: Re: Telecom in the MidWest


In TELECOM Digest V12 #752 Ang Peng Hwa <[e-mail]>
writes:

> Pat noted:

>> Even twenty years ago, Tulsa, OK, was considered an ideal place for
>> telemarketers as was Omaha, NB. Why? Because they had the least
>> expensive WATS costs of anywhere in the USA. After all, the most you
>> can go in any direction from Tulsa is 2,000 miles or less,....

> I was told that the reason telemarketers chose the MidWest was that they
> had the most "neutral" accents. Nebraska was said to have been pitching
> that. I'm told by a Nebraskan that she thinks the accent is neutral
> except for Washington, which they pronounced "Waa-shington."

Another reason for good telephone service in Nebraska is that Omaha
was the home of the former Strategic Air Command of the US Air Force
and top-notch telecom service was needed.

At least that was one of the reasons I was told when I grew up there.

If PAT doesn't mind, I'd like to point out that Nebraska's
abbreviation is NE not NB.


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


[Moderator's Note: Thanks for the postal code abbreviation correction.
And as 'they' say, the abbreviation for the area along the south shore
of Lake Michigan from southeast Chicago eastward to Gary is PU.  :)   PAT]

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

Date: Sun, 04 Oct 1992 13:27:44 CDT
From: Andrew C. Green <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Quick New York Telephone Repair (Sort Of ...)


Our Esteemed Moderator notes:

> I'm one of those people who when they see or experience a pay
> phone out of order actually calls it in to repair service. It
> is interesting to go past a week later and see how many of the
> called in repairs have actually been done and how many of the
> pay phones are still out of order.  PAT]

Hmph. In this city (Chicago) it seems like the repairs will still be
un-done a week later, to judge from my attempts. After three or four
calls to 611 over about three weeks, I gave up. Why don't we all get
together on this and have another attempt?!

It's a pedestal-mounted pay phone on the sidewalk outside 110 North
Wacker Drive downtown. It is the only pay phone in sight on this very
important and busy downtown street. For months it has gone unrepaired;
its handset and cord are gone. Its phone number is [phone].

My first call to Repair Service got me a prompt promise to fix it by
the close of business the next day. A week later, they told me they
couldn't find any record of the order, and resubmitted it.  About a
week after that, I pressed a bit further.

"Sir, I don't show any listing for that number; it's been disconnected."

"Well, of course it's disconnected; parts of it are missing."

"It's not a pay phone in service, so I would have to submit it as a
Non-standard Request [or some such term]."

"Fine! Let's do that, then ..."

Of course, nothing happened. Perhaps the collective power of TELECOM
Digest readers can get some action. ("We'd better fix the phone on
Wacker Drive ... people in Los Angeles are calling to complain!")


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


[Moderator's Note: Well, I just now dialed it and 641-9644 *is* a
disconnected number. That may have not been the correct number for the
phone in the first place. If repair has no record of the phone, they
have no way to submit a request for service on it. :(    PAT]

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

Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
Date: Sun, 04 Oct 1992  16:57:21 EDT
Subject: Re: About the Internet White Pages


I received the following clarification.  Based on this, it looks like
I just "slid under the wire" in getting MY name registered with NIC.


Paul Robinson     [e-mail]

 == Forwarded Mail ==

 From: [e-mail] ( Page Carter (Network Solutions))
 Subject: Re: About the Internet White Pages
 To: [e-mail]
 Date: Thu, 1 Oct 92 15:12:03 PST
 Cc: [e-mail] ( Page Carter (Network Solutions))

Paul, I just saw your message in TELECOM Digest, and things have
changed in spite of what RFC 1202 says. The following message was
recently posted on the commercialization-privatization-of-the-Internet
list by Stephen Wolff, director of the NSF:

"DISA has the NIC under contract to serve the DDN.  They have
augmented the contract to supply **some** services to the rest of the
Internet community; this augmentation is paid for by NSF by
transferring funds monthly to DISA.

"When we were negotiating the terms and conditions (and cost) of this
augmentation, we said "Don't register hosts, and don't register
people."  One reason was to save a little money, but the primary
reason (as has been alluded to already on this list) is that without
central **control** over which hosts and which people use the Internet
no one but a fool would accept the (centralized) **responsibility** of
keeping such a "registry" up to date.  Only a decentralized directory
("registry" sounds too big-brother-ish) of people makes sense.

"DARPA and NSF have jointly supported the Field Operational X.500
(FOX) experiment, with participation of USC-ISI, SRI, Merit, and
Nysernet/PSI.  This work has been regularly reported to IETF, and a
number of IDs and RFCs have been issued.  The experiment is still
rather small-scale, as together with the European X.500 trials still
(I believe) fewer than a million people are registered worldwide.  For
a sample, telnet to wp.nyser.net and login as fred.

"Recently, the NSF conducted a competitive solicitation for
Registration/ Information/Directory services for the NREN program and
the Internet.  This process has nearly run its course, and we hope
soon to be able to offer much more comprehensive whois/white_pages
service than ever before.  Stay tuned."

In other words, the NIC will no longer register individuals unless
they are contacts for registered domains or networks.

Hope this clarifies the situation.


Page Carter, NIC Staff

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

Date: Sun, 04 Oct 92 23:35:51 EDT
From: Tony Harminc <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: ADA Requirements


The AT&T Public Phone 2000s that I have seen all fail at the least the
height, reach, and handset cord length requirements of the ADA.  I am
fairly sure they did not have a TDD mode either.


Tony Harminc

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

From: [e-mail] (Laurence Chiu)
Subject: Re: British Call Waiting (was My Favorite Intercepts)
Organization: GCS Limited, Wellington, New Zealand
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1992 04:12:39 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Alan M.
Gallatin) writes:

> The British have won my award for best call waiting handling anywhere.
> A week or so ago, I was talking to a friend who lives outside London.
> In the middle of our conversation, she got what she thought to be a
> call-waiting beep (this was the first time she encountered
> call-waiting over there ...) -- anyway, I hear her say "hold on"
> followed by a click.  A few seconds later, I hear (in a VERY proper,
> English voice), "I'm sorry, but the other person is temporarily
> engaged on another call.  Please hold the line."  This cycled a few
> times with a good ten seconds between repeats.  The recording got
> interrupted by another click and my friend returning to the line.

> I, for one, hate call waiting (I got it under protest, but enough
> pepole that I talk to insisted that I get it).  I despise the idea of
> making someone wait.  However, if you're going to do it, at least do
> it with style!

> [Moderator's Note: At one point Illinois Bell was considering music on
> hold for the held party in a call-waited conversation. Nothing ever
> came of it, but it might have been a pleasant addition, and certainly
> one that IBT could have charged another dollar a month for!  :)   PAT]

In New Zealand, the waiting party hears either a ringing tone, or
distinctive long short tone sequence, depending upon when the exchange
had the software installed. The long short sequnce is certainly not
heard anywhere else so can't be mistaken, the normal ringing tone
could be confusing. Music on hold would be better!


Laurence Chiu    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Brent Capps)
Subject: Re: Funny Phone Behaviour ... Restatment of Problem.
Organization: Atlas Telecom Inc.
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1992 17:23:47 GMT


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

[problems with Panasonic Easa-phone]

I have also experienced problems with the Easa-phone (the older El
Cheapo squarish-ones, not the newer ones with the rounded edges).  It
involved an interaction between the speakerphone and the mute button,
and the symptoms were:

  Easa-phone: offhook on speakerphone, dial VRU.
  VRU: answers, prompts for DTMF digits.
  Easa-phone: enter DTMF digits.  Mute lite comes on without
  being pressed, but mute feature isn't really active.
  VRU: loud female voice says "you have reached the mailbox of
  subscriber OH ONE OH OH OH OH...
  Easa-phone: drops call suddenly

The recorded voice is too loud and the OHs are very staccato, but I
could never figure out for the life of me why the Easa-phone would be
experiencing a talk-off problem when it isn't supposed to be listening
for digits...the newer ones have a fix for this problem but I'm
curious about what caused it in the first place.

Any guesses?


Brent Capps            | I am not responsible
[e-mail]   | for the views
[e-mail]  | of my employer.

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

From: [e-mail] (Jon Sreekanth)
Subject: Re: A Good Way to Play a Micro Tape Over the Phone?
Organization: The World
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1992 15:18:33 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Gail M. Hall) writes:

> 1.  Can you reverse that little gadget to go through the phone line
> by PLAYing it instead of on record to play the tape from the office
> in order to avoid room noise, etc.?

> 2.  If not, is there somewhere an INEXPENSIVE gadget that will do the
> same thing?  My dictation system dealer does not know of such a

You might try out a Music-on-Hold adapter. As the name suggests, it
has a phone connector and a earphone connector for connecting in a
cassette player. They go for < $50 if you look around in electronic or
department stores, office product suppliers, Radio Shack, etc.  Hello
Direct (1-800-HI-HELLO) has one for $39.95, but they're not usually
price leaders, so you might find a better price. But your clients
would need to have plain analog phones, this won't work if they have a
digital PBX.


Jon Sreekanth

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

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Funny 800 Number Spelling
Date: Sun,  4 Oct 92 09:22:24 PDT


It took a friend of mine in Palo Alto over four months to get Pac Bell
to give him the unused number xxx-1234.  Their initial story was that
"mnemonic sequences" like that and xxx-0000 are reserved for business
customers only.

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: LD Transmission Quality Comparison
Date: Sun,  4 Oct 92 09:25:43 PDT


I have used MCI for everything, since before the breakup, and have
never had any problems with it.  I wouldn't be surprised if the people
with problems are calling to or from some rural location that only
AT&T has wired yet.

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: A Good Way to Play a Micro Tape Over the Phone?
Date:  4 Oct 92 18:18:20 GMT


In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Gail M.
Hall) writes:

> Here is the situation.  I have a call-in dictation system that doctors
> can use to call in to dictate their reports for me to type.

[...]
> Normally this is a very unsatisfactory process because the machine
> they use is very "low-fi" and then with the relatively low fi from the
> phone line, what we end up with is a mess.

No solutions, but an idea for some of you analog types out there; I've
thought about this exact situation in the past, and wondered if it
would be feasible to play the tape through the phone, through some
sort of direct interface, but at a substantially higher speed.
Sixty-to-one would be nirvana, but 15-to-one would make a more than
acceptable product.  (Come to think of it, this might be a digital
question after all.)


Laird P. Broadfield     [e-mail]    ...{ucsd, nosc}!crash!lairdb

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

Date: Sun, 4 Oct 92 22:24 GMT
From: Richard Cox <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Local Battery
Reply-To: [e-mail]


Gabe Wiener ([e-mail]) writes:

>> In a local-battery phone, how was the battery charged?

>  It wasn't.  When you found that you started to have difficulty hearing
>  the calling party, you opened up the phone and replaced the battery.

Nope, the battery was for the microphone circuit.  It was when the
*other* party couldn't hear you, that you changed the battery.  It's
only in very recent years (relatively speaking!) that incoming speech
has been amplified.


Richard Cox

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

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

Subject: Re: Modem <-> Digital Telephone System
From: [e-mail] (Eric Jacksch)
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1992 10:28:16 -0400


[e-mail] writes:

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

>> We have electronic key set telephones; the four wire ones which plug
>> into RJ-11 jacks and allow you to select from a set of lines, an
>> intercom, etc.  After playing around trying to build an acoustic ...

> How did it work?

Very well.

> Or am I missing some crucial wisdom about key telephones?

Yup ... it isn't a ring-and-tip pair, it's straight audio.  It isn't
connected to anything until you select a line using the keys on the
telephone.

> I have two lines at home ... now if only I could put together some
> similar $10 in parts and have the answering machine on one line answer
> calls on both lines, (while both lines are separate for all other
> purposes.)

You can buy one at Radio Shack, but it's a bit more than $10.


Take Care,

Eric Jacksch   [e-mail]   Data/Fax: [phone]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #759
******************************










Received: from [129.105.5.103] by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa22129;
          5 Oct 92 10:47 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA24699
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 5 Oct 1992 07:31:27 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA14434
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 5 Oct 1992 07:31:19 -0500
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1992 07:31:19 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #760

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 5 Oct 92 07:31:22 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 760

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: AT&T Wants $3 For International DA (Dave Leibold)
    Re: Living in the Past (John Higdon)
    Re: Cellular Interception in Private Talk (Louis A. Mamakos)
    Re: Exchange Codes Near Area Code Boundaries (Eugene R. Schroeder)
    Re: Sidetone (was LD Transmission Quality Comparison) (Richard Nash)
    Re: Network Installation Box Rules ([e-mail])
    Re: Cellular Phones With Deals Attached (Ron Dippold)
    Re: Two-Line Switching Device (Shrikumar)
    Re: What it Costs to Have the President Over (Clark B. Merrill)
    Re: Non-Air Air-Phone/ (Cellular Roaming Cost in PEI) (David E. Sheafer)
    Re: A Good Way to Play a Micro Tape Over the Phone? (Ron Bean)
    Re: N0N and N1N Exhanges and 1+ Dialing (Tony Pelliccio)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 05 Oct 1992 02:45:09 -0400
From: [e-mail] (Dave Leibold)
Subject: Re: AT&T Wants $3 For International DA


As far as I can tell, getting international DA in Canada is relatively
free, though I've encountered the odd occasion where the operator
demands that this coincide with an actual call. One wonders how long
this might last under the opened competiton, although Canadian
overseas calling remains a monopoly under Teleglobe.

But at $3/call, I would wonder whether it is possible to dial the DA
operators overseas more cheaply? This would not be cheaper for the
more primitive operations that require 15-20 minutes to get an
operator, but surely a DA operator can be summoned rapidly from
Australia, the UK or some other places.


(this Fidonet address, or c/o [e-mail])

Dave Leibold - via FidoNet node 1:250/98
INTERNET: [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: Directory service is fast and very effecient in the
UK and Australia to name just two places. You can get on and off in a
minute or so with either place.  PAT]

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

Date: Sun, 4 Oct 92 02:42 PDT
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: Living in the Past


[e-mail] writes:

> One frustrating thing about Telco is that they don't understand
> anything beyond POTS.  For example, when installing a line next door,
> they took out one of my pairs and claim they can't promise to repair
> it till 5pm tomorrow.  I asked them to busy out the line in the
> interim since anything more complicated would utterly confuse them.

Which Telco is this? It does indeed sound like something out of the
past in an era when the customer was not to know anything about how
"the system worked". What happened to the pair history and service
records? Sounds like heads need to roll.

> Naah, that would require a company that has a modicum of understanding
> a competitive marketplace.  After all, if car drivers had no choice
> to buy buggy whips, why improve them.

Again, which telco is this? Pac*Bell has apparently resigned itself to
the inevitability of a competitive environment. For the past couple of
years, there has been a wonderment of "can do" flexibility. One can
now get digital entrance facilities for POTS for no extra monthly
charge.  Installs happen same day as the order. Repair service is
nothing short of miraculous.

When I order temporary service for a radio station event, it takes
less than three minutes to get an order number, telephone number, and
disconnect order number. (Another well known telco who claims to do
business in this region cannot take the order in this manner. First,
one must explain what a "one-emm-bee" is. Then, since the person who
answers the phone is completely powerless, someone has to call you
back. Then there a discussion as to why the service will only be
connected for three days. This unnamed telco cannot take a disconnect
order at the same time as an install order, so one has to remember to
call back to have it disconnected AFTER the event. And on and on.
Since I have been roundly critisized for speaking ill of this telco,
the name will remain unmentioned.)

If you think telcos are bad now, you should have seen them in the
"good old days".


John Higdon  |   P. O. Box 7648   |   [phone]     |       FAX:
[e-mail] | San Jose, CA 95150 | 10288 0 700 FOR-A-MOO | [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Louis A. Mamakos)
Subject: Re: Cellular Interception in Private Talk
Organization: University of Maryland, College Park
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1992 15:15:37 GMT


> [Moderattor's Note: We have touched upon this several times recently.
> Cellular calls are quite easy to intercept on a scanning radio which
> covers the 800 mh range of frequencies. The 'technical problems'
> consist of sometimes having to make a small modification in the radio
> itself. Conversations cannot easily be followed between cells.   PAT]

Why assert that conversations cannot easily be followed between cells?
It is not as if the mechanism for handoffs is secret; it is done in
band and someone with sufficient motivation should easily be able to
decode and interpret this information.  While its true that Joe Blow
with a scanner won't be able to, it is by no means difficult enough to
to give anyone a sense of security.


[Moderator's Note: But by and large it is Joe Blow with his scanner
who causes the privacy violations of cell phone users. Therefore, if
Joe Blow can't do to, for all practical purposes it can't be done.
Naturally, spies and other persons specially trained in surveillance
can get around the complications, but Joe Blow isn't among them.  PAT]

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

Date: Sun,  4 Oct 92 11:57:21 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Eugene R Schroeder)
Subject: Re: Exchange Codes Near Area Code Boundaries
Organization: AT&T


In article <[e-mail]> Philip Gladstone <philipg@
onsett.com> writes:

 <stuff deleted>

> This all implies to me that these exchange codes are allocated in each
> area code, and somehow all point to the same exchange. Further, it
> seems that allocating new exchange codes in this area would use up
> exchange codes in multiple area codes. I realise that in that part of
> the country, there is probably a lot of free number space -- but is
> this a typical approach?

This sounds like "protected codes," an arrangement where you can call
across an NPA boundary with 7d dialing.  The term "protected" means
that the NXX code cannot be assigned in the caller's NP, to prevent
ambiguity.  This was done when there is a community of interest split
by an NPA boundary, to simplify dialing.

It does consume NXXs, though, and I believe that Bellcore recommends
againt establishing any more of these.


Gene

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

Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1992 07:09:11 -0600
From: [e-mail] (Richard Nash)
Subject: Re: Sidetone (was LD Transmission Quality Comparison)


Hans-Gabriel Ridder writes:

> In article <[e-mail]> John Higdon <john@zygot.
> ati.com> writes:

> I seem to remember reading (in an ITT manual, I believe) that the
> sidetone was generated by *intentionally* unbalancing the hybrid
> transformer.  Also, a friend of mine once had a phone with a "broken"
> hybrid which produced *no* sidetone at all (or at least very little).
> This always annoyed me as it fooled me into thinking the phone had
> gone dead.

In the good old days, the 2500 set could be ordered up without
sidetone.  This was some kind of a military specification that
improved communications in less than ideal environments.


Richard Nash         Edmonton, Alberta Canada T6K 0E8
UUCP:                   trickie![e-mail]
Amatuer Radio Packet:   VE6BON @ VE6MC.AB.CAN.NA
                        VE6BON.ampr.org [44.135.147.206]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Network Installation Box Installation Rules
Date: 4 Oct 1992 20:56:49 GMT
Organization: Marquette University - Computer Services
Reply-To: [e-mail]


In article <[e-mail]>, David <[e-mail].
dec.com> writes:

> I just had a second phone line installed in my home, and the
> Network Interface Box was installed on the outside of the house.  This
> strikes me as a problem, since it leaves the box open to weather,
> vandalism, and theft of service.  Also, my phone number is written
> inside the box (which does have a hole for a padlock, but which is
> made of flimsy plastic).

> ...  I don't seem to have any option to have it installed
> inside the house.

Here (SE Wisconsin) I've seen the Network Interface placed both inside
and outside.  New construction seems to be mainly outside.  If you
don't have one on an old installation and request one, they usually
put it inside right next to the protector.  It would seem to be a
security problem to me also, wandering teenagers with telephones
calling 900 numbers from your line.  I would at least erase/eradicate
the number written inside.  Maybe you could build a more substantial
box around theirs.

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

From: [e-mail] (Ron Dippold)
Subject: Re: Cellular Phones With Deals Attached
Organization: Qualcomm, Inc., San Diego, CA
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1992 21:24:50 GMT


[e-mail] (Dan Ganek) writes:

> Free/cheap cellular phones are the norm here in the NE. I never did
> understand why CA made such tie-in's illegal. If I'm running some sort
> of service business and offer to subsidize my customer's equipment,
> why not?  I'm not REQUIRING them to do it.

It's California.  We apparently lead the nation in Stupid People Who
Must Be Protected From Themselves, given the number of similar laws
which also reduce the options of the competent.

It is morally wrong to allow a sucker to keep his money.

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

Date: Sun, 4 Oct 92 13:26:39 -0400
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Two-Line Switching Device
Organization: UMass, Amherst, MA 01002 + Temporal Sys & Comp Net, Bombay, India


>> Radio Shack .. sell a device .. for sharing an answering machine
>> on two lines.  [...] presume first line is the default for outgoing.

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] said:

> They sense an incoming call on either line ...

> Outgoing calls are placed on the line that most recently received an
> incoming call.

> They're only $9.95, but I've had two of them fail already (the second
> one was a replacement for the first one).  They seemed ideal for an
> answering machine or a cordless phone, but they just don't seem to
> work very well, after a while they refuse to answer one of the lines.

> Guess its a small latching relay with a ring voltage trip.

     I just saw it at Rat-shack yesterday, it was listed at $21.95,
and the store keeper did not know which line it would grab on
outgoing, so I did not buy it. (I want my roommate's answering machine
to grab those few calls that I might get when I'm not home, but I want
our outgoings not to be messed up.)

     Lucky, since you have such a bad experience with them.


shrikumar ( [e-mail], [e-mail] )

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

Date: 04 Oct 1992 03:35:10 -0400 (EDT)
From: Clark <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: What it Costs to Have the President Over


[e-mail] (Charles Mattair)

> Totally off the subject of telecom but Barbara Bush decided to take a
> walk in Hermann Park (the largest park in Houston proper) during the
> Economic Summit a couple of years ago.  They cleared the park.

> [Moderator's Note: Whatever happened to government of the people, by
> the people and for the people?  Surely she could have walked in the
> park, perhaps with an agent or two and been perfectly safe without
> causing all that annoyance to everyone else who was using the park.  PAT]

What has happened is that the secret service has totally taken over
the presidential security detail.  I don't agree with how they protect
out leaders, but look at it from their prospective.  In the last 30
years they have had one president killed, one president shot, one
president that would of been shot from close range except for the gun
jamming, and one presidential candidate crippled from a gunshot wound.
Another thing that makes me wonder why anyone would want that job!
The Secret Service had gotten paranoid.  It seems that they want the
same amount of security for unannounced stuff as the do for the stuff
on the public calendar.

I saw Reagan come back from a trip once and land at the Pentagon
instead of the White house.  A six lane road leading into DC was
closed off.  And there were officers stationed everywhere.  There was
no way to get anywhere near him.  I was one of five people that
stopped and watched the landing from the Pentagon parking lot.

Another thing I've found slightly amusing is that when presidents go
to sporting events, they never get to see the end of the game.
Another thing that makes me wonder why anyone would want that job!


Clark B. Merrill   Space Telescope Science Institute
Baltimore, Maryland   [e-mail]

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

From: David E. Sheafer <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Non-Air Air-Phone/ (Cellular Roaming Cost in PEI)
Date: 5 Oct 92 06:58:24 GMT
Organization: Merrimack College, No. Andover, MA, USA


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(CHRISTOPHER WOLF) writes:

> When I took the ferry across Lake Michigan from MI to WI this summer,
> there was a phone or two on board that looked like the phones on
> air-planes.

> How does this work being only 100ft off the ground, in the middle of a
> lake?

  When I took a ferry in Canada to Prince Edward Island, the phones
were cellular (IsleTel Cellular I believe) on the Ferry.

  As an aside, when I was on PEI and used my Cellphone, the roaming
costs were cheap, I had a couple of two and three-minute calls, each
call was billed for a total of $1.25 CND (not 1.25 /minute but per
call), and there was no daily charge.  By the way I'm a NYNEX/Boston
Customer, and was told that the charges would be 1.25/minute plus 3.00
per day.  So I'm not complaining.


David E. Sheafer
internet:  [e-mail]   or  uucp:      samsung!hubdub!nin15b0b
GEnie:     D.SHEAFER             Cleveland Freenet:    ap345

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

From: astroatc!vidiot!madnix![e-mail] (Ron Bean)
Subject: Re: A Good Way to Play a Micro Tape Over the Phone?
Organization: ARP Software
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1992 23:16:02 GMT


[e-mail] (Gail  M. Hall) writes:

> However, some doctors still like to use their little dictating
> machines that they can carry in their pockets and would like their
> secretaries to play the tape over the phone into my system.

> Normally this is a very unsatisfactory process because the machine
> they use is very "low-fi" and then with the relatively low fi from the
> phone line, what we end up with is a mess.

   If the micro-tape machine has an earphone jack, you may be able to
plug in a better (larger) speaker. I used to do this kind of thing
with transistor radios when I was a kid, and it really does make them
sound better. I doubt if you could buy one, you'd have to build it
yourself. All you need is a speaker, a plug, some wire, and some kind
of box to put it in.


[e-mail] (Ron Bean)   uwvax!astroatc!nicmad!madnix!zaphod

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

Date: Sun, 04 Oct 92 17:51:39 EDT
From: Tony Pelliccio <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: N0N and N1N Exhanges and 1+ Dialing


Dialing in the Rhode Island area requires the following:

NNN-XXXX             To dial a local number
1-NNN-XXXX           To dial a toll call
1-NPA-NXX-XXXX       To dial an inter-lata call

The peculiar parts follow:

To call the following exchanges in MA from a Providence telephone
number:  Exchanges: 252, 379, 399, 761

You dial it as a local 7-D number. The strange part is that you can
also dial 1-508-NXX-XXXX and get the same thing.  Oh ... the part I
love: DA for RI and MA. In the directories 252, 379, 399 and 761 are
listed as part of Providence and Vicinity but call DA and they tell
you to dial 1-508-555-1212 and pay the 65 cents.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #760
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa22631;
          5 Oct 92 11:00 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA10084
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 5 Oct 1992 08:02:05 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA04495
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 5 Oct 1992 08:01:56 -0500
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1992 08:01:56 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #761

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 5 Oct 92 08:02:00 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 761

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    ZyXEL ROMs v:5.02 Available From Mail-Server (Steve Pershing)
    Unhappy With the AT&T Attitude (John Higdon)
    Re: X.25 Connections From Commercial BBS's? (Joseph Bergstein)
    Re: NYTel Problems (Barton F. Bruce)
    Cheap Cellular Phones in California (Steven H. Lichter)
    Re: Information on Diskfax (Richard Cox)
    About a Bad Cellular Connection (Paul Robinson)
    Confused About T1 Bandwiths (Matt Szela)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Steve Pershing)
Subject: ZyXEL ROMs v:5.02 Available From Mail-Server
Date: 4 Oct 92 18:40:13 GMT
Organization: Questor|Free Usenet News|Vancouver, BC: [phone]


The latest release of ROM firmware for ZyXEL 1496S and 1496E modems
has been received from ZyXEL USA, and are available by mail-server
request from Questor as ZOO archives.

> (If you do not have access to an EPROM programmer, we may be able to
> help with that...
> Please ask by sending e-mail to:    [e-mail]
> and we will respond promptly.)

The Questor mail-server automatically uuencodes binary files, with
xxencoding available as an option.

To request either set of ROM binaries, send e-mail to:

        [e-mail]

and in an otherwise blank body text, insert the following line(s):

/GET prodinfo/zyxel/rm1496e.zoo
/GET prodinfo/zyxel/rm1496s.zoo

  --->  If you require XXencoding, use the following format:

/GET prodinfo/zyxel/rm1496e.zoo xxencode

         - or -

/GET prodinfo/zyxel/rm1496s.zoo xxencode

Questor also *sells* ZyXEL and Telebit modems at *very* reasonable prices.

For a copy of the current price list, add the following line to your
request:

INFO USACOST    (for USA prices)
INFO WLDCOST    (for World prices)
INFO CDNCOST    (for Canadian prices)

A complete file listing (including TIFF images of spec sheets) is also
available by adding the following line:

INFO FILINDX

The following is a copy of the release note for version 5.02 ROMs.  It
is also include in the ZOO archive:


        Firmware 5.02 release note
  -----------------------------------------------------------

1. AT detection has been tuned for plus model.

2. "RINGING" response is restored, set bit 6 of s42 can disable
   this function.

3. Fast Rate re-Negotiation fall back/forward range change from
   16800-7200 to 16800-4800.

4. Improve the silence/quiet detection in voice mode.

5. Fix Caller ID and distinctive ring bugs.

6. Can send to fax machine which has no answer tone.

7. Correct response messages associated with ATX2 & ATX3.

8. Fix compatibile problem with some fax machchine which can
   not response to MPS signal correctly without some delay between
   fax message and MPS.

9. Add Austra country code (233) for 120 ms flash time.

10. Add Japan country code (234) for 20 pps pulse dial and
    ring detector spec.

11. Correct remote digital loopback problem in async non error
    control mode.

12. Correct frequency range problem of ring detector.

13. Correct 1300 Hz calling tone to be recognized as fax calling tone
    problem.


        Steve Pershing, System Administrator, The QUESTOR Project
  FREE access to Environ, Sci, Med, & AIDS news, and more.  [also UUCP]
        on a ZyXEL-1496S v.42bis, v.32bis, v.33, up to 16,800bps.

    POST: 1027 Davie St., Box 486, Vancouver, B.C., Canada  V6E 4L2
    Fones: (+1 604)  Data: 681-0670  FAX: [phone]  Voice: 682-6659

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

Date: Sun, 4 Oct 92 22:13 PDT
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Unhappy With the AT&T Attitude


Some time back, I recounted a situation where calls to the UK were
appearing on my telephone bill. These calls showed as being made on a
weekly basis on a line that is not used in any way for outgoing calls.
As mentioned, AT&T very reluctantly removed the charges, indicating in
essence that since the calls were "direct dialed" they had to have
been made from my residence, with or without my knowledge.

And now, the rest of the story. Each month the frequency and duration
of the "calls" increased to the point where the monthly amount was
pushing $100. And each month AT&T became snottier and snottier about
removing the charges, until finally I was informed that there would be
"no more credits". AT&T's position was that the calls were being made
and there was no room for error. My position was that I did not make
any such calls; no one in my house made any such calls; and I was not
going to pay for calls that I had nothing to do with.

On September 10, Pac*Bell found the problem that involved some crossed
lines. I was informed that Pac*Bell had identified the source of the
calls and the party responsible. End of problem, or so I thought.

Today I received my September 26 bill. There were no bogus UK calls,
but AT&T had failed to remove previous charges for these phony
billings causing a past-due balance and late charges. I called AT&T.
The rep informed me that since "Pac*Bell has found no difficulty, the
billing stands." At that point I demanded a supervisor, and when he
came on the line I three-wayed a Pac*Bell rep into the conversation.
(Is it not nice that both AT&T AND Pac*Bell do business on Saturday?
Unlike another telco that I will not name whose business office is
open 8AM to 5PM Monday through Friday PERIOD.)

The Pac*Bell rep informed the AT&T supervisor that there had indeed
been a problem with my lines and that it had been corrected. The AT&T
supervisor issued an immediate credit (and Pac*Bell removed the late
charges). I thanked the Pac*Bell rep for her help and then I reamed
the AT&T supervisor a new orifice.

Throughout this whole affair, AT&T has been arrogant and
uncooperative.  It had even promised to follow up on the actions taken
by Pac*Bell to determine if there were technical problems with the
line. It did not.  Somehow I prefer not to do business with a company
that just assumes that I am lying, or attempting to evade lawful and
appropriate charges.  Each and every frontline rep at AT&T with whom I
spoke sported an attitude that there was no question that I had made
the calls in question. To them, that was a "fact" that was not even
negotiable. All we were discussing, from their point of view, was how
"generous" AT&T would be in "forgiving" those charges.

As mentioned previously, I do substantial business with AT&T each
month. Considering the size of my bills, the idea that I would attempt
to weasel out of even $100 is absurd. The supervisor today was put on
notice that considering the wretched treatment that I received and the
lack of effort AT&T put forth in resolving the problem, my search for
a carrier that would offer even remotely similar rates/service has
been intensified.

AT&T blew it with this one. No, the problem of erroneous charges was
not due to any mistake or negligence on its part. But there was a
legitimate technical problem. And even though it involved Pac*Bell,
AT&T might have operated from the position that it needed to look
after its customer's interests just a little. And even though the
technical glitch was in Pac*Bell's facilities, Pac*Bell always treated
me with great respect and with the attitude that there was something
that needed to be corrected. The proof was in the pudding: Pac*Bell
technicians pursued it until it was found. I was given progress
reports and was immediately contacted upon resolution.

Apparently AT&T could not have cared less, particularly since no one
there believe there was a technical problem in the first place.


John Higdon  |   P. O. Box 7648   |   [phone]     |       FAX:
[e-mail] | San Jose, CA 95150 | 10288 0 700 FOR-A-MOO | [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Joseph Bergstein)
Date: Sun, 04 Oct 1992 17:22:19 -0500
Subject: Re: X.25 Connections From Commercial BBS's?


Joel M. Hoffman asks:

> Does anyone know if there are commercial BBS's (like CompuServe,
> etc.that provide outgoing X.25 connections?  If so, what are the
> typical fees?  I would think it's cheaper for low-volume usage than
> requesting X.25 service from the local telco.  Anyone have specific
> information?

What do you mean by outgoing X.25 connection?  Do you mean X.25
outdial service? Check with Compuserve, BT Tymnet, and Sprint
(Telenet), and possibly GE.

If you mean support for a BBS, Compuserve offers an X.25 link plus PAD
to multiple host ports (i.e. your BBS).  If you have enough COmpuserve
users who log on and use Compuserve connect time to access your BBS,
then Compuserve will provide the X.25 link, plus modems, and the PAD
for free.  The advantage to your BBS users is that an hour of
Compuserve connect time can often be cheaper than one hour of long
distance fees, depending on distance.  Also, if you have many users,
then access via X.25 becomes distance insensitive (i.e. flat hourly
rate for any users within U.S.) Check with Compuserve sales rep for
details.

I am not sure if BT or Sprint have similar offerings.

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

From: Barton F. Bruce <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: NYTel Problems
Organization: Cambridge Computer Associates, Inc.
Date: 5 Oct 92 03:59:17 EDT


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

> In TELECOM Digest, Volume 12, Issue 735 Douglas Scott Reuben
> <[e-mail]> writes:

>> On 24 Sep 92 16:52:40 GMT, [e-mail] (Henry Mensch) wrote:

>> Then, the next day, call 611. Report the payphone and the problem.
>> Since this is NYNEX, there is a 70% chance they won't fix it.

> Let's make that 90% as per my experience.

>> Isn't NYNEX just SO competent? And some people say GTE is bad ...:)

> NYNEX/NYTel is USELESS!

The 'office-of-the-President' hot line number in MA is via the
main switchboard at 617-743-9800 -- ask for 'Executive Appeals'.

I am NO great lover of NYNEX or its 'children', but they *ARE*
changing -- give them some credit.

Our company is 'served' by NET&T here in MA and by NYTEL in NY. Though
I agree NYTEL may have its records/billing/repair systems badly messed
up, and they have high TT charges when others are dropping them and
they have many other problems, they DO HAVE SOME *GOOD* features!

Those good features are brought to you by some younger/newer
management that is trying very hard to change the company and who are
daily more frustrated by it than you possibly ever could be.

We have DDS-II (aka BDS or non-hubbed DDS) that is available
intra-LATA and on FCC tariffs at a fraction of the price of the old
DDS rates. We have NRS available that actually lets you log in to
THEIR DACS and reconfigure where each of your DS0s connects to. Do you
have these?

And now there is Frame Relay (in use in NY, in field trial in MA --
but will be available soon). 56 kb F/R costs DDS-II normal charges to
the nearest DACS -- if it is in your local CO, that means $80. Then
you add a $67 port charge into the F/R net -- that is it. You get the
first virtual circuit included. The next five or so are $10, then next
five are $5, and all rest are $1.

An Internet access provider can feed a T1 into the F/R net off a
single cisco port and then feed *HUNDREDS* of modest traffic 56kb
users for far less than ever before. There is no mileage component
other than getting to the nearest DACS. This is goodness. Do you have
it in your state?

NET&T has a user's group that meets periodically. NYNEX management
folks from White Plains come to talk and listen. And they DO listen,
and they do give candid no BS answers. Does your telco do this?

NET&T is even getting connected to the Internet via NEARNET!

So bitch and natter all you want, but be aware of what is changing; GO
TO DPU hearings; stand up and SPEAK; ask your local politician why the
MBTA (that owns some abandoned rail lines being converted to bike
paths) seems to obstruct bypass carrier's attempts to bury fiber on
such routes (might they have NET&T 'friends'?), and in general get
involved.

TELCOs can change, and you can help :-)

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: 5 Oct 92 00:02:00 UT
Subject: Cheap Cellular Phones in California


Well that seems to be changing. Radio Shack was advertising their hand
held phone for a lot less then it has been in the past. The problem
was you had to pay $100.00 more for it if you did not get their
service (LA Cellular). Since I had PacTell Cellular, and have never
had any problems with it I saw no reason to change. I was shown the
costs for the phone in other states and it is a lot more.  By the way,
North Carolina appears to have gone the way of the other states. I
bought an OKI 900 for a fair price had it programmed at the selling
price and paid PacBell $15.00 for an ESN change.

I also found out that a phone sold by Circuit City, Silo and so on as
XXX by and a brand name phone are made for them and may not be as
good. Also if you don't want to sign up for the service they really
don't want to sell you one.


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


[Moderator's Note: This is another example of mail coming from gte.com
under the name of Gloria Valle. I had to change it to the address
shown above. I *wish* correspondents from GTE would show the correct
address when writing here.   PAT]

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

Date: Sun, 4 Oct 92 22:25 GMT
From: Richard Cox <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Information on Diskfax
Reply-To: [e-mail]


shrikumar ([e-mail], [e-mail]) asks:

> The product he's talking about "takes a computer disk and sends it as a
> fax" or somesuch thing.  Whats this thingummy?  Anybody used it?

The Diskfax is a remote disk duplicating system, using an integral
modem and proprietary protocol.  The idea is that you can "transmit"
the contents of a floppy to another similar machine, somewhere else,
without human intervention where it is "printed out" on a blank
floppy. In other words it does for disks what fax machines do for
documents.  Hence the name.

It does work, but is not cheap (close to $1000) and not many were
sold. There are therefore few places that you can "fax" disks to,
which is probably why so few were sold.  Most people that bought them,
did so for use to/from a specific partner machine, rather than for
general use.


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

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

Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
Date: Sun, 04 Oct 1992  22:35:13 EDT
Subject: About a Bad Cellular Connection


A funny thing happened today.  One of the executives called into this
office from Europe and had a connection that made me think they were
calling locally.  Really clean call.

Later on, one of the mid-level people calls in on a cellular phone
that made me think he was calling from Mars or Jupiter, or at least
during a sunspot attack.  Really bad.

So I mentioned to him that his connection was {worse} than one that
came in from Europe.  So I asked him, "By the way, which phone system
are you using, Crapula One or Barf Atlantic?"  :) He thought it was
funny too ...


Paul Robinson     These opinions are MINE, MINE, MINE.

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

From: [e-mail] (Matt Szela)
Subject: Confused about T1 bandwiths
Organization: AT&T IMS - Piscataway, NJ (USA)
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1992 04:13:20 GMT


Data Comm Folks,

I am confused about the T1 usable rates.  My understanding is that the
T1 lines can come in two speeds:

1. 1,344 Kbps i.e. 24 channels @ 56 Kbps each;  OR
2. 1,536 Kbps i.e. 24 channels @ 64 Kbps each.

Now, what do I need to do in order to get the higher 1,536 speed: Is
this the function of the terminating CSUs, the phone company circuit
or both? The difference is 192 Kbps which is quite a lot and we would
like to take advantage of this extra bandwith if possible.

Do I need to tell the phone company when I order the circuit that I
want the 1,536 Kbps line?

My understanding also is that if the two CSUs are connected back to
back via an in-house circuit less then 6,000 long they can indeed get
the 1,544 Kbps usable bandwith rates since no framing bits are needed.

Thanks in advance for any info on the subject.


Matt    [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #761
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa25386;
          6 Oct 92 3:14 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA32269
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 6 Oct 1992 00:58:05 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA21277
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 6 Oct 1992 00:57:56 -0500
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1992 00:57:56 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #763

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 6 Oct 92 00:58:00 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 763

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Comments on the Multimedia Article (David G. Lewis)
    Re: Brooklyn Bridge Phone Episode (Will Martin)
    Re: Confused About T1 Bandwidths ([e-mail])
    Re: Confused About T1 Bandwidths (Bruce L. Friedman)
    Re: What it Costs to Have the President Over (Laird Broadfield)
    Re: Living in the Past (Bob Frankston)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (david.g.lewis)
Subject: Re: Comments on the Multimedia Article
Organization: AT&T
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1992 17:13:11 GMT


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

> We will buy the capacity as we want it.  Just have the capacity
> there and have it low enough cost to allow anyone who can afford a
> phone now to get in on this stuff.

> Note to anyone working for a telephone company: Do us all a favor and
> oversupply capacity!  You should build for a factor of one hundred
> times current capacity, the equivalent of running a small PBX into
> each house.

Unfortunately, as you touch on in the previous paragraph, there is a
cost issue involved.  You can not put in a factor of 100 overbuild in
capacity without an increase of cost.  Even if economies of scale can
somehow provide a factor of 10 improvement, you're still talking a
cost ten times current cost.  Are you willing to pay $100/month for a
POTS line just so the capacity can be there sometime in the future?

> I believe that 10 fiber optic (FO) cables are the size of one
> twisted pair, and one FO cable is the equivalent of something like
> 5,000 phone lines or 20 tv channels.

Size of the cables is the least concern; the biggest cost element in a
fiber optic system is the cost of the electronics hanging on either
end.  A 12-fiber cable (the smallest I've seen used in my, albeit
limited, experience) is probably no bigger than a piece of CATV coax
(remember, you've got to have the physical support built into the
cable -- it's not just ten fibers in a sheath).  Those six pairs of
fiber can get you anywhere from one DS1 (1.544 kb/s) (using a single
pair) to 72 DS3s (over 20Gb/s), at a cost ranging from about $5000 to,
oh, somewhere in the neighborhood of $2 million.  When you're dealing
with these numbers, cable size gets kind of lost in the noise.

Don't get me wrong; fiber's great, and one of the things that makes it
great is the fact that you can yank out the existing electronics and
upgrade the capacity of the link by orders of magnitude without having
to change out the cable plant.  But when you're talking about running
to the home, the electronics cost is *the* significant cost factor.

> Figure sending 1/2 of the capacity of a FO cable per house, and you
> can expect to cover the bandwidth demands of the future and several
> years from now.

Using your 5000 phone lines per (I'm guessing you mean) fiber pair, at
64kb/s for a phone line, you're talking sending 160Mb/s to each house.
Let's use 155Mb/s, since that's an STS-3 SONET/SDH rate.  Anyone know
what an STS-3 FOT is going for these days?  I don't have any
up-to-date information (and if I did, I probably wouldn't be allowed
to post it), but I'd guess that $30k/link (both ends) is correct
within an order of magnitude.  Even if using ring architectures and
ADMs can drop your costs by a factor of two (unlikely to impossible),
you're talking $15k electronics costs per house.

Even if the cost of overlaying the fiber itself goes to zero, you've
just incurred a $15k per subscriber incremental cost.  At a 50,000
line CO, that's an investment of $750 million dollars.  For capacity
which will, basically, sit there until people figure out how to use
it.

Try selling that to your local PSC.

> You can't go wrong overestimating capacity; if one party doesn't use
> it, someone else will.

But who pays for it??

> We did not, when steel was invented, build metal copies of wooden
> bridges; we have new technology, we need new ideas.

Actually, when iron and steel were first used as structural members in
bridges, we built metal copies of stone and wooden bridges.  It took
some years before the engineers designing bridges got sufficiently
creative to understand the paradigm shift.

(Then they went too far the other way and got too radically different;
witness Tacoma Narrows and the hideous side beams on the
Bronx-Whitestone Bridge -- but that's another story ...)

Agreed, we need new ideas.  And I would agree, up to a point, that one
element of these new ideas is to overlay fiber in sufficient quantity
that one or two fiber pairs can be dropped at each home, on spec.  But
I'd find it hard to justify pulling a fiber pair into each home and
terminating it with the electronics to support any amount of
bandwidth, unless I could charge at least ten times the going rate for
a POTS line -- and even that might not cut it.

Disclaimer: my opinions; AT&T has nothing to do with them.  In fact,
my colleagues over in Network Systems have this great Fiber To The
Curb product, the SLC(R)-DT ...

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

Date: Mon, 5 Oct 92 14:21:36 CDT
From: Will Martin <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Brooklyn Bridge Phone Episode


> The family tries to arrange a code with the grandparents, who live
> downstairs: when the family should go down to the grandparents, the
> grandparents are to call, hanging up after the second ring.  This is
> to avoid a toll.  I thought a charge for a local call was something
> new, made possible by new technology which could meter all calls.  Is
> this not true?  Were local calls charged for in the fifties (I think
> this is when the show is set)?  Or were the characters confused about
> local vs toll?

> [Moderator's Note: No indeed. We've had measured service in Chicago
> for a half-century; so has New York City. Until the past few years
> they could not tell you *exactly what number* you dialed ... just
> that you did.  If you protested, the next month they'd put a pen
> register on the line to keep track of it for you.  PAT]

I think there is a fundamental misunderstanding here based on the
definition of "measured service". Back in the '50s, my parents had
just this sort of arrangement with my grandparents, who lived a block
away.  The grandparents would call and let the phone ring twice, and
then hang up. We would then call them every time the phone rang twice
and then stopped. (Of course, that meant that you'd always have to
wait till the third ring to pick up the phone, even if you were
standing there right next to it.)

This was because the grandparents had the minimal-cost service of a
party line with a limit of 30 (or so -- don't recall the exact
numbers) uncharged [and also untimed] calls per month. Any calls over
the 30 were charged at ten cents each [I think]. We had a party line
too, but had a more-generous limit of a larger number of calls per
month before a per-call charge would set in, because we paid more.

Note that each call had no timing and no duration limit; there was
simply a counter for completed calls. So a two-minute call and a
two-hour call each counted the same, and, if over the numeric limit
and thus charged for, would each cost ten cents. I do not know if
long-distance calls counted against this limit, or did not because
they went through the operator. (I do not recall if we had direct-dial
LD at this time; Long Distance was something one just did not do. One
wrote letters. :-) This was in St. Louis, MO.

This type of service is probably equivalent to some forms of the
"Lifeline" service for the elderly that some telcos now offer.  Back
then, it was just a lower-cost residential option, which we frugal
Midwesterners chose to save a few bucks per month.  I do not think
this type of service can be bought now, but perhaps a few long-time
subscribers still have it in place.  It was grandfathered in place at
least up to the late '60s, because at that time, when I began working
and had a paycheck, but still lived at home, I told my parents that I
would pay the phone bill from then on, and changed the service to
regular single-party unlimited flat-rate calling.

(Checking the current White Pages here reveals that "Lifeline" is
offered, but appears to be a discount off the bill only, not a special
class of service.  It is defined as a discount of $3.50 per month,
plus the $3.50 Federal End User Common Line Charge is waived.  Also a
discount of up to 50% on installation chages is available.  No
definition of who is qualified for this is given, though; one has to
call the Business Office for information.  What is interesting is that
there is no specification as to limits of class of service the
Lifeline subscriber can choose, so it seems they can have either
measured or flat rate service with the discount taken off.)


Regards,

Will   [e-mail] OR [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Confused About T1 Bandwidths
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 92 16:17:30 CDT


> Data Comm Folks,

> I am confused about the T1 usable rates.  My understanding is that the
> T1 lines can come in two speeds:

> 1. 1,344 Kbps i.e. 24 channels @ 56 Kbps each;  OR
> 2. 1,536 Kbps i.e. 24 channels @ 64 Kbps each.

> Now, what do I need to do in order to get the higher 1,536 speed: Is
> this the function of the terminating CSUs, the phone company circuit
> or both? The difference is 192 Kbps which is quite a lot and we would
> like to take advantage of this extra bandwith if possible.

> Do I need to tell the phone company when I order the circuit that I
> want the 1,536 Kbps line?

> My understanding also is that if the two CSUs are connected back to
> back via an in-house circuit less then 6,000 long they can indeed get
> the 1,544 Kbps usable bandwith rates since no framing bits are needed.

A T1 line represents 1's by alternating between high and low voltage
(called Alternate Mark Inversion) -- that is, 0's are represented by 0
volts, and 1's are represented by +voltage (if the previous 1 was
represented by a negative voltage) or by -voltage (if the previous 1
was represented by positive voltage).  This allows repeaters, which
must get their timing from the line, to remain in sync over long
streams of 1 bits (since there will be a voltage change between two
consecutive 1's).  However, any more than 14 straight zeros, and the
repeater may lose sync (since there is no voltage change between
consecutive zeros).  In a T1 carrying voice, 1's can be inserted where
needed to maintain 1's density (since you won't likely notice the
difference), but that is obviously not acceptable in a digital
high-speed data circuit. There are two ways around this:

 1) Use only 56KBps of each 64KBps DS0 channel.  This means seven out
of every eight bits are used.  The eighth bit is set to 1, ensuring
1's density.

 2) Use B8ZS coding.  What this does is replace any 00000000 byte with
10011010 (I don't think thats the correct bit pattern, but it will
suffice for this explanation).  Since no 00000000 streams occur,
sufficient 1's density will be maintained.  But, when the receiver
received 10011010, how does it know if the original byte really was
10011010 or 00000000? When 10011010 is sent in place of 00000000 the
sender deliberately causes a bi-polar violation on the fifth bit.
Normally, 10011010 should be sent (voltage wise) as +00-+0-0 or
-00+-0+0.  If a substitution for 00000000 is occurring, then +00--0+0
or -00++0-0 is sent.  The receiver then detects this bipolar violation
and substitutes 00000000.

 (A third method is to guarantee that your source will never send two
many zeros consecutively.  This is generally not possible with
computer data, which could be anything.)

So, you need to get a circuit from the telephone company that is set
up for B8ZS.  (If the circuit is a direct line connected by repeaters,
then you can probably use B8ZS, as most repeaters don't care about
anything but a voltage transition at least once every 15 bits.  But,
this is rarely the case.  Usually the telco will have some other
equipment in the line that will show an error on the line (becasue of
all the bipolar violations) if it is not configured for B8ZS.

For a fast serial line, framing bits are never needed (the computers
take care of figuring out where a byte starts).  If nothing inbetween
the sender and receiver cares about framing, and you had a CSU that
would support it, then you could use the full 1.544 (most repeaters
don't care about framing, but, for example, a DACS probably would).


Brett    ([e-mail])

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

From: [e-mail] (B.L. Friedman)
Subject: Re: Confused About T1 Bandwiths
Organization: Vpnet Public Access
Date: Tue, 06 Oct 1992 00:16:13 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Matt
Szela) writes:

> I am confused about the T1 usable rates.  My understanding is that the
> T1 lines can come in two speeds:

> Do I need to tell the phone company when I order the circuit that I
> want the 1,536 Kbps line?

Matt,

The short answer is that the telco transmission equipment and your own
terminal equipment are the driving factor.  You must be able to use
the B8ZS zero-code suppresion standard to achieve 64Kbps data rates on
a per channel basis.  See below for the long answer.

The data rate over each channel of the T1 carrier is dependent on a
couple of items, one being the use of "in-band" signalling, and the
other being the zero-code suppresion standard being used.

Each of these uses will occupy/corrupt one data bit in the data stream.

By "in-band", also referred to as "robbed-bit", I am referring to the
trunk supervision signalling protocol (on-hook/off-hook) status.
Every sixth frame, the least significant bit in each channel is used
to indicate the on-hook/off-hook status of the trunk.  This is used
for call setup and release in some applications.  In the US, most
calls probably will be using common channel signaling (CCS) and will
not steal that bit. Also for data calls, (ie. your application), the
robbed bit signaling should not be enabled.

The other place data is lost is the zero-code suppresion standard
being used.  There is a standard called B8ZS (binary 8-bit zero
substitution), which allows for no bit stealing to prevent long
strings of eight zeros.  An older standard, called zero code
suppression for lack of a better term, will corrupt one bit to prevent
a long stream of zeros.

The reason that a long stream of zeros must be prevented is that the
T1 carrier signal is a self-clocking signal, ie. the data carrier also
includes the timing.  This self clocking encoding doesn't work on the
zero bit encoding, but just on one's.  A long stream of zeros can
throw off the clocking of the receiver.

> My understanding also is that if the two CSUs are connected back to
> back via an in-house circuit less then 6,000 long they can indeed get
> the 1,544 Kbps usable bandwith rates since no framing bits are needed.

I can't help you with the in-house application without framing.  Good
luck on your quest.


Regards,

Bruce Friedman

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: What it Costs to Have the President Over
Date: 5 Oct 92 19:28:16 GMT


In <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Charles Mattair) writes:

> Totally off the subject of telecom but Barbara Bush decided to take a
> walk in Hermann Park (the largest park in Houston proper) during the
> Economic Summit a couple of years ago.  They cleared the park.

> [Moderator's Note: Whatever happened to government of the people, by
> the people and for the people?  Surely she could have walked in the
> park, perhaps with an agent or two and been perfectly safe without
> causing all that annoyance to everyone else who was using the park.  PAT]

No, no, you're confusing this with Britain, a constitutional monarchy
with a number of terrorist organizations active, where (until pretty
recently, when the press have been such a bother) it was not at all
rare to see one of the Royals pop out for an afternoon's shopping.


Laird P. Broadfield     [e-mail]    ...{ucsd, nosc}!crash!lairdb

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Living in the Past
Date: Mon 5 Oct 1992 19:53 -0400


It is NET (Nynex).  The problem seems to have been in the cable
between the pole and my house which probably died due to work on the
pole and old age rather than a stolen pair.

My real point about competitive environment is not so much the
question of willingness to cooperate as the limits on innovation.  In
this particular case, does ANY telco offer to provide your own message
during a temporary outage? (A private OOS message)

I realize that I'm begin unfair in that even in competitive
environment there are many "obvious" services that are simply not
available.  While the majority is probably due to failures of
imagination as much as lack of competition some of the problems still
occur in competitive environments where are particular service though
valuable doesn't offer an immediate competitive advantage so gets
little or no priority.

Still, my feeling is that the presence of competition increases the
probability of useful features being made available.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #763
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa25536;
          6 Oct 92 3:19 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA32031
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 6 Oct 1992 00:32:09 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA18114
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 6 Oct 1992 00:32:00 -0500
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1992 00:32:00 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #762

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 6 Oct 92 00:32:06 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 762

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Manufacturers of Phone Patches Wanted (Richard Nash)
    Re: Select Ringing Call Director Needed (Bill Petrisko)
    Re: Two-Line Switching Device (Steven S. Brack)
    Re: 800 Numbers Restricted by NYTel? (Mike Coyne)
    Re: AT&T Public Phone 2000 (Edwin G. Green)
    Re: What's in a NAM (Jim Rees)
    Re: X.25 Connections From Commercial BBS's? (Joel M. Hoffman)
    Re: Network Installation Box Installation Rules (Jim Rees)
    Re: Non-Air Air-Phone (Christopher Wolf)
    Re: Non-Air Air-Phone (Nigel Allen)
    Re: Non-Air Air-Phone (Darren Alex Griffiths)
    Re: LD Transmission Quality Comparison (John Higdon)
    Re: What it Costs to Have the President Over (Dave Niebuhr)
    Re: Cellular Interception in Private Talk (Jon Gefaell)
    Re: Cellular Interception in Private Talk (Jacob DeGlopper)
    Re: My Favorite Intercepts (Claus Tondering)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1992 09:51:25 -0600
From: [e-mail] (Richard Nash)
Subject: Re: Manufacturers of Phone Patches Wanted


> I'm developing a product for stutterers that will process speech when
> talking on the telephone.  To connect the processor to the phone, I

> All I need is audio in and audio out.  My processor unit will have
> volume controls for both.  I suppose I should have something to keep
> the outgoing level below -20dBm, as I understand that the phone
> company doesn't want levels over this.

> Lastly, if I sell more than 20-30 of these, I'll have a complete
> circuitboard designed with a phone patch on it.  If it connects to the
> handset jack, not the phone line, can I avoid FCC Part 68
> certification?  I understand that certification costs about $20,000.
> Will the phone patch circuit be substantially different?

Might I suggest modifying a cheap telephone which could have a couple
of RCA or similar jacks mounted onto it?  Find someone locally who
knows how to properly piggy-back onto the network components to gain
access to the correct signals.

I had performed this operation on a friend's Meritor (tm) keyset phone
he uses in his recording studio business.  Amazingly, the trans-hybrid
loss was phenomenaly good. Signals could be fed from the studio
microphone, into the phones' line, and at the same time, the studio
performer could hear the distant telephone user via the return path.
No feedback!  Total parts count = four. I used two non-polarized 2
mf., capacitors and two bantam jacks (so that the console patch bay
patch-cords could be utilised).


Richard Nash    Edmonton, Alberta Canada T6K 0E8
UUCP:        trickie![e-mail]

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

Subject: Re: Select Ringing Call Director Needed
From: [e-mail] (William Petrisko)
Date: 5 Oct 92 04:07:57 MST
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: University of Arizona, College of Engineering and Mines, Tucson


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

> I'm looking for a call director that can direct a call to various
> devices based on selective ringing. I'd like to find a device that can
> attach three or four devices. Sources?

MISCO now has a unit that will do just that.  It is called the Ring
Decipher (misco part #fl-3622).  The only other identification in the
ad is "ASAP RD-4000".  I'd like to know who makes it, and alternate
sources.  Supposedly, it will provide a standard ring signal on any
one of the four outputs determined by the incoming ring pattern.
Price $99.


bill petrisko            [e-mail]
aka n7lwo   ...!uunet!4gen!warlok!gargle!omnisec!thumper!bill

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

Date: 05 Oct 1992 11:59:47 -0400 (EDT)
From: [e-mail] (Steven S. Brack)
Subject: Re: Two-Line Switching Device


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

> I think that Radio Shack used to and might still sell a device
> designed for sharing an answering machine on two lines.

RS also sells a sharp-looking answering machine that answers two
lines.  I haven't used it myself, but it certainly *looks* better than
the normal "stuff" RS puts out in the consumer end of their operation.


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]
Subject: Re: 800 Numbers Restricted by NYTel?
Date: 5 Oct 92 16:35:20 GMT
Organization: The University of Texas at Austin


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

> Blocking 800 is sometimes done for fraud prevention.  One example is
> street drug dealers.  They often use payphones as their "office
> phones."  Clients usually contact their dealers through a pager, and
> paging companies often use 800 numbers.  This may not be a big issue
> any longer, since most pagers display the caller info.  Payphones in
> high crime areas often have both calling card blocked, and 800
> blocked, about the only thing callers can do is to drop in coins or
> call collect.

Laird P. Broadfield expresses confusion at this.

I am confused too.  Is this not clearly in violation of the alleged[1]
public policy of universal access.  I might be able to see blocking
specific numbers where there is a repeated problem, but blocking 800
and calling card is not allowable.


[e-mail]:

[1] allegation:  A lie that has attained the dignity of age.  Art Buchwald

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

Date: Mon,  5 Oct 92 08:41:27 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Edwin G Green)
Subject: Re: AT&T Public Phone 2000
Organization: AT&T


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

> You say "when equipped with a keyboard" ... are there installations
> that do not include keyboards?  What might be the rationale?  (I have
> only seen the keyboard-equipped model, and not in Minnesota.)

Yes, there are installations that do not include keyboards.  Which
features are turned on or provided in each installation is dictated by
the agent (airport authority, hotel, airline, etc.) and local
regulatory agencies.  I guess some agents just want a fancy
credit-card phone and are uninterested in the keyboard and TTD
capabilities.

If you are interested, I can provide you with the locations of MN
installations (if any exist).  (I suggest we use email since specific
information like that is probably of limited interest to the rest of
this group.).


Edwin G. Green    AT&T Bell Laboratories     Indianapolis, Indiana, USA
INH 1E-506        17-845-3659      [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Jim Rees)
Subject: Re: What's in a NAM
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: University of Michigan CITI
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1992 16:14:01 GMT


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

> All one has to do to change NAMs is to enter the five-digit system ID
> and ten-digit phone number for the new NAM, then press Func-6.  The
> new NAM will be in effect until it is changed.  This works an
> unlimited number of times.

I wonder what Audiovox does about the "access overload class,"
"Systems Station class mark," and "Systems group ID mark" fields that
are normally part of a NAM?  These fields are normally programmed by
the dealer when a phone is put on service.

The Station Class Mark depends on the phone, not the system, and will
normally be the same for every NAM in a given phone.  SCM sets the max
number of channels (666 vs. 832), max power (.6, 1.2, 3), and VOX
enable (which you can always turn off if you don't know whether the
system supports it or not).

The Group ID Mark gives the significant bit mask for the system id.
If you set it too big, your phone will think it's home when it's
really roaming, and if you set it too small, it will be the other way
around.  I'm not sure what the results will be in actual use if you
set it wrong but it's probably not catastrophic.

The Access Overload Class is assigned by the service provider.  I
think you can just pick one at random and your phone will still work,
although the provider may not be happy (if the provider even
understands what this is for, which is not likely).

I would also be concerned about setting the MIN Mark and the local use
bit correctly.

The limits on user NAM programming are a crock designed to protect
lazy cell service providers.  A cell system should never give service
to a phone it doesn't know, and ESNs should never be sent in the clear
over the air.  Rather than implement real security, the cellular
industry tries to legislate the problem away, then bills the
legitimate users for losses due to abuse.  They've taken the same
morally bankrupt approach to eavesdropping.  Rather than provide a
secure channel, they lobby for laws making it illegal to listen.
They're trying to shirk their responsibilities as common carriers
rather than solve the problem.

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

From: [e-mail] (Joel M. Hoffman)
Subject: Re: X.25 Connections From Commercial BBS's?
Organization: University of Maryland, College Park
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1992 17:03:28 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> Joseph.Bergstein@p501.f544.
n109.z1.fidonet.org (Joseph Bergstein) writes:

> Joel M. Hoffman asks:

>> Does anyone know if there are commercial BBS's (like CompuServe,
>> etc.that provide outgoing X.25 connections?

> What do you mean by outgoing X.25 connection?  Do you mean X.25
> outdial service? Check with Compuserve, BT Tymnet, and Sprint
> (Telenet), and possibly GE.

Yes, that's what I mean.  And CompuServe doesn't offer it.


Joel

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

From: [e-mail] (Jim Rees)
Subject: Re: Network Installation Box Installation Rules
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: University of Michigan CITI
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1992 16:25:23 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, David <[e-mail].
com> writes:

> I just had a second phone line installed in my home, and the
> Network Interface Box was installed on the outside of the house.  This
> strikes me as a problem, since it leaves the box open to weather,
> vandalism, and theft of service.

Anyone who taps into my network interface box (which is unlocked) had
better have an ISDN set capable of operating on the U interface.

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

From: [e-mail] (CHRISTOPHER WOLF)
Subject: Re: Non-Air Air-Phones
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 92 13:08:50 EDT


Many seem to think that the phones are cellular, but I thought the
range of cellular was only a few miles with many towers.  How do they
get the signal all the way across Lake Michigan, some 60-80 odd miles?


Christopher Wolf    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Non-Air Air-Phone
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 92 1:27:14 EDT


In Volume 12, Issue 753, Christopher Wolf ([e-mail]) wrote:

> When I took the ferry across Lake Michigan from MI to WI this summer,
> there was a phone or two on board that looked like the phones on
> air-planes.

> How does this work being only 100ft off the ground, in the middle
> of a lake?

On the ferries owned by the British Columbia government that operate
between Victoria and Vancouver, there are pay phones of two kinds:
conventional radio-telephones operated by the British Columbia
Telephone Company (B.C. Tel, half-owned by GTE Corporation), and
cellular pay phones, operated by B.C. Cellular, which I believe is a
subsidiary of B.C. Tel.

I think that the charge for calls from the cellular phone was about $1
(Canadian) a minute a year ago. I didn't try it out.


Nigel Allen      [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Darren Alex Griffiths)
Subject: Re: Non-Air Air-Phone
Organization: Open Systems Solutions Inc.
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1992 20:25:35 GMT


[e-mail] (CHRISTOPHER WOLF) writes:

> When I took the ferry across Lake Michigan from MI to WI this summer,
> there was a phone or two on board that looked like the phones on
> air-planes.

> How does this work being only 100ft off the ground, in the middle of a
> lake?

They have phones similar to this on the San Francisco -- Oakland
ferries.  In our case they are simply cellular phones with credit card
attachments.  BTW, the most civilized way to get home in the evening
is a quiet ride across the bay with glass of wine and a slow breeze.
It sure beats the Bay Bridge during rush hour, but don't tell anyone
or it will get to crowded on the boat.


Cheers,

Darren Alex Griffiths          [e-mail]
Open Systems Solutions Inc.    [phone] x139
Fujitsu Ltd.                   Fax: [phone]
6121 Hollis Street       Emeryville, CA 94608-2092

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

Date: Mon, 5 Oct 92 11:07 PDT
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: LD Transmission Quality Comparison


[e-mail] writes:

> I have used MCI for everything, since before the breakup, and have
> never had any problems with it.  I wouldn't be surprised if the people
> with problems are calling to or from some rural location that only
> AT&T has wired yet.

I find PEP connections over MCI to suffer a substantial loss in
throughput. Granted, many including myself consider San Jose
(California, for those outside the state) to be a cow town (formerly a
One Horse town). The other parties are in places such as Los Angeles
(California) and San Diego (California). I understand that LA is
coming right along in its efforts to become a big town.


John Higdon  |   P. O. Box 7648   |   [phone]     |       FAX:
[e-mail] | San Jose, CA 95150 | 10288 0 700 FOR-A-MOO | [phone]

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

Date: Mon, 5 Oct 92 15:32:01 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Dave Niebuhr)
Subject: Re: What it Costs to Have the President Over


In TELECOM Digest Volume 12 : Issue 760 Clark <[e-mail]>
writes:

> [e-mail] (Charles Mattair) writes:

>> Totally off the subject of telecom but Barbara Bush decided to take a
>> walk in Hermann Park (the largest park in Houston proper) during the
>> Economic Summit a couple of years ago.  They cleared the park.

> What has happened is that the secret service has totally taken over
> the presidential security detail.

The way I think that this happened is that the Treasury Department was
assigned the task of protecting the President after one was assassin-
ated (sp) and the Secret Service was the branch of that department
selected for the job.

This was in the late 1800s and the job has expanded to the point that
the the President, his immediate family, the Vice-President and his
family and any Presidential candidates get this protection via a law
or executive order signed by signed by the late President Lyndon
Johnson after the assassination of Senator Robert Kennnedy of New York
in 1968.


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


[Moderator's Note: Yeah, we know how it was set up, but I still think
there is a massive overkill.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Jon Gefaell (KD4CQY))
Subject: Re: Cellular Interception in Private Talk
Organization: The Turing Project, Charlottesville Virginia.
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1992 21:15:05 GMT

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Louis A. Mamakos) writes:

>> [Moderator's Note: We have touched upon this several times recently.
>> Cellular calls are quite easy to intercept on a scanning radio which
>> covers the 800 mh range of frequencies. The 'technical problems'
>> consist of sometimes having to make a small modification in the radio
>> itself. Conversations cannot easily be followed between cells.   PAT]

> Why assert that conversations cannot easily be followed between cells?
> It is not as if the mechanism for handoffs is secret; it is done in
> band and someone with sufficient motivation should easily be able to
> decode and interpret this information.  While its true that Joe Blow
> with a scanner won't be able to, it is by no means difficult enough to
> to give anyone a sense of security.

> [Moderator's Note: But by and large it is Joe Blow with his scanner
> who causes the privacy violations of cell phone users. Therefore, if
> Joe Blow can't do to, for all practical purposes it can't be done.
> Naturally, spies and other persons specially trained in surveillance
> can get around the complications, but Joe Blow isn't among them.  PAT]

I tried to respond the original 'Moderator's Note' above, but it
didn't make it past the moderation point. I'll state it again, since
it needs clarification. Joe Blow CAN and DOES intercept and TRACK cell
phone conversations between cells. The allocation of frequencies among
cells allows this to be a relatively simple operation.

Trust me, I do it all the time ... (I mean, I _could_ do it all the
time, I'd never actually break a law ...)

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

From: [e-mail] (Jacob DeGlopper)
Subject: Re: Cellular Interception in Private Talk
Date: 5 Oct 1992 17:36:52 GMT
Organization: Dept. of Electrical Engineering, CWRU, Cleve. OH


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Louis A. Mamakos) writes:

> Why assert that conversations cannot easily be followed between cells?
> It is not as if the mechanism for handoffs is secret; it is done in
> band and someone with sufficient motivation should easily be able to
> decode and interpret this information.  While its true that Joe Blow
> with a scanner won't be able to, it is by no means difficult enough to
> to give anyone a sense of security.

Indeed, "someone" makes a suitcase for just this purpose.  The version
I saw contains five AR-2500 scanners controlled by a laptop computer;
the laptop monitors the control channels and switches the others to
recieve a desired conversation as it moves around.  The price tag for
the system was in the neighborhood of $10,000.


   Jacob DeGlopper, EMT-A, Wheaton (MD) Volunteer Rescue Squad
      -- CWRU Biomedical Engineering - [e-mail] --

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

From: [e-mail] (Claus Tondering)
Subject: Re: My Favorite Intercepts
Organization: Dansk Data Elektronik A/S
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1992 08:09:10 GMT


A British friend of mine had this experience once he visited
Washington, DC:

He was trying to make a phone call, but being unacquainted with the US
telephone system, he wasn't aware that he was supposed to dial an
initial 1 in front of the area code. The phone responded with a
recording saying: "You have a problem. Please replace the receiver and
dial again."

This offended him somewhat, because in his particular dialect of
English, "You have a problem" implies something like: "Try using a
deodorant!"


Claus Tondering    Email: [e-mail]
Dansk Data Elektronik A/S, Herlev, Denmark


[Moderator's Note: But at least the recording did not say something
like 'please check your deodorant and spray again, or ask your former
friends for assistance ... this is a recording  PU-U2.   :)   PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #762
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa26881;
          6 Oct 92 4:11 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA23172
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 6 Oct 1992 01:53:17 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA17710
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 6 Oct 1992 01:53:07 -0500
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1992 01:53:07 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #764

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 6 Oct 92 01:53:00 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 764

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: A Good Way to Play a Micro Tape Over the Phone? (Jack Decker)
    Re: The Smallest US Telephone Company (Jack Decker)
    Re: What Does a DS-3 Circuit Terminate at? (Karl Denninger)
    Re: LD Transmission Quality Comparison (Greg Andrews)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 5 Oct 92 16:20:19 CST
From: Jack Decker <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: A Good Way to Play a Micro Tape Over the Phone?


In message <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Gail  M. Hall) wrote:

> Here is the situation.  I have a call-in dictation system that doctors
> can use to call in to dictate their reports for me to type.

> However, some doctors still like to use their little dictating
> machines that they can carry in their pockets and would like their
> secretaries to play the tape over the phone into my system.

> Normally this is a very unsatisfactory process because the machine
> they use is very "low-fi" and then with the relatively low fi from the
> phone line, what we end up with is a mess.

Audio-to-audio coupling (holding the speaker of the recorder to the
telephone microphone) is almost guaranteed to produce poor results.

> I have seen those little gadgets in stores that can attach to the
> phone line and that you can attach a recorder to to record a
> conversation over the phone.  What I am wondering is:

> 1.  Can you reverse that little gadget to go through the phone line
> by PLAYing it instead of on record to play the tape from the office
> in order to avoid room noise, etc.?

Only maybe.  Depends on the circuitry inside the unit.  Try plugging
the microphone plug into the earphone/speaker output on the recorder,
and adjust the volume while you listen in on another phone on the
line.  If you can hear the audio clearly, it should work.  When
sending down the line, the audio you hear on your end should be
slightly ABOVE normal conversational volume (the same as when someone
else is talking on an extension phone on your line ... normally, you
hear them at a much louder volume than the person on the other end of
the call).

> 2.  If not, is there somewhere an INEXPENSIVE gadget that will do the
> same thing?  My dictation system dealer does not know of such a
> product.  They make the little hand-held machines, the transcribers,
> and the phone-in dictation systems, but not a thing like I am
> interested in.

> This would need to be an inexpensive item.  Doctors are not going to
> want to pay big bucks for this as they have enough big bucks expenses
> to worry about.

Yeah, those tennis club memberships and greens fees aren't cheap!  :-)

(My apologies if you work for some good doctors.  At this point, I
hold doctors as a class in only slightly higher esteem than
attornies ... but there is a difference ... there ARE a few good
DOCTORS still around.)  :-)

Seriously, here is a circuit I've used with good results, for both
recording AND playback of tapes from/to the phone line:

      +-------+---------)||(------------||----------> phone line
      |       |         )||(          .1 uf
      |   .02 =   8 ohm )||( Hi Z
      |    uf |         )||(          .1 uf
  o---O-------+---------)||(------------||----------> phone line
  plug               transformer

Parts List (and explanation):

plug - plug to fit the earphone/speaker and/or microphone jacks on
     recorder
 .02 uf capacitor, any available voltage... helps eliminate radio
     frequency noise (from nearby transmitters, floursecent lights,
     etc.) from the recording.  Probably not necessary on playback only
     unit.
 .1 uf capacitors (2) - prevent DC from the phone line from saturating
     the transformer.  Mylar capacitors are recommended, and should be
     rated at 200 volts or higher.  Higher values (e.g. .5 uf or even 1
     uf) are probably even better as long as the voltage rating is high
     enough AND the capacitors are non-polarized (don't use
     electrolytics!).  However, you don't want to go TOO high or you
     may drain off so much of the audio signal that you'll be unable to
     hear on the phone.
Audio transformer - one side is 8 ohm (typical impedence of a speaker)
     and the other side is a higher impedence.  The unit I used came
     out of an old tube-type television set and I believe had an
     impedence of 10K or so on the Hi-Z side, but I imagine other high
     values might work.  If you have an old audio transformer lying
     around and you know which side drove the speaker, by all means try
     it (the speaker side should be the Lo-Z side).  Note that you
     DON'T want to try to the phone line if you're using this as a
     recording device, since matching the phone line would cause a loss
     in audio level on your telephone.  HOWEVER, if you are using the
     unit for PLAYBACK ONLY, then you may want to try making the Hi-Z
     side of the transformer 600 ohms and eliminating the two .1
     capacitors...  this should allow the user to hang up the phone
     while playing back the tapes.

Electronic purists will probably be having fits at my callous
disregard to impedence matching, but all I can say is that the unit as
pictured has worked very well for me in the past!  If you don't feel
you have the expertise to build one, ask any ham radio operator or
electronics wizard you know for help ... this should be a pretty easy
circuit to construct for anyone who knows how to handle a soldering
iron (I was building stuff more complicated than this when I was 12
years old!).

> When doctors can use the phone my setup works very nice.  There are
> some, though, that would really rather use their hand-held machine and
> let the secretary send the whole tape via phone at one time.

That should not be a problem as long as they use some sort of direct
connection to the phone line.

By the way, if you want to get REALLY cheap and dirty, and can't find
anyone to build the above circuit, and have phones where the
mouthpiece can be unscrewed and the tape recorders are BATTERY
OPERATED (very important!  You don't want them connected to the AC
power line if you try this!), you could go to Radio Shack and get a
"patch cord" with one end that has a plug that fits the
speaker/earphone output on the recorders, and the other end with two
alligator clips.

Try plugging the patch cord into the recorder, unscrew the phone
mouthpiece, and clip the alligator clips across the exposed microphone
contacts.  Then adjust the volume as required by listening to the
earpiece (in this case you're looking for a normal volume level).  If
THAT doesn't produce good results, you could also try unscrewing the
EARPIECE and clipping across the two screw terminals on the earpiece
and see if that sounds any better.  But even if it works, eventually
you're going to want to find a better method of injecting the audio
into the phone line.

DISCLAIMER: Since none of the suggestions involve FCC registered
equipment, I will not even attempt to guarantee that the above advice
is both legal and does not violate telephone company tariffs.  So,
either try these suggestions on a private phone system, or understand
that some phone companies might not care for you trying these things
on their lines.  Also, be aware that shoving excessive audio signal
down the line could cause crosstalk and other undesirable effects, so
use only a high enough volume setting to produce a comfortable
listening level.


Jack Decker    [e-mail]    FidoNet 1:154/8

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

Date: Mon, 5 Oct 92 16:23:00 CST
From: Jack Decker <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: The Smallest US Telephone Company


In message <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Gabe M Wiener) wrote:

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

>> the smallest phone company however. There is (or was) a guy in
>> Colorado who owned a telco with *eight* subscribers.

> How does he qualify as a telco per se?  How does this differ from any
> organization that buys its own PBX?  Or is the distinction that any
> call outside of the local equipment is long-distance?

One distinction (at least in Michigan) is that you have to get a
license from the Public Service Commission to be a phone company, and
one of the documents you have to file is a map or geographic
description of your exchange boundaries.  An organization that has its
own PBX most likely will already be within the service area of a
licensed carrier, and thus is not eligible to form their own phone
company (at least until the law is changed to allow local competition).

Now, if you are with a company that really wants to be its own local
exchange carrier, come up to East Lake in Michigan's beautiful Upper
Peninsula.  You'll probably be required to provide local service to
the 30 or 40 residents that want phone service in the area, but I can
guarantee you that no one will object to you starting a local phone
company there (East Lake is like an albatross around the neck of the
PSC in this state ... it's a problem that won't go away!).  Only one
problem, you may have difficulty acquiring enough privately owned land
for your operation since most of the land is national forest.

> Incidentally, I've always wondered ... hypothetical: someone moves out
> to the middle of nowhere ... buys switch and hooks up 30 odd
> subscribers to old used SxS ... how does he go about getting long
> distance connectivity?

Ah, there's the rub!  Used to be you just went to the nearest major
carrier (usually the nearby Bell or GTE company) and they were more
than happy to acquire new customers.  Now, however, Bell actually
wants money to provide this connectivity.  For providing long distance
service to East Lake (a distance of about 10 to 15 miles from their
nearest exchange ... and their fiber optic toll cable actually runs
THROUGH the affected area), they wanted over $100,000.  Were it not
for that, the folks in East Lake might have phone service today.

(One other wrinkle on this story: I found out a couple months ago that
GTE North purchased a $2 million wireless rural system to provide
service to some unserved customers in their territory, that would also
have been capable of serving the folks in East Lake.  Only thing is,
East Lake is only about 40 miles or so from the Canadian border, and
nobody at GTE bothered to get the necessary approval from the Canadian
government (required by some treaty) before purchasing the system.  I
hear they've put in the application now, but if the Canadian
government turns thumbs down, GTE just bought a $2 million boat
anchor, for all practical purposes.  PLEASE NOTE that I got this info
secondhand from a source at the PSC, so please don't ask me for any
more details on this, and don't quote it as absolute fact to anyone
else without checking the details first).

> [Moderator's Note: I think he qualifies as a telco instead of a 'PBX'
> because he has several users who are not associated with each other
> through any common affinity group, i.e. not all of the same employer;
> not all of the same residential premises, etc. To get long distance
> service he cuts a deal with the various carriers. That is how it is
> done now days. Anyone can be a telco; anyone can be an LD carrier.  PAT]

I'd still like to know if there is ANY place in the United States
where there is REAL competition for local dial tone for RESIDENTIAL
customers.  If there is no such place, then I would say that the
statement that "anyone can be a telco" rather oversimplifies the true
situation.


Jack Decker   [e-mail]    FidoNet 1:154/8

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

From: [e-mail] (Karl Denninger)
Subject: Re: What Does a DS-3 Circuit Terminate at?
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1992 01:59:21 GMT
Organization: Macro Computer Solutions, Inc., Chicago, IL


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Maxime
Taksar) writes:

> In article <[e-mail]>, Peter M. Weiss <PMW1@psuvm.
> psu.edu> writes:

>> According to the _Link Letter_ March/April 1992 - Vol. 5 No.1, lead
>> article "T3 Network Nears Full Production":

>>       "Merit obtains NSFNET backbone services from ANS which
>>       provides a major national network that operates at T3 speeds
>>       using circuits provided by MCI and central networking
>>       technology based on the IBM RS/6000 (TM)."

> I stand corrected.  Aparently my information is outdated and ANS has
> now upgraded to rs/6000s.  In any case, I'm certainly glad to hear it!

Considering that CISCO can now terminate T3s with HSSI interfaces, are
you >sure< you are glad of that?

I have to wonder which is the better box for this application.  It
would be interesting to see some comparative statistics in terms of
backplane capacity, packet switch speeds, latency, etc.


Karl Denninger ([e-mail], <well-connected>!ddsw1!karl)
Data Line: [[phone]] Anon. arch. (nuucp) 00:00-06:00 C[SD]T
Request file: /u/public/sources/DIRECTORY/README for instructions

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

From: [e-mail] (Greg Andrews)
Subject: Re: LD Transmission Quality Comparison
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1992 06:06:36 GMT


Looks like I've fallen behind in my TELECOM Digest reading.  Apologies
for responding to a message posted so many days ago ...

[e-mail] recently wrote:

> [e-mail] (John R Ruckstuhl Jr) writes:

>> Can I safely extrapolate -- AT&T LD quality is superior ?

> Regarding modem communications, apparently the answer is 'yes'. I have
> six modems that are communicating with modems around the country and
> occasionally overseas around the clock. Each day I send and receive
> tens of megabytes over long distance circuits.

> Every so often, I find that a better rate can be had from MCI or from
> Sprint by using some plan or another. Each time I have started routing
> calls over anyone other than AT&T, all hell breaks loose. I find
> failed conversations aplenty. UUCP sends me messages right and left
> peppered with 'LOGIN FAILED' or 'CONVERSATION FAILED' or 'LOST LINE'.
> Frequently, throughput falls from 1400 CPS to something like 300-400
> CPS. And invariably, my overall bill goes WAY up. Why? First there is
> the lower throughput. Then there are the billing errors.

I can't speak to the billing errors, but the modem symptoms you
describe seem to this Telebit technician like a well-known interaction
between Telebit's PEP modulation and the echo cancellers used my MCI,
Sprint, and others.

When this problem first appeared, the first conclusion everyone drew
was that the line was bad.  However, the line was perfectly functional
and of high quality, as Telebit's own tests confirmed by holding the
line open and switching the modems to a V.32 connection.  The modems
were able to hold the line effortlessly, even with a sensitive
modulation like V.32, on a line that caused PEP to constantly retrain
until the modems gave up.

Rather than poor quality, the problem was being caused by the echo
cancellers interfering with the modem transmissions.  When the modems
stopped sending data to train themselves to the line conditions, the
echo cancellers would turn themselves off.  The difference in the
modem 'conversation' between data transfer mode and training mode was
enough for the echo cancellers to change their behavior.  The modems
saw an undisturbed line when they trained, so they couldn't adapt.
Why didn't AT&T lines do this?  They used different brands of echo
cancellers.  (Perhaps because their network hadn't used fiber optics
until very recently?)

Telebit worked with the engineers from a couple of the echo canceller
manufacturers for several months.  Eventually a solution was found
where the modems would be able to keep the echo cancellers disabled.
The modem firmware was updated to add the 'echo canceller mods'
starting with version 7.00 (BC7.00, GE7.00, and GF7.00, though the
T1000 uses FA2.10).

In most cases, the modems on both ends of the phone line needed the
new firmware, though a few calls could get by with just one.
Unfortunately, a compatibility issue with an old version of
TrailBlazer Plus firmware caused many people to turn off the echo
canceller mods by setting S120=16.

If your modem or the other modem has older firmware, or has the echo
canceller mods turned off, you could have been experiencing this
problem when you used Sprint or MCI.

The point I've been trying to make is that your connection troubles
might have been caused by this interaction and not by the quality of
the LD carrier.  It would be unfair to criticize the LD carrier
because the original PEP modems couldn't keep their echo cancellers
off the line.


Greg Andrews   UUCP: {amdahl,claris}!netcom!gerg   Internet: [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #764
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa08913;
          7 Oct 92 3:28 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA12141
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 7 Oct 1992 01:27:00 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA08950
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 7 Oct 1992 01:26:50 -0500
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 01:26:50 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #765

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 7 Oct 92 01:26:39 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 765

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Happy With MCI (Was Unhappy With the AT&T Attitude) (Paulo Santos)
    Health Costs and Telecommunications (J. Philip Miller)
    Caller-ID Boxes (Home Use) Information Request (Chris M. Beery)
    Caller-ID in Massachusetts, Again (John R. Levine)
    And NOW, For a Limited Time Only, Caller-ID in Denver (Shing P. Benson)
    Host Controlled Data Switches Wanted (Thomas E. Lowe)
    Loudness (Jack Winslade)
    Potential Telescamming at the OC Swap Meet (Robert L. McMillin)
    College Phone System (Jeff Dubin)
    Help With BCH Sought For BCH Codes (William Y. Lai)
    dBm0. dBmr? (Terence Cross)
    GTE Addresses on Outgoing Email (David Lesher)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Paulo Santos)
Subject: Happy With MCI (Was Unhappy With the AT&T Attitude)
Organization: Georgia Institute of Technology
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1992 17:38:35 GMT


John's story of how AT&T handled a good customer (John himself) who
was having a problem involving Pac*Bell leads to my story of an
average MCI residential customer (myself) having a problem with
Southern Bell.  Only MCI provided a much better service to me than
AT&T did to John.

My residential line has dial-1 service from AT&T.  On Saturday, Oct.
3rd, at about 11:20 p.m., I attempted to place a direct-dialed call
from home [that's (404) 233-xxxx, Atlanta, Georgia] to (407) 846-xxxx
(Kissimmee, Florida) on MCI by dialing the 10222 access code.  I could
not get through, and I was getting a fast busy.  I made many other
attempts, including various combinations of 10xxx-[0|1]-407-xxx-xxxx.
Always the same result.  By then I was pretty sure that Southern Bell
was blocking all 10xxx calls from my exchange to area code 407.  I
tried 10xxx calls to a couple other area codes and got through just
fine.  I tried calling area code 407 on AT&T and it worked too.

So I decided to call Southern Bell and complain.  Their answer was
always that it was a long distance problem, and the most they would do
would be connect me to the long distance operator of my choice.  I
called Southern Bell Repair at 611 and reported the problem, but was
told repeatedly by the repair droid that it was not a Southern Bell
problem.  I knew it was a problem with Southern Bell involving the
tables in (404) 233, but in the middle of a Saturday might there was no
one technically competent to understand it.

As I was getting nowhere with Southern Bell, I decided to give MCI the
opportunity to handle the problem.  I called customer service.  After
explaining the problem, the representative realized that I knew what I
was talking about and connected me to their technical folks in
Atlanta.  The technical person (Peter) three-way called to the
Southern Bell terminal, but obviously there was no answer.  They would
not be open until 8 a.m. on Monday.

At 8:15 Monday morning, an MCI tech (Laurie) called me to find out if
I was still having the problem.  Obviously I was, as Southern Bell
never did anything about it.  She said she would press Southern Bell
to solve it, and left her number and extension.  She kept me informed
of the progress throughout the day.  At 3:50 p.m.  she called to say
that Southern Bell had finally fixed the problem.  It was a
translation problem in the local exchange -- as anticipated.  She
thanked me for notifying MCI of the problem, and invited me to call
her number directly if I ever had any technical problems involving
MCI.

This is what I call great technical service from MCI.  Even though it
was not their problem, they pursued it with Southern Bell and kept me
informed all along.  Kudos for MCI.

At 5:30 p.m., some clueless person from Southern Bell called "We
understand you are experiencing some problem, but we can't understand
what it is.  Would you care to tell us what the problem is?".  Right.


Paulo Santos   Internet: [e-mail]
Georgia Tech, College of Computing   uucp: ...!gatech!cc!pas
Atlanta GA 30332-0280, U.S.A.        Voice: [phone]


[Moderator's Note: This is precisely the same problem I experienced
with a call to a place in Wisconsin a few months ago. Finally someone
from AT&T had to lean hard on Illinois Bell to get them to do
anything.  He told me frankly that part of his job involved getting
telcos to correct these things as they were discovered, and " ... with
Illinois Bell, they will *always* argue and find reasons not to do
what I tell them ... it would take them less time to fix something
than they spend arguing with me about why it is not their problem ..."
And about the same time, IBT payphones had one rate for calls to Cell
One phones and another rate (cheaper!) to Ameritech phones. That also
got fixed after asking several times.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (J. Philip Miller)
Subject: Health Costs and Telecommunications
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 92 23:11:42 CDT


The following was posted to several health related lists - but I
thought that the readers here might be interested in the study.
Discussion should probably be continued on other lists, not here.


phil

 Forwarded message:
 From: [e-mail]

TELECOMS: A HEALTH CARE REMEDY?

Soaring US health care costs can be reduced by more than $36 billion
using telecommunications, according to a report by Arthur D. Little
Inc., commissioned by eight major US telecoms companies.

The study found that electronic management and transport of patient
information offers the greatest savings in terms of money and time.
Among these applications are home-based terminal systems for patients
to transmit self-administered test results such as blood pressure over
the telephone to a physician, reducing trips to and lenght of stay at
hospitals. The transmission of fixed images such as X-rays between
remote locations and hospitals has also been effective.

Nynex Corp., for example, has provided Massachussetts General Hospital
with a fiber optic network for quick transfer of images and records
among sites in three Massachussetts cities. Finally, the electronic
management of patient data reduces the number of of errors and
tracking of files associated with manually written records.

Another health care-telecoms solution is electronics claims processing
(CWI, 10 Aug). More than four billion claims are submitted annually.
By automating the process, according to the Arthur D. Little report,
patients are reimbursed more quickly than with paper claims filed by
mail. Likewise, electronic data links between hospitals and suppliers
can speed the inventory process. Electronic data interchange reduces
the amount of time spent placing and expediting orders for hospital
supplies by providing electronic purchase orders, confirmations,
invoices, fund transfers, and price and sales catalogs.

Videoconferencing has also been increasingly used, specifically for
remote consultations and education, according to the report.  For
example, the Medical College of Georgia is using a broadband network
service provided by Bell-South Corp. to allow specialists at its
teaching hospital in Augusta, GA, to examine patients 130 miles away
with biomedical telemetry devices, such as electronic stethoscopes and
digitized X-rays, and interactive video equiment.


(Transcribed from Communications Week International, Issue 91,
August 1992 (C) 1992 CWI Inc.)

 FROM: [e-mail]
 POSTED TO: MEDINF-L, MEDNETS, HSPNET-L, VETINFO, NRSING-L, SBIS-L
           COCAMED

 *** PLEASE DO NOT CROSS-POST TO THESE LISTS ***


     J. Philip Miller, Professor, Division of Biostatistics, Box 8067
     Washington University Medical School, St. Louis MO 63110
     [e-mail] - Internet  [phone] [362-2694(FAX)]

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

From: [e-mail] (Chris M. Beery)
Subject: Caller-ID Boxes (Home Use) Information Request
Organization: INTERACTIVE SYSTEMS CORPORATION - BOULDER
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1992 15:03:01 GMT


I am interested in finding out some info on Caller_ID boxes as the
feature is soon to be offered in the Denver, CO area.

My primary question is: Does any manufacturer make one that prints the
data on a spool of paper rather than use an LCD display? (A combination
would also be fine).

Alternatively, I'd like to know what type of stores carry these
devices (of any style).

Thanks for the info in advance.


Chris   [e-mail]      INTERACTIVE Systems Corporation   A Kodak Company

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

Subject: Caller-ID in Massachusetts, Again
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 92 12:13:23 EDT
From: John R. Levine <[e-mail]>


While talking to a nice lady at New England Tel about residential ISDN
this morning, she mentioned that NET has re-filed for calling number
delivery, but didn't know what blocking options were to be offered.
Does anyone else have the details?

She was remarkably well-informed -- "Is the interface 2B1Q?"  "No,
your CO is still just AMI but should be equipped for 2B1Q next year."
The basic rate is just $8/month above POTS, which includes both B
channels equipped for voice, with the same rates as for POTS calling,
i.e., free local calls.  Data is $5/month extra and all calls are
charged at the message rate, 1.6 cents/minute plus 1 cent per call.

I told her that like everyone else I'd probably disguise my data as
voice, live with 56KB and occasional dropped frames, and save big
bucks.  She said that the tarriff said I wasn't supposed to do that
but agreed there was no way they could tell.


Regards,

John Levine, comp.compilers moderator
[e-mail] or {spdcc|ima|world}!iecc!johnl

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

From: [e-mail] (SHING PUI-SHUM BENSON)
Subject: And NOW, For a Limited Time Only, Caller-ID in Denver)
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 00:21:28 GMT


You may not know, but Denver's Public Utilities Commision (PUC --
often known as PUCK for no other reason than a neat name) did NOT want
US West to install Caller ID in the Denver metro area due to too many
people who insisted that it was an invasion of privacy, an annoyance,
and just another option to make people pay more on their bills.
Denver's PUC was really serious about not letting this go through, but
it seems they and US West have come to an agree- ment.  From what I
hear, USW will install CID temporarily, and offer free CID blocking to
those who ask for it before it's up and running.  Below are two briefs
from the newspaper:


{Rocky Mountain News}
'Corporate Clips' pg 138
Sun., Oct. 4, 1992

U S West Inc.

The Colorado Public Utilities Commision last week approved a
compromise agreement between U S West and the Colorado Consumer
Counsel that will allow in Denver within 90 days.  U S West said
that consumers will have 90 days to apply for free line blocking,
which prevents outgoing calls being monitored by the Caller ID
service.

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

{Rocky Mountain News}
'Colorado Report' pg 138
Sun., Oct. 4, 1992

   U S West's controversial Caller ID service Wednesday got the
go-ahead for the Denver metro area.

   The Colorado Public Utilities Commision approved a compromise
agreement that will bring Caller ID -- which lets people know who's
calling them -- to Denver on a trial basis in 60 to 90 days.

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

And what *I* want to know is, if I buy a decoder and US West kills
CID, do I get my money back?  (Actually, I won't buy from USW, but the
thought is still there for other customers ...)


Shing


[Moderator's Note: Don't worry ... they won't kill it.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (thomas.e.lowe)
Subject: Host Controlled Data Switches Wanted
Organization: AT&T
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1992 23:41:20 GMT


I am looking for a potentially large data switch that will allow me to
have a host computer controlling everything it does.  The host would
be able to tell the switch to connect port X to port Y, then later
connect port X to port Z.  Of course the different ports might have
different parameters such as baud and parity, so the switch would have
to handle that.  The trick is I don't want the user to initiate or
change the connections.

If anyone can suggest any vendors that may be able to supply such a
beast, I'd appreciate some email or a phone call.

Thanks in advance!


Tom Lowe   [e-mail]  or  [e-mail]    908-949-0428

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

Date: Tue, 06 Oct 92 22:01:22 CST
From: [e-mail] (Jack Winslade)
Subject: Loudness
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: DRBBS Technical BBS, Omaha


> One thing that really bothers me is that now that everything is
> digital, volume levels on many calls seem a lot lower than they used
> to be, regardless of carrier used (and I've noticed this in several
> cities, using several different types of phones including

Back in the early 70's, Omaha's last panel office was converted to a
#1 ESS <tm>.  My boss at the time was on that office and lived close
to the CO.  His wife had a slight hearing problem, and they remarked
to me that when the CO equipment was changed, they noticed a definite
drop in loudness.  (I believe this was due to the fact that the newer
switch compensated for the short loop, where the stone-age switch did
not.)  I did some tests, and confirmed that short loop signals on two
#1 crossbar offices in the same building were significantly louder
than those on the ESS offices.  (There were four NNX's served from
that CO.  Two were panel and two were #1 Xbar.  The panel was junked
and replaced with ESS, but the Xbar remained, for a while.)

He tried to get TPC to switch him to a 556 or 558 line (#1 Xbar) but
nobody at TPC would listen to him, and kept insisting that there was
no loudness difference between the old and new offices.

I finally corrected the problem by installing an amplified handset on
one of their sets.


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

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

Date: Tue, 6 Oct 92 08:10:01 -0700
From: [e-mail] (Robert L. McMillin)
Subject: Potential Telescamming at the OC Swap Meet


Last weekend, I went to the Orange County Swap Meet.  This affair goes
on both weekend days in the parking lots at the OC Fairgrounds, except
on those days where the fair actually runs -- about two weeks out of
the year.  They have a number (more than 200, I would guess) of tented
stalls where you can buy new merchandise, sometimes at pretty good
deals, sometimes not.  The people cleaning out their garages long ago
were priced out of the "Swap Meet" by fairly high rents and by small
businesses that generate real profits; for that reason, the operators
of the weekly event renamed it to the "Orange County Marketplace".
Some vendors have had permanent stall numbers for many years now.
These businesses are quite professional, and most take major credit
cards.  The trouble is that the people doing this simply call in the
cards for verification using cellular voice lines.  It seems to me
that this would be a terrific source of both telecom and credit card
fraud were anyone in the neighborhood to hang out with a scanner,
particularly the sort that fetches the phone ID ...

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

Organization: The American University - University Computing Center
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1992 12:10:42 EDT
From: Jeff Dubin <[e-mail]>
Subject: College Phone System


Hi all, I'm a student at the American University and have a few q's
about the phone system here.  Here's some background:

Local calls are free, not even a monthly charge for local service.
This is great, but there are a few disadvantages: Can't call time or
weather services.  Apparently, the university blocks them, but no one
seems to know why.  For long distance, we have ACUS service which
prompts us for a personal ID code after we dial the number.  The
advantage of this is that there is a personal bill for each person,
not each room, and I can dial anywhere on campus.

Now, the system is obviously a PBX-ish system, because if I try to get
a C&P operator (AU is in Wash. D.C.) I get an error tone.  The only
operator available is the campus operator, who is only there 9-5.  We
have nice stuff such as call-waiting (which only works when you did
not originate the call for some bizarre reason), three-way, etc.  For
some _other_ reason, people off campus sometimes get a busy signal
when trying to reach me when I am not on the line.

Is there any way to get a real operator?  Weather?  Etc.?  I've tried
talking to the telecom department but they seem real protective and I
feel as if they're hiding something from me.  Also, I suspect that if
I dialed an ANI or CallerID equipped phone, "my" number wouldn't show
up, but another would.  Whatever.  Thanks for all your help!


Jeff Dubin        [e-mail]    [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: What happens when you dial 9-0, or 9-00? Do you get
an operator that way, or re-order?  What about 9-10xxx-0?  What about
combinations like 9-411, 9-611 and 9-911?  What about 9-0-<local area
code and number>, then timing out to an operator?  If the phone
service is free, maybe they have time and temp blocked because it is a
premium service or they otherwise consider it a waste of money. If
people Direct-Inward-Dial to your extension and all the common equipment
in the campus phone switch is in use then the caller will possibly get
a busy instead of a fast busy (no circuit) tone.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (William Y. Lai)
Subject: Help With BCH Sought For BCH Codes
Organization: George Washington University
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1992 17:37:45 GMT


I have to write a proprietary protocol implementation, and the ECC
needed is a n=63, k=7 BCH code.  The polynomial was given to us as:

     X^7 + X^6 + X^2 + 1

My problems is that it has been years since I looked at these stuff,
and I can't remember how to generate/check the code.  Is there a
better way to implement it in SW rather than doing a shift-register
type of algorithm?

Any pointers, algorithm, and codes :-) are greatly appreciated!


Regards,

William Lai   email: [e-mail]  Dept. of Electrical Eng.
George Washington Univ.     Washington, D.C.

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

Date: Tue, 6 Oct 92 18:38:18 BST
From: [e-mail] (Terence Cross)
Subject: dBm0. dBmr?


dBm is decibel relative to one milliwatt, so 1 mw is zero.  But what
is dBm0 and dBmr?

Are there different values in each country and how do you get these
values?


Terence Cross

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

From: David Lesher <[e-mail]>
Subject: GTE Addresses On Outgoing Email
Date: Tue, 5 Oct 92 11:33:13 EDT
Reply-To: [e-mail]  (David Lesher)
Organization: NRK Clinic for habitual NetNews abusers - Beltway Annex


> [Moderator's Note: This message was sent by Curt Lammers but for some
> reason was sent under the account of Jim J. Murphy. I wish the people
> at gte.sprint.com would quit using the accounts of Gloria Valle (and
> now Jim Murphy!) to send messages here and would use their own
> accounts instead or at least include a return address in their mail so
> I could adjust the headers manually.

Clearly, their news host is ill-configured, and can't handle such
CLASSical features as individual accounts.

Maybe they can get help from a guy I met who seems to know all about
those computer things -- I've got his name here somewhere {flip, flip,
flip..} Ah-Ha, here it is -- John Higdon ...   :-}


[e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #765
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa10729;
          7 Oct 92 4:57 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA18998
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 7 Oct 1992 02:35:30 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA21574
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 7 Oct 1992 02:35:18 -0500
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 02:35:18 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #766

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 7 Oct 92 02:35:20 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 766

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    "First Cities": Where? When? (Sandy Kyrish)
    Videoconference Costs: NOT! (Sandy Kyrish)
    Retail Videoconferencing? (Laird Broadfield)
    Highway Call Boxes (Paul Gloger)
    Time For a Distinctive Ringing FAQ (John R. Levine)
    Distinctive Ringing Availability on #1ESS (Jack Decker)
    Programming Motorola Cell Phones More Than Three Times (Andrew Klossner)
    "...Because There is a Difference..." (Paul Robinson)
    Question About ROLM PBX Telephones (Rick Spanbauer)
    Question About Caller ID Information Display (Bill Romanowski)
    Which States Have Caller ID? (Bruce James Robrert Linley)
    For Sale: Curtis NAMFAX, 2nd Edition (Bill Berbenich)
    COCOT Certificate (Carl Moore)
    Program to Send Alphanumeric Pages (MS Windows, Free) (Steven Warner)
    Cellular Phones With Scramblers Attached (Scott Coleman)
    Source For Installation Equipment Wanted (James Gustave)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Tue, 6 Oct 92 18:21 GMT
From: Sandy Kyrish <[e-mail]>
Subject: "First Cities": Where? When?


Does anyone have any information about where the "First Cities"
consortium (the 13 high tech companies organizing under MCC to
investigate video dial tone) will be located?  Will it be in Austin,
at MCC?  Is it still on the drawing board, or has it begun to form?
Any specific information will be appreciated.  Respond to the Digest
or to my e-mail box.


Thanks,

Sandy Kyrish  [e-mail]

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

Date: Tue, 6 Oct 92 19:12 GMT
From: Sandy Kyrish <[e-mail]>
Subject: Videoconference Costs: NOT!


Paul Robinson, in his comments regarding the Washington Post article
about the "First Cities" article, makes a lot of good points.  But he
is far, far off base about one element: that of videoconferencing
transmission costs.  It's not $30 a minute -- in many cases, it's more
like $30 an HOUR for 112 kb/s service.  And for bigger data rates,
like 384 kb/s, depending on how many hours a month you use, what kind
of network arrangements, blah, blah, blah, the cost is still going to
be in the ballpark of anywhere from $150 an hour to $500 an hour.  Now
some international links will cost you $2000/hour, but that's a whole
different thing.

I took these numbers not from published tariffs but from anecdotal
knowledge based on my experiences as a member of the videoconferencing
industry.  Don't try them at home!

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Retail Videoconferencing?
Date: 6 Oct 92 19:35:05 GMT


Reminded by someone else's post hypothesizing full-motion switched
service, I've been wondering for a while why there aren't services out
there that provide a meeting room with a videoconference setup, on a
by-the-hour basis.  (Maybe there are, and I just haven't found them.)

I end up doing quite a bit of traveling just in order to resolve
technical issues face to face, and I would think that I could
substitute videoconferencing for a lot of that, if I could just tell
the other people (mostly in other major metros) to go to thus-and-such
an address at thus-and-so time, and we'll "meet."

Am I overestimating the demand, or have I not found the supply?


Laird P. Broadfield     [e-mail]    ...{ucsd, nosc}!crash!lairdb


[Moderator's Note: For many years, the Bell Telcos all had 'Picturephone'
studios in their larger offices which they rented to the public. I do
not know why they never were very popular. For that matter, why is
videoconferencing catching on now, but Picturephone never did. Or is
videoconferencing doing any better financially?   PAT]

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

Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1992 00:39:37 PDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Highway Call Boxes


Along the highway, out in the country in California anyway, there are
emergency telephone call boxes, with phones which connect you directly
to the Highway Patrol or some such agency.  The boxes have no apparent
wire connections to the rest of the world.  They have mounted on them
what may be a small (eight inch?) photocell, and a small whip antenna.

Are these indeed radio phones powered off a battery which is charged
by the photocell?  What radio frequency and kind of transmission do
they use?


Thanks,

Paul Gloger <[e-mail]>

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

Subject: Time For a Distinctive Ringing FAQ
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 92 12:28:44 EDT
From: John R. Levine <[e-mail]>


I see that at least twice a week people ask where they can get a ring
leader, a box to be used with distinctive ringing, counts the rings on
an incoming call and connects one of two or three devices.  I hereby
volunteer to collect a list of suppliers of ring leader boxes and
compile a FAQ file for the Telecom Archives.

My box is an ITS Autoline Plus (which works well.)  I've heard of
others from Lynx Automation, the HAL and Hello Direct catalogs, and
now Black Box.  (The price for the Black Box was only $99, surprising
since most of their other stuff costs twice what anyone else charges.)

Send me your ring leader experience and I'll neaten it up into a FAQ
along with some other miscellaneous distinctive ringing lore.  Oh yes,
it'd be useful to have the newspeak names used by all the RBOCs.  Here
are the ones I know:

Nynex:        RingMaster
Bell Atlantic:    IdentaRing

(Add (R), (TM), (SM), etc., to taste.)  There must be at least five more
such names.  Send them along, too.


Regards,

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


[Moderator's Note: Everyone send your information on this to John.
John, when it gets compiled send it to '[e-mail]'
with a note and I will put it in the archives.  Thanks for helping.  PAT]

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

Date: Tue, 6 Oct 92 17:03:11 CST
From: Jack Decker <[e-mail]>
Subject: Distinctive Ringing Availability on #1ESS


Here in Sault Ste. Marie, Michigan (906 area code, 632/635 exchanges)
our local Michigan Bell ("Ameritech Pages Plus") telephone directory
mentions, in the "Optional Services" section, the availability of
Multi-Ring Service (this is the same service known as "distinctive
ringing" or "RingMaster" in other parts of the country).  Anyway, a
lady up here wanted to order it and was told that it is not yet
available in this area (apparently the "Optional Service" page is a
generic one that goes into all Michigan Bell directories, even when
some or all of the mentioned services aren't offered in the area
covered by the directory).

In doing some further checking, I found out that Sault Ste. Marie is
served by a 1ESS switch (I know that the same switch has been in use
since at least 1979, and probably at least a couple of years prior to
that).  A Michigan Bell official (at their executive offices) tells me
that it is not possible to offer Multi-Ring service on a 1ESS switch;
that you have to be on a digital ESS for such service to be available.
They also say that they are planning on converting the Sault to
digital by the third quarter of 1994, although this date might be
moved up a bit.

My question is, is the claim that Multi-Ring cannot be offered on a
1ESS true or false?  And, if it is false, is it possible that the cost
of the upgrade might be prohibitive, to the point where Michigan Bell
would be justified in not purchasing it when the expected remaining
useful life of the switch is only two years or less?  Or is it a
capability that could be added easily and inexpensively, and they are
just choosing not to do it?

Any informed comments on this would be much appreciated.  As it is,
the lady is now going to have to order a second line just to be able
to receive the very occasional unattended FAX transmission (please
note that a device that answers the phone and then determines how to
route the call would not be suitable here, since if the shared line
solution were used it would probably be placed on a business line, and
many customers would not appreciate the added delay, nor being charged
for incompleted calls when she isn't there to answer the phone).

I guess I should ask one other question, regarding the interaction
between Multi-Ring and Call Waiting.  Is it usually possble to order
these features so that only calls to the primary number will activate
call waiting (put the call waiting beep on the line), while calls to
the second number go directly to a busy signal if the line is busy?  I
guess another way to say that would be, is it possible to have call
waiting only for calls to the primary number?  It would not be so good
if calls to the FAX number caused the call waiting to beep, since you
would probably not want to interrupt a voice conversation to take a
FAX call.


Jack Decker   [e-mail]    FidoNet 1:154/8


[Moderator's Note: The way it is set up here, Distinctive Ringing
brings with it Distinctive Call-Waiting tones. The tones sound similar
but you can tell the difference in the cadence just as you can with
the ringing line. I do not know about splitting off call-waiting on
the one side only, but here we can have Call Forwarding handle both
lines or just the main line, with the Distinctive Ringing line ringing
through even if the main line is being forwarded.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Andrew Klossner)
Subject: Programming Motorola Cell Phones More Than Three Times
Date: 6 Oct 92 20:49:23 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Tektronix Color Printers, Wilsonville, Oregon


In file cellular.program-motorola in the Telecom archives, we read:

> "Your cellular telephone can be programmed up to three times.
>  After that, it must be reset at a Motorola-authorized service
> facility ... If this message does not appear, it may be ... The
> maximum number of times that your cellular phone can be
> reprogrammed from the keypad may have been reached. Contact the
> personnel where you obtained your cellular telephone if
> reprogramming is required."

What magic do the "personnel where you obtained the phone" do to allow
reprogramming after three changes?  And more generally, what purpose
is served by allowing only three changes between service calls?


Andrew Klossner  ([e-mail])


[Moderator's Note: Their 'magic' consists of jumping two pins (I think
Local to Ground, but don't hold me to it) then reinserting the battery
and doing a couple key sequences which flushes the register that holds
this count. I can't find my Motorola manuals right now or I would give
you more data. I'm sure someone will send you the specifics.  Why is
the cell phone locked out after three number changes? Mainly to
prevent idle hands from becoming the Devil's workshop ... and to make
it hard on cell phone phreaks who try to find cellular phone numbers
used for adminstrative purposes by the carrier which often as not have
no ESN validation done on them when a call is placed. Consider the
Radio Shack dealer in your town with his collection of cell phones on
display and for sale: even with (obviously) a different ESN in each
unit, he can let you make calls from the single cellular phone number
assigned to his store for demos from any phone. How? The carrier does
not check the ESN on those numbers either. If you find out that
number, go home and program your phone accordingly, you can make all
your calls on the demo and/or cell company administrative line(s)
also.  Of course it is illegal, and you'd be embarassed if they called
your mother and ask if she recalled who she spoke with at a certain
time on a certain date ... discretion advised!  PAT]

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

Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
Date: Tue, 06 Oct 1992  17:35:07 EDT
Subject: "...Because there is a difference..."


 "...Because there is a difference..."

The AMC theater chain uses that servicemark to identify its movie
service.  The same term could be applied here to Touch-Tone* on
Centrex supplied by C&P Telephone Co.  Here's why.

Currently, in this area, one can block Caller-ID by dialing *67, even
on Centrex.  (This has to be done BEFORE dialing 9 for an outside
line.)  If you are on a pulse dial phone, you dial 1167.

Diaing *67 gives a "stuttered" dial tone.  But Touch-Tone dialing of
116 gives reorder.  From a phone that can generate pulse or tone,
pulse dialing 116 gives the stuttered dial tone, as does *67.
(Apparently since return call and other *6x codes are not used, it
doesn't require or permit the 7 to be dialed; on the other hand 116
could be a feature group; where *72 and *73 are used on other phones
to set up and tear down call forwarding, 172 and 173 must be typed
from a Touch-Tone phone.

So it is interesting that depending on whether the phone can generate
Touch-Tone or not determines whether 11 before a code works.  This
difference is not evidenced on my POTS line at home where I can use *
or 11 on Touch-Tone to signal a feature group.


Paul Robinson   [e-mail]
* Touch-Tone is a trademark of AT&T.
These opinions are my responsibility alone and nobody else's.

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

Date: Tue, 6 Oct 92 16:21:08 -0400
From: [e-mail] (Rick Spanbauer)
Subject: Question About ROLM PBX Telephones


Does anyone know offhand what sort of signalling scheme ROLM uses
between a telephone deskset and their digital pbx?  A cursory
inspection of the innards of my telephone reveals an impressive array
of custom transformers, two big LSI chips (one by Exar, one by TI),
and the usual mess of discretes.  Is the signalling they use
compatible with either ISDN S/T attachment, or perhaps like the
Motorola UDLT format (B+D rather than 2B+D)?  The basic signalling
cell seems to be about four microseconds.


Rick Spanbauer    State University of New York

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

From: [e-mail] (Bill Romanowski)
Subject: Question About Caller ID Information Display
Date: 6 Oct 92 21:15:07 GMT
Organization: CERFnet


Well, we have Caller ID service here in Lebanon, Indiana (30 miles
 from Indy). I first found out from a postcard sent by Indiana Bell
talking about number blocking (dial *67). I called 'em up and they
said it's $6.90 per month. They don't sell the boxes but gave me an
800 number of a company to call(800 742-4258) that sells 'em.

SO now I want to know how it works. I suspect DTMF after 1st ring???
No doubt an FAQ but any info would be appreciated.


bill romanowski    prairie research

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

From: [e-mail] (Bruce James Robrert Linley)
Subject: Which States Have Caller ID?
Organization: NetCom- Cheaper than Compu$erve (isnt everything, though?)
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 05:52:29 GMT


My modem claims to support caller ID but California does not (yet).
Can someone please tell me which states do support caller ID. I am
particularly looking for western states (OR,NV,AZ,etc). Thanks in
advance.


Bruce James Robert Linley    Comp Sci & Engr, UCLA   <[e-mail]>

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

From: wabwrld![e-mail] (Bill Berbenich)
Subject: For Sale:  Curtis NAMFAX, 2nd edition
Date: 6 Oct 1992 19:23:54 -0500
Organization: Shaque d'Amour


For sale - one Curtis NAMFAX manual, 2nd edition.

This book is a comprehensive guide to cellular telephone handset
programming procedures.  Includes A/B select, lock and unlock
procedures, and programming and reset codes.

The book is sold as-is.  The upgrade to the 3rd edition HAS already
been used, that's why I'm selling this one.

Best offer over $30.  Price is $179 new or $89.50 from an upgrade.
Please reply by e-mail or phone [phone].


Bill


[Moderator's Note: See a message earlier in this issue for a
prospective buyer.   PAT]

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

Date: Tue, 6 Oct 92 15:16:25 EDT
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject: COCOT Certificate


Place: U.S.1 just off I-85 in Wise, North Carolina, just south of the
Va./N.C. border.

Pay phone [phone]) at that location lists Triangle Telephone
Co., P.O. Box 5730, Cary, NC 27512.  Also displayed is "North Carolina
Utilities Commission has issued COCOT Certificate No. SC-172".  I take
it "COCOT" has made it into some official documents?

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

From: [e-mail] (Steven Warner)
Subject: Program to Send Alphanumeric Pages (MS Windows, Free)
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 92 8:50:45 PDT


    Now Available!

Send alphanumeric pages using IXO protocol, with swIXO!

Swixo is a MS Windows based utility that enables you to quickly and
easily send messages to anyone who has an alphanumeric pager.

Swixo has configuations that allow tailoring for a variety of modems,
and paging options.  Support for GSC and POCSAG pagers is included.
Swixo remembers the last ten pages sent for quick recall, and it
remembers defaults, so your most common pages can be sent quickly.

Swixo can sit on the desktop as an icon, to be ready to go at any
time.

Requirements: Microsoft Windows 3.1, Any windows compatible modem, and
someone to send pages to.

Use of this program is FREE, and you are encouraged to distribute it
to others, for free.

To obtain your copy of swIXO, send email to:  [e-mail]
and ask for product swixo.


Steven Warner   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Scott Coleman)
Subject: Cellular Phones With Scramblers Attached
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1992 16:41:33 GMT


I was watching a re-run of thirtysomething yesterday (please, no
flames ;-) The main characters were involved in a hostile takeover
attempt of their ad agency. The outfit which was attempting to buy out
the agency gave their "inside man" a cellular phone with a built-in
scrambler, since they were concerned that the office phones might be
monitored.

Do scrambled cell phones really exist, or was this just another
Die-Hard-esque fudge on the part of the show's writers?

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

From: [e-mail] (James Gustave)
Subject: Source For Installation Equipment Wanted
Date: 6 Oct 1992 22:18:05 GMT
Organization: University of California; Santa Cruz


Does anyone know of a source for telephone installation equipment?
I'm not talking about radio-shack crimpers and plugs, but rather the
fun stuff that the telco people have.  Like linesperson's handsets, or
the things-they-hook-to-the-lines-that-go-BEEP.  Someone must know
what I'm talking about.

Either a source in the Bay Area or something mail-order would be
great.  Thanks.


Jim Speth     [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #766
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa09499;
          9 Oct 92 3:29 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA32317
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 9 Oct 1992 00:59:19 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA00398
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 9 Oct 1992 00:59:10 -0500
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 00:59:10 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #767

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 9 Oct 92 00:59:15 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 767

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Confused About T1 Bandwidths (Joseph Bergstein)
    Re: Confused About T1 Bandwidths (Thomas J. Roberts)
    Re: Confused About T1 Bandwidths (Roger Fajman)
    Re: Highway Call Boxes (Mike Morris)
    Re: Highway Call Boxes (Darren Alex Griffiths)
    Re: Highway Call Boxes (Arthur Rubin)
    Re: Highway Call Boxes (Robert S. Helfman)
    Re: Highway Call Boxes (Rich Greenberg)
    Re: Highway Call Boxes (Lars Poulsen)
    Re: Highway Call Boxes (Jacob DeGlopper)
    Re: Highway Call Boxes (Maxime Taksar)
    Re: Question About Caller ID Information Display (Paul Robinson)
    Re: Question About Air Phones (Grover McCoury)
    Re: Question About Air Phones (Mitch Wagner)
    Re: Distinctive Ringing Ability on #1ESS (Mark C. Baker)
    Re: Distinctive Ringing Ability on #1ESS (John Higdon)
    Re: Distinctive Ringing Ability on #1ESS (Terry Kennedy)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Joseph Bergstein)
Date: Fri, 09 Oct 1992 01:55:44 -0500
Subject: Re: Confused About T1 Bandwidths


Matt Szela mentions:

> T1 lines can come in two speeds:

> 1. 1,344 Kbps i.e. 24 channels @ 56 Kbps each;  OR
> 2. 1,536 Kbps i.e. 24 channels @ 64 Kbps each.

And then asks:

> Now, what do I need to do in order to get the higher 1,536
> speed: Is this the function of the terminating CSUs, the phone company
> circuit  or both? The difference is 192 Kbps which is quite a lot and we
> would like to take advantage of this extra bandwith if possible.

You must order the T-1 circuit as B8ZS (also known sometimes as clear
channel).  On older circuits every eighth bit was set to one to ensure
for timing.  This reduced each 64KB channel to 56KB.

You must order your T-1 with B8ZS (which I believe stands for bit
eight zero suppression) and be sure that your CSU's and other related
CPE supports this also.  The IXC's offered this some time ago, but
many local telcos took awhile to offer this as well.  It should be
pretty much universally available, at least from the RBOCs.

> Do I need to tell the phone company when I order the circuit
> that I  want the 1,536 Kbps line?

Yes.

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

Date: Fri,  9 Oct 92 01:17:56 CDT
From: [e-mail] (Thomas J Roberts)
Subject: Re: Confused About T1 Bandwidths
Organization: AT&T


[e-mail] wrote:

> (A third method is to guarantee that your source will never send two
> many zeros consecutively.  This is generally not possible with
> computer data, which could be anything.)

Actually, it is quite common to do this. Any protocol using inverted
HDLC (or any of its variants) will automatically satisfy the 1-density
requirements. This includes X.25, which is probably the most popular
access protocol in use today (and also X.75, its inter-network
variation).


Tom Roberts    att!ihlpl!tjrob        [e-mail]

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

From: Roger Fajman <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1992  12:31:07 EDT
Subject: Re: Confused About T1 Bandwidths


>  (A third method is to guarantee that your source will never send two
> many zeros consecutively.  This is generally not possible with
> computer data, which could be anything.)

Sometimes there is a way to do that.  If you are using HDLC or SDLC, a
zero bit is stuffed in after every five one bits, in order to keep
flags (zero, six ones, zero) from occurring in the data.  So if you
can invert the data stream, you will meet the ones density requirements
for T1.


Roger Fajman                    Telephone:  [phone]
National Institutes of Health      BITNET:     RAF@NIHCU
Bethesda, Maryland, USA          Internet:   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Mike Morris)
Subject: Re: Highway Call Boxes
Organization: College Park Software, Altadena, CA
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 05:14:57 GMT


[e-mail] writes:

> Along the highway, out in the country in California anyway, there are
> emergency telephone call boxes, with phones which connect you directly
> to the Highway Patrol or some such agency.  The boxes have no apparent
> wire connections to the rest of the world.  They have mounted on them
> what may be a small (eight inch?) photocell, and a small whip antenna.

> Are these indeed radio phones powered off a battery which is charged
> by the photocell?  What radio frequency and kind of transmission do
> they use?

They are self-contained cellular phones.  The type of antenna varies
with the location, some use a whip, others (notably the beach area of
Ventura county) use directional antennas with gain.  The solar panel
charges a rechargeable battery inside the phone.  Supposedly they have
tamper and tilt-over switches, but I doubt it -- there's been one laid
flat in Eagle Rock (near Pasadena) now for almost two weeks.  The
solar panel disappeared on day four.  There's no wires coming out of
the concrete going into the support pipe (or, in reality, where the
pipe used to be before it was hit ...).  I don't know any more as I've
never used one.  Rumor says that CalTrans (California Department of
Transportation) has a deal with LA Cellular for phone service, but I
have no facts.


Mike Morris   WA6ILQ   PO Box 1130  Arcadia, CA. 91077
All opinions must be my own since nobody pays me enough
to be their mouthpiece.      818-447-7052 evenings

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: 8 Oct 92 01:14:24 GMT
Subject: Re: Highway Call Boxes


[e-mail] writes:

> Along the highway, out in the country in California anyway, there are
> emergency telephone call boxes, with phones which connect you directly
> to the Highway Patrol or some such agency.  The boxes have no apparent
> wire connections to the rest of the world.  They have mounted on them
> what may be a small (eight inch?) photocell, and a small whip antenna.

> Are these indeed radio phones powered off a battery which is charged
> by the photocell?  What radio frequency and kind of transmission do
> they use?

I read an article about them some months ago in one of the San
Francsico dailies.  They are actually cellular phones with a solar
cells to keep them charged.  Each phone has a unique number (same as
it's telephone number?)  that is automatically transmitted to a
highway patrol communications center when a call is made so they no
exactly where you are; of-course there is no keypad to speak of, when
you pick the phone up it automatically calls a preset number.

I think these things are neat idea.  The article mentioned that the
extra cost for the equipment, when compared to standard emergency
phones, was saved by the fact that no telephone lines had to be
installed to the site.  I believe they quoted less than two hours to
install each phone, which is pretty good.  They are also more
resilient to natural distaster such as weather and earthquakes since
there are no phone lines to be pulled down.


Cheers,

Darren Alex Griffiths         [e-mail]
Open Systems Solutions Inc.   [phone] x139
Fujitsu Ltd.                  Fax: [phone]
6121 Hollis Street      Emeryville, CA 94608-2092

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

Subject: Re: Highway Call Boxes
From: a_rubin%dsg4.dse.beckman.com (Arthur Rubin)
Date: 8 Oct 92 19:39:53 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Arthur Rubin)


I can't confirm at the moment, but I read that those are solar-powered
cellular phones.


Arthur L. Rubin: [e-mail] (work) Beckman Instruments/Brea
[e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail] (personal)


[Moderator's Note: The consensus is that you are correct.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Robert S. Helfman)
Subject: Re: Highway Call Boxes
Date: 7 Oct 1992 16:30:55 GMT
Organization: The Aerospace Corporation, El Segundo, CA


The antenna appears to be the same size as a cellular phone antenna.
I believe they are just solar-powered cellular phones which are
hard-coded at the switch to be a 'you-can-only-call-this-special-
number' cellular (you can buy that as a specific cellular service
feature -- it's used for outside personnel to be able to only call
their office. I'm sure PAT knows the exact name of the feature.)

A solar charger would be more than enough to keep a cellular battery
up.


[Moderator's Note: Many/most cellular phones can be programmed to
only allow calling to one or more of the 'speed dial numbers' and to
ignore things entered from the pad itself. I think 'call restriction'
is the name of the feature.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Rich Greenberg)
Subject: Re: Highway Call Boxes
Organization: Hatch Usenet and E-mail.  Playa del Rey, CA
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 14:05:30 GMT


They are cellphones.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Lars Poulsen)
Subject: Re: Highway Call Boxes
Organization: CMC Network Systems (Rockwell DCD), Santa Barbara, CA, USA
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 92 19:01:50 GMT


These are stationary cellphones. Neat, huh? We have them every mile or
so on US 101 right through downtown Santa Barbara. In fact, I think
they are only half a mile apart in the urban area.


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] (Jacob DeGlopper)
Subject: Re: Highway Call Boxes
Date: 8 Oct 1992 00:39:10 GMT
Organization: Dept. of Electrical Engineering, CWRU, Cleve. OH


Yep, they're radio phones powered by photocells and rechargable
batteries (in places with lots of sun) or sometimes landline power.
Transmissions are usually normal FM voice; frequencies vary by state
but are probably VHF/UHF allocated to the highway department for
callboxes.


    Jacob DeGlopper, EMT-A, Wheaton (MD) Volunteer Rescue Squad
       -- CWRU Biomedical Engineering - [e-mail] --

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

Subject: Re: Highway Call Boxes
Date: Wed, 07 Oct 92 11:20:25 -0700
From: [e-mail]

> Along the highway, out in the country in California anyway, there are
> emergency telephone call boxes, with phones which connect you directly
> to the Highway Patrol or some such agency.  The boxes have no apparent
> wire connections to the rest of the world.  They have mounted on them
> what may be a small (eight inch?) photocell, and a small whip antenna.

Some have a whip, some have the tradional cellular antenna with the
helix in the center.

> Are these indeed radio phones powered off a battery which is charged
> by the photocell?

They sure are.  I have no idea what sort of capacity the batteries
have, but I imagine it need not be huge, since the phones don't really
get heavy use

> What radio frequency and kind of transmission do they use?

The ones that look like they'd be cellular phones -- are.  The ones
with the whips, I believe are trunked 450 MHz.  (This latter one I'm
not absolutely sure of ... I just remember being told this at one
point or another.  If someone more authoriative info, I'd like to hear
it, too.)


Maxime Taksar              KC6ZPS           [e-mail]

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

Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1992  20:35:38 EDT
Subject: Re: Question About Caller ID Information Display


In a message From: [e-mail] (Bill Romanowski) on 6 Oct 92
21:15:07 GMT:

> So now I want to know how it works. I suspect DTMF after first ring?
> No doubt an FAQ but any info would be appreciated.

Here is some generic information I've picked up.  Someone else will no
doubt have the exact answer.

Approximately just before the second or third ring (depending on the
system), the information is sent as a data stream about 300 baud
between rings.  In short, this is why modems can be built to take the
caller ID information.


Paul Robinson -- [e-mail]
This is my (uninformed) opinion and nobody else is (stupid enough
to be) responsible for it.


[Moderator's Note: I think it is 1200 baud.    PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Grover McCoury)
Subject: Re: Question About Air Phones
Organization: Fujitsu Network Switching
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 92 16:57:26 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Armando
P. Stettner) writes:

> The prices have gone down and the quality is much better though I
> suspect it has little if anything to do with the actual units.

Airfone prices: $2.00/minute domestic(USA) calls
        (this includes 800 numbers)

Just $.02 worth from ...

  Grover McCoury
  @ Fujitsu Network Switching Of America, Inc.
    4403 Bland Road       Raleigh,  NC  27609
  audio:      919-790-3111    electronic: ...!mcnc!fns-nc1!gcm

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

From: [e-mail] (Mitch Wagner)
Subject: Re: Question About Air Phones
Organization: OPEN SYSTEMS TODAY
Date: Thu, 08 Oct 92 17:34:03 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(gordon hlavenka) writes:

> Often, Hollywood modifies reality a bit in order to make the
> screenplay a little easier.  Another glaring example is the fact that
> upward calling to a commercial airplane just does _not_ exist.  (Yet,
> but that's another post.)

A point which killed the willing suspension of disbelief for me in DIE
HARD II.

I'm no nerd when it comes to movies. If Our Hero Dirk Cleft wants to
glance at a sheet of computer printout and say, "Oh My God that's the
Computer Virus that ate Manhattan!" I'll just keep munching popcorn
and wait for the next cool gunfight. But all that phoning back and
forth to the airplane in flight was getting to be a bit much in DH II.


          -- mitch w.

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

Date: Thu, 8 Oct 92 07:34 CDT
From: ihlpk!mcb (Mark C Baker)
Subject: Re: Distinctive Ringing Availability on #1ESS


> In doing some further checking, I found out that Sault Ste. Marie is
> served by a 1ESS switch (I know that the same switch has been in use
> since at least 1979, and probably at least a couple of years prior to
> that).  A Michigan Bell official (at their executive offices) tells me
> that it is not possible to offer Multi-Ring service on a 1ESS switch;
> that you have to be on a digital ESS for such service to be available.

> My question is, is the claim that Multi-Ring cannot be offered on a
> 1ESS true or false?

Yes, it appears that there is a 1 ESS switch in Sault Ste. Marie.  The
1 ESS switch was first put into service in 1965 and does not have
Multi-Ring or any CLASS features built into its generic program.  The
1A ESS switch (also analog) which was introduced in 1976 is fully
CLASS and Multi-Ring capable.  The 1A ESS switch is simply the 1 ESS
switching system with a more modern (mid-70's vs. early 60's) central
processor.


Mark Baker  - AT&T Network Systems

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

Date: Thu, 8 Oct 92 10:37 PDT
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: Distinctive Ringing Availability on #1ESS


Jack Decker <[e-mail]> writes:

> A Michigan Bell official (at their executive offices) tells me
> that it is not possible to offer Multi-Ring service on a 1ESS switch;

That is true. A 1ESS has insufficient program-store to provide even
distinctive ringing on internal/external calls on a Centrex group. It
is also incapable of providing "Cancel Call Waiting" and of course,
any CLASS features.

> that you have to be on a digital ESS for such service to be available.

This is NOT true. A 1AESS (analog) can provide all of these things,
including CLASS features. However, it is extremely unlikely that a
1AESS would be used to upgrade a 1ESS.

> Or is it a capability that could be added easily and inexpensively,
> and they are just choosing not to do it?

The feature ("multi-ring") cannot be added to a 1ESS, period.


John Higdon  |   P. O. Box 7648   |   [phone]     |       FAX:
[e-mail] | San Jose, CA 95150 | 10288 0 700 FOR-A-MOO | [phone]

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

From: Terry Kennedy <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Distinctive Ringing Availability on #1ESS
Organization: St. Peter's College, US
Date: 8 Oct 92 21:31:52 EDT


  Well, both the 1ESS and the 1AESS are "computer controlled"
switches, while the 5ESS is a true digital switch.

  Anyway, the official name for the feature you're interested in is
"Multiple Directory Numbers Per Line With Distinctive Ringing" (now
you know why the RBOC's pick "cute" names for services like this 8-),
and is described in detail in AT&T Pub 231-390-395. The feature is
available on the 1AESS starting at 1AE9.05. While not incredibly
ancient, I wouldn't call that release "current" as I believe 1AE12 or
1AE13 is current.

  So, the question boils down to whether you really have a 1ESS or a
1AESS serving your line. I think it rather unlikely that it's a basic
1ESS, as the savings on the 1A should cover the upgrade. However, only
your phone company knows for sure.

  Regarding the interaction with Call Waiting, the interaction summary
says: "... The dependent DN's access all the features associated with
the master DN. ..."


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

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #767
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa12590;
          9 Oct 92 5:18 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA03773
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 9 Oct 1992 02:45:42 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA03622
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 9 Oct 1992 02:45:32 -0500
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 02:45:32 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #768

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 9 Oct 92 02:45:30 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 768

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: College Phone System (Eli Mantel)
    Re: College Phone System (Maxime Taksar)
    Re: GTE Addresses On Outgoing Email (Stephen Lichter)
    Re: GTE Addresses On Outgoing Email (Jim J. Murphy - Really this time!)
    Re: Cellular Phones With Scramblers Attached (Paul Robinson)
    Re: Cellular Phones With Scramblers Attached (John McHarry)
    Re: Cellular Interception in Private Talk (Thomas J. Roberts)
    Re: Cellular Phones With Deals Attached (Dave Ratcliffe)
    Cellular Antennae Extenders (Matt McConnell)
    Cellular Rates (Thomas K. Hinders)
    Re: What it Costs to Have the President Over (Jim Thornton)
    Re: What it Costs to Have the President Over (David E. Bernholdt)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Eli Mantel)
Subject: Re: College Phone System
Organization: Extended Bulletin Board Service
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 01:45:38 GMT


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

> ...there are a few disadvantages: Can't call time or weather services.
> Apparently, the university blocks them, but no one seems to know why.

> [Moderator's Note: ...  maybe they have time and temp blocked
> because it is a premium service or they otherwise consider it a waste
> of money.]

Being as this is the Washington, DC metropolitan area, I think that
time and temperature are offered as non-premium services (844-2525 for
time, 936-1212 for temperature, if things haven't changed in the last
couple of decades).

I find it unlikely that they would have the temerity to judge the
value of calls, so I offer an alternative explanation for the call
blocking: Stupid PBX administrators!  Yes, incompetence in the phone
service is not limited to employees of the telephone company.  There
is a tendency on the part of PBX administrators to block anything they
aren't familiar with.  Perhaps they have a directive to block
"information service" exchanges, where the intent is to avoid premium
charges. The underlying problem is that the people who are hired
haven't spent half their lives playing with phones; heck, most of them
probably don't even know about this newsgroup.  Naturally, this flame
doesn't apply to any PBX administrators who read this newsgroup.

Now to possibly answer Jeff's question: First, you can try and find
the boob who misprogrammed the PBX, offer him a case of beer, or do
whatever else is necessary to convince him to reprogram the PBX.

Second, you can use the information service number offered (usually)
in the front of the Yellow Pages (I believe this service is offered in
Washington, DC), or you can use the {Washington Post's} information
service number.  I don't know for a fact that these offer time and
weather services, but usually these free information services do.


Eli Mantel ([e-mail])

   The opinions expressed are not necessarily those of the University of
     North Carolina at Chapel Hill, the Campus Office for Information
        Technology, or the Experimental Bulletin Board Service.
           internet:  bbs.oit.unc.edu or 152.2.22.80


[Moderator's Note: Even if those services in DC do not carry premium
charges ala 976, don't they still cost a message 'unit' or some small
amount of money per call?  Maybe the administrators there feel even at
that low rate it is a waste of resources.  :)   PAT]

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

Date: Thu, 8 Oct 92 11:04:29 -0700
From: [e-mail] (Maxime Taksar)
Subject: Re: College Phone System


In article <[e-mail]>:

> [Moderator's Note: What happens when you dial 9-0, or 9-00? Do you get
> an operator that way, or re-order?  What about 9-10xxx-0?  What about
> combinations like 9-411, 9-611 and 9-911?
                                     ^^^^^
Please don't try this just as an experiment!  Most of us know that it
is in bad form to call 911 "just to make sure it works," but not
everyone would know this.

(And shame on you PAT for not including such a disclaimer.)


Maxime Taksar    KC6ZPS    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: 8 Oct 92 17:23:00 UT
Subject: Re: GTE Addresses On Outgoing Mail


Sorry but the account is used by a number of us for company
communications that do not require it to know who the sender is since
we put it within the message. I have no need for my own box and have
never asked for one.  I do have Internet/UUCP access and at times do
use that. John may know a lot of things, but just look at his address,
something about cows?


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]
Date: 9 Oct 92 02:00:00 UT
Subject: Re: GTE Addresses On Outgoing Email


We will submit future postings to this group with as much information
and complete addresses as we can give.  We're sorry if this caused any
problems, especially to our Moderator.  We thought the message was
more important than the header or other electronic addresses.

We've been hooked on TELECOM Digest since it was made available to
through our GTE Telemail service about 1 1/2 years ago.  TELECOM has
been an education to us for many topics, some that were completely
over our head and others that we could relate to.  It's been amusing
and informative, and we even look forward to reading a Higdon
observation.

Our access to Internet, or more specifically, to TELECOM Digest, is
through GTE Telemail.  I have the Telemail account that we use.  I
suppose Curt could get an account of his own, but it wouldn't gain us
much.  Let me explain that Curt and I report to the same building for
work.  Curt is a Switching Systems Technician and works on the GTD5
CO.  I am a Facility Maintainer and work outside on deregulated
customer equipment as well as regulated network cable, etc. In this
small town we can work together when the need arises, such as helping
to run some jumpers or testing a cable pair with the CO.

It's natural that we share our TELECOM Digest access.  It would be like
each department having it's own post office box.  We could have a box
for switching, one for service, and another for construction.  In a
large city this might be necessary, but here in rural Iowa it's not.
All the mail for GTE comes to one PO box.  Likewise, we use one Telemail
address.  It's not that we're ill-configured, it's just not needed.

We are aware of the Gloria Valle reference and I think theirs is the
same thing on a bigger scale.

Since this started out as a comment on our electronic address, I would
like to ask for more information about these things.  How exactly are
we connected with these gateways, why are some addresses so
complicated, how can we access the TELECOM archives from Telemail with
only a dumb terminal, how do you prefer us to address submissions to
this group, what is X.25, X.400, and the hardest question, can you
explain this in beginners terms?  Please reply to this directly to me
so as to not take Pat's valuable time.

BTW, even though we are the scourge of the Earth, GTE in this community does
strive to provide customer service.  After all, around here the customers
have our home phone numbers.  They know where we live!


Jim Murphy      Curt Lammers
AA0JG           SST

   Internet - [e-mail]
          Telemail - J.J.Murphy
       America Online - Big Daddy8


[Moderator's Note: I'll defer to others to answer your questions about
mail and gateways in more technical detail. My original observation
was only meant to be this: About 90 percent of this Digest is handled
automatically by a computer and software.  The Table of Contents at
the top of each issue is made up from the Subject and From lines in
the articles. I have to go back each time and remove Gloria from the
lines where it appears. If people do not include their actual name at
some point in the article or the header, then I can't always tell for
sure who wrote the piece and have to use just an email address without
a name where the author's name would usually go. If you write from a
GTE site using a generic mailbox name (or anywhere with a similar
situation) please put your actual name in the signature or somewhere
where I will find it. As for GTE people writing to this Digest,
*please continue doing so* -- you are just as welcome as anyone else
here and don't need to clear anything before you send it along.  PAT]

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

Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1992  20:37:18 EDT
Subject: Re: Cellular Phones With Scramblers Attached


In a message from: [e-mail] (Scott Coleman) on Tue, 6 Oct 1992
16:41:33 GMT:

> I was watching a re-run of [expletive deleted].  The outfit
> which was attempting to buy out the agency gave their "inside
> man" a cellular phone with a built-in scrambler, since they
> were concerned that the office phones might be monitored.

> Do scrambled cell phones really exist ...

Yes.  I remember reading about it because there was a man who wrote an
on-line article somewhere about the abysmal stupidity of the law which
makes listening to a non-encrypted radio transmission a federal
criminal offense, and he offered to demonstrate the scrambling
capability on HIS cellular phone if someone wanted to call and hear
what it sounded like.  He was in the San Francisco Area, I believe.
He pointed out that encryption is not very expensive if you want to
protect your conversation, it's that the cellular providers and phone
makers don't want to pay the cost of upgrading their switches and
equipment to offer it for the few that want it.  (My guess is he sells
cellular phone scramblers!)

Somewhere I remember reading in a book about a means to build for
landline wire telephones, a *cheap* effective scrambler by using a
common radio signal to combine the signal against, which would be
usable against anything short of NSA class equipment, and probably
sufficient for most ordinary calls.  The only problems were that both
parties had to have the scrambler device activated, and that the same
radio signal had to be available at both ends, which meant you either
needed a national broadcast or had to be local to each other.

Now you know why so many people who want private phone calls listen to
Larry King's radio show or WSM.  :)


Paul Robinson -- [e-mail]
This is my (uninformed) opinion and nobody else is (stupid enough
to be) responsible for it.

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

From: [e-mail] (John McHarry(J23))
Subject: Re: Cellular Phones With Scramblers Attached
Organization: The MITRE Corporation
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 13:07:32 GMT


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

> Do scrambled cell phones really exist, or was this just another
> Die-Hard-esque fudge on the part of the show's writers?

They do indeed.  There are STU-III cellular phones available.  I
believe the commercial versions use DES encryption.  Manufacturers
include Motorola, I believe AT&T, and maybe others.  I have no idea
what restrictions there are on their sale, however.


John ([e-mail])

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

Date: Thu,  8 Oct 92 11:01:56 CDT
From: [e-mail] (Thomas J Roberts)
Subject: Re: Cellular Interception in Private Talk
Organization: AT&T


 From article <[e-mail]>, by  louie@sayshell.
umd.edu (Louis A. Mamakos):

>> [Moderator's Note:
>> [...] Conversations cannot easily be followed between cells.   PAT]

> Why assert that conversations cannot easily be followed between cells?
> It is not as if the mechanism for handoffs is secret; it is done in
> band and someone with sufficient motivation should easily be able to
> decode and interpret this information. [...]

But you forgot the reason calls are handed off between cells in the
first place: the different cells cover a different geographical area.
In general, you need to move your scanner (or its antenna) in order to
follow the intercepted caller (who is moving between cells).  This is
NOT easy. Even if you are mobile, how do you determine where to go?

Sometimes (often?) you could probably still hear your target in an
adjacent cell. But after the target is more than one cell away, I
doubt you could still monitor effectively. After all, that is why
cells were invented in the first place: to re-use the same frequency
bands in multiple areas (somebody else in your cell may be using the
same frequency as your target -- the system is designed so that you
will hear the nearby caller, not the distant target).


Tom Roberts    att!ihlpl!tjrob      [e-mail]

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

Subject: Re: Cellular Phones With Deals Attached
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 20:08:32 -0400
From: Dave Ratcliffe <eds1!compnect!frackit![e-mail]>


Andrew Klossner says:

>> "what is the maximum number of nams you've seen for a single
>> telephone."

> The OKI 900 has five.

The Uniden CP 5500 only has 2.

> [Moderator's Note: You say the cell company 'paid $300 of the phone's
> cost' but some of us believe the prices of cell phones are
> artificially inflated so the cell company can then 'offer them at a
> cheaper price.'

This is certainly the case with most cell companies. They charge what
the market will bear and pity the poor customer who doesn't know the
ropes before going in to see about signing up.

> Cell phones may cost $20-30 to manufacture. Like all other
> electronic items, the cost is but a tiny fraction of what it was when
> they first came out nearly a decade ago. You should be able to buy a
> good cell phone for $100 or less regardless of signing up with anyone
> or not. Cellular One in Chicago owns a number of dealers including
> Leader Communications, a company for whom I have no love lost.  PAT]

Our first excursion into the world of cell phones started at Sears
where they were running a special.  Buy a Motorola America series
transportable (in a bag w/ battery, hands-free mike, window antenna
bracket) for $150 and they sign you up with Centel Cellular.  Further
inducement was no start-up fee, 100 free minutes air-time, first month
free.  The salesman filled out the paperwork and sent the unit to
Centel for programming.  We picked it up two days later and found
Centel had screwed up the A/B selection (it was always on ROAMING even
in our home area).  I took it in to Centel to have them set it up
correctly and found out that same day that Sprint was proposing the
purchase of Centel.  After a little panic (I've had poor experiences
with Sprint in the past) we decided to switch to Cellular One.  I
figured there would be a problem knowing the history of low-cost
phones tied to long-term contracts.  Imagine my surprise when I
CLOSELY read the contract we signed at Sears and found that the clause
describing a minimum subscription time was CROSSED OUT BY THE
SALESMAN! We switched to Cellular One by the end of the week and have
been satisfied with the service.

The interesting thing here is that Centel tried some strong arm
tactics to force us to pay $35 which they said was only fair since we
canceled so soon.  I talked to several different sales droids and got
a different story each time.  They finally sent a "Final Notice" bill
and I had my wife return it with a copy of the contract with the
deleted portion clearly marked.  About a week later we got a new bill.
Account credited for $35, balance $0, account closed.  They haven't
bothered us since and I've just recently picked up a portable (the
Uniden mentioned above) for myself.

BTW, the same Motorola unit without the bag, battery and hands-free
mike is now listed in the Sears catalog at $69.00 and the usual fine
print indicates it's tied to a one year contract with "a local
provider".  Here, at least, it's still Centel.


 ...uunet!wa3wbu!frackit!dave -or-                      |  Dave Ratcliffe  |
 frackit![e-mail] -or- [e-mail] -or-  |  Sys. <*> Admin. |
 vogon1!compnect!frackit![e-mail]           | Harrisburg,  Pa. |

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

From: Matt <[e-mail]>
Organization: Idaho State University
Date: 8 Oct 92 17:10:21 MDT
Subject: Cellular Antennae Extenders


For those of you with Hello Direct catalogs turn to page 49.

I noticed in the Hello Direct catalog these antenna extenders for
handheld and portable cellular phones.

One is a Y-Star antenna that connects to a car window via suction cups
and then screws in place of the regular antenna.  I can understand
this.

The other two are cordless antennas.  "The patented passive repeater
design restores the cellular signal inside the car, providing a full
3dB bidirectional gain for your handheld cellular phone."  One clips
onto the window and this makes it portable.  The other uses adhesive
pads which mounts it on the window.

My client tends to use his time on Friday mornings to attend board
meetings via conference calls using his Motorola Ultra Clasic.  He's
on the governing board of 24 hospitals so he does this every week.  He
likes to drive out to his cabin at the same time.  So he enters the
fringe areas.

The cellular system he is on is rural.  Don't know if that helps.  So
the cell covers about 20-30 miles.  He also drives a urban tank aka
Suburban.  He already uses the battery eliminator so doesn't want
another cord attached to the phone.

Do these cordless antennas really work?   How so?


Matt McConnell   [e-mail]   <---  Stuff that can't wait.
               [e-mail]  <---  Stuff that CAN wait.

Idaho State University  Telecommunications/Computers/Medical
Consultant to Sterling Medical Group, Doctors Plaza, Covington Inc.

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

Date: 9 Oct 92 06:53:51-0900
From: /PN=Thomas.K.Hinders/OU=CCMAIL/O=CHAN.IS/PRMD=MMC/ADMD=TELEMAIL/C=US/@sprint.com
Subject: Cellular Rates


I'm curious ... is it possible that a cellular call can be cheaper
than a LD or intra-state toll call?

Are cellular rates regulated, and if so are the rates set or compared
to the rates for wire based services?


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

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

Date:  8 Oct 92 17:46 -0600
From: Jim Thornton <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: What it Costs to Have the President Over


I recently read a book which included a story about special telecom
preparations for a presidential visit to New York.  In "Emergency!",
Saundra Shohen recounts experiences as administrator of the Emergency
Department at St. Luke's Roosevelt Hospital, New York.

One of these experiences began with a visit by two secret Service
Agents who informed her that the president was coming to the city to
visit the theatre and that a phone would be installed in her E.R. and
directly connected to the White House.  She was told that no staff
member was to touch the phone, even if it rang.  Later in the day, the
new phone began to ring and continued to ring until the staff could
not stand it.  A nurse finally answered the phone, only to be screamed
at: "We TOLD you not to touch THE PHONE!". [emphasis in original].

The chapter concludes with some description of other preparations made
for the president's medical care.  There are two additional points of
telecom interest.  First, the author claims that the setup connecting
the White House to the host city's Emergency Department varies with
the administration in office.  Finally, the author states that
arrangements are made for the phone even when the president is merely
flying over the city.


Jim Thornton,  [e-mail]    University of British Columbia

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

From: [e-mail] (David E. Bernholdt)
Subject: Re: What it Costs to Have the President Over
Date: 8 Oct 92 14:24:25 GMT
Organization: Quantum Theory Project, University of Florida


We just had a visit from a presidential _candidate_ and his entourage.
They had a rally on campus, right in front of my office in fact.
People (mostly campaign roadies, I think) worked through the night to
set up platforms (for the candidates, speakers, TV cameras, etc.),
barricades, and such.  I did _not_, notice any unusual telecom goings
on, though -- that suprised me little.  Sure he's not the president
yet, but it sounds like most of the telecom gear discussed in this
thread was for the media rather than the president.  There were, of
course, a fleet of satellite uplink trucks growing all over the lawn
by the morning of the event, but that's about it.

Security is similar, though.  Lead story in our campus newspaper the
following day included a description of Clinton and Gore jogging
through town and campus the night before the rally and of restroom
stop just after the rally which played up the clearing of the path.
Even Tipper Gore rates a cleared, searched, guarded restroom.  Hard to
reconcile this with the idea that they were just standing in front of
20,000 people without any precautions other than the eyeballs of the
Secret Service.

During the rally, they wouldn't let anyone on the roof of my building,
which would have been a good vantage point, but they didn't stop
people from going to the windows.


David Bernholdt        [e-mail]
Quantum Theory Project    [e-mail]
University of Florida   Gainesville, FL  32611     904/392 6365


[Moderator's Note: In August, 1968 at the infamous Democratic National
Convention here (yes folks, I was there on Michigan Avenue the night
of the riot in front of the Hilton Hotel; another story for another
time but I saw it all from a few feet away), President Lyndon Johnson
used a bathroom at the Merchandise Mart during a visit with the
relative of the Kennedy family who was general manager of the Mart at
that time. Afterward someone part of his entourage identified the
precise stall in which LBJ had been seated. Soon thereafter, grafitti
appeared on the wall of that stall saying that 'LBJ took a sh-- here,
August ??, 1968'. That message remained on the wall, with numerous
addendums and postscripts both witty and crude for several years. At
one point, the toilet seat itself disappeared; apparently stolen by
someone who unscrewed the hinges and carried it away, eager for some
bit of history that would be worth money later on.   PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #768
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa24600;
          10 Oct 92 13:53 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA15006
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 10 Oct 1992 11:47:26 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA18683
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 10 Oct 1992 11:47:17 -0500
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1992 11:47:17 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #769

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 10 Oct 92 11:47:20 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 769

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Voting from Ireland by Fax (Linc Madison)
    Use N-1-1 Codes for Relay Services: FCC Docket 92-105 (Curtis E. Reid)
    Call For Presentations - Low-Cost Remote LAN Access via ISDN BOF (D Martin)
    Seeking Advice on Remote Telecom System (Chris Kennedy)
    Toronto Police Charge Teen in 911 Calls (Toronto Star via Nigel Allen)
    Re: Source For Installation Equipment Wanted (Joseph Bergstein)
    Seek Commercial Telnet Access Site in New York (Mike McCurdy)
    10252 as a Code For Sprint (Carl Moore)
    SLC 96 and Tip/Ring Polarity (Gordon D. Woods)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sat, 10 Oct 92 18:09:27 BST
From: Linc Madison, Oracle Europe <[e-mail]>
Subject: Voting from Ireland by Fax


Well, hello, everyone!  I'm off in Ireland on the student work-abroad
thing, having now finished my degree at Berkeley.  I can't read the
Digest (no USENET access, and my employer grumbles enough about
personal e-mail I can't subscribe to the list), but I can still post!

With the day following the first Monday of November fast approaching,
my good old red-white-and-blue blood cells are getting a strong urge
to VOTE.  Trouble is, it's getting rather late in the season to start
the process.  Fortunately, I'm already registered at my "legal address
for voting purposes."  I contacted the U.S. Embassy here in Dublin
about the rest of the process, and it turns out I can do much of the
work by fax.  [The policy on faxing voting materials varies from state
to state in the U.S.  Your mileage may vary.]

I got the brochure that explains that all I have to do is fill out my
FPCA (Federal Post Card Application -- accepted by all the states for
registering and requesting a ballot, although the specifics vary
somewhat) and fax it to Autovon 223-5527, or to [phone].  Umm,
excuse me?  I can't call an "800" number from here, and I'm not
anywhere near an Autovon phone.  In fact, I've never even seen one.
(Incidentally, that's 1-800-DOD-VOTE) The appendix to the information
brochure does list POTS/PSTN numbers at the Pentagon to call or fax
for information, but their fax machine doesn't work!  Apparently, the
U.S.  government considers military personnel the only overseas voters
worth much concern or effort for voting purposes.

A friend back in California called the local registrar for me, and the
clerk had never heard anything about faxing in the absent voter
request.  So I called up, got the same answer, and told the woman that
I had in my hand information specifically for the State of California,
provided by the US Embassy.  She put me on to "the front office,"
where the woman gave me the number, without hesitation.  Now we'll see
if they fax back the blank ballot like they're supposed to.

While I'm here, a couple of other musings about the phone system here
in Ireland and in the U.K.  The phone plugs in Ireland are standard
RJ-11, the U.S. kind, not the strange things they have in the U.K.  I
haven't yet had the opportunity to confirm the report I read in the
Digest about the line one/line two wiring being reversed here.  The
phone rates are bloody outrageous, to the point that there is an ad in
today's {Irish Times} for MCI Call America with Friends and Family.

On almost any call over two minutes, you save by dialing on your
home-country-direct number (MCI, AT&T, or Sprint), even without the
F&F discount.  Cheapest rate here is 89p/minute (one 11.17p "unit"
every 7.5 sec., plus VAT at about 12.5%, but Telecom Eireann pays the
first 10% for residential customers; payphone units are 18p incl. VAT,
or as little as 16p with a stored-value card) which is about
$1.63/minute, compared to about $0.60 direct-dial in the other
direction. HC-direct runs about $1/minute at all times of day, plus $3
fee.

The public phones do odd things, too: they're ALL pulse dial, but they
automatically cut over to DTMF on answer supervision, so I can access
my voice-mail at work.  However, AT&T USA Direct doesn't make the cut
over (it's a freephone 1800 number -- not 1-800, but 1800), so you
can't use the automated system from a payphone. Circuits take a long
time to complete, with a loud beeping noise as the system hunts for an
open line to complete your call.  Dublin itself is in the process of
adding a seventh digit to all local numbers.  The agency I work
through is at 679-xxxx, but their fax is 77-xxxx.  Exchanges are quite
geographically specific.  Ireland also switched to "00" for
international access as of April, and has done away with special codes
for dialing the U.K., except for Northern Ireland.

Well, cead mile failte and all that kind of stuff.


Regards,

Linc Madison                   Oracle Europe Manufacturing Limited
[e-mail]         P. O. Box 34, Blackrock, Co. Dublin, Ireland
Tel. [phone] ext 415   Fax [phone]
Direct-dial 283.6216 ext 415#  Home +353 1 288.6082 (until 22.30pm local)

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

Date: 10 Oct 1992 09:44:36 -0400 (EDT)
From: Curtis E. Reid <[e-mail]>
Subject: Use N-1-1 Codes for Relay Services: FCC Docket 92-105


I am quoting an article from the newsletter, _GA-SK_Newsletter_,
Summer, 1992 (but I just received it last week).  _GA-SK_Newsletter_
is sent to all members of the Telecommunications for the Deaf, Inc.
(TDI), a non-profit organization devoted to promoting
telecommunications use for and by the deaf people in the world.  The
article appears on page 5.  I am typing it as excatly printed.


MAKE OUR RELAY LIVES EASIER!  DIAL 7-1-1 OR 5-1-1 FOR RELAY?!!
Pamela Ransom

It has been a little over a year now since the Americans with
Disabilities Act and Title IV -- Telecommunications Relay Services --
was signed into law.  We have had some time to step back, take a look
at the "big picture" and decide where we want to go from here.

One of our goals is to make accessing Telecommunication Relay Services
(TRS) quick and easy.

The Problem: At present there are more than 40 statewide relay
services -- each with its own telephone number.  For a person
travelling from state to state it becomes a near impossibility to
remember all the different numbers.  Also the relay telephone numbers
are usually ten digits, so it takes a long time just to dial into the
TRS.

A solution: T.D.I. is working together with a coalition of national
disability rights organizations represented by the National Center for
Law and Deafness.  The coalition has asked that the Federal
Communications Commission (FCC) reserve two of the remaining N-1-1
telephone numbers for national access to telecommunication relay
services (TRS), 5-1-1 for voice initiated relay calls and 7-1-1 for
TTY/TDD initiated relay calls.

Dialing 5-1-1 or 7-1-1 from anywhere in the country to access a
state's relay service will be easy to remember, quicker, and will
bring us closer to the ADA goal of equal access to the telephone for
people who are deaf, hard-of-hearing or have speech disabilities.

What you can do: The FCC is in the process of making its decision
based on legal documents that have been filed and letters that it
receives.  A letter of support from you will help!  Please include in
your letter that you are writing about Docket 92-105, "Use of N-1-1
Codes" and send your letter to:

    Secretary Donna Searcy
    Federal Communications Commission
    1919 M Street N.W.
    Washington, D.C.  20554

and a copy to TDI.  If you need assistance, call TDI.  Your letters
will help make a difference!


Curtis E. Reid                [e-mail]
Rochester Institute of Technology/NTID    [e-mail] (DECUS)
P.O. Box 9887                716.475.6089 TDD/TT 475.6895 Voice
Rochester, NY 14623-0887        716.475.6500 Fax

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

From: [e-mail] (David E. Martin)
Subject: Call For Presentations - Low-Cost Remote LAN Access via ISDN BOF
Date: 9 Oct 92 20:39:07 GMT
Organization: Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory,  Batavia, IL,  USA
Reply-To: [e-mail]


Interop Birds-of-a-Feather Announcement

Low-Cost Remote LAN Access via ISDN
Wednesday, October 28, 1992, 7:30-9:30 PM
Room 121, Moscone Convention Center, San Francisco
Open to All

Computer users are increasingly dependent upon LAN network services
such as X Windows, electronic mail, remote printing, and remote file
access.  Unfortunately, the current model of remote computing from a
home or auxiliary office is still that of logging in as dumb terminal,
despite powerful PC's and X-terminals being highly available outside
the local environment.  Basic Rate ISDN promises to extend traditional
LAN services outside normal geographical boundaries by making
high-bandwidth connectivity widely available upon demand.  This BOF
will be a lively discussion, led by those currently using ISDN, of
topics such as ISDN terminal equipment, obtaining ISDN service,
software to support IP and DECnet via ISDN, and performance of
applications.  Come ready to discuss such neat technological tricks as
turning your home PC into a highly networked workstation.

Discussion Topics:

- Deployment of ISDN
- Bridging Ethernet across ISDN
- Bridging Appletalk across ISDN
- Dynamic Bandwidth Management using ISDN
- PPP over ISDN
- Security
- Performance of X-Windows over ISDN
- SNMP Management of ISDN links
- Bridging vs. PPP over ISDN
- Routing vs. Bridging
- Call-back schemes with ISDN
- How to Order ISDN
- Terminal Equipment
- US and International ISDN Connectivity
- Commercial Internet Access via ISDN
- Performance of Applications over ISDN
- PRI Hubbing of ISDN Access Lines

I am looking for people to make a short (5-15 min) presentation to
spark discussion on any of the above or related topics.  A formal
presentation is not required, the intent is to share experiences or
desired/implemented features.  A viewgraph projector and flip-chart
will be available.

Please contact me via phone, fax, or e-mail if you would like to give a
presentation or bring up a topic for discussion.  Even if you do not
have anything specific to say, however, I encourage you to attend and
be part of the discussion.  Neophytes are welcome.


David E. Martin
National HEPnet Management                     Phone: [phone]
Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory          FAX: [phone]
P.O. Box 500, MS 368; Batavia, IL 60510  USA   E-Mail: [e-mail]

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

From: mainecoon![e-mail] (Chris Kennedy)
Subject: Seeking Advice on Remote Telecom System
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 92 12:00:39 PDT


I recently purchased a hunk of land in more or less the middle of
nowhere and am seeking alternatives to simply paying line extension
charges in order to meet my telecom needs.  By way of background my
current residential telecom mix consists of five voice and one 56Kb
ADN line, all of which I'll gladly trade for ISDN if and when I can
convince PacBell to either upgrade the Siemens/Stromberg-Carlson we've
currently got to support ISDN (or preferably admit to the fact that
they haven't a clue how to manage the switch and install something
like a 5E instead). I need to preserve more or less this level of
service in whatever solution I finally select.

The building site in question is several miles from the nearest
PacBell copper, which in turn is a SLC away from the CO.  Cellular
service is unavailable in the area and the cellular carriers can't
even find this *county* on their planning maps.  FM prop
characteristics in the area are good and with modest work I can get
line-of site to a commercial tower where rent is cheap and a PacBell
presence in place.

I've requested a quote for the installation of a bunch of centrex
lines in order to discover the line extension charge, but after
several weeks the (one) engineer in the local planning department is
still having problems putting the quote together.  He's making
grumbling noises about the ADN line and given past experience I've got
visions of a solution which incorporates load coils, bailing wire and
chewing gum ;-).

Seems like a good time to ask the net for alternatives.


Many thanks,

Chris Kennedy            | [phone]      | [e-mail]
BIT (Quincy), Inc.       | [phone] fax  | Standard disclaimers, etc.
1580 E. Main St, POB 4094| [phone] home |
Quincy, CA 95971 USA     | [phone] fax  |

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Toronto Police Charge Teen in 911 Calls
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 92 17:36:24 EDT


Here is a press release that I received from the Metropolitan Toronto
Police. The {Toronto Star} ran a story (based on the press release) on its
front page today.

1992 October 06, 1950 hours

Teenage Computer Hacker Nabbed by Police

Detectives from the Major Crime Squad at Police Headquarters have
arrested a 15-year-old North York boy and charged him with a number of
computer-related crimes. Investigations have revealed that on some
occasions his pranks paralyzed the Metropolitan Toronto 911 emergency
telephone system.

Last July, a young man called the 911 emergency number from a
location in the west end of Metropolitan Toronto and reported a number
of medical emergencies which caused units from the Metropolitan
Toronto Police, ambulance services and local fire departments to
respond. All of these calls were determined to be false.

On one occasion, he totally monopolized the 911 system and rendered
it inoperable thereby denying citizens access to the 911 lifeline
throughout the Metropolitan Toronto area.

Bell Canada security officers assisted police in their search for the
source of the calls. Acting on a Criminal Code search warrant, police
today entered a North York home, seized a quantity of computers and
arrested a teen-age boy.

He is to appear in Youth Court, 47 Sheppard Avenue East, North York,
Friday, November 6, 1992, charged with theft of telecommunications, 24
counts of mischief and 10 counts of convey false message.

Investigations are continuing.

                     (end of press release)

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

Note from NDA: More information may be available from the public
affairs office of the Metropolitan Toronto Police at [phone] or
from Detective W. Johnston of the Major Crime Squad at [phone].
"Convey false message" is how the charge appears in the police press
release; it is evidently police shorthand for the charge of conveying
a false message.

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

From: [e-mail] (Joseph Bergstein)
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1992 01:31:18 -0500
Subject: Re: Source For Installation Equipment Wanted


In reply to message from James Gustave on 06OCT:

> Does anyone know of a source for telephone installation equipment?
> Like linesperson's handsets, or the things-they-hook-to-the-lines
> -that-go-BEEP.  Someone must know what I'm talking about.

Try GrayBar or Anixter Brothers, both of which are national firms with
distribution locations in most major metro areas.

For best selection try:

Jensen Tools:  602-968-9662
Specialized Products: 1-800-866-5353

These two firms specialize in selling all manner of "real" telephone
installation equipment: test sets, tone generators, tone detectors,
cable splicers, wire strippers, toolbelts, punch down tools, etc. etc.
you ame, they probably carry it.  They also sell complete tool kits.
They've got lots of stuff available, but prices are steep.

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

Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1992 15:08:00 GMT
From: [e-mail] (McCurdy M.)
Subject: Seek Commercial Telnet Access Site in New York
Organization: San Diego State University - Dept. of Redundancy Dept.


Looking for suggestions/recommendations for a commercial Telnet access
site in New York. So far, we have information on Panix and PSI. Any
help appreciated ... thanks.


Mike McCurdy            Disclaimer:
VAX Systems Management
San Diego State University    "Everything I say may be wrong."
[e-mail]

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

Date: Sat, 10 Oct 92 04:37:10 EDT
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject: 10252 as a Code For Sprint


I made a long distance call from a Red Roof Inn room recently and
found that 10252 access code got Sprint.  The archive file
occ.10xxx.access.codes says "Long Distance/USA".

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

Date: Wed,  7 Oct 92 10:29:06 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Gordon D Woods)
Subject: SLC 96 and Tip/Ring Polarity
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories


There was a discussion a few days ago about a problem with a tip/ring
reversal on a SLC 96 and people wanted to know why SLC 96's were still
designed to be polarity sensitive.  Well, according to some experts in
the business:

1. Ground start lines must distinguish between tip and ring correctly
in order to handle the ground start protocol.

2. Early CO channel units were polarity sensitive and the ringing
detector was on one side to ground. This made the channel unit appear
to have a different resistance to ground on tip versus ring. This
resistive "DC signature" is used by testing systems to verify that a
good channel unit is installed.  Therefore, the DC signature was
grandfathered for subsequent designs even if they could be polarity
insensitive. In fact, today there are many DC signatures for detecting
many services such as POTS, coin, PBXs, etc.

3. Proper installation is very important in the telephone business
because there is a lot of "churn" (service changing).  If a line is
installed with the wrong polarity and an insensitive channel unit used
on it, then if service is changed in the future, (say from loop start
to ground start) it would delay the installation while the previous
trouble is fixed. This is a significant problem because frequently
different craft are used for the initial office wiring versus just
plugging in circuit packs for service.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #769
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa27178;
          10 Oct 92 15:14 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA21894
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 10 Oct 1992 13:15:20 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA21856
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 10 Oct 1992 13:15:09 -0500
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1992 13:15:09 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #770

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 10 Oct 92 13:15:08 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 770

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    FCC Acts on Satelite Radio Plan (Washington Post via Paul Robinson)
    Caller ID Approved In Arizona (Jim Carpenter)
    FCC Moves on Wireless Phone Service (Washington Post via Paul Robinson)
    Bell Canada to Use GTE Billing Software (David Leibold)
    Switch Back to AT&T? NOT! (Thomas Lapp)
    Does Phone Company Log Calls to a 'Busy' Line? ([e-mail])
    Use of Single Mode Fiber For Video (John Holman)
    Cellular Internationally? (Sarah Johnson)
    NECA 4 Online/CD-ROM? (James R. Saker Jr.)
    Fax Store-and-Forward Service Wanted (Fred E.J. Linton)
    Surrepticious Recording of Calls in Federal Agency ([e-mail])
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
Date: Fri, 09 Oct 1992  21:39:01 EDT
Subject: FCC Acts on Satelite Radio Plan


{Washington Post}, October 9,1992, Page F8)

{Agency Urges Setting aside of Frequencies}

By John Burgess, Washington Post Staff Writer

   Federal regulators yesterday moved to clear the way for a new
generation of radio entertainment services in which satelites would
beam compact-disc quality directly to cars and homes.

   The five member Federal Communications Commission proposed setting
aside enough radio frequency to allow several services to go into
operation.

   At present, there is only one applicant, the tiny District company
Satelite CD Radio Inc.  It hopes to launch satelites and begin service
in 1996 but it must first raise nearly $200 million and get final FCC
approval.

   Another obstacle is that today's radios can't receive the signals.
Listeners would have to buy special equipment to receive the service.

   Satelite CD Radio would offer 30 channels of music and
entertainment, without commercials, for a subscription rate of $5 to
$10 a month, said Robert D. Briskman, its president.

   The entertainment industry has experimented for years with
delivering services to homes directly from space, but so far has had
little success.  The FCC approved television broadcasting from
satelites more than a decade ago but, because of heavy costs and
competition from cable and video rentals, no industry has grown up.

   Satelite radio's promoters contend that a major new market will
emerge from the technology, especially among motorists, who could tune
to a single station while driving coast to coast.

   Sound would be superior to FM or AM radio, and static-free, because
it would be transmitted using the digital technology of computers,
which converts sound into streams of electronic ones and zeroes.

   Skeptics say the radio business is firmly grounded in local
information such as traffic reports, news and advertising.  Moreover,
the huge costs of launching satellites and creating a national
marketing organization might make the ventures collapse under their
own weight.

   Meanwhile, another small Washington company, AfriSpace, is working
to launch a satelite that would beam radio broadcasts to listeners in
Africa and the Middle East.

   The FCC's action marks a new milestone in the world's gradual
transition to digital technology in all types of communication and
information services.  Fiber-optic telephone lines, compact discs and
personal computers already employ this basic approach.

   In general, it offers higher quality, greater capacity and lower
costs than "analog" systems such as FM radio, records and television.

   Owners of conventional radio stations are experimenting with ways
to turn their broadcasts digital, once thought to be a technically
hopeless task.  In the meantime, they have opposed granting frequency
for satelite broadcasts, on the grounds that national services would
undermine the U.S. tradition of local broadcasters serving local
communities.

   The broadcasters' critics, however, contend that they are simply
trying to keep out legitimate competition.

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

From: gtephx![e-mail] (Jim Carpenter)
Subject: Caller ID Approved In Arizona
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 92 9:59:44 MST
Reply-To: [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: Unfortunatly, Mr. Carpenter did not tell us *where*
this article came from. It appears to be issued by US West, but
neither the date or source was given in the article sent here
yesterday.  PAT]

   The days of anonymous phone calls may be nearing an end.

   The Arizona Corporation Commission on Wednesday approved "Caller
ID", a controversial device that flashes the caller's name and number
on a screen when a phone begins ringing.  The commission also approved
several other new services for U S West Communications, including the
option to block the identification.

   U S West is scheduled to begin the service on Feb. 1 in the
Phoenix area and sometime in 1994 in Tuscon.

   But the commission also will require U S West to conduct a
widespread education campaign and offer free line blocking until early
May.

   "I still think it's just another intrusion in people's private
lives," said Terrance Mead, an attorney who represents the Arizonal
Coalition Against Domestic Violence.

   But Tony Seese-Bieda, director of public relations for U S West,
said the company is doing everything it can to protect privacy.  All
customers can keep themselves from automatically being identified by
dialing "*67" before the number, he said."

                             --------

The article continues to discuss the privacy issue, gives a history of
caller ID in Arizona, and incudes basic Q & A's on Caller ID usage and
the associated SS7 features (e.g. "Selective Call Forwarding").


Jim Carpenter, AG Communication Systems, Phoenix, AZ, USA
        ** my opinions are only my opinions **

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

Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
Date: Fri, 09 Oct 1992  21:40:21 EDT
Subject: FCC Moves on Wireless Phone Service


FCC Moves On Wireless Phone Service
{Washington Post}, October 9, 1992, pg. F1)

Three firms granted 'Pioneer Preference'

By Paul Farhi, Washington Post Staff Writer

   A partnership affiliated with the Washington Post Co., and two
other companies received a major boost from federal regulators
yesterday in its effort to win licenses to offer a new wireless
telephone service.

   The Federal Communications Commission tentatively granted American
Personal Communications "pioneer preference," meaning APC may receive
preferential treatment when the government begins awarding licenses.

   APC, which is 70 percent owned by The Post Co., is one of dozens of
companies conducting tests of personal communications services, a new
mobile telecommunications technology that employs small radio
transmitters to send and receive calls from tiny wireless phones.  APC
has been operating an experimental system in the Washington-Baltimore
area for the past year.

   Proponents of the technology believe it has vast potential.  Only a
limited number of companies will be licensed to offer service in each
market because PCS systems use scarce frequency space.

   But the value of the future PCS licenses won't be clear until the
FCC gives final approval to the new technology and resolves key
questions about the size of the markets and the number of competitors
in each market, communications attorneys said.  Final action by the
FCC is expected in the first half of next year, but the timetable
could be thrown off by legal or regulatory challenges from
unsuccessful competitors for the licenses.

   In addition to APC, the FCC granted tentative pioneer preference to
Cox Enterprises and Omnipoint Communications yesterday, and turn down
requests for similar status from 53 other applicants.

   The agency said the three companies deserved licensing preference
because each had developed special services and equipment using their
PCS trials.  Specifically, APC has developed a technology that permits
a PCS provider to share part of the spectrum with another user.
Atlanta-based Cox demonstrated that PCS micro-cells can be linked with
a cable TV system -- potentially enabling cable TV operators to offer
phone service.  And Omnipoint, created equipment now broadly used in
PCS sets.

   The awarding of pioneer preferences to companies testing other
communications technologies has proven to be a controversial practice
because of the difficulty in determining which of numerous applicants
are deserving.  Post Co. officials said the practice could be
challenged in court.

   Indeed, FCC commissioners Andrew C. Barrett and Ervin S. Duggan
expressed reservations about the commission's decision, in view of the
number of competing applicants.

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

Date: Fri, 09 Oct 92 19:18:33 EDT
From: David Leibold <[e-mail]>
Subject: Bell Canada to Use GTE Billing Software


Some news from {The Toronto Star} features an announcement by Bell
Canada that it will be using billing software from GTE in a strategic
alliance.  The intent is to provide a more flexible billing package
for Bell customers.  The GTE software was chosen to provide custom
bills for businesses, and has the capability to bill on pay-per-use
basis, such as for local calls.  Bell Canada has no plans for local
measured service, and would have to slug that one out with the
regulator (CRTC) and certain public opposition.

The business community seemed cautiously optimistic about this
announcement.  It seems to be a wait and see attitude from what the
article described.  There are also mixed feelings expressed by one
communications consultant regretting the fact that the software
couldn't be Canadian-developed, while conceding that an "off-the-shelf"
package like GTE's would be cheaper than an in-house job by Bell.


[e-mail]

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

Date: Sat, 10 Oct 92 07:51:12 EDT
From: Thomas Lapp <[e-mail]>
Subject: Switch Back to AT&T?  NOT!


I was talking to a friend who relayed a most humourus story to me.  He
received a call that was so noisy and scratchy, that all he could
understand was "I can't hear anything, I'll call you right back."

The phone rang again, and again the connection was very noisy.  Again,
"I'll try again to get a better connection."

The third time, the connection was better, but not fantastic.  But he
could understand the lady on the other end.  According to my friend,
he nearly collapsed in laughter when the lady identified herself
finally: she was a telemarketer working for AT&T and wanted to know if
they could get him to come back (from his current Sprint 1+).  She
realized her point was fruitless and finally said, "I don't suppose
you have this (noise) problem with your current carrier?"

"No."

"Oh."

End of conversation.


tom
internet  : mvac23![e-mail]  or  [e-mail] (home)
          : [e-mail] (work)
OSI       : C=US/A=MCI/S=LAPP/D=ID=4398613
uucp      : {ucbvax,mcvax,uunet}!udel!mvac23!thomas
Location  : Newark, DE, USA

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

From: [e-mail] (Jazzman)
Subject: Does Phone Company Log Calls to a 'Busy' Line?
Organization: Nexus
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 21:10:06 GMT


I know that most phone companies log the telephone calls made from one
point to another.  My question is: if I tried to make a local call and
got a busy signal, would my call attempt show up on the phone company
(or anyone elses) log?

In case it matters, the system I'm using is NYNEX in the greater
Boston area.  Also, theres nothing special about my phone: not
monitored, tapped, or anything like that!

Thanks in advance,


John   ([e-mail])


[Moderator's Note: I do not think they usually bother unless the
subscriber has some interest in the information. I do know that many
large inbound call centers (reservations, customer service, credit
authorizatioins, etc) ask for that information in an effort to have an
adequate number of lines available. Many years ago at the Amoco/Diners
sales authorization center (when it was in Chicago) they had numerous
little meters they would read hourly to measure the traffic. Whenever
all trunks in a given group were busy, a counter would increment by
one; and whenever IBT gave a busy signal to a caller then they (IBT)
would send a pulse down a special line which caused another counter in
the Amoco office to increment by one. Still another special circuit
from IBT would send a pulse whenever IBT disconnected a call which had
not yet 'supervised', that is, a 'lost call' in Amoco terminology: one
where the call had been abandoned by the caller without waiting for an
answer, mostly because of a delay in getting a response. When I
operated my recorded message service twenty years ago, I also had IBT
do a 'busy' study for me. They kept track of that data for a couple
months to help me decide if I had enough lines on my system.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (John Holman)
Subject: Use of Single Mode Fiber for Video
Date: Friday October 9, 1992


The University of Wisconsin System is about to undertake a nine campus
fiber optic backbone project.  The inital design calls for 16 strands
of multi mode fibers to Residence Halls and low technology use
buildings and 32 strands to higher IT Buildings.  The plan calls for a
star configuation with the posibility of pulling in ten strands of
single mode where conduit space allows.  I would be interested to hear
from other campuses that have installed interbuilding fiber backbones
as to what their cable configuration includes.  The system plan seems
to arbitrary to me.  The project is explained to utilize four stands
for voice, four for data, four for video and four for building
controls.  The single mode fiber, which was donated by MCI, is
expected to be used for video.  Is anyone out there using single mode
fiber for video in a campus environment?

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

From: [e-mail] (Sarah Johnson)
Subject: Cellular Internationally?
Organization: Western Washington University
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 15:20:07 GMT


I was wondering how Cellular telephones have progressed
internationally.

Specifically, are other countries following the technology used here
in the US? Will there be atime when I can take my cellular phone to
Europe and use it with out a hitch? (I realize there may be problems
with local carrier / account sort of thing, but my question is
primarily with the technology compatibility thing.)


Sarah

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

From: [e-mail] (James R. Saker Jr.)
Subject: NECA 4 Online/CD-ROM?
Organization: University of Nebraska at Omaha
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 16:32:09 GMT


Is anyone aware of the NECA 4 tariff being offered either through
online services (for dialup) or on a CD-ROM library?


Jamie Saker            [e-mail]
Network Costing Analyst        Business/MIS Major
Telenational Communications    Univ. Nebraska at Omaha
[phone]

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

Date: 10-OCT-1992 14:45:26.88
From: Fred E.J. Linton <[e-mail]>
Subject: Fax Store-and-Forward Service Wanted


The "Subject:"-line asks it all -- if there are any fax-transmission
store-and-forward services (doing for FAX what MCI's Messenger and
AT&T's voice-store-and-forward do for voice), how do I find them?

(I'm tired of running into busy trunks, busy recipient fax-machine, or
recipient fax machine's ring-no-answer signals outside office hours in
connection with a fax I'm trying to send to Zimbabwe University.)

[The paper mail version I sent two days ago may get through quicker
than its fax counterpart, at the rate I'm going.]


Many thanks.

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)


[Moderator's Note: Illinois Bell has offered 'fax mailbox' for a
couple years now. This is just like voicemail, but for faxes. You can
either use it as an overflow to your existing fax line (IBT sets up
'transfer on busy/no answer' on that line) or as a stand-alone place
to have your fax messages left; that is, fax senders can dial direct
to the mailbox. You need not even tell them that is what it is since
you program your 'answerback' in the box yourself, just like a
voicemail greeting. If used as an overflow, then the system tries to call
your regular fax line every minute or two to deliver the fax once your
machine is available. Or you can tell it to hold all mail in the box
for your pickup; then you use any fax machine of your choice to call
the mailbox. Naturally, passwords are used to insure privacy and all
system features are user programmable. People without a fax machine at
all can use it to store incoming faxes which they then pick up from a
public fax machine, or one in an office they are visiting, etc.  Costs
about $10 per month I think, maybe less. Like voicemail, faxmail is
virtually non-blocking, busy signals are rare, etc.  PAT]

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

Date: Sat, 10 Oct 92 00:52 GMT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Surrepticious Recording of Calls in a Federal Agency


I have a question I am posting from my own Internet account (which I
pay for out of my own pocket) so I can state this specifically and ask
a public question which might be inappropriate for me to ask from a
government account.

I am a private employee of a contractor to a government agency.  I
work out of that agency but I am not a government employee.

Some rumors have been floating around to the effect that this agency
is now and/or was recording (unannounced to anyone) telephone calls at
this agency, either calls made from the agency, calls made to the
agency, or both, and perhaps only on certain phone lines.

The rumor has it that in one instance a person (a former federal
employee) got to hear a playback of a recording of some personal calls
they made where they were not supposed to be doing so.

For obvious reasons, unless I have solid legal grounding to know
whether or not this form of activity is legal or otherwise, I would
like to get some background from a telecom digest reader who knows
what the law says, or has a copy of the laws dealing with this.

Please note that I am *NOT* referring to SMDR taping or pen registers,
which is what I thought the person who told me this was referring to
(which would record phone numbers dialed; that is not what I am
talking about; I am talking about the (surrepticious) recording of the
audio content of telephone calls.)

Question: Even for a government agency, is it legal for them to record
calls without notification to the parties involved?  I believe this
not only violates the 1968 Federal Wiretap Act but might also violate
the more recent Electronic Communications Protection Act.

I for one don't have anything to worry about; the most I've done is
call MCI's 800 number -- which is okay since the agency isn't charged
for the call -- but I wonder about the legality of this.

Also, I note that this agency does have a special reports office to
accept calls from the public and reports to the agency by employees,
people under its jurisdiction, and the public, and the first thing the
person on that line does when he or she answers is to report that the
line is recorded.  Which strikes me as odd, if the rumor I'm hearing
is true.

I thought the only time where a call could be recorded without the
knowledge of the people on the call -- even in a federal agency -- is
either if there is a wiretap order from a court or it's a security or
law enforcement agency such as the FBI, NSA, CIA or other such. This
agency is not generally a law enforcement agency.

Could someone tell me if I'm wrong and this type of activity is legal?


These opinions ARE those of the owner of this account and nobody else's.


[Moderator's Note: This is better suited for continued discussion in
the comp.privacy forum (where I think you also posted it), but I place
it here for people who might not have seen it so they can reply to you
direct or via comp.privacy. Rules pertaining to employers listening to
calls in the conduct of their business are a bit different than rules
pertaining to third parties just simply snooping illegally on others.
I do not think employers have to announce each and every call they
listen to as long as it is generally known by employees that the
employer may monitor the phones from time to time in an effort to
improve call handling effeciency, etc. This would even apply in the
case of the government *as an employer* I think, although obviously
there are safeguards in place such as you describe when the government
*as a governor* listens to your calls.

The difference between being *employed* by the government and being
*governed* by the government is simply that while you have no
practical choice in the latter case (thus are afforded consititutional
protections against abuse) in the former case no one is guarenteed or
entitled to government employment (or employment by anyone else for
that matter). The employer (or anyone who pays for the telephones) is
entitled to supervise phone use. You say your personal calls may get
overheard also? Well, your personal calls have no place on the
employer's phone system. If this is a problem, make personal calls
from the payphone in the hallway; your employer is NOT permitted to
listen to those calls ever!  PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #770
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa28678;
          10 Oct 92 15:50 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA18523
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 10 Oct 1992 13:58:09 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA25267
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 10 Oct 1992 13:58:01 -0500
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1992 13:58:01 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #771

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 10 Oct 92 13:58:00 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 771

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Comments on the Multimedia Article (James Hanlon)
    Re: More LATA Nuttiness (David Esan)
    Re: LD Transmission Quality Comparison (Andy Sherman)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (James Hanlon)
Subject: Re: Comments on the Multimedia Article
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1992 16:51:45 GMT
Organization: ddsw1.MCS.COM Contributor, Chicago, IL


[e-mail] (Paul Robinson) writes:

> The problem we have is that we have copper wire (or that cheap
> substitute I can't remember the name for, DXC, DGC or something) which
> can't handle large bandwidth.  When people switched from outhouses to

All the above is true enough, but I can get a 500Mhz bandwidth pipe to
my house tomorrow for ten dollars (sometimes less during promotions).
It's coax, but it's 50,000X the bandwidth of tip-ring, and 300X that
of T1. The issue is not "copper is slow, fiber is fast", it's that
telco thinking invariably excludes options that don't involve sending
billions of dollars to them to Rewire America.

> servicing this demand, the only answer we have is to tear out the
> wires and put fiber in.  We will buy the capacity as we want it.  Just
> have the capacity there and have it low enough cost to allow anyone
> who can afford a phone now to get in on this stuff.

How much is an RF modem, bandwidth of 1MHz or so? 50 bucks? How
complex are RF multiplexors? Can you go RF to T-1 or T-3? (MCI seems
to).

> Note to anyone working for a telephone company: Do us all a favor and
> oversupply capacity!  You should build for a factor of one hundred

There is so much excess capacity today that moneymaking organizations
routinely send crude text messages (required bandwidth: roughly 300
baud) down 6MHz-wide channels 24 hours a day. They know they have
bandwidth to burn.

>> Many feel that for the market to take off, the country must have
>> a new communications network capable of opening a video circuit
>> between any given point and another -- just as today's telephone
>> network does for calls.

>  "Video Dial Tone".  You can get it now, it's just too expensive.  What

Or, by changing our perspective, we can merely alter an existing video
communications network from unidirectional to bidirectional capability.

> terms of what people use the space for and instead simply allocate
> them a block of frequency.  If they buy 6MHZ space, they can do FCFMV
> or they can transmit 500 simultaneous telephone calls.  What is
> expensive is the switching equipment.  But it can be done.

Just how expensive are video matrix switches? Who makes them?

> FCFMV telephone calls at $1 a minute.  Charge someone $300 to install
> his line on a finance basis, say over a ten month period.  Charge $100
> a month for the service.

It is currently about $10/$25 for coax-to-the-home; 300/100 is a tough
sell.

>> Highly complex software also will be needed to control and
>> manage new networks capable of carrying large amounts of digital
>> data.

> I believe this to be true; it therefore behooves all of us that the
> systems be done small and simple; it makes failures less dangerous.

The software to allocate, track usage of, and bill for, 50,000X chunks
of bandwidth-time, is not 50,000X more complex than that for X chunks.
Any software developer that quoted me 2X, in fact, would be in for a
cross-examination of his motives.

> To reuse an overworked quote from a movie I've never seen, "If you
> build it, they will come."  If the capacity is there, people will find
> ways to use it that the inventors would never even dream of.  When the

A duchess once said: "You can never have too much bandwidth."

> We need new ideas and we need to think of new ways to use the
> technology and the capacity we have.

Some ideas: RBOCs forbidden by law to subsidize the rebuilding of the
Venezuelan phone system, or to dream up new, expensive ways of
delivering video to my home when I already have an old, cheap way.


Jim Hanlon  [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (David Esan)
Subject: Re: More LATA Nuttiness
Date: 8 Oct 92 19:29:44 GMT
Organization: Moscom Corp., Pittsford NY


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(John R. Levine) writes:

> While we're looking at pointless LATA statistics, the Atlantic City
> LATA appears to be the smallest one in the country based on the number
> of prefixes, of which it only has 64, and probably number of
> subscribers.  Are there any other smaller ones?  It may also be the
> smallest in land area, since it takes only an hour on the Parkway to
> drive from Barnegat at the north end to Cape May at the south end.

Pointless V&H statistics are my business. :-).  Attached are a list of
LATAs and the number of exchanges in each.  It is possible that there
are minor errors here, since this information is transcribed from a
tape to my database, and in doing 50,000+ of these some errors will
creep in.

But, it should be close.

The smallest LATAs have just one entry:

999 is in NPA 504 and is labelled as "OFF SHORE". I assume that it is the
    offshore drilling platforms.
930 is EPPES FORK, VA.  Anyone know anything about it?
921 is FISHERS ISLAND, NY.  One exchange on one island.
981 is in Utah.  It includes three exchanges, for HALCHITA, MONUMENT
    VALLEY, and MONTEZUMA CREEK-ANETH.  My guess is a small independant
    company.

The largest is 730, the monster that takes in a large part of southern
    California and a piece of Arizona.

A complete list of NPA/LATA combinations is below the count list.

LATA NXX LATA NXX  LATA NXX  LATA NXX  LATA NXX  LATA NXX LATA NXX
730 2405  234 435   538    275   252 196    546 147      374 100   376    65
830 1980  632 431   834    272   230 192    478 147      953 94    977    64
460 1889  628 417   134    266   634 191    133 146      828 92    960    61
132 1856  324 414   848    262   344 189    668 144      624 92    973    57
854 1696  832 412   350    257   728 183    426 144      436 90    850    57
358 1277  952 409   326    257   352 182    626 142      370 90    736    57
722 1198  348 401   232    257   638 181    440 141      526 89    550    57
858 1154  732 388   676    250   124 181    130 139      432 87    826    54
238 1053  532 388   354    249   738 179    368 137      362 86    364    54
552 987      528 382   140    248   846 178    544 135      956 85    521    52
438 924      636 378   652    242   670 177    474 135      740 85    428    51
458 894      356 369   122    241   254 175    488 133      240 85    938    48
236 822      482 364   450    237   464 174    256 132      366 82    824    48
128 791      844 353   490    236   630 173    126 132      322 82    570    45
560 777      640 352   454    236   568 172    564 127      446 81    484    45
224 777      939 351   468    233   244 171    338 126      548 79    456    45
228 765      660 350   226    231   648 170    724 122      961 78    937    40
340 686      120 347   852    230   558 166    342 120      562 78    856    39
520 672      452 340   466    228   658 165    242 120      530 78    932    36
566 607      644 335   448    228   654 165    444 119      734 77    980    24
674 586      726 323   222    223   650 165    334 117      330 77    928    24
842 569      534 320   462    221   430 165    556 115      246 76    963    22
524 563      664 319   646    215   325 162    346 114      420 75    862    19
840 550      470 309   248    210   332 161    492 110      360 72    927    16
656 547      320 305   958    207   721 158    442 110      976 70    822    11
920 496      974 302   424    206   138 152    949 109      250 70    929    10
536 492      422 296   522    205   923 150    542 109      220 69    981    3
666 456      476 293   328    205   434 149    480 108      978 67    999    1
860 450      136 293   486    204   951 147    477 107      924 66    930    1
672 442      922 283   635    203   720 147    472 107      540 66    921    1
336 437      620 278   820    200   554 147

This is a list of LATAs and the NPAs that they include.  NPAs may
contain more than one LATA, and LATAs may contain more than one NPA.

LATA NPA LATA NPA  LATA NPA  LATA NPA  LATA NPA  LATA NPA LATA NPA
120 207      250 919   376    217   474 606    538 918      636 605   670    503
122 603      252 804   420    704   474 615    540 505      636 701   670    916
124 802      252 919   422    704   474 704    540 915      638 406   672    206
126 413      254 304   422    803   476 205    542 915      638 605   672    503
128 508      254 703   422    919   477 205    544 806      638 701   672    509
128 617      256 304   424    919   477 601    546 405      640 307   674    206
130 401      256 412   426    919   478 205    546 505      640 308   674    509
132 203      320 216   428    803   478 912    546 719      640 402   676    208
132 212      322 216   428    919   480 205    546 806      640 406   676    503
132 516      322 412   430    704   480 601    548 817      640 507   676    509
132 718      324 614   430    803   480 904    550 915      640 605   720    503
132 914      325 216   432    803   482 205    552 214      640 701   720    702
132 917      326 313   434    803   482 318    552 817      640 712   720    916
133 717      326 317   436    803   482 504    552 903      644 308   721    702
133 914      326 419   438    205   482 601    554 501      644 402   722    408
134 413      328 513   438    404   482 901    554 903      644 605   722    415
134 518      330 812   438    706   484 504    556 817      644 712   722    510
136 315      332 219   438    912   484 601    558 512      644 816   722    707
136 607      334 219   440    803   486 318    560 409      646 303   724    916
138 607      334 419   440    912   486 501    560 713      646 307   726    916
138 717      336 217   442    404   486 903    562 409      646 308   728    209
140 716      336 219   442    706   488 318    564 210      646 605   730    213
140 814      336 317   442    803   490 504    564 512      646 913   730    310
220 609      338 812   442    912   490 601    566 210      648 208   730    602
222 609      340 313   444    912   492 504    566 512      648 406   730    619
224 201      340 517   446    912   520 314    568 210      650 307   730    714
224 609      342 715   448    205   520 618    568 512      650 406   730    805
224 908      342 906   448    904   521 314    570 409      650 701   730    818
226 215      344 517   450    904   522 316    620 319      652 208   730    909
226 717      346 517   450    912   522 417    620 507      652 307   732    619
226 814      348 517   452    904   522 501    620 515      652 503   734    805
228 215      348 616   454    904   522 918    620 605      652 702   736    408
228 302      350 414   456    904   524 712    620 712      652 801   738    209
230 814      350 715   458    407   524 816    624 218      654 208   740    805
232 215      352 612   458    904   524 913    624 715      654 303   820    809
232 717      352 715   460    305   526 417    626 218      654 307   822    809
232 814      354 608   460    407   526 501    626 605      654 308   824    809
232 908      354 815   462    502   526 918    626 612      654 406   826    809
234 412      356 414   462    606   528 314    628 612      654 605   828    809
236 202      356 815   462    812   528 501    630 402      654 801   830    809
236 301      358 219   464    502   528 901    630 507      656 303   832    907
236 410      358 312   464    615   528 918    630 605      656 308   834    808
236 703      358 414   464    901   530 318    630 712      656 719   840    403
238 301      358 708   466    606   530 501    632 319      656 801   842    604
238 410      358 815   466    615   532 316    632 507      658 719   844    204
240 301      360 608   468    502   532 405    632 515      660 303   846    506
240 304      360 815   468    601   532 417    632 712      660 602   848    709
240 717      362 618   468    901   532 719    632 816      660 702   850    403
240 814      364 815   470    205   532 918    634 309      660 801   850    819
242 301      366 217   470    502   534 308    634 319      664 505   852    902
242 410      366 309   470    615   534 402    634 608      664 915   854    416
244 615      366 815   472    205   534 719    634 815      666 602   854    519
244 703      368 309   472    404   534 913    634 816      666 619   854    613
246 703      368 815   472    615   536 405    635 319      666 801   854    705
248 804      370 217   472    704   536 806    635 507      668 505   854    807
250 804      374 217   472    706   538 316    636 218      668 602   856    902
858 416      920 203   923    614   937 317    952 813      960 208   976    217
858 418      921 516   924    814   937 513    953 904      960 406   977    217
858 514      922 513   927    703   938 217    956 615      960 509   977    309
858 519      922 606   928    804   938 812    956 703      961 915   978    618
858 613      922 812   929    703   939 813    958 402      963 406   980    602
858 819      923 216   930    804   949 919    958 712      973 619   981    801
860 306      923 419   932    304   951 919    958 913      974 716   999    504
862 403      923 513   932    703


David Esan      [e-mail]

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

Date: Fri, 9 Oct 92 09:32:01 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Andy Sherman)
Subject: Re: LD Transmission Quality Comparison


On 6 Oct 92 06:06:36 GMT, [e-mail] (Greg Andrews) said:

> [e-mail] recently wrote:

>> Every so often, I find that a better rate can be had from MCI or from
>> Sprint by using some plan or another. Each time I have started routing
>> calls over anyone other than AT&T, all hell breaks loose. I find
>> failed conversations aplenty. UUCP sends me messages right and left
>> peppered with 'LOGIN FAILED' or 'CONVERSATION FAILED' or 'LOST LINE'.
>> Frequently, throughput falls from 1400 CPS to something like 300-400
>> CPS. And invariably, my overall bill goes WAY up. Why? First there is
>> the lower throughput. Then there are the billing errors.

> I can't speak to the billing errors, but the modem symptoms you
> describe seem to this Telebit technician like a well-known interaction
> between Telebit's PEP modulation and the echo cancellers used my MCI,
> Sprint, and others.

> Rather than poor quality, the problem was being caused by the echo
> cancellers interfering with the modem transmissions.  When the modems
> stopped sending data to train themselves to the line conditions, the
> echo cancellers would turn themselves off.  The difference in the
> modem 'conversation' between data transfer mode and training mode was
> enough for the echo cancellers to change their behavior.  The modems
> saw an undisturbed line when they trained, so they couldn't adapt.
> Why didn't AT&T lines do this?  They used different brands of echo
> cancellers.  (Perhaps because their network hadn't used fiber optics
> until very recently?)

First off, AT&T has had *some* optical fiber in the network for some
time.  But the particular medium of digital transmission should matter
not one whit for how to do echo cancellation.  The propagation delays
are the same for all terrestrial links.

Yes AT&T uses an echo cancellation scheme that is different from that
used by the other carriers.  Wanna take a guess as to which brand?
Most of the AT&T long distance network is switched by #4 ESS(R)
switches, which have integral echo cancellation on all trunks that are
greater than some given distance.  (Some one of my former colleagues
can tell us if that number is proprietary).  These echo cancellers
automatically drop out as soon as a modem guard tone is detected.
That's why none of the modems had a problem on AT&T.  (It was once
alleged in this forum, by some dweeb or another, that AT&T never had a
modem problem because AT&T didn't do echo cancellation, but that was
B.S.)

> Telebit worked with the engineers from a couple of the echo canceller
> manufacturers for several months.  Eventually a solution was found
> where the modems would be able to keep the echo cancellers disabled.
> The modem firmware was updated to add the 'echo canceller mods'
> starting with version 7.00 (BC7.00, GE7.00, and GF7.00, though the
> T1000 uses FA2.10).

Had the echo cancellers done the right thing to begin with, Telebit
would never have had the problem.

> The point I've been trying to make is that your connection troubles
> might have been caused by this interaction and not by the quality of
> the LD carrier.  It would be unfair to criticize the LD carrier
> because the original PEP modems couldn't keep their echo cancellers
> off the line.

Really?  I consider the inability of echo cancellers to detect a modem
to be a quality issue.  It is not a quality, customer driven solution
to force customers to modify their CPE because the network
infrastructure is of inferior quality.  Remember that there was one
carrier whose infrastructure never had the problem and whose network
could and can deal with the unmodified Telebit modems.  The problem
was not that the PEP modems couldn't turn off the echo cancellers, the
problem was that the echo cancellers couldn't (and can't) detect the
PEP modem without forcing the modem manufacturer to add non-standard
stuff.  You don't consider that a quality metric?  I do.

Besides all that, every now and then somebody posts a throughput test
for the big three carriers, and AT&T almost always wins.  That also is
John Higdon's experience, but I don't know if he's ever posted the
numbers or any $$/KB_transferred figures derived from them.

Needless to say, I speak for neither my former nor current employers.


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 #771
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa18431;
          12 Oct 92 9:30 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA11531
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 11 Oct 1992 23:21:55 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA08808
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 11 Oct 1992 23:21:40 -0500
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1992 23:21:40 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #772

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 11 Oct 92 23:21:44 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 772

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Operator -- Live or Memorex? (Lauren Weinstein)
    Question For Michigan Residents (Damon A. Koronakos)
    ADPCM Speech Encoder/Decoder IC (Neezam Mohd Bohari)
    Personal Communications Services: Washington Post Co. (Nigel Allen)
    Questions About Token Ring Bridge ([e-mail])
    Seeking Information on SS7 Packets (Raum Pattikonda)
    "Movie On Demand" Service Tested (Washington Post via Paul Robinson)
    Old Telephone Wiring at Network Interface (Arnold de Leon)
    Fiber to the Home (Leonard Erickson)
    Private PBX Installation (Don Smith)
    Craig Shergold (Ken Dykes)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sat, 10 Oct 92 11:07 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Lauren Weinstein)
Subject: Operator -- Live or Memorex?


Greetings.  The first few times, I couldn't put my finger on what was
bothering me about the calls.  Something had changed when I called the
AT&T (0-0) operator, possibly sometime within the last couple of
weeks.

After a few more calls I realized what seemed odd.  Operators were
answering with "This is (name) with AT&T -- how may I help you?"  But
the pause between the first and second phrases was often a wee bit too
short -- like an audio edit that had been made a little too tightly.
And listening carefully, I realized that the volume level between the
opening phrases and my conversation with the operators sometimes
varied just a litte.  That was it -- the opening phrases were
recorded!  Apparently the ID and "how may I help you" were (presumably
digitally) recorded separately, and were being played back in
sequence, with the operator actually cut in and listening at the end
of the second phrase.

When I asked a couple of operators about this, they immediately
confirmed that the intros were recorded.  They said that this was
being done to give them a bit more rest time between calls.  This
makes sense--it allows the operators to rest their voices a little
while not delaying the handling of any calls.  It doesn't actually
increase call capacity (since the operator position must be free
before the recordings are played, since the caller must already be
attached to that position before the playback).

Another benefit of the system is that it assures a uniform answering
message from each operator which includes their name.

So, the next time you call your 0-0 operator, listen carefully.  Is
the greeting live, or is it ...?


 --Lauren--


[Moderator's Note: Actually this is not new. Illinois Bell operators
have used these recorded greetings for a few years now. In many cases
they do not have to speak at all as in the case of a call to DA where
the recording greets the caller, the caller gives his request and the
operator merely types it in, then the computer announces the number
the operator selected from the listings. I thought AT&T had been using
this for quite awhile also, although not with a standard response in
the system. (It was up to each operator to record what they wanted to
say there.)   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Damon A. Koronakos)
Subject: Question For Michigan Residents
Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University.
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1992 02:07:11 GMT


Hi Michigan hackers out there..

A friend of mine in Kalamazoo recently got an IBM-compatible machine.
I would like to be able to exchange electronic mail with him if
possible.

Does anyone have any suggestions about how I might establish net
access for him?  Is there something like netcom.com in the Bay Area in
the Kalamazoo area (a cheap service which provides net access)?  I
don't know if Prodigy/Compuserve-type services provide email access to
the net, how much extra (if any) this costs, etc.

Any suggestions much appreciated!!


(pls send replies to [e-mail]).
Damon Koronakos       [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Neezam Mohd Bohari)
Subject: ADPCM Speech Encoder/Decoder IC
Organization: George Washington University
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1992 02:58:30 GMT


I am looking for an ADPCM Speech Encoder/Decoder I.C in small quantity
(two or three pieces). This IC is basically compresses the toll
quality voice signal (like in telephone line) and decompresses later
on. The input signal is serial digital PCM data stream from Compander
I.C and it generates the compressed bytes in parallel, so you can feed
it to PC bus etc, and vice versa.

So far, I had came across with NEC Electronics product ic # uPD7730
(old version and its production is discontinued).

   #  uPD77C30 new version, but currently not available, even
      for sampling (as far US regions is concerns). The best I can
      do is to place an order and wait the next 16 weeks,
      which is something I can't stand for.

 If any of you out there know where-how I can get this I.C. please
inform me as soon as possible, or had some extras or spare regardless
the old version or new one I AM WILLING to buy from you (please
consider a gift anyway).

Those folks who know any cross-product for this IC PLEASE help me.


e-mail [e-mail]   phone : [phone]
Thanks in advance.

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Personal Communications Services: Washington Post Co.
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 92 23:43:02 EDT


Here is a press release from the Washington Post Co. and American
Personal Communications.

Washington Post Co. Receives FCC 'Tentative Pioneer Preference'
for Personal Communications Services

Contact: Guyon Knight of the Washington Post Co., 202-334-6642,
         or Albert Grimes, 410-825-4221,
         or W. Scott Schelle, 202-296-0005, both of
         American Personal Communications

   WASHINGTON, Oct. 8 -- The Washington Post Co. announced today that
its affiliated limited partnership, American Personal Communications
(APC), has received from the Federal Communications Commission a
tentative pioneer's preference for Personal Communications Services.

   This preference, if finalized, will give APC one of two or more
licenses for a market area yet to be defined by the FCC.  APC had
applied for a pioneer's preference for the PCS licensing area
encompassing the Washington/Baltimore markets.  The pioneer's
preference decision today will be subject to further comment, and a
final decision on the preference grants will be made at the time PCS
services are authorized by the FCC, a step expected to occur in the
first half of next year.

   APC is a partnership of The Washington Post Co. and principals of
Schelle Cellular Group, Inc.  Since November 1991, APC has been
operating personal communications systems in Washington, D.C.,
northern Virginia, and the Baltimore region under an experimental
license authorized by the FCC in February 1990.

   Wayne Schelle, chairman of APC, said: "Personal Communications
Systems will be one of the major international growth industries of
the 1990s.  The FCC's actions represent a significant step in enabling
American manufacturing and service companies to be major factors in
the new business.  We're delighted we have been able to participate in
this industry from its inception."

   Martin Cohen, vice president of The Washington Post Co., said:
"This tentative award from the FCC reflects the creative and thorough
work done by the APC staff, especially in the area of technological
innovation.  Market and field testing, which are ongoing, also are
contributing greatly to the advancement of the process."

   Personal communications services embrace a range of wireless
telephony products that will be relatively inexpensive, small in size
and that will provide a range of voice and data services.  They
immediately will use digital technology, which permits clearer
conversation with less interruption and more privacy than traditional
radio phones.

   Alan Spoon, chief operating officer of The Washington Post Co.,
said he was very pleased and excited by the tentative pioneer
preference award, but cautioned that the FCC's rule-making process
still must be completed in a timely manner to permit the new industry
to roll out.

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

From: [e-mail] (yyang)
Subject: Questions About Token Ring Bridge
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1992 03:51:17 GMT


I have some problems bridging two IBM token rings together.

We have two token ring network running at two different buildings.  We
try to use fiber optic cable to bridge them together.  The problem is
the cable come out of the LAM on both side is T1 type.  Is there a
device that converts it into fiber optic?

We have AS/400 and PCs on both rings.  What kind of hardware and
software do we need to do the bridge?

I'm not very familiar with bridge and router.  Are there any books and
technical references that discuss in details about bridge hardware
products as well as software protocals?

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

From: [e-mail] (Raum Pattikonda)
Subject: Seeking Information on SS7 Packets
Organization: Texas Tech University
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1992 18:36:50 GMT


I am not very familier with SS7 protocols. I would like to know if the
SS7 packets contain the calling card number information for the calls
made using the calling card. Can someone also please sugest a good
book on SS7.

Thanks in advance.


Raum Pattikonda     Internet: [e-mail]
Dept. of Computer Science    Texas Tech University

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

Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1992  21:42:05 EDT
Subject: "Movie On Demand" Service Tested


(Washington Post Business Digest, October 9, 1992, Page F2)

Three communications giants launched a $10 million, 18-month test
south of Denver that may determine the future of home movie viewing.
Spokesmen for AT&T, Tele-Communications and US West said to determine
what people will watch and how often, 300 Littleton, Colo., residences
are being hooked up to one of two services: a "movie-on-demand"
service called Take One, or an enhanced pay-per-view service called
Hits at Home.

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

From: [e-mail] (Arnold de Leon)
Subject: Old Telephone Wiring at Network Interface
Organization: Synopsys, Inc.
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1992 06:15:47 GMT


I just had a second line installed at our house.  Since a second line
has never been installed here before PacBell installed a new network
interface box for the second line.  The house is 39 years old.

I had decided to do my own inside wiring.  My plan was to simply tie
in the second line to the existing wiring on the second pair (yellow
and black).

When I opened the old network interface I had trouble finding the
yellow/black pair.  I eventually found the yellow wires connected to a
screw connector.  There is also a wire running from this connector to
the new network interface.

The wire does *not* go to any of the connectors used for phones.  Is
it some sort of ground?  Was it used for powering Princess phones?

On the old cables I could not find the black wire.  Was it standard
practice to clip it?  Every jack inside that I've opened has it.  I
haven't checked in the crawl space yet for a junction.

I did find one cable at the old network interface that had all four
wires (It appears that there are three runs to feed the jacks into the
house).  It appears to have been a more recent addition.  It had the
yellow/black wires simply unconnected.  I was able to use that to
bring the second line into the house.

Can I simply take the yellow wire from the other cables and use them
for the second line?  I am assuming that I can find the black in the
sheath.

Should/can I ask PacBell to move both my lines to the new network
interface box?  It's so much easier to work with.  The old boxes were
obviously from the days when MaBell owned everything.

Any general comments?  Any recommended reading for someone doing
inside phone wiring?


Arnold de Leon  [e-mail]
NCS        Synopsys Inc.
[phone]    700 E. Middlefield Road
        Mtn. View, CA 94043-4033

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

Date: Sat, 10 Oct 92 06:25:45 PST
From: [e-mail] (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Fiber to the Home


In TELECOM Digest V12#763 [e-mail] (david.g.lewis)
writes:

> Using your 5000 phone lines per (I'm guessing you mean) fiber pair, at
> 64kb/s for a phone line, you're talking sending 160Mb/s to each house.
> Let's use 155Mb/s, since that's an STS-3 SONET/SDH rate.  Anyone know
> what an STS-3 FOT is going for these days?  I don't have any
> up-to-date information (and if I did, I probably wouldn't be allowed
> to post it), but I'd guess that $30k/link (both ends) is correct
> within an order of magnitude.  Even if using ring architectures and
> ADMs can drop your costs by a factor of two (unlikely to impossible),
> you're talking $15k electronics costs per house.

> Even if the cost of overlaying the fiber itself goes to zero, you've
> just incurred a $15k per subscriber incremental cost.  At a 50,000
> line CO, that's an investment of $750 million dollars.  For capacity
> which will, basically, sit there until people figure out how to use
> it.

On the other hand, how *cheap* could a 64kb/s interface be? That's all
it'd take to supply a "regular" phone line. And in the quantities
involved, I'd expect the cost to drop *fast*. For the sake of
argument, call it $50. (I've seen RS-232 to fiber adapters in that
range).

At this price, the PUC could likely be talked around. And if you need
extra capacity, instead of running more lines, you replace the
interface box at the user premises. I'm not sure whether the CO end of
the fiber would be better served by a box capable of handling a range
of line capcities, or by a dedicated box. Either way, at some point,
in the course of upgrading, it'll be necessary to "move" the fiber to
a different box. While this is not as simple as splicing copper, I
doubt that it'd be *that* expensive.

The hard part is dealing with the fiber between the user and the
exchange. In urban areas, boosters can be avoided. In the suburbs we
have a problem. Because I can't see an amplifier that will uniformly
handle all the different signals that could be present on a fiber
given my scheme above. But I don't really know enough about fiber to
know if my feeling is correct on this point.


uucp: uunet!m2xenix!puddle!51!Leonard.Erickson
Internet: [e-mail]

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

Date: Sun, 11 Oct 92 15:17:06 -0400
From: [e-mail] (Don Smith)
Subject: Private PBX Installation


Looking at a Panasonic KXT-1232 Key system that uses the KXT-7000
series phones. We would like to know any advantage/disadvantages of
the system.  Any recommendations on other Key systems would be
welcome.


Send E-mail to [e-mail]


Thanks,
Don Smith

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

Date: Wed, 7 Oct 92 17:21:43 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Ken Dykes)
Subject: Craig Shergold


Modem tax? did someone say modem tax? :-)      -ken, thinkage ltd.


 >From: [e-mail] (Ben Scott)
 >Newsgroups: rec.humor.funny
 >Subject: Craig Shergold
 >Date: 3 Oct 92 23:30:02 GMT

This just in -- FCC official Craig Shergold has announced new
regulations to add a fee to phone lines used for telecommunication,
including bulletin boards and public network services.  Critics say he
is still bitter from a childhood experience during which he was buried
underneath several tons of get-well cards, largely due to the
well-meaning efforts of computer users all over the world, and this
has sparked his current crackdown.

Everyone reading this message would be affected by a tax on modem
lines!  It's vital that we make ourselves heard, and stop this FCC
ruling.  Please, forward this message to as many bulletin boards and
services as you can, and encourage everyone you know to sign petitions
against this plan.  Send them to Mr. Shergold at the FCC in
Washington, DC.

                              (United Wire Services, July 2002)

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #772
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa19458;
          12 Oct 92 9:56 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA21314
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 12 Oct 1992 00:33:44 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA30089
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 12 Oct 1992 00:33:32 -0500
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 00:33:32 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #773

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 12 Oct 92 00:33:30 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 773

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    What is WSM? (Was Cellular Phones With Scramblers) ([e-mail])
    Michigan Bell: Business vs Residential Rates (Ken Jongsma)
    Phone Network Simulator (Andrew Klossner)
    Detection of Pulse Dial Codes by Information Response Systems (Mark James)
    Touch Tone Question (Tom Kovar)
    "It's a New NPA in Georgia..." (Paul Robinson)
    "...is the Highest Law of the Land..." (Paul Robinson)
    ATM Technical Information Wanted (Josh Cohen)
    Another List of Cellular Phone Prices (Paul Robinson)
    911 Calls from Remote Locations (Joseph Bergstein)
    Caller-ID Privacy Question (Jason Hunsaker)
    Email to Serbia (Yugoslavia) (Kirill Tchashchin)
    Huh? (John Higdon)
    LEC Repair Disservice (Steven S. Brack)
    Smart Equipment? (Carl Moore)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sun, 11 Oct 92 14:48 GMT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: What is WSM? (Was Cellular Phones With Scramblers)


Carl Moore (Cmoor@@brl.mil) asked what is WSM ...

WSM is a clear channel radio station that operates out of the Grand
Old Opry in Nashville.  I've never had the opportunity to listen to it
(and I don't really care for country music anyway) but I understand it
can be heard in some 23 states.

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

Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1992 10:32:08 EDT
From: Ken Jongsma x7702 <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Michigan Bell: Business vs Residential Rates


In a recent bill insert from Michigan Bell (News and Views), a small
article caught my eye. The article was promoting the installation of a
second phone line. This is nothing new. However, one paragraph read as
follows:

 "Home based workers who use their phone lines for business more than
  50% of the time need a business line."

At first glance, this seems to be a pretty reasonable compromise on
class of service billing. How one determines 50% may be open to
discussion, but it beats the attitudes of some companies that want to
bill business rates if you so much as publicise your phone number.


Kenneth R Jongsma          [e-mail]
Smiths Industries      73115,[e-mail]
Grand Rapids, Michigan           [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Andrew Klossner)
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 92 12:26:11 PDT
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Phone Network Simulator


I want to test a modem's network interface without connecting to a
live telephone network.  I've heard that there are devices with
several RJ-11 jacks that simulate network interfaces, but I don't know
where to look for them.  Can you give me pointers to such devices?


Andrew Klossner  ([e-mail])

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

From: [e-mail] (Mark James)
Subject: Detection of Pulse Dial Codes by Information Response Systems
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Mark James)
Organization: Basser Dept of Computer Science, University of Sydney, Australia
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1992 08:25:50 GMT


I dialed an airline automated infomation system the other day and it
allowed responses to be either tone or pulse encoded.

The tones could be detected at any time, but you had to wait till
after a beep for the pulse code to be recognised.

What mechanism to they use to detect the pulses?

Can you buy equipment that will respond to tones and pulses?

Are pulses only able to be detected on an incoming analog line, or
could they also be detected on an ISDN line from a call originating in
the POTS network?

Thanks for your help,


Mark James                                   |  EMAIL : [e-mail]  |
Basser Department of Computer Science, F09   |  PHONE : [phone]   |
The University of Sydney NSW 2006 AUSTRALIA  |  FAX   : [phone]   |

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

From: [e-mail] (Tom Kovar)
Subject: Touch Tone Question
Organization: Inst.of Theor.Chemistry,Univ.of Vienna,Austria
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1992 13:30:46 GMT


I've got a problem with touch tone.  Our nice city has parts of its
telephone network already on the touch tone system, parts without it.
I am living in a touch tone district; our institute is still in the
pulse dialing region. But the internal network of the institute is
touch tone, again.

And this is the problem. I want to reach my replying machine at
home, and send it some touch tone signals. Unfortunately, our
institute's "gateway" transforms all outgoing touch tone signals into
pulse sequences, thus the remote end gets just the first trace of the
beep, interrupted by the pulsing. And, naturally, does not react.

Nobody knows here, how (if??) I can force the gateway to stop the
transformation of the beeps into pulse sequences. Is there any
standard defined method for that?

I'd be very grateful for any help.


Desperately,

Tom
(+43/1) 436141 670       (+43/1) 214-0608 priv.


[Moderator's Note: Does your system continue pulsing even after the
connection has been established?   You might try hitting the * or #
keys first, then the answering machine commands. Some systems will
quit pulsing and just pass along the tones if they get the * or #
first as a signal to not pulse but just pass along what is heard.
Other than that, you may have to get one of the handheld touchtone
pads which you hold up to the receiver and press ... and that is
assuming your system won't start pulsing when it hears those tones
also. Incidentally, in the regular course of dialing, what does the *
and # produce? Sometimes they act like repeat dial, etc.   PAT]

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

Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1992  21:26:51 EDT
Subject: "It's a New NPA in Georgia..."


(With apologies to Ray Charles...)

"It's a new area code in Georgia,
 Looks Like a new area code in Georgia,
 Feels like I'm dialing all over the world..."

According to a map I have received, all of Georgia which is currently
in area code 404 will move to area code 706 except for the following:

Entirely in 404: Cobb, Gwinnett, De Kalb, Clayton, Henry,
                 Rockdale, Fulton, and Douglas Counties.

Split between 404 and 706 are the following:
                 Spaulding, Carroll, Cowita, Fayette, Walton,
                 Barrow, Forsyth, and Cherokee Counties

Area code 912 does not change.


Paul Robinson -- [e-mail]
These (uninformed) opinons are my own, and no one else is (stupid
enough to be) responsible for them.

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

Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1992  21:50:21 EDT
Subject: "...is the Highest Law of the Land..."


Here's a little tidbit I forgot about.

Many years ago I lived in California and did some research into State
Constitutional provisions and discovered something interesting that is
rarely mentioned.

It is also unusual in that it is a feature which no other state
provides for, and is an extremely strong provision.

Two sections of the California Constitution provide that the highest
law of the state is not the State Constitution, but the Public
Utilities Code.  The State Legislature may create any provisions in
the Public Utilities Code and as long as those provisions are
applicable to the regulation of Public Utilities, if those provisions
conflict with the State Constitution, the provision of the Public
Utilities Code will override the State Constitution.


Paul Robinson -- [e-mail]
These (uninformed) opinons are my own, and no one else is (stupid
enough to be) responsible for them.


[Moderator's Note: That is a very interesting finding ... where the
state constitution is a bit hard to change, public utility commissions
are bought and sold all the time.  :(   PAT]

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

Date: Sun, 11 Oct 92 22:38:02 -0400
From: Josh Cohen EMT <[e-mail]>
Subject: ATM Technical Information Wanted


Do you have or know where I can get any technical information on ATM
machines/cards or other magnetically encoded card systems? I am
currently taking a proseminar course at Lehigh University in Computer
Engineering and that is my topic.  Unfortunately up to now, I have not
been able to find much information at all.

Please help :-)


[e-mail]    [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: Actually, the banks, credit card processors and a
few others would prever that you not find out much information about
the topic ... but TELECOM Digest readers will come to the rescue I am
sure with all you ever wanted to know on the topic.    PAT]

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

Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1992  21:59:54 EDT
Subject: Another List of Cellular Phone Prices


Three cellular phone offers appear in Luskin's {Washington Post} ad,
October 9:

Quad Nam, Antenna and Cigarete Lighter included, Transportable Hands
Free, $49.00 (Why does a cellular phone include a cigarette lighter? :))

GE Hand-Held Cellular phone, $169.00

Neither of these mention any tie-in requirements.

Motorola "tote" Cellular Phone, "Transportable from car-to-car,
Antenna & Cigarette Lighter, Full 3 watts, No Installation Required,
Certain Cellular Telephone Company Restriction may apply."  $0.01
(That is correct, one cent.)


Paul Robinson -- [e-mail]
These (uninformed) opinions are mine alone (because nobody else
is stupid enough to have them).


[Moderator's Note: I think that was a typographical error and meant to
say 'cigarette lighter adapter plug', ie. you can charge or operate
the phone from the car battery. Even though those two you mentioned
did not include a cellular company contract in them, are you certain
that somewhere in small print it was not otherwise mentioned in the
ad?   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Joseph Bergstein)
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1992 12:20:10 -0500
Subject: 911 Calls From Remote Locations


As an added note to discussion of PBX originated 911 calls, I submit
the following cautionary story.  I've heard that an area firm has a
main office with a large PBX, and several remote satellite offices
with small key or hybrid systems.  The small remote office systems are
connected to the main PBX via OPX lines, and have no direct outside
calling capability at those locations.  All outbound calls are routed
via the OPX lines to the main PBX where they then go out either on
local CO trunks, or T-1 service to the IXC.

Well, some months ago, as the story goes, a 911 call was placed from a
remote location because someone appeared to have had a heart attack.
The county dispatcher used the E911 data to determine where to
dispatch police and ambulance.  Well, you guessed it!  They showed up
at the main office, because that's what the ANI indicated for the CO
trunks; not ten miles away at the remote location where the call
originated.  The story concluded with note that the police dispatcher
was supposed to (and failed to) verbally verify the address before
dispatching the ambulance.

I'm not sure it's possible, but if you manage a similar configuration,
you should try to contact the E911 telecom manager to see if the
database for your home office CO trunk ANI's can be flagged to force
the dispatcher to verify address prior to dispatch.  This can be life
threatening in the wrong circumstances.

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

Date: 11 Oct 1992 20:33:29 -0600 (MDT)
From: Jason Hunsaker <[e-mail]>
Subject: Caller-ID Privacy Question
Organization: Utah State University


Maybe I'm missing the point, but if blocking caller-ID is such a big
issue of privacy, what's wrong with having call blocking made
available as part of unlisted and/or unpublished number services?

That is to say, if one requests an unlisted and/or unpublished number,
the caller-ID block is automatic.

If one has a regular listed, published number, there is no blocking.

It seems so obvious to me.  What loop-holes or problems does this
solution have?

The people for whom privacy is such a big issue probably already have
unlisted or unpublished numbers, and thus caller-ID blocking would be
obvious for them.

For the rest of us, what's all the concern about?

Businesses selling your phone number?  If it's already in the phone
book, what difference does it make?  What would be the difference
between that and the 800 call tracking that business can already get?

Someone enlighten me please regarding this.


Jason Hunsaker  -|-  Logan, Utah  -|-  Internet: [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: We pretty much gave up on Caller-ID pro/con and
privacy discussions here a couple years ago because they were going no
where and I was overloaded with messages all the time. I published
this message from Mr. Hunsaker so that people who want to do so can
contact him personally in email. And of course the comp.privacy group
moderated by Dennis Rears will entertain these messages also.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Kirill Tchashchin)
Subject: Email to Serbia (Yugoslavia)
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Newsbytes News Network / Moscow Bureau
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 92 00:10:17 GMT


Hi:

As far as I know, EUnet has discussed the implementation of the
Serbian embargo (disconnecting the mail link, literally speaking). I
know that Russians tried to keep the link alive, as it's rather better
to have them beating each other in the flame war, not in actual war.
But this did not work and EUnet has decided to disconnect. I don't
know for how long it will stay in this state. Will appreciate any
further information.


Kirill Tchashchin     Newsbytes News Network

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

Date: Sun, 11 Oct 92 00:28 PDT
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Huh?


Latest Sprint commercial:

"We interrupt this commercial for this important message. An
independent consumer organization has found that among unrestricted
calling plans, Sprint often offers the lowest rate with the least
restrictions."

So let us take a look at this (for those who shop by listening to
commercials rather than looking at rates) statement and see what it
tells us. It says that what Sprint calls "unrestricted" actually has
restrictions. Sometimes those restricted calling plans (which Sprint
refers to as "unrestricted") have lower rates than the competition
(but not always).

Pretty heavy stuff. Guess I should immediately "switch to Sprint"!


John Higdon  |   P. O. Box 7648   |   [phone]     |       FAX:
[e-mail] | San Jose, CA 95150 | 10288 0 700 FOR-A-MOO | [phone]


[Moderator's Note: Speaking of interuptions for important messages,
the Chicago papers had an clever and funny advertisment Sunday.
Channel 50 ran a full page ad showing the three presidential
candidates and a caption saying "at six pm central time tonight, seven
television networks will be showing you these three men. Here at
Channel 50, we will be showing you these three guys instead."  Then
immediatly below the caption was a picture of the Three Stooges. I
thought that ad was pretty funny.    PAT]

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

Date: 11 Oct 1992 17:31:45 -0400 (EDT)
From: [e-mail] (Steven S. Brack)
Subject: LEC Repair Disservice (was Happy With MCI)


I recently called Ohio Bell to report that one of their machines that
generated SIT recordings wasn't operating correctly.  No matter how
many times I repeated myself, in successively simpler (non-telecom)
language, the teledroid at the other end couldn't understand what
trouble I was reporting.  I finally had to resort to the "let me speak
to your supervisor" approach to get anywhere.

The specific problem: on calls to invalid numbers, the recording was
quite garbled.  What the CSR at Ohio Bell thought the problem was:

    1) Are you sure it's not in your equipment?
    2) It's probably a problem with your long-distance company.

I honestly don't know how some people get jobs in the telecom
industry.


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]

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

Date: Sun, 11 Oct 92 16:44:41 EDT
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject: Smart Equipment?


It has been discussed here that Bellcore recommends that 1 +NPA + 7D
be useable for all calls, not necessarily meaning that 7D for local
calls should be dropped.  The equipment would have to be smart enough
to recognize those prefixes which are local.

A public reference to smart equipment was made on a Philadelphia TV
station when the "no 1" announcement was made (i.e., change from 1 +
7D to 7D for long distance within 215).  It was said then that the
equipment was smart enough to spot the exchange and know what kind of
call it was.

That announcement about 215 area did not mention the quirk I found
later for Adamstown and Denver, which are out on the fringe of 215.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #773
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa16306;
          13 Oct 92 0:26 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA03933
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 12 Oct 1992 22:03:16 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA08975
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 12 Oct 1992 22:03:07 -0500
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 22:03:07 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #774

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 12 Oct 92 22:03:10 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 774

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: What it Costs to Have the President Over (John Holman)
    Re: What it Costs to Have the President Over (Barry Mishkind)
    Re: What it Costs to Have the President Over (Dave Levenson)
    Re: Highway Call Boxes -- Radio, But Not All Cellular (Lauren Weinstein)
    Re: Highway Call Boxes (Sue Miller)
    Re: Highway Call Boxes (John Gilbert)
    Re: Highway Call Boxes (Steve Forrette)
    Re: Highway Call Boxes (Hon Wah Chin)
    Re: Highway Call Boxes (Bob Turner)
    Re: Cellular Phones With Scramblers Attached (Ted Hadley)
    Re: Cellular Phones With Scramblers Attached (John Gilbert)
    Re: Cellular Phones with scramblers attached (Rob Bailey)
    Today's Price on Cellular Phones (Paul Robinson)
    Re: Cellular Interception in Private Talk (Macy Hallock)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (John Holman)
Subject: Re: What it Costs to Have the President Over
Date: Mon, Oct 12, 1992


I just heard on the radio that the city of Milwaukee spent $25,000
for security alone for a Bush visit on Labor Day and $8,000 for a
Clinton visit.  The president was also just in another city (Fond du
Lac) in Wisconsin and a friend of mine went to the rally with this
report, "Anyone wearing a campaign button that was not the President's
had to remove them!"  Some were anti-Bush buttons were confiscated and
people were told they could get them backafter the rally.

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

From: [e-mail] (Barry Mishkind)
Subject: Re: What it Costs to Have the President Over
Organization: Datalog Consulting, Tucson, AZ
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 92 04:50:07 GMT


Jim Thornton <[e-mail]> writes:

> Finally, the author states that arrangements are made for the phone
> even when the president is merely flying over the city.

With all the travel due to the election, I wonder what all this costs?


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


[Moderator's Note: It costs plenty. Of course with a deficit of umpty-
trillion dollars, I guess it is a small outlay by comparison. Do you
know how Perot got to the debate Sunday night?  He flew on a
commercial airline with a couple aides, and took a taxi from the
airport to the hall. On the plane, he greeted people who came up to
him to wish him well, etc.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Dave Levenson)
Subject: Re: What it Costs to Have the President Over
Organization: Westmark, Inc.
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 03:33:48 GMT


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

> I saw Reagan come back from a trip once and land at the Pentagon
> instead of the White house.  A six lane road leading into DC was
> closed off.  And there were officers stationed everywhere.  There was
> no way to get anywhere near him.  I was one of five people that
> stopped and watched the landing from the Pentagon parking lot.

I happened to be in New York City a few weeks ago when President Bush
also happened to be in town.

I was heading home to New Jersey, in the midst of the evening
rush-hour, and had waited almost 45 minutes in line to enter the
Holland Tunnel (it goes under the Hudson River, from lower Manhattan
to NJ).  When I was three cars from the tunnel entrance, three NYC
police cars arrived from several directions, a dozen officers hopped
out and stopped all traffic entering the tunnel.

Nothing further happened for about five minutes (probably to allow the
traffic already in the tunnel to reach the far end).  Then a motorcade
consisting of several NYPD cars, several un-marked cars with U.S.
Government plates, a limousine, and several more U.S. Government cars
entered the tunnel.

Nobody else was allowed into the tunnel for another five minutes.
Then a police car entered the tunnel, and drove slowly, straddling two
lanes, in case anybody should try to pass, and the rest of us piled in
behind him.

When I reached the NJ end of the tunnel, I noticed that the motorcade
was visible ahead, entering the NJ Turnpike.  It continued, in
splendid isolation, all the way to exit 14 (Newark International
Airport).  All six lanes of the turnpike, from about a half-mile ahead
to a half-mile behind, were kept empty.

If they wanted to hide what they were doing, they did a lousy job of
that!  But I suppose it is necessary.  I found myself wondering if
this was the real thing, or if it was a diversion, deliberately
designed to attract attention, while the real president was whisked
away with less fanfare, by another route.


Dave Levenson        Internet: [e-mail]
Westmark, Inc.        UUCP: {uunet | rutgers | att}!westmark!dave
Warren, NJ, USA        Voice: 908 647 0900  Fax: [phone]

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

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 92 00:25 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Lauren Weinstein)
Subject: Re: Highway Call Boxes -- Radio, But Not All Cellular


Greetings.  Not all of the call boxes with the short antennas are
"cellular phones" -- at least not in the conventional sense.

Around the L.A. area, there has recently been a massive upgrade of the
call box system.  Along major freeways, where there have mostly been
wired call boxes for many years, the new radio/solar units were
recently installed and the older units pulled.  At the same time,
identical radio call boxes appeared in some canyon areas which have
never had call boxes before.  However, since there is no cellular
coverage in at least some of the areas where these canyon boxes are
located, they must be other than cellular phones.  Presumably they
operate in a commercial or government service band.


 --Lauren--

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

From: [e-mail] (Sue Miller)
Subject: Re: Highway Call Boxes
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 15:17:51 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Lars
Poulsen) writes:

> These are stationary cellphones. Neat, huh? We have them every mile or
> so on US 101 right through downtown Santa Barbara. In fact, I think
> they are only half a mile apart in the urban area.

Yeah -- real neat.  We have them on US 101 in the SF Bay Area also.
Tried one last May when my car blew its head gasket.  No answer!!
Maybe they are just for show.  ;-)

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

From: [e-mail] (John Gilbert)
Subject: Re: Highway Call Boxes
Organization: Motorola, Inc. LMPS
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 15:31:45 GMT


In addition to cellular, 800/900 Mhz trunking is available for call
boxes.  This would be a less expensive solution for a customer who
already has a trunked radio system, such as a large corporate campus
or university.


John Gilbert   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: Highway Call Boxes
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 17:27:08 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail].
ca.us (Mike Morris) writes:

> [e-mail] writes:

>> Along the highway, out in the country in California anyway, there are
>> emergency telephone call boxes, with phones which connect you directly
>> to the Highway Patrol or some such agency.

> They are self-contained cellular phones.  Supposedly they have
> tamper and tilt-over switches, but I doubt it -- there's been one laid
> flat in Eagle Rock (near Pasadena) now for almost two weeks.  The
> solar panel disappeared on day four.

They do indeed have tamper alarms.  There was a case a few months back
of someone on I-580 in the Altamont Pass area taking them down to
steal.  When the CHP dispatcher saw the tamper alarms going off in
succession for a few of the boxes, they got an officer out there
pronto, who found a pickup truck with various call box parts in the
bed.  The driver was apparently stealing them for the metal recycling
value rather than the cellular equipment.  Either way, he got a free
ride to the Greybar Hotel (appropriate for a phone thief, no?  :-))

Here's another tidbit on the California cellular call boxes: I have a
friend who is a civil engineer with CalTrans.  He was lamenting that
the wonderful California legislature passed a law saying that
whereever these boxes are installed, they must be at intervals no
further than two miles apart.  This makes it not cost effective to
install in very rural areas, where a box even every four or five miles
would be a lot better than no boxes.  But, as is the case in many
instances the CA legislature knows what's best for the residents of
the Golden State.


Steve Forrette,  [e-mail]

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

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 92 11:46:23 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Hon Wah Chin)
Subject: Re: Highway Call Boxes
Reply-To: [e-mail]


I used one last Monday on 101 in Menlo Park.  It automatically called
CHP.  I described my location and they read back the ID number painted
on a sign next to the phone, so I don't know whether they had the ID
transmitted or from my location description.  The most interesting
thing is that the hanger for the handset (with noise canceling mike)
did not appear to move for off-hook indication.  I wasn't in a mood to
investigate further but hypothesized some kind of magnetic sensor to
activate an internal switch.

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

From: [e-mail] (Bob Turner)
Subject: Re: Highway Call Boxes
Organization: Univ. of Dayton, School of Engineering
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 00:45:22 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Lars
Poulsen) writes:

> These are stationary cellphones. Neat, huh? We have them every mile or
> so on US 101 right through downtown Santa Barbara. In fact, I think
> they are only half a mile apart in the urban area.

At a few of the NENA (Natl Emergency Number Assoc) (the E911 Industry
and Gov Assoc) and APCO (Assoc of Professional Comm Officers aka
Dispatchers) conventions I have seen GTE showing off their cell call
box. Apparently, they work with local goverment to give a significant
discount for usage charges. Alot of phones with low relative
utilization. The sales droid didn't (or wouldn't, I can't remember)
say what typical charges and costs were.


Bob Turner                        System Engineer and Programmer
5134342738                         [e-mail]
CommSys, Inc. 77 West Elmwwod Drive, Suite 101, Dayton, OH 45459

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

From: [e-mail] (Ted Hadley)
Subject: Re: Cellular Phones With Scramblers Attached
Organization: Cylink Corp.
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 92 16:20:50 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (John
McHarry(J23)) writes:

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

>> Do scrambled cell phones really exist, or was this just another
>> Die-Hard-esque fudge on the part of the show's writers?

> They do indeed.  There are STU-III cellular phones available.  I
> believe the commercial versions use DES encryption.  Manufacturers
> include Motorola, I believe AT&T, and maybe others.  I have no idea
> what restrictions there are on their sale, however.

We At Cylink also have SecureCell, a DES-encrypted cellular phone. It
is compatible with our other DES telephone encryptors. As for
restrictions on their sale, I believe anyone in the US or Canada can
purchase them. The only restrictions I know of are for export outside
[US | Canada].


Ted A. Hadley  [e-mail]
Cylink Corporation, 310 N. Mary Ave., Sunnyvale, CA 94086  USA    408-735-5847
All opinions expressed are my own, and probably not liked by my employer.

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

From: [e-mail] (John Gilbert)
Subject: Re: Cellular Phones With Scramblers Attached
Organization: Motorola, Inc. Land Mobile Products Sector
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 15:24:36 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (John
McHarry(J23)) writes:

> They do indeed.  There are STU-III cellular phones available.  I
> believe the commercial versions use DES encryption.  Manufacturers
> include Motorola, I believe AT&T, and maybe others.  I have no idea
> what restrictions there are on their sale, however.

All STU-III phones are comsec controlled items and are only available
from the manufacturers after obtaining NSA approval.  Motorola does
make several models of wireline phones that use the same encryption
types available in the land mobile products.  These phones look like
the STU-III phone, but are available to commercial users. Several
flavors of encryption are available depending on who you are and where
the equipment will be used. Last I heard the "STU-III Dynasec"
cellular phones were not available off-the-shelf, but were made for a
specific government contract.


John Gilbert   [e-mail]

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

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 92 02:12:06 EDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Cellular Phones With Scramblers Attached


Answer to question: YES. In the mall here someone (Schlage, I think)
sells a scrambler that attaches to the cell phone handset. I don't
know what technology it uses.

Side note: I drive a ... well ... interesting looking car. It's a
black Volvo 780 (the two-door Volvo sports sedan that you've probably
never seen before) with five antennas on the trunk and back windows,
and a big metal star on the license plate. To say the least, it slows
down traffic on the interstate (the X-band transmitter doesn't hurt
that any ;^).  Anyway ... one day I was driving through town and
happened to notice a very stereotypical dark-suit/dark-Chrysler/Dodge
type car parked along side the road and a the suit-wearer talking into
the adjacent pay phone.  He looked at my car and followed me with his
eyes the entire time I was in sight. Since I thought this a little
suspicious/interesting, I rounded the block for another pass. Same
response as before, but I noticed that attached to the payphone's
handset was what appeared to be a cross between an overgrown
calculator and one of those handheld inventory scanners that grocery
stores use, replete with keypad. Anybody know what this thing was?
Some top-secret scrambler/descrambler, or was this just some
well-dressed grocery store clerk downloading the latest produce
inventory?  Hmmmm ...


(for) Rob Bailey    reply to: [e-mail]

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

Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992  19:16:37 EDT
Subject: Today's Price on Cellular Phones


In an ad in the Friday 10-9-92 {Washington Post}, Circuit City is
selling a GE Transpak 5000 bag, rate $57.97, with Phone Company (Bell
Atlantic) contract of 90 days.


Paul Robinson -- [e-mail]
I alone am (stupid enough to be) responsible for these opinions.

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

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 92 08:53 EDT
From: fmsys![e-mail] (Macy Hallock)
Subject: Re: Cellular Interception in Private Talk
Organization: The Matrix


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

> In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
> (Louis A. Mamakos) writes:

>> Why assert that conversations cannot easily be followed between cells?

> Indeed, "someone" makes a suitcase for just this purpose.

There is a company in CA that makes a modified Panasonic handheld
cellular phone that does this and much more.  Although its intended
use is for law enforcement, its been used by a couple of cellular
providers for diagnostic use.

With a good enough antenna, this unit will track calls between cells.
You can key in a phone number, ESN, channel number and lock on to a
call, or you can scan calls and lock onto one as well.

There was a provision for an external tape recorder, and provision for
a DAT interface that would also record the data stream as well as
audio was in development.

Price of the unit was around $3500.  It worked very well.  I saw it
demonstrated in the Washington D.C. area, and was thoroghly impressed.
I almost bought one.

I was also surprised at the content of some of the calls we picked up.
Cellular encryption is available in D.C. from the carriers, and you'd
think it would be used more that it apparently is.  Some people never
learn.


Regards,

Macy M Hallock Jr N8OBG 216.725.4764 [e-mail] [e-mail]
[No disclaimer, but I have no real idea what I'm saying or why I'm telling you]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #774
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa18014;
          13 Oct 92 1:19 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA22230
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 12 Oct 1992 23:00:23 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA13795
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 12 Oct 1992 23:00:14 -0500
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 23:00:14 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #775

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 12 Oct 92 23:00:20 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 775

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: College Phone System (Steve Forrette)
    Re: College Phone System (Jeff Dubin)
    Re: College Phone System AGAIN! (Bob Kupiec)
    Re: College Phone System (Bob Clements)
    Re: College Phone System (Carl Moore)
    Re: GTE Addresses On Outgoing Email (Bob Frankston)
    Re: GTE Addresses On Outgoing Email (Ed Greenberg)
    Re: GTE Addresses On Outgoing Email (Steve Forrette)
    Re: Retail Videoconferencing? (Bruce Taylor, IV)
    Re: Retail Videoconferencing? (Sandy Kyrish)
    Re: Question About ROLM PBX Telephones (Martin McCormick)
    Re: Question About ROLM PBX Telephones (Lars Poulsen)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: College Phone System
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 17:40:29 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Maxime
Taksar) writes:

>> combinations like 9-411, 9-611 and 9-911?

> Please don't try this just as an experiment!  Most of us know that it
> is in bad form to call 911 "just to make sure it works," but not
> everyone would know this.

I once had an occasion where I needed to test 911.  I called the
non-emergency number for the answering agency and explained my
situation.  They said that a test would be fine as long as I called
the non-emergency number first to let them know that I would be
testing.  This was in a smaller town where it was likely that the same
person would answer all of the calls, though.


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

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

Organization: The American University - University Computing Center
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 15:19:36 EDT
From: Jeff Dubin <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: College Phone System


A) Thanks for all of your responses!

B) No, I didn't try 0-911.  Actually, to call 411, you have to enter
the access code to your account.  It costs something like $.65!

C) Apparently, someone passed a hard copy of that message to the
director of telecommunications here at AU, who in turn called me to
answer my questions.  Turns out that having however many students live
on campus dialing wx or time would just cost too much.

Very nice guy, but when I asked him if call-waiting could be
temporarily disabled (for modeming ...) he said that call-waiting was
an all or nothing system.  They control it at the switch. When I
informed him that there was this temporary call-wait turn off feature
on other (non-campus) phones (at least in Boston area -- does C&P
offer this?  To turn off call-wait temporarily in Boston just dial *70
then you get a second dial tone) -- he seemed amazed and said that he
did not know of such a feature.

I don't love this system -- people calling in often get busy signals
because of full trunks here.  In fact, I hate it.  A normal phone
system would be much preferred over this, but this is obviously
impossible with the number of people here.

Oh yeah ... when I dial 0 + number I get the signal to enter my code.
Haven't gone through with it and put my code in though.  Can imagine a
charge 3x higher than usual if I did.

Thanks again, all!


Jeff Dubin    [e-mail]    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Bob Kupiec)
Subject: Re: College Phone System AGAIN!
Date: 12 Oct 92 22:14:58 GMT
Organization: LaSalle University, Philadelphia, PA


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

> Hi all, I'm a student at the American University and have a few q's
> about the phone system here.

Same situation here at LaSalle University.  We have been running on
two PBX's (one for campus offices, one for campus dorms) and AT&T ACUS
for the dorms for the past few years.  We were equipped with free
local calls, free 800, Call Waiting, Three-Way Calling and Call
Forwarding with all the frills.

Now things have changed ...

Everything was fine until I returned for the fall semester.  They
decided to consolidate the two switches into one NCR switch.  So far
there has been nothing but trouble.

800 access to all 800 numbers are BLOCKED (except for the 445 ACUS
prefix) and without an ACUS plan you can't call 800!  What about
calling card users?  The Telecom Operations guy gave me the useless
"800 numbers were forwarded to 900 numbers and we don't want to be
stuck with the bill" response.

Call Waiting sometimes does not work for incoming off-campus calls.
There is NO way to block Call Waiting!  This give me a fit, because
how am I supposed to use the modem?!

Also, the Telecom Operations person told me one of the tie lines seems
to be messed up because some on-campus calls connect with very faint
audio.  He also can't seem to find which one it is to disable it
either.

No Three-Way and no Call-Forwarding enabled.  Also, and the previous
poster mentioned, there is NO WAY to get a local or LD Operator!  NO
9-0 and no 9-00.  Only the campus operator.

I just hope that 9-911 works in case of an REAL emergency!  (How
should I test this?)

The latest development is the ACUS codes don't even work!  For the
last few days there has been no way to call home from the campus
telephones.  I think I should ask for my "phone service" deposit back
because I sure don't get any.


Bob Kupiec - Amateur Radio: N3MML       Internet: [e-mail]

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

Subject: Re: College Phone System
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 92 12:58:45 EDT
From: [e-mail]


In the discussion of blocking access to time/temperature numbers from
a college's PBX, our esteemed Moderator suggests:

> [Moderator's Note: Even if those services in DC do not carry premium
> charges ala 976, don't they still cost a message 'unit' or some small
> amount of money per call?  Maybe the administrators there feel even at
> that low rate it is a waste of resources.  :)   PAT]

No smiley about it.  Let me relate some ancient history.

Back in about 1961 I was a wee tad at MIT.  Every time the weather was
bad a very large fraction of the outside lines were kept busy by
people calling the weather number (617-936-1212).  And all those calls
cost message units.  And since most of the trunks were two-way, people
got busy signals when calling the MIT switchboard (617-UNIversity-6900).
This was long before direct inward dialing.

The chief architect of the phone system, the late Carlton E. Tucker,
Professor of EE, decided this had to be fixed.  He talked with the
telco folks and negotiated a price for a permanent trunk from the
telco weather recording to MIT.  He then whipped up a design that
would play that audio onto a block of internal MIT extensions
(x5211-521n).

Now you could get the weather without tying up outside lines and
without running up message units.  A side benefit was that you could
get the weather without having a "dial-9" class of service on your
phone extension.  So we at the radio station (then WTBS, now WMBR)
saved some message units on our separate outside line, too.

All this of course required custom hardware work and some arm-twisting
at the state DPU, because the MIT phone system was all owned by Telco
and all the services had to be tariffed.  But this was no big deal
because Prof. Tucker was doing this sort of thing all the time.  He
held a number of patents on relay and Strowger phone gizmos and the
phone company and DPU loved him (at least part of the time).

At that time, the MIT PBX was a huge Strowger system with a
many-position cord board much like the one PAT describes from his
past.  I was never formally employed to run the MIT one but I did get
on good enough terms with one of the night operators to try out some
of the interestingly-labeled jacks once in a while.


Bob Clements, K1BC, [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: When I was an operator at the University of Chicago
from 1958 through about 1962, they had (WEather-4) and (CAThedral 8000)
 -- the latter for the time of day -- blocked from all extensions. It
was a Strowger system also, and there were three groups of cordboards,
one group for the main campus (MIDway 0800) with about nine operator
positions, one group for the hospitals (MUseum 4-6100) with eight or
nine positions and one group for the Computation Center (NORmal 4700)
with two or three positions.  PAT]

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

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 92 10:14:11 EDT
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: College Phone System


Local calls in the DC area, other than the extended-area-local from
Va. suburbs to Prince William County, are untimed, although I recall
reading that some service plans levy a charge per local call beyond
the initail allotment of calls.  I do NOT recall 844 and 936 being any
different from other local DC-area calls.

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: GTE Addresses On Outgoing Email
Date: Mon 12 Oct 1992 09:06 -0400


I also appreciate all (well, most?) submissions and want to encourage
them.  As an email advocate I feel some obligation to education.

The key is that once one starts submitting to telecom, one is no
longer a passive reader of a shared bulletin board but rather an
individual with an identity.  To continue on the analogy with phones,
a single TELECOM Digest access at each site is like a single phone at
each site.  Incoming callers must speak to an receptionist to reach a
given person.  This might be tolerable for voice but not when one
attempts automated access to a Fax machine.

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

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 92 09:35:03 -0700
From: [e-mail] (Ed Greenberg)
Subject: Re: GTE Addresses On Outgoing Email
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)


This note is to [e-mail] writing about why GTE employees
don't need their own accounts.

Steven,

You DO need an account for yourself.  Everyone who posts to the net
should have his own account.  Two reasons:

1.  Accountability.  If everyone can log into the same account, and if
one person abuses it, all will be under suspicion, and will be tarred
with the same brush.  Most of us who are security aware would not ever
want to be associated with a password that others know.

2.  Courtesy and politeness. When a message pops up, I first look at
the return address line to see who it's from.  When I see that silly
reply address, I know nothing more.  In a sense, your company is
saying, we'll do it our way even though the whole rest of the net does
it another way.  We don't care.

If John Higdon wants to name his machine after a cow, that's his
privelege, but if he wants to post messages with non-standard headers,
that's not.

"MOO!" --John Higdon


Ed Greenberg         | Home: [phone] | [e-mail]
1600 Stokes St. #24    | Work: [phone] | DoD#: 0357
San Jose, CA  95126    | Fax:  [phone] | KM6CG (ex WB2GOH)


[Moderator's Note: Well you know who else is fond of doing things
their own way? The various commercial services which deign to permit
their users to read and write to/from Internet. They all must think
they are doing *us* the favor by interconnecting ... for the longest
time, mcimail.com was incapable of (or unwilling to) handle incoming
mail from Internet according to standards.  If an envelope had dozens
of names (as the one from this Digest does) and they were unable to
deliver to one name on the envelope ... well, they would just dump the
whole load undelivered. Maybe they changed it now; I've not had any
trouble with delivering the Digest there in several weeks. If it is
now fixed, I publicly thank them.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: GTE Addresses On Outgoing Email
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 23:13:02 GMT


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

> Let me explain that Curt and I report to the same building for
> work.  Curt is a Switching Systems Technician and works on the GTD5
> CO.  I am a Facility Maintainer and work outside on deregulated
> customer equipment as well as regulated network cable, etc. In this
> small town we can work together when the need arises, such as helping
> to run some jumpers or testing a cable pair with the CO.

I hope that when you call Curt to help run jumpers or do other CO
work, that it's for your regulated network cable responsibilities, and
not your deregulated customer equipment tasks.  This type of situation
shows why it is not really possible for a watchful PUC to ensure that
the deregulated side of a telco cannot really be operated at "arm's
length" such that it has no advantage over competitors.  There will
always be cases where informal arrangements like this can be used to
the advantage of the unregulated side, and the only way to prevent it
is to not allow regulated telcos to operate in competitive
nonregulated markets.


Steve Forrette, [e-mail], I do not speak for my employer.

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

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 12:40:32 -0400 (EDT)
From: Bruce Taylor, IV <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Retail Videoconferencing?


Laird,

  Sprint has a network of public and private videoconference rooms.
Some are operated by Sprint, others by Sprint customers.  Here in
Pittsburgh, costs are in the range of $100/half hour, plus
communications charges.  Try calling the Sprint Meeting Channel
reservation center for more information: 800-669-1235.

  AT&T is affiliated with an entity called the Affinity Group, which
operates a number of public video conferencing rooms.  Try calling
508-768-7480.

  Mandatory disclaimer: I'm a customer of both AT&T *and* Sprint, so I
guess I'm biased fairly evenly... :-)


Bruce Taylor   ([e-mail])    [phone]
New Projects Coordinator, Telecommunications, Carnegie Mellon University

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

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 92 14:50 GMT
From: Sandy Kyrish <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Retail Videoconferencing


Indeed there is a thriving business in public videoconferencing rooms.
By far and away the most successful is U.S. Sprint's "The Meeting
Channel", with hundreds of rooms across the US and the world.  You can
rent rooms by the hour at quite reasonable costs.

Also, videoconferencing itself is a fairly healthy business, though
not of course "blanketing the world" as it was always excessively
hyped to do.  There are more than 2500 rooms in more than 500
institutions in about 32 countries, and these numbers are about a year
old so I'm sure they're conservative.  Total revenues for all
teleconferencing are about $1 billion per year these days.  The
industry recently adopted a CCITT standard for coder/decoders and has
seen dramatic price reductions in these devices, from $150K to $75K to
$30K and now much lower than that.  The availability of switched 56
and switched 384 opens up plenty of options too, and declining
transmission prices for these offerings helps a lot.  Multipoint
control units allow true "conference calls" among many sites.  Anyone
interested in the field should contact the International
Teleconferencing Association in Washington DC at 202-833-2549.

The main points about videoconferencing, IMHO, are (1) it will never
live up to its ridiculous billing and it shouldn't have to; (2) any
improvement in digital transmission offerings will benefit
videoconferencing; (3) one should NOT strictly limit one's evaluation
of videoconferencing to travel reduction.  There are many soft dollar
benefits that can be directly converted to hard dollar savings (see
Meyer and Boone's book "The Information Edge" for a very enlightening
look at this subject).  Travel reduction is nice and all but it is
just like saying you should cost-justify your fax machine only in
terms of the postage you don't spend.  When videoconferencing is
proposed simply as a "travel displacement appliance", it is not only
potentially dangerous (what if the project you justified it for goes
away), but it is hardly the kind of thing that gets upper management
very turned on.  As Mary Boone (of above) likes to say, "if you go to
a CEO and ask him/her what the biggest challenges facing the company
are, he/she is not going to say travel costs."  Things like shortening
the decision making cycle and bringing a product to market faster are
much more beneficial to focus on.


All opinions are mine, don't reflect the ITCA or Dean Meyer
and Associates, and are welcome to be questioned at:

[e-mail]    Sandy Kyrish

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

Subject: Re: Question About ROLM PBX Telephones
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 92 10:11:00 -0500
From: [e-mail]


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Rick
Spanbauer) writes:

> Does anyone know offhand what sort of signalling scheme ROLM uses
> between a telephone deskset and their digital pbx?  A cursory
> inspection of the innards of my telephone reveals an impressive array
> of custom transformers, two big LSI chips (one by Exar, one by TI),
> and the usual mess of discretes.

The Rolm PBX'S are made by Seimens, as far as I know.  The signaling
format is proprietary and, as you said, totally digital.  Digital
phones must have an anallog to digital/digital to analog converter set
to handle the transition from the analog world of the handset to the
digital world which exists in the switch.  In addition, low-pass
filters are required to remove audio above the 3.1 to 4KHZ used as the
top end of the pass-band for voice-quality communications.  The Exar
chip is probably a phase-locked loop for recovering the data clock.
The transformers are for impedance matching and isolation.  There is a
lot of activity going on in a digital phone.  Besides the audio I/O
the phone must have the logic to receive and send all necessary
display and control signals.

    This prompts me for a question, also.  How electronically
similar are the Seimens/Rolm phones to those used on the Ericsson
MD110 type switches?  Many of the descriptions of the inside and
outward appearance of the two brands of phones are strikingly similar.
Even some of the glitches such as certain phones loosing track of the
digits being dialed if one pushes too many buttons in too short a time
sound very similar.


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

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

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 92 12:49:57 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Lars Poulsen)
Subject: Re: Question About ROLM PBX Telephones
Organization: CMC Network Systems (Rockwell DCD), Santa Barbara, CA, USA

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

> Does anyone know offhand what sort of signalling scheme ROLM uses
> between a telephone deskset and their digital pbx?  A cursory
> inspection of the innards of my telephone reveals an impressive array
> of custom transformers, two big LSI chips (one by Exar, one by TI),
> and the usual mess of discretes.  Is the signalling they use
> compatible with either ISDN S/T attachment, or perhaps like the
> Motorola UDLT format (B+D rather than 2B+D)?  The basic signalling
> cell seems to be about four microseconds.

There are many different models of ROLM systems, and each of them can
be coinfigured with different line cards to communicate with different
types of desk sets. Without specific model numbers, I doubt that
anyone can help you.

As you may know, ROLM has been the subjects of takeovers and
divestitures. At one time it was swallowed by IBM, and then sold to
Siemens. At the present time, I believe it is still owned by Siemens,
but does business under the Rolm name again.

The system that we use here, is a Siemens series 2000 PBX. Most of our
desksets are 2500-clones manufactured by Stromberg for Siemens (the
faceplate says Siemens) with message-waiting light. The more
featureful desksets are Panasonic KX-T2342 Easa-Phone speakerphones
with alpha display. They are definitely not ISDN sets: A standard 2500
set works on the same outlet. I suspect that these are similar to the
sets used with the small Panasonic hybrid PBX/KSUs (although they are
not compatible with the 308 and its sisters): The first pair is an
analog voice circuit, the second pair is a digital data link for the
"advanced" features.


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]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #775
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa19944;
          13 Oct 92 2:21 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA03376
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 13 Oct 1992 00:12:07 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA15382
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 13 Oct 1992 00:11:57 -0500
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 00:11:57 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #776

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 13 Oct 92 00:12:00 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 776

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Does Phone Company Log Calls to a 'Busy' Line? (Bill Campbell)
    Re: Does Phone Company Log Calls to a 'Busy' Line? (Richard Nash)
    Re: Local Battery (Steven S. Brack)
    Re: Local Battery (John W. Shaver)
    Re: And NOW, For a Limited Time Only, Caller-ID in Denver) (Richard Lucas)
    Re: Question About Caller ID Information Display (Robert S. Helfman)
    Re: Question About Caller ID Information Display (Art Hunter)
    Re: Caller ID Approved In Arizona (Bill Everts)
    Re: British Call Waiting (was My Favorite Intercepts) (Seth Breidbart)
    Re: British Call Waiting (was My Favorite Intercepts) (Charles Mattair)
    Re: 800 Numbers Restricted by NYTel? (Norman Nithman)
    Re: 800 Numbers Restricted by NYTel? (Shrikumar)
    Re: Fax Store-and-Forward Service Wanted (John R. Levine)
    Re: Fax Store-and-Forward Service Wanted (Tony L. Hansen)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Bill Campbell)
Subject: Re: Does Phone Company Log Calls to a 'Busy' Line?
Organization: Celestial Software, Mercer Island, WA
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 15:36:06 GMT


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

> I know that most phone companies log the telephone calls made from one
> point to another.  My question is: if I tried to make a local call and
> got a busy signal, would my call attempt show up on the phone company
> (or anyone elses) log?

Bell Atlantic Cellular sure kept track in 1987 and 1988.  They would
charge $0.10 for attempts to call a busy line!  I always considered
this a rip, particularly when the busy was due to lack of lines at
Bell Atlantic.  I was always glad to get back to US West Cellular.


Bill
INTERNET:  [e-mail]   Bill Campbell; Celestial Software
UUCP:   ...!thebes!camco!bill   6641 East Mercer Way
             uunet!camco!bill   Mercer Island, WA 98040; [phone]

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

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 08:52:45 -0600
From: [e-mail] (Richard Nash)
Subject: Re: Does Phone Company Log Calls to a 'Busy' Line?


John  ([e-mail]) writes:

> I know that most phone companies log the telephone calls made from one
> point to another.  My question is: if I tried to make a local call and
> got a busy signal, would my call attempt show up on the phone company
> (or anyone elses) log?

Our Esteemed Moderator noted some instances ...

Another instance when calls to a busy line are recorded, is for police
requested call trace, apparently used in criminal investigations to
link someone to a crime.


Richard Nash   Edmonton, Alberta Canada T6K 0E8
UUCP:       trickie![e-mail]

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

Date: 12 Oct 1992 09:42:21 -0400 (EDT)
From: [e-mail] (Steven S. Brack)
Subject: Re: Local Battery


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

> Gabe Wiener ([e-mail]) writes:

>> In a local-battery phone, how was the battery charged?

> The battery was for the microphone circuit.  It was when the
> *other* party couldn't hear you, that you changed the battery.

If the battery provided DC between the phone and the local exchange,
then:
    a) Why was it that the batteries were located at the phone,
       rather than at the exchange?  (Probably an obvious, but
       unseen by me, answer)

    b) How could it power the microphone circuit without also
       powering the talk path, which is bidirectional?


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]


[Moderator's Note: The very old (early twentieth century) rural
service phones with the magneto crank on the side had large 1.5 volt
dry cell batteries in them also. The magneto crank supplied the
current needed to signal the operator or other parties on the line but
the actual talking was done over the 'telephone cells' as they were
called.  You can still buy them in some hardware stores where
batteries are sold; in fact I use them in my Western Union clocks.  PAT]

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

Date: 12 Oct 92 11:01:26 MST
From: Mr John W Shaver <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Local Battery


On the old telephones before breakup, a local battery was two or three
1.5 volt A-Cells. As noted earlier, when you could not be heard, you
changed the batteries. I was amazed to find in later years that the
50V central battery became about four volts across the carbon microphone.

I have in my possession a WE 1.5 volt wet cell. Does someone know how
the lid on these cells was attached to the glass cell. If there was
material, it has long since disappeared.


              John W. Shaver
     602 538 7622 // DSN 879 7622 // FTS 658 7622
     FAX [phone] // DSN 879 0656_// FTS 658 0656

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

From: [e-mail] (Richard Lucas)
Subject: Re: And NOW, For a Limited Time Only, Caller-ID in Denver)
Organization: Boulder Valley School District
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 02:20:08 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(SHING PUI-SHUM BENSON) writes:

> You may not know, but Denver's Public Utilities Commision (PUC --
> often known as PUCK for no other reason than a neat name) did NOT want
> US West to install Caller ID in the Denver metro area due to too many
> people who insisted that it was an invasion of privacy, an annoyance,
> and just another option to make people pay more on their bills.
> Denver's PUC was really serious about not letting this go through, but
> it seems they and US West have come to an agree- ment.  From what I
> hear, USW will install CID temporarily, and offer free CID blocking to
> those who ask for it before it's up and running.

     My understanding of the matter doesn't match this description.

     The US WEST offering was a bot different than most in that the
device displayed not only the number but a listing as well. As a
result there were some pretty drastic privacy concerns voiced by a
number of people.  After the hearings the Colorado PUC approved Caller
ID, but only with a mandatory per-line blocking (rather than the
per-call only blocking). US WEST was willing to offer per-call
blocking, but didn't want the per-line option to be available -- they
'rejected' the PUC decision and said they were going to withdraw the
filing. PUC response was that they legally couldn't withdraw it after
the decision had been reached (or some such reasoning), and the final
decision resulted from negotioations to break the deadlock that
resulted from the opposing opinions.

     My wife still works for US WEST (I used to), and watching the
dispute in the local papers and company bulletins was the most fun I'd
had since pointing out to the PUC several years ago that a local rate
case to set up calling zones in Denver lacked rate reciprocity
(calling from point B to A cost more than calling from point A to
point B) -- and that the PUC's home exchange was the one that would be
on the wrong end of the discrepancy more than any other exchange in
the area. I was amazed that a case lacking reciprocity was even filed.
Knowing that had happened made me less amazed than I should have been
that US WEST tried to pull the Caller ID filing when they did.

     I'm pretty sure I have the Caller ID details right, and I welcome
any corrections if I don't.


Rick Lucas ([e-mail])     Debate Coach, Fairview HS, Boulder, CO

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

From: [e-mail] (Robert S. Helfman)
Subject: Re: Question About Caller ID Information Display
Date: 12 Oct 1992 19:56:35 GMT
Organization: The Aerospace Corporation, El Segundo, CA


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

> In a message From: [e-mail] (Bill Romanowski) on 6 Oct 92
> 21:15:07 GMT:

>> So now I want to know how it works. I suspect DTMF after first ring?
>> No doubt an FAQ but any info would be appreciated.

> Approximately just before the second or third ring (depending on the
> system), the information is sent as a data stream about 300 baud
> between rings.  In short, this is why modems can be built to take the
> caller ID information.

>[Moderator's Note: I think it is 1200 baud.    PAT]

Note, however, that it's Bell 202 specs, NOT Bell 212, which is why,
if you couple it to a typical 1200 baud modem, it doesn't work.


[Moderator's Note: As I found out after some experimentation several
months ago. See the article "Me and My Crazy Ideas" in an issue of the
Digest earlier this year.   PAT]

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

Subject: Re: Question About Caller ID Information Display
From: [e-mail] (Art Hunter)
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Art Hunter)
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 08:23:49 -0400
Organization: AFI Communications - Ottawa, Ontario, Canada


> Approximately just before the second or third ring (depending on the
> system), the information is sent as a data stream about 300 baud
> between rings.  In short, this is why modems can be built to take the
> caller ID information.

        The Caller-ID message is 1200 bps and resides between rings
one and two.  There are two other ways that the specification says it
can come.  One is when the handset is on-hook and is NOT ringing and
the other is when the handset is off-hook and not ringing.  The latter
is designed so that you can obtain the identification of the calling
party (like call waiting) while you are talking to someone else.

        To date, I am only aware of the message between rings one and
two as being implemented by the telcos.  It is just a matter of time
for the other two applications to be implemented.

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

From: [e-mail] (Bill Everts)
Subject: Re: Caller ID Approved In Arizona
Date: 12 Oct 92 20:00:02 GMT


This is probably a typical question, but if you don't want me to know
who you are, why the &*^# are you dialing my phone number?

everts   [e-mail]
Expressing my own opinion.


[Moderator Getting Nervous Again: Will readers who wish to express an
opinion of their own to Bill Everts expression of his opinion will
please do do in email or via comp.privacy.  It is my opinion we don't
need any more of it here.   Thanks.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Seth Breidbart)
Subject: Re: British Call Waiting (was My Favorite Intercepts)
Organization: Morgan Stanley & Co., New York, NY
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 19:25:06 -0400


The major advantage of anything-on-hold during call waiting comes when
both parties get calls.  You put me on hold to take your second call;
while I'm waiting, another call comes in for me, and I take it.  Now,
when you return to my call, you get silence, and will often hang up  :-(


Seth        [e-mail]

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

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 92 10:52:15 CDT
From: [e-mail] (Charles Mattair)
Subject: Re: British Call Waiting
Organization: Synercom Technology, Inc., Houston, TX


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

> Touchtones here have always been (and will always be) free!

I can understand why the US telco's initially charged for touchtone
(or at least the rationale) but what's the excuse now?  Don't they
have to add additional equipment to convert pulse to TT for most
switches?


Charles Mattair         [e-mail]
Any opinions offered are my own and do not reflect those of my employer.

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

Subject: Re: 800 Numbers Restricted by NYTel
From: [e-mail] (Norman Nithman)
Date: 12 Oct 92 15:41:00 GMT
Organization: Aquila BBS - Aurora, IL - 820-8344
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Norman Nithman)


I have had problems with private pay phones blocking 800 info
(800-555-1212).  Seems like they programmed them to charge $0.65 for
any call to 555-1212, no matter what the prefix.


Norm


[Moderator's Note: How about $3.65 per *minute* for calls to 800 or
the zero operator from the COCOT in the laudromat near me ...  PAT]

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

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 92 00:55:36 -0400
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: 800 Numbers Restricted by NYTel?
Organization: UMass, Amherst, MA01002 + Temporal Sys & Comp Net, Bombay, India


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

  ... in answer to ...

>> AOSs don't want callers using their resources to make free calls,
>> when they typically charge $3 to $4 for a three minute local call.

says ...

> I know about AOS's; I don't use their phones if I can help it.  They

Ok, question time again ...

 I know AOS stands for "Alternative Operator Serivices" (I read so
 from a publication from the MA Dept of Public Utilities.)

  What services does an AOS typically provide ?
  How would I recognise an AOS phone ?

  It is plainly obvious that you dont mean COCOTs here, and while
going thru the literature from the PUC, I could not quite guess what
an AOS really was, in familiar terms.

  Also, at least in MA, the Department of Public Utilities needs to
license you (and your dog :-) before you can offer any IXC/LD service
even as a reseller. Is that true for all the 50 states? Thats a lot
of paperwork !


shrikumar ( [e-mail], [e-mail] )


[Moderator's Note: One thing all payphones (genuine Bell or COCOTS)
need is an operator to handle special billing and person-to-person
calls. In their eagerness to stay away from anything-Bell, the COCOTS
will generally have the operator service for their phones handled
through a service bureau offering AOS (alternate operator services.)
In other words, a non-telco operator.  If you see a COCOT phone, you
are most likely looking at an AOS behind it. If you have questions
about this when using one of these phones (it is just like me riding
the subway in Chicago -- sometimes I have an immediate need to use the
bathroom and have to use the filthy subway toilets; very distasteful
experience but it can't be helped) then when the operator answers ask
point blank "are you an xxx-Bell operator?" or "are you an AT&T
operator?"  and if the answer is negative, be prepared for the worst,
and do as I try to do: either take care of it before leaving home or
wait until you get back. If you can't wait, then pay the price. Even
then sometimes the COCOT/AOS operators lie about it and claim to be
genuine. Like the Chicago Transit Authority public toilets, avoid
COCOTS if at all possible.  PAT]

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

Subject: Re: Fax Store-and-Forward Service Wanted
Organization: I.E.C.C.
Date: 12 Oct 92 19:07:50 EDT
From: [e-mail] (John R. Levine)


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

> The "Subject:"-line asks it all -- if there are any fax-transmission
> store-and-forward services (doing for FAX what MCI's Messenger and
> AT&T's voice-store-and-forward do for voice), how do I find them?

A recent article in TELECOM Digest announced AT&T's Fax Mailbox
service.  They assign you a ten-digit fax mailbox number, which is
typically the number of your office or fax machine.  Then callers can
send you a fax by calling [phone], dialing the mailbox number,
optionally leaving a voice message, and sending the fax.  If you have
a beeper, they can call it when a fax arrives.  You pick up faxes by
calling an 800 number, listening to the messages, and telling it the
number to which to forward stored faxes.  You can discard unwanted
faxes if you want, and everything seems to be discarded after eight
days.

The charge is 30 cents to listen to the message, and 70 cents/page to
retrieve a fax, plus a fairly hefty surcharge if forwarded outside the
U.S.  There is no charge for faxes that you don't choose to deliver,
and no monthly fee.  It's all charged to your AT&T calling card.

Call [phone] to sign up.  If you have an AT&T card, you can
sign up immediately.  I've signed up but haven't had occasion to use
it.  (I have a fax card on my PC, so it'd only be useful to collect
faxes while I'm travelling.)


Regards,

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

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

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 92 19:27:03 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Tony L Hansen)
Subject: Re: Fax Store-and-Forward Service Wanted
Organization: AT&T


> The "Subject:"-line asks it all -- if there are any fax-transmission
> store-and-forward services (doing for FAX what MCI's Messenger and AT&T's
> voice-store-and-forward do for voice), how do I find them?

Call AT&T EasyLink Services (1-800-624-3672) and ask about their
Enhanced Fax service. It does exactly what you want.


        Tony Hansen
    [e-mail], [e-mail]
    att!pegasus!hansen, attmail!tony

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #776
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa22162;
          13 Oct 92 3:18 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA00380
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 13 Oct 1992 00:44:04 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA28074
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 13 Oct 1992 00:43:55 -0500
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 00:43:55 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #777

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 13 Oct 92 00:44:00 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 777

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Telecom in the MidWest (Tim Russell)
    Re: Telecom in the Midwest (Jack Winslade)
    Re: Fax Store-and-Forward Service Wanted (Nigel Allen)
    Re: LD Transmission Quality Comparison (Richard Nash)
    Re: LD Transmission Quality Comparison (John Hidgon)
    Re: Network Installation Box Installation Rules (Macy Hallock)
    Re: Sidetone (was LD Transmission Quality Comparison) (Julian Macassey)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Tim Russell)
Subject: Re: Telecom in the MidWest
Organization: University of Nebraska at Omaha
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 14:52:03 GMT


[e-mail] (Dave Niebuhr) writes:

>> I was told that the reason telemarketers chose the MidWest was that they
>> had the most "neutral" accents. Nebraska was said to have been pitching
>> that. I'm told by a Nebraskan that she thinks the accent is neutral
>> except for Washington, which they pronounced "Waa-shington."

    This is very true, Nebraskans do indeed have VERY neutral accents.
I would say that the "Wa" sound tends more toward the "War"
pronunciation, though not so badly that "wash" sounds like "warsh",
just different.  Being an Air Force brat, I find it refreshing since
my accent (almost complete lack thereof, actually) doesn't stand out
at all.

> Another reason for good telephone service in Nebraska is that Omaha
> was the home of the former Strategic Air Command of the US Air Force
> and top-notch telecom service was needed.

    Definitely.  I'm not familiar with the specifics, but I do know
that Omaha has TONS of trunks coming in from all over everywhere.  Now
that SAC is Stratcom and Langley AFB in Virginia has taken over quite
a bit, I would think phone capacity will be even higher.

    One thing I always chuckle at is Omaha's constant trumpeting that
the unemployment rate is WAY below the national average, hovering
somewhere around 2%.  They neglect to note that this would most
certainly not be the case were it not for telemarketing, though.


Tim Russell    Omaha, NE   [e-mail]

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

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 92 12:23:58 CST
From: [e-mail] (Jack Winslade)
Subject: Re: Telecom in the Midwest
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: DRBBS Technical BBS, Omaha


> [Moderator's Note: That has been the case for many years. Even twenty
> years ago, Tulsa, OK was considered an ideal place for telemarketers
> as was Omaha, NB. Why?  Because they had the least-expensive WATS
> costs of anywhere in the USA. After all, the most you can go in any
> direction from Tulsa is 2000 miles or less, unlike being located on
> the coasts where calls to the opposite coast travel 4000 miles and
> cost considerably more.  PAT]

Not only is Omaha (that's NE, not NB, Pat ;-) close to the wire center
of the US, but it is known for a high literacy rate, thus articulate
speech, and the lack of any regional accent.  (I might restate, with
several various emoticons, that Omaha has what might be considered the
'Columbia School of Broadcasting' accent. <insert smileys here>)

Seriously, Omaha is north enough to avoid the 'twang' which is obvious
even from residents as close as Kansas City, south enough to avoid the
'ooot' (out) and 'abooot' (about) that's common north of here, and, of
course exempt from the Bwooklynese 'toity-toid and toid' which is
spoken in some eastern states and some parts of New Awlans.  (Flames
to [e-mail], please.  ;-)

On the negative side, I've been told that Omaha is known in the
Teleslime industry for complacent non-union workers who are more than
willing to rent their voice for close to minimum wage.  In many
communities, a clear, distinct voice is an asset that is quite
marketable, and worth more than poverty wages.

On the positive side, however, almost anyone in Omaha who wants to
work and can speak can get a job almost any time.  It's probably not a
very promising career choice, but telemarketing jobs are almost always
available, especially right before the holiday season.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Nigel Allen)
Subject: Re: Fax Store-and-Forward Service Wanted
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 92 6:28:50 MDT
Organization: Echo Beach


> (I'm tired of running into busy trunks, busy recipient fax-machine,
> or recipient fax machine's ring-no-answer signals outside office
> hours in connection with a fax I'm trying to send to Zimbabwe
> University.)

I wonder whether someone at Zimbabwe University turns the fax machine
off after 5 p.m. to save electricity, assuming that nobody else in the
country would be likely to be sending a fax message outside business
hours, and forgetting that people in other time zones (such as Fred
Linton) might want to send a fax message.

It's also possible that the fax number is no longer used by a fax
machine.  It might be wise to double-check the fax number, possibly
against a university calendar.

I think the most reliable solution, assuming the fax machine at
Zimbabwe University is working properly and you have the correct
number for it, is to use the outbound fax service of MCI Mail.
(Perhaps AT&T Mail offers a similar service.)  If all you want to send
is text, the MCI Mail or AT&T Mail services should be adequate.

And if nothing else works, you could send a cablegram, but cablegrams
are quite expensive.


Nigel Allen   [e-mail]

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

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 10:25:33 -0600
From: [e-mail] (Richard Nash)
Subject: Re: LD Transmission Quality Comparison


[e-mail] writes:

> On 6 Oct 92 06:06:36 GMT, [e-mail] (Greg Andrews) said:

>> I can't speak to the billing errors, but the modem symptoms you
>> describe seem to this Telebit technician like a well-known interaction
>> between Telebit's PEP modulation and the echo cancellers used my MCI,
>> Sprint, and others.

>> Rather than poor quality, the problem was being caused by the echo
>> cancellers interfering with the modem transmissions.  When the modems
>> stopped sending data to train themselves to the line conditions, the
>> echo cancellers would turn themselves off.  The difference in the
>> modem 'conversation' between data transfer mode and training mode was
>> enough for the echo cancellers to change their behavior.  The modems
>> saw an undisturbed line when they trained, so they couldn't adapt.
>> Why didn't AT&T lines do this?  They used different brands of echo
>> cancellers.  (Perhaps because their network hadn't used fiber optics
>> until very recently?)

Detecting the guard tone is the basis under which all echo-cancellers
work.  What isn't described, is when do they drop back in? As soon as
the modem guard tone is once again detected?

>> Telebit worked with the engineers from a couple of the echo canceller
>> manufacturers for several months.  Eventually a solution was found
>> where the modems would be able to keep the echo cancellers disabled.
>> The modem firmware was updated to add the 'echo canceller mods'
>> starting with version 7.00 (BC7.00, GE7.00, and GF7.00, though the
>> T1000 uses FA2.10).

> Had the echo cancellers done the right thing to begin with, Telebit
> would never have had the problem.

The above statement is rather arrogant! Echo cancellers have been
around for several decades and the operational specifications for them
are well known by telco engineering standards groups. Telebit PEP
modulation scheme has not. Perhaps the echo canceller manufacturers
should be issued with crystal balls that allow them to see how future
contraptions will affect their product?  Only an engineer, would have
the audacity to presume that a marketed product *they* designed was
free of problems. Almost everyone who has attempted to use a modern
modem has encountered some degree of operational difficulty with it.
As is well known, data transmission greater than 1200 baud on a
switched circuit is a recent thing. Modem manufacturers have spent
considerable R&D to engineer products with faster data rates *around*
the limitations of the switched network.  Some modem designs are
better thought out than others.  Obviously the engineers at Telebit
never took the echo canceller interaction into account because they
were unaware of it!  As described, the problem was corrected by
Telebit.  This scenario of revising a product to address a previously
unanticipated problem is very common as anyone in the manufacturing
industry knows. Adaptability!

> Really?  I consider the inability of echo cancellers to detect a modem
> to be a quality issue.  It is not a quality, customer driven solution
> to force customers to modify their CPE because the network
> infrastructure is of inferior quality.  Remember that there was one
> carrier whose infrastructure never had the problem and whose network
> could and can deal with the unmodified Telebit modems.  The problem
> was not that the PEP modems couldn't turn off the echo cancellers, the
> problem was that the echo cancellers couldn't (and can't) detect the
> PEP modem without forcing the modem manufacturer to add non-standard
> stuff.  You don't consider that a quality metric?  I do.

Sounds like the Total Quality movement has hit your company, eh?  This
kind of thinking reminds me of the time I was on a hardware course,
and the work assignment was to manually enter a small hand written
program.  A fellow student had quickly coded the program and dumped it
into the core.  When he attempted to execute the program, it failed to
run properly.  Being a rather hyper type of person, he immediately
afixed the blame on the computer rather than his hand loop.

In case you haven't noticed, Telebit modems do their own thing. My
v.32bis modem doesn't talk to the Telebit in it's native tongue.  The
never ending battle over whose product will become the defacto
standard is an issue that will only die when the demand for the
product also dies. Perhaps when data modulation is no longer required?
(ISDN?)


Richard Nash     Edmonton, Alberta Canada T6K 0E8
UUCP:         trickie![e-mail]

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

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 92 02:47 PDT
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: LD Transmission Quality Comparison


[e-mail] (Greg Andrews) writes:

> The point I've been trying to make is that your connection troubles
> might have been caused by this interaction and not by the quality of
> the LD carrier.  It would be unfair to criticize the LD carrier
> because the original PEP modems couldn't keep their echo cancellers
> off the line.

I bought into this once. In fact, we ended up upgrading every single
modem in our domain to BC7.00. And after we went through all of that
(on the urging of Sprint AND the Telebit service department), it made
not one bit of difference. What it DID do was ruin the ability of our
modems to talk to some of our neighbors who had lower versions of
firmware, but it did not significantly affect the poor throughput on
MCI and Sprint. (When I upgraded to BC7.00 it caused the connection to
my newsfeed site, from which I receive as much as 16 meg per day, to
continually fail. We suffered with this until he upgraded also.)

Logic tells us that AT&T uses echo cancellers. The question that I ask
is, how can AT&T do it and MCI and Sprint cannot? Someone from Sprint
even had the gall to tell me that the problems were caused by the
modems because "AT&T uses older equipment and the newer Sprint
equipment requires certain standards that these OLDER modems are not
meeting". Yeah, sure.


John Higdon  |   P. O. Box 7648   |   [phone]     |       FAX:
[e-mail] | San Jose, CA 95150 | 10288 0 700 FOR-A-MOO | [phone]

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

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 92 20:55 EDT
From: fmsys![e-mail] (Macy Hallock)
Subject: Re: Network Installation Box Installation Rules
Organization: The Matrix


In an attempt to put some factual information back into this thread, I
present the following:

In general, Network Interface rules are goverened by:

FCC rules
National Electrical Code
PUC rules
Telco policy
Local telco whim

(Not neccessarily in that order, BTW)

The current trend is toward the Minimum Point of Penetration (MPOP)
rule.  The idea being that the telco's regulated facilities should end
at the MPOP into a customer location.

Normally this is the entrance or point of contact within the building
in question.

In residential facilites, especially single family dwellings, the
trend is to locate the Network Interface (NI) in a weatherproof
enclosure on the side of the dwelling, outdoors, for both aerial and
buried entrances.

I find this "rule" to be somewhat flexible, though.  In the case of a
buried entrance, we often prefer a completely concealed entrance for
security reasons.  If we work with the telco, i.e. open the trench
area next to the dwelling and cut a hole throught the block basement
wall, the telco will usually cooperate and install the NI in the
basement right next to the entrance through the wall.  Many telco
installers actually prefer this method, if someone else does the dirty
work [grin].

For aerial entrances, there is less flexibility.  In years past we
would be able to gain telco cooperation in relocating the NI or
protector in the attic area.  Due to access problems, and the
increased sensitivity to grounding concerns on the part of telco
personnel, this is much more difficult to accomplish these days.
Where security is an issue, we now arrange for a new buried entrance,
rather than attempt attic placement of an NI.

In commercial establishments and in multifamily buildings, interior
location of the MPOP and NI is common.  This is often due to the use
of buried conduits for these type of buildings.  In existing
structures, the multipair cable is usually already constructed to an
interior multipair protector, and the telco considers this to be the
MPOP and located all NI's there.

I have seen a few exterior NI's on commercial sites, but usually where
only one or two phone lines are involved and the feed is drop wire as
opposed to multipair cable.

Where the jacks or other termination is distant from the NI, such as
in an apartment/multifamily dwelling, all wiring, whether existing or
new, is regarded as customer owned inside wiring.  The regulated telco
facility ends at the NI.  This has proven to be somewhat problematical
in the case of T1 circuits and other sensitive data facilities, BTW.

Where the desired point of demarcation is different from the MPOP, the
NI is at the MPOP and the wiring to the demarc is treated as customer
owned inside wire.  This means that charges for inside wire
installation are incurred if the demarc is not at the same location as
the MPOP/NI.  It also means that if you don't pay for inside wire
maintenance and the demarc is distant from the MPOP, then billable
service charges can be applied by the telco for sometimes very flimsy
reasons.


Macy M Hallock Jr N8OBG 216.725.4764 [e-mail] [e-mail]
[No disclaimer, but I have no real idea what I'm saying or why I'm telling you]

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

From: [e-mail] (Julian Macassey)
Subject: Re: Sidetone (was LD Transmission Quality Comparison)
Date: 12 Oct 92 15:20:55 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Julian Macassey)
Organization: The Hole in the Wall  Hollywood California U.S.A.


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

> In the good old days, the 2500 set could be ordered up without
> sidetone.  This was some kind of a military specification that
> improved communications in less than ideal environments.

    There was a simple reason this set had no sidetone. It had no
hybrid. It was a four wire device for use on a four wire system. You
got no sidetone, no echo and no singing. So yes, it worked in crummy
throw em up in a hurry environments.

    And as I am sure Mr. Higdon can tell us, nulling a hybrid for
0 sidetone -- or the best you can get -- is a tricky act. The null
will shift for every call made requiring a null every time a call is
established. Modern DSP hybrids such as the Telos used in call in
shows does this on the fly.


Julian Macassey, [e-mail]  N6ARE@WA6FWI.#SOCAL.CA.USA.NA
742 1/2 North Hayworth Avenue Hollywood CA 90046-7142 voice [phone]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #777
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa23403;
          13 Oct 92 3:53 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA04043
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 13 Oct 1992 01:34:23 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA24088
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 13 Oct 1992 01:34:08 -0500
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 01:34:08 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #778

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 13 Oct 92 01:34:09 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 778

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Why No Sprint Service Here Since Thursday? (Ben Harrell via H. Shrikumar)
    GTE <> Pac*Bell SS7 Update (John Higdon)
    Answering Machine CPC? (Henry E. Schaffer)
    Alltel Open House (Pat Turner)
    Global Networking (Grover McCoury)
    Dialing From Bronx to Queens Within 718 Area Code (Adrienne Voorhis)
    PC Communications (Ross Dargahi)
    T-1 for Datacom (Vance Shipley)
    A Small Tutorial on Some Networking Stuff (Lars Poulsen)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 92 17:49:54 MDT
From: [e-mail] (H. Shrikumar)
Subject: Why No Sprint Service Here Since Thursday?
Organization: UMass, Amherst, MA 01002 + Temporal Sys & Comp Net, Bombay, India


[Moderator's Note: This was passed along to the Digest by Mr.
Shrijumar who saw it in alt and thought others would want to see it.]

In article <[e-mail]> in alt.dcom.telecom
[e-mail] wrote:

[e-mail] (Ray Timmons) writes:

> The Greenville, SC area has not been able to access Sprint since
> Thursday.  What?  When you call the operator, they say that Sprint has
> requested that customers be referred to AT&T and MCI.  To make matters
> worse, 1-800 service (with all carriers) has been out so far today.
> What gives?

It's due to the recent torrential rains in western SC, that flooded a
Sprint DMS-250 switch (that was underground I believe).  Will take
quite a while to get things back to normal.  We are affected here in
central and eastern NC as well. My primary private net and 800 service
is with Sprint.


Ben Harrell    [e-mail]

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

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 92 16:56 PDT
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: GTE <> Pac*Bell SS7 Update


After talking to spokespeople at Pac*Bell and GTE today, I can give a
report on the progress of SS7 connectivity (and CLASS feature
compatibility) in California.

As has been pointed out, there is currently no SS7 connectivity
between Pac*Bell and GTE. In northern California (Bay Area), this is
insignificant since the bulk of the telephone service is provided by
Pac*Bell. However Los Gatos is in my local calling area so I was
curious about how long it would be before features, such as my Select
Call Forwarding, would work with Los Gatos phone numbers.  In southern
California, this lack of SS7 connectivity really impacts the value of
Pac*Bell's CLASS features since GTE serves major areas of the greater
Los Angeles area (including parts of Los Angeles itself).

Here is the scoop (from Thousand Oaks spokespersons): GTE is currently
in the final testing phase of SS7 within its own service area.
Depending on the final outcome of those tests (which should conclude
within several weeks), negotiations should finalize with Pac*Bell
paving the way for SS7 connectivity between the two companies. This
could happen by mid-1993, just in time for Pac*Bell's proposed
offering of Caller-ID (finally!).

So it appears that GTE will possibly have SS7 connectivity with
Pac*Bell within the year. In the meantime, it is interesting to note
that a nearby outpost of little Contel already has SS7 connectivity
with Pac*Bell. And indeed, my CLASS features work perfectly with
Gilroy numbers.


John Higdon  |   P. O. Box 7648   |   [phone]     |       FAX:
[e-mail] | San Jose, CA 95150 | 10288 0 700 FOR-A-MOO | [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Henry E. Schaffer)
Subject: Answering Machine CPC?
Organization: North Carolina State University
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 21:07:36 GMT


A telephone answering machine which used to hang up quickly when the
calling party disconnected (even during the OutGoing Message) started
stopped hanging up.  Someone said "It's the CPC." and found that a
hidden switch had CPC-Off, changed it to CPC-On and the answering
machine resumed hanging up quickly.

What does "CPC" mean?  What does it detect (battery reversal?)  Why
would an answering machine allow this to be switched off?  Is "CPC" a
common answering machine capability/feature?


henry schaffer  n c state univ  [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: CPC means 'called (calling?) party control'. It has
to do with getting the line released immediatly when one party or the
other disconnects. Yes, it detects changes in the voltage. The reason
it is switchable on/off is because if a line is also equipped with
call waiting, then the voltage drop from a call waiting signal would
also trick the answering machine in to disconnecting. If the line got
call-waited while the answering machine was doing its duty, then the
machine would hang up on the party currently talking to it. Thus the
switchable condition; take your pick: fast disconnect when the voltage
change is detected, ie no dial tone and 'please hang up now' messages
on the tape while the machine is continuing to its timeout point or
the other choice of not having call waiting on the line with the
answering machine or risking losing a call now and then when a second
one arrived in the midst of the first one.  You can't have it both
ways and the switch lets you the user decide.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 92 18:35 EDT
From: rsiatl![e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Alltel Open House


For you people on the left coast: I received an invitation from Alltel
Supply in LA to attend a vendor products showcase involving over 50
vendors.  Most major telecom vendors, save AT&T, are listed.  It's
Thursday, Oct 22, 1992 3 pm to 7 pm with a BBQ dinner at 5 pm.

   Alltel LA Counter Sales Center
   2525 Workman Mill Rd.  Whittier, CA.

What's funny is that it was mailed to me in Alabama from the Alltel
office in Norcross, GA (outside Atlanta).  I guess Alltel confuses the
original LA (Lower Alabama) with it's better known counterpart on the
west coast :-).


Pat Turner KB4GRZ   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Grover McCoury)
Subject: Global Networking
Organization: Fujitsu Network Switching
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 92 18:45:56 GMT


 From "Information Week", October 5, 1992:

"Carrying a Global Message"

  Six of the largest international telecommunications carriers signed
an agreement last week to share undersea fiber-optic capacity in an
attempt to improve the flow of global voice, video, and data
communications. Under the pact, called the Global Networking Project,
AT&T, BT, Deutsche Bundespost Telekom, France Telecom, Australia's
OTC, and Japan's Kokusai Denshin Denwa will combine portions of their
transcontinental cables to create a shared-facilities network.

 Many of the details have yet to be worked out. The digital
cross-connect equipment and management systems for the project are
being developed to operate with the current transmission systems as
well as Synchronous Digital Hierarchy systems. And AT&T Bell
Laboratories is working with the carriers to develop the technical
specifications and guidelines for the project. The parties hope to
have the Global Networking Project running by the end of next year.


Grover McCoury    @ Fujitsu Network Switching Of America, Inc.
  4403 Bland Road     Raleigh, NC  27609    audio: 919-790-3111
                electronic: ...!mcnc!fns-nc1!gcm

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

Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 10:02:25 -0400 (EDT)
From: Adrienne Voorhis <[e-mail]>
Subject: Dialing From Bronx to Queens Within 718 Area Code


In TELECOM Digest Volume 12 : Issue 750 I ran across the following
quoted material, from <[e-mail]>:

> In the 212, 718, and 917 areas, all calls within and among 212, 917,
> and 718 happen to be local (or at most message units) so there's no
> issue of 1+ for toll, and in fact you dial 1 + 718 + number to make a
> local call from Manhattan to Queens, or 1 + 917 + number to call a
> beeper or fax machine within Manhattan.

Not only that, if I make a call from the Bronx to Queens (both within
718), the call will not go through unless I dial 1 + 718 + seven digit
number.

I imagine this is also true for calls from the Bronx to Brooklyn.
Queens and Brooklyn broke off to 718 (from 212) years ago.  The Bronx
has only been added to 718 (from 212) since July.


Adrienne Voorhis    Albert Einstein College of Medicine
Bronx, New York     I'm only speaking for myself.

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

From: [e-mail] (Ross Dargahi)
Subject: PC Communications
Date: 12 Oct 1992 21:13:26 GMT
Organization: Baylor College of Medicine
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Ross Dargahi)


I have a project which has presented me with a dilemma. Let me briefly
outline what the application needs to do:

1) contact NSB via modem and sync clock with atomic clock
2) connect to several bbs via modem and download data
3) validate data (for data entry error on bbs side)
4) merge data into a database (Foxpro)

The app must be robust enough so that communication failures such has
modem hangups, lost carriers will not effect it. i.e. it should be
able to recover from such scenarios. The keyword for this system is
robustness.

I have thought of several scenarios:

1) code the whole nine yards myself. This would include the
   xmodem /xmodem crc stuff, low level comm libraries etc.. etc..

2) get hold of libraries that give me serial communications
   functionality, file transfer funcitonality etc...

3) Buy a package/packages that let me do most of this stuff

Time as always is a factor, so solution three is most attractive
followed by two then one.

Coming from a Unix background, I am not a PC/DOS guru so I would
really appreciate any and all input from you experts out there.

Thanks for your help in advance.


Ross Dargahi     [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Vance Shipley)
Subject: T-1 For Datacom
Organization: SwitchView Inc., Waterloo, Ontario
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 16:05:06 GMT


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

> For a fast serial line, framing bits are never needed (the computers
> take care of figuring out where a byte starts).  If nothing inbetween
> the sender and receiver cares about framing, and you had a CSU that
> would support it, then you could use the full 1.544 (most repeaters
> don't care about framing, but, for example, a DACS probably would).

This is something I've long wondered about.  If I have a Cisco (for
example) router connected to another router somewhere with a T-1
circuit is it one serial stream at 1.54Mbs or is it broken into 24
channels?  I would guess that if they supported the 24-Channel
arrangement they would also have an option to have one stream.  I
guess the question is then; does datacom commonly use T-1 in a 24
channel arrangement?


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Lars Poulsen)
Subject: A Small Tutorial on Some Networking Stuff
Organization: CMC Network Systems (Rockwell DCD), Santa Barbara, CA, USA
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 92 06:15:44 GMT


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

> How exactly are we connected with these gateways, why are some
> addresses so complicated, how can we access the TELECOM archives from
> Telemail with only a dumb terminal, how do you prefer us to address
> submissions to this group, what is X.25, X.400, and the hardest
> question, can you explain this in beginners terms?

Although Jim asked for replies to be sent directly to him, I will give
Pat a chance to put it in the Digest if he wants to. I'm feeling in
the mood to teach/preach today; I had a run-in with GTE 611.

    I was trying to get directory assistance for the next city down
the cost, which I think is a Pac Bell area. And since GTE has often
chastised my for using 411 for non-local directory assistance, I tried
to dial 1-805-555-1212, only to get an intercept that said "It is not
necessary to dial 1 or the area code in front of the number you are
calling". But 555-1212 did not work either: It went to fast busy after
555. The poor, underpaid, undertrained girl at the tech service end of
the menu-monster reached by 611 could not understand why I would think
this was a problem, and she felt abused by my attempts to get her to
record a suggestion to route 555-1212 to directory assistance. "Why
don't you just dial 411 like normal people?".

    Anyway, back to the questions.

WHAT IS X.25 ?

In its simplest form, data communication is about moving databytes
from one computer's memory to another's without loss or errors. In
general, we like to get the costs down, and so we generally want to
have several simultaneous connections share the wire. When we do that,
we need to make sure that one stalled connection doesn't prevent the
others from getting their work done. The technical terms for these
features are error control, multiplexing and flow control.

In the early 1970's, it was demonstrated (by researchers working on a
small government-funded research network called ARPAnet) that it was
quite practical to set up a network with fast, permanent lines, and
share these lines between many users, instead of setting up individual
lines for each user like we do/did with telephone calls. The procedure
of getting the same effect out of the shared network as if you had
dialed a temporary connection was called packet switching, as opposed
to the then normal circuit switching. It was decided that this was a
good thing, and that since people would soon be calling on telephone
companies to provide such services, CCITT should standardize the
protocols and procedures by which such networks might be built and
connected to each other. X.25 is the reference number for a CCITT
document that describes how a computer might connect to such a network
over a synchronous line such as a DDS-1 (56 kbps) link.

It soon turned out, however, that the greatest number of connections
were not between two computers, but between a user at a terminal on
one end, and a computer on the other end. Thus, a specification was
written up for a small computer that might be deployed next to the
X.25 packet switch, which might be reached by people with asynchronous
ascii terminals, and which then connected on behalf of the terminal
user to the computer on the other end. This specification came in
three parts, numbered X.3 (what services to provide), X.28 (the user
commands), and X.29 (what the bits on the wire looked like between the
two computers).  Such an auxiliary machine was called a Packet
Assembler/Disassembler, or PAD for short, and most people that talk
about using X.25 are really talking about using an X.29 PAD.

The first two large commercial X.25 networks were Telenet, (which was
started by some BBN people that had worked on the ARPAnet, but soon
sold out to GTE) and TYMNET, which was owned by a computer service
bureau called TYME-SHARE, and was originally mostly used to access
that service, which was the Compu-Serve of its time. (Today, I think
TymShare is gone, and only the network is left.)

When X.25 first came out, we all thought it was horribly complicated.
Today, we can appreciate the simple elegance by which it provides many
services in a modular manner; it just happened to provide so many more
services than what we had ever seen before.

X.25 is still alive and well, but the way in which it is used today
(except for X.29 PADs) uses very few of those services. Accordingly, a
"leaner and meaner" multiplexing protocol has sprung up, called Frame
Relay, which gives better performance over today's faster links.

WHAT IS X.400 ?

One of the most valuable things that people use networks for, is
electronic mail. Only problem is, many people have done it
differently.  CCITT decided to cut through it and define a new
standard, which would be suitable for a telco-provided central place
that all of these all-different systems could use as a neutral
celaringhouse. The X.400 book of standards describes this system.

The only problems are:

(1) The world doesn't look like that. There are already multiple,
interconnected, independent networks, and there is no clear place for
a clearinghouse to fit in.

(2) The standard was designed by several committees over several
years, and everybody wanted to put something in that would be easy for
them to do, plus something that would be hard for the competition to
do. The result is a stack of paper about 4 inches high. Any practical
implementation is slow, expensive and hard to set up.

(3) There already was a defacto clearinghouse standard. The ARPAnet
had grown, evolved, and spawned clones, that had interconnected with
each other and with FIDOnets and other bulletin boards, using a
different but much simpler Internet specification called RFC-821 and
RFC-822.

Slowly, but surely, X.400 is collapsing under its own weight.

RFC-822 says an address has an "@" sign in the middle; to the right of
that is the name of a computer, and to the left of that is a
description of a mailbox that that computer will know how to
interpret.

X.400 says mail is addressed to a person; that person has a
Given_Name, a Surname, sometimes a Common_Name. The person belongs to
an organizational unit, which may be a part of yet another
organizational unit, within an organization, which is of course
located in a country.

While X.400 was supposed to be easier for people to deal with (and
might actually be easy, when and if there is a global, distributed,
interconnected database for both the users and the computers to look
each other up in), RFC-822 deals with the world the way the computers
are already set up.

Usually, an RFC-822 mailbox address is either the person's login name,
or their full name as defined when the account was set up, but
sometimes it will be a pointer to a user on a different system, which
cannot be reached directly. In such cases, it is common to stick a "%"
sign in the middle, and have the name of the next system to the right,
and on the left, whatever that machine can deal with.

HOW DO I GET TO THE ARCHIVES ?

Your mailbox on TeleMail is about as limited as anyone can get. All
you can do is send mail. To really get to the archives, you must have
access to the Internet, and you can then just copy files across. There
are, however a few systems that have "robots" that you can send mail
to, and they will copy the file, and mail it to you. Pat describes
this procedure about once a month. Sine I don't need it, I generally
don't save it.


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]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #778
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa13316;
          14 Oct 92 4:45 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA18797
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 14 Oct 1992 02:41:03 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA30598
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 14 Oct 1992 02:40:54 -0500
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 02:40:54 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #779

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 14 Oct 92 02:41:00 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 779

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    SPRINT Outage (Matthew Waugh)
    AT&T vs A Cable Company (John Higdon)
    East German Pay Phone (Mark Brader)
    Data Services to the Home (Gerry Lawrence)
    Stolen Cell Phone (Monte Freeman)
    Where Can I Get: Digital Matrix Switches, Craft Tools, RF Links (P Turner)
    Help Needed With Communications and Computers (Michael Hauben)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Matthew Waugh)
Subject: SPRINT Outage
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 92 20:07:20 GMT
Organization: Data General Corporation, RTP, NC.


I haven't seen anything on this, and I'd expected people to be jumping
all over it.

Sometime on Thursday evening 10/8/92 the SPRINT switching centre in
Fairfax, South Carolina, went down completly. Various "rumors" abound,
most of which involve the switch being under 18 feet of water. We're
located in North Carolina, and all our SPRINT switched service is
routed via that switch. Certainly on Friday people in the area with
SPRINT 800 service were not getting any calls sent their way.

It's 16:00 EDT on 10/13/92, still no service. We have dial-tone on the
trunk, and get an all circuits are busy if we try and make a call.
Refresh my memory, didn't Congress go ballistic after the AT&T outage
around New York? Here we are going on the third business day, and not
a peep out of any news organization.


Matthew Waugh        [e-mail]
RTP Network Services     Data General Corp.    RTP, NC. (919)-248-6034


[Moderator's Note: I put a short article about this in the Digest on
Tuesday. I don't know how deep the water is, but yes, the underground
switch was flooded. Apparently Sprint had no provision for backup
routing of any sort. The word is the service will be out for a long
time; maybe a month or more. A lot of the customers affected have
simply made arrangements to switch their service over to AT&T or MCI
permanently. For the life of me, I cannot understand why any telco
would bury their switch underground knowing how vulnerable they are to
dampness and other conditions.  Even here in Chicago, when we try to
call over to that part of the country if we use Sprint to start the
trip from here the calls are just bombing out. We get a rapid busy
signal. You'd think Sprint might at least pick off their traffic going
that way and hand it off to AT&T or someone else to make things a
little easier.  Would anyone from Sprint care to comment?  I'll give
the article priority attention here if they do.   PAT]

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

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 92 18:47 PDT
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: AT&T vs A Cable Company


In the last month, I have had two problems with "wire companies". One
was with my cable company (TCI Cablevision of San Jose); the other
with AT&T. The difference in response between the two companies is
remarkable.

My complaint with cable was the disruption of service in the wee hours
to do "maintenance". You will recall that I mentioned this practice in
a recent post, which I faxed to TCI. TCI's response was a full-page
letter from the general manager fully explaining the situation,
including measures taken to prevent recurrance, and apologizing for
the annoyance that it caused. As a "peace offering", I was informed
that there would be a credit on my next statement representing one
free month of the DMX service including box rental.

The AT&T matter involved charges for hundreds of dollars worth of
calls never made. It took many calls, including three-way conferences
with Pac*Bell, to get AT&T to agree to issue a credit. Throughout the
whole affair, I was treated as some sort of deadbeat who was trying to
avoid paying my bill. One rep barked, "The calls WERE made from your
residence, whether you were aware of them or not. There is no mistake
with direct-dialed calls." I would not mind seeing that person fired.
I sent a letter to a number of the executives of AT&T including Bob
Allen. AT&T's response? Absolutely none. Obviously my business is of
no concern to anyone at AT&T. In fact, I was informed by someone in
the company that my complaints and observations were indeed brushed
off.  AT&T may have good products and services, but it has a lot to
learn about customer relations.

The next time you consider cable companies to be slime and telephone
companies to have class, please remember these two notable exceptions.


John Higdon  |   P. O. Box 7648   |   [phone]     |       FAX:
[e-mail] | San Jose, CA 95150 | 10288 0 700 FOR-A-MOO | [phone]

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

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 16:59:00 -0400
From: [e-mail] (Mark Brader)
Subject: East German Pay Phone


> The most interesting thing is that the hanger for the handset did
not appear to move for off-hook indication.

That reminds me.  At the end of May I was in what used to be East
Berlin, and made a call from a pay phone there (specifically, it was
in one of the city center S-Bahn stations, either Friedrichstrasse or
Alexanderplatz).

That phone, too, had no obvious moving parts for off-hook detection.
The hanger was metal, and the other end of the handset rested against
a small metal plate, so I wondered if it was be passing a small
current through the handset, but the handset seemed to be plastic.
Anyone know how it worked?

There were no directories, so I needed to call directory assistance to
get the number.  The only information about special numbers was a
plate with pictograms, which I read even less well than I do German.
One showed a picture of a telephone handset, and another showed a
telephone handset with eight radiating lines near one end of it, like
an eight-pointed asterisk.  What *is* the intended meaning of these
symbols anyway?

Having no idea what either symbol meant, I called one of them and
asked if they spoke English.  I was told to call the other one.  I
called it and gave the name and address.  I knew East and West Berlin
were still separate for telephone purposes, but I was still surprised
when they were surprised that I didn't say "West Berlin" when I gave
the address.

They gave me the number and I asked if I had to dial a code before it
to reach West Berlin.  They said yes and gave a two-digit code (74, I
think).  I dialed the code and started dialing the number, and the
phone said, "Kein Anschluss mit diese Nummer", or some such -- no
connection with this number -- and returned my coin.

After several repetitions of this, I pulled out the guidebook I was
carrying and found the *3*-digit code that *it* had given for dialing
West from East Berlin (849, I think).  I tried this and it worked.
The mind boggles.  Now that I think of it, it also rather boggled at
the fact that, unless my hotel listing included some out-of-date
numbers, West Berlin telephone numbers could be five, six, seven, or
eight digits long ...


Mark Brader, SoftQuad Inc., Toronto, utzoo!sq!msb, [e-mail]

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

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 92 11:40:07 EDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Data Services to the Home


[e-mail] (Leonard Erickson) writes:

> On the other hand, how *cheap* could a 64kb/s interface be? That's all
> it'd take to supply a "regular" phone line. And in the quantities
> involved, I'd expect the cost to drop *fast*. For the sake of
> argument, call it $50. (I've seen RS-232 to fiber adapters in that
> range).

Math Associates make ethernet on multimode fiber trancievers for about
$200.  That's 10 Megsbits/sec.  Of course, the distance is limited to
less than 1km.

This is the rub.  Bandwidth is always distance limited.  It's easy
(and therefore cheap) to get a bazillion bits/second if the distance
is across the room; across the world is a different story.

Of course, TPC has no idea whatsoever of what the public needs or
wants in data services be it on fiber or copper.  All they're are
interested in is getting a monopoly on the service, no matter how bad
it is.

Witness ISDN.  You, I, and everyone else that has ever paid a phone
bill has helped foot the huge cost of development for ISDN. All to get
64KB/S.  These days you can get about the same data rate with off the
shelf modems on regular phone lines.  Can you say BILL OF GOODS?

Fortunately the public is not as naieve as it once was.  It's clear
that TPC does can not provide what it has always claimed to provide:
security, reliability and speed.  People will go elsewhere to get the
services that they need, if they can.

Unfortunatly it is our legal system that will ultimately decide who
gets what slice of the pie.  As long as the lawyers get the biggest
slice they don't give two s*#$s and a holler for the public's demand
for service.  I say network revolution NOW.  Just say no to the phone
company.  Get an amateur radio licence and some packet switching
hardware and just say NO to MA BELL!

So what do we need?  True competition at the door?  You bet, the time
is now.  A "fiber company" could provide TV, Phone, and high speed
data all on the same wire, but this "fiber company" would face both
TPC and TCC (the cable comany) as competitors.  Unless all their cable
is sealed in concrete vaults I suspect many "accidental" cuts to their
system.  TPC and TCC would also fight them at the legel level,
claiming all kinds of unfair advantage.

But the public will ultimately demand these services, just as it
demanded cheap TV's, Cheap autos, subsidized roads and gas, etc etc.

A luxery once tasted becomes a neccesity.  TPC is counting on the
public's unsaitiable desire for luxeries, and their ability to con
them into thinking it's the only one who can provide them.


Gerry Lawrence    University of Florida -- Engineering Computer Services

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

From: [e-mail] (Monte Freeman)
Subject: Stolen Cell Phone
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 92 2:27:56 EDT


Pat,

Over this past weekend, someone broke into my car. The two items they
removed (they wanted the whole car, but the alarm system prevented
them from getting that. ) were my OKI 700 cellular phone and a Yaesu
FT-727 dual band hand-held ham radio.

I realize that I'll probably never see the HT again; but I was
wondering what you and/or the rest of the readers think my chances of
getting the phone back are? I called Pactel and told them what had
happened. They turned off service to the phone immediately.

I've heard that there is a database of stolen phone ESNs that the
different service providers keep. What I'm not sure about is if this
database is local to each area, or if it's a nationwide thing ...

If I report a phone stolen here in Atlanta, are the cellular service
providers in Chicago or L.A. likely to know about it?

If the phone does show up "active" on a cell somewhere, is it possible
(or more importantly is it done) to try and track it down?

One more thing. I think that the OKI 700 is no longer made ... :(
Anyone got any recommendations on replacements that I can give to the
insurance company?


Thanks,

Monte Freeman  --  Operations Department / Information Technology
Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta Georgia, 30332
Internet: [e-mail]     Bitnet:   [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: I think the chances of recovering the phone are
almost zilch. Yes, there is a nationwide negative listing that all the
carriers see.  Most likely when the thief discovered the phone would
not work any longer he sold it to some cell phone phreak for ten
dollars ... :(   that person will try and modify the ESN or possibly
use the phone for scrap parts, etc.  Sorry about your bad luck.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 92 18:35 EDT
From: rsiatl![e-mail]
Subject: Where Can I Get: Digital Matrix Switches, Craft Tools, RF links
Reply-To: [e-mail]


There have been a number of the "where can I get" questions and I
thought I would tackle a few now that I am home, and can pull the info
from my files:

1) I think Tim Lowe asked about an RS-232 matrix switch.  When I checked
   my mail, I had a catalog from Phoenix Telecom. Test Equipment in
   Huntsville, AL.  In addition to the standard lineup of VF and digital
   test equipiment, they sell a digital matrix switch that does RS-232,
   422, 449, V.35, T1, E1, or T1 "hitless" (unframed?) depending on the
   model.  Comes with 16 ports, expandable to 256.

   Model 3250 Matrix Switch
   Phoenix Microsystems, Inc
   1-[phone]
   1-800-866-8480

2) Craft Tools:
   James Gustave writes:

   > Does anyone know of a source for telephone installation equipment?
   > I'm not talking about radio-shack crimpers and plugs, but rather the
   > fun stuff that the telco people have.  Like linesperson's handsets, or
   > the things-they-hook-to-the-lines-that-go-BEEP.  Someone must know
   > what I'm talking about.

   > Either a source in the Bay Area or something mail-order would be
   > great.  Thanks.

   The buzzer is called a tone generator.  Most were made by PEI.
   The receiver is called an inductive line aid, AKA banana.

   Try Greybar, Anixter, North Supply, and Alltel Supply in your
   local phone book.

   In addition to SPC and Jensen mentioned in todays issue of the digest,
   try :
   Time Motion Tools    [phone]
   Techni-Tool          [phone]

   For a good buy on new and used telecom tools try:
   Western Tel-Com Surplus Co.   1-800-543-5916

   They have reconditioned rotary butt sets for $25, TS-21's for 125/150 new.

3) Chris Kennedy writes:
   > I recently purchased a hunk of land in more or less the middle of
   > nowhere and am seeking alternatives to simply paying line extension
   > charges in order to meet my telecom needs.  By way of background my
   > current residential telecom mix consists of five voice and one 56Kb
   > ADN line,

   > FM prop
   > characteristics in the area are good and with modest work I can get
   > line-of site to a commercial tower where rent is cheap and a PacBell
   > presence in place.

   Look at 900 MHz Spread Spectrum links.  One company that comes to mind
   is Cylink (1-408-735-5800).  They make several fractional T1 links.  My
   guess is that will work if you are LOS to the tower (<20 miles).
   Their systems have a loss budget of around 120 dB, which shouldn't
   be hard to meet with Yagi antennas.  They also make 5 GHz radios and
   others sell 2.5 GHz radios such as Western Multiplex Corp. (1-415-592-8832)
   that are SS.  I would avoid these as they will require a fortune in
   feedline.  Most users point them out a window or mount them on a roof top
   where long feedlines aren't needed.  If you need a source for high gain
   antennas on these frequencies let me know.  Dishes, Yagi's and omni's
   are available, but at least one company (Marti Electronics) recommends
   against the latter two at these freq's.


Pat Turner KB4GRZ   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Michael Hauben)
Subject: Help Needed With Communications and Computers
Date: 14 Oct 92 03:56:35 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Michael Hauben)
Organization: Columbia University


I am taking a Computers and Society class and the following is the
proposal I handed into my teacher. I will appreciate it if anyone has
any comments on it, or if they can help me with references and / or a
better clarification or sharpening of a topic.


  Thanks,
 -Michael

             Computers & Society Term Paper Proposal

     Computers and concurrent technologies have had a significant
impact on communications. I am interested in writing on the impact
that this combination is having and will have on people's lives. The
combination of computers and communications has led to enormous
networks that transmit and carry numerous different types of
information and data. In Computers, Communications and Society, Murray
Laver wrote:

     "Cost apart, territorial distances are no longer a barri-
     er ... If the present trend continues, then by 1980 more than
     90% of the world's computers would be linked to communica-
     tion systems. This combination promises to be exceptionally
     important because its effect will not be confined to one
     section of technology, nor to technology alone. The collec-
     tion and exchange of information underlies all that we do,
     and the structures and functions of industrial society
     depend absolutely on its prompt and ample supply. A major
     change in information techniques is bound to affect every
     aspect of out lives -- economic, social, political and domes-
     tic -- and we need to be alert and aware of what is happening
     if we aspire to direct its course." (Oxford, 1975, p 1)

     This flow of information can selectively be accessed, allowing
the individual to make the information suit him or her.  This is a
fundamental change from the traditional mode of the mass media making
the individual conform to it. The world is becoming more accessible
while at the same time growing in size.  New international communities
are forming (based on common interests, backgrounds, and abilities.)

     The combined efforts of people interested in communication has
led to the development and expansion of the global communica- tions
system. Ithiel de Sola Pool in Technologies Without Bound- aries
wrote:

     "The system becomes part of the largest machine that man has
     ever constructed -- the global telecommunications network.
     The full map of it no one knows; it changes every day."
     (Cambridge, 1990, p 56)

This system has grown because of the interest people have in
communicating with the world outside of themselves. The voluntary
nature of this system has lead to an enormous collection of generally
helpful resources in other people and collections of information.

     A current material example of the fundamental powers of this
communications and information revolution is Eastern Europe. Much of
the changes there were assisted through the opening up of information
and communication. The organized form of Usenet News assists in the
connections. This example might possibly serve as a foundation for my
premises. A useful pointer is the following quote from "The
Information Technologies and East European Societies" in East European
Politics and Societies:

     "The perception of serious technological backwardness, and
     the desire to end it, lie at the heart of Eastern Europe's
     economic, political, and social upheaval...The computer and
     its related technologies have contributed most to the indus-
     trial world's rapid economic restructuring and have high-
     lighted Eastern Europe's economic deficiencies most clear-
     ly." (vol 5, no 3, Fall '91, p. 394)

     My research will consist of materials from books and my personal
experiences. Along with this, I will interact with the Net and think
of interviewing people involved with the develop- ment of various
parts of the global communications network, along with personal
observations from people who participate in Usenet.

     As an example of the helpful resources, I posted a message in
several newsgroups to gain help in figuring out a useful and
interesting topic. In response I received over ten email responses
from around the world offering help.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #779
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa24764;
          15 Oct 92 2:20 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA32167
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 14 Oct 1992 23:55:04 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA06253
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 14 Oct 1992 23:54:55 -0500
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 23:54:55 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #780

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 14 Oct 92 23:55:00 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 780

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Fibre Cables Not That Immortal (Don Kimberlin)
    Re: Fiber to the Home (David G. Lewis)
    How Should I Get My House Wired For Future Phone Needs? (Toby Nixon)
    Cost Accounting Software (Craig A. Brown)
    Different Rings For Different Things? (Justin Leavens)
    It's Back - FBI Wiretap Bill (Ron Dippold)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 00:14:42 -0400
From: [e-mail] (Don Kimberlin)
Subject: Fibre Cables Not That Immortal


[originally posted in Fidonet BROADCAST conference, with some spelling
corrections]

Here's a just a bit of "real world" about fiber optic cable and those
overblown statements about the apparent invincibility of fiber optic
cable ... those things that trumpet phrases like, "Impervious to harm
and interruption ... non-metallic and interference-proof!"... and so
on.

In fact, practical fiber optic cable of the type planted in the ground
for intercity use has at least two important natural enemies, both of
which have caused, and continue to cause failures of those cables,
gophers and lightning.  Both have been significant causes of failure
of preceding cable technologies in the twisted copper pairs and
coaxial cables of the earlier analog era.

A recent edition of "Lightguide Digest" published by AT&T technologies
tells quite openly how AT&T's RL series of fiber optic cable is
constructed to attempt to avoid both kinds of natural enemies.

First addressing the gopher threat, the article describes it as a
"gnawing problem" that "is growing."  It says, "the fact is well
established that rodents such as gophers will gnaw through unprotected
buried cables.  Information collected in the 1950s indicated that
gopehrs infested more than 60 percent of the continental U.S." An
accompanying figure shows a distribution of gopher areas to include
almost all the area west of the Mississippi River plys most of
Florida, Georgia and about a third of Alabama.  The article goes on,
"To grind down incisors which grow approximately 12 inches per year,
gophers spend 10 percent of their time, which means more than 90,000
bites per week, gnawing various items including fiber optic cable."
The bite pressure exerted by a gopher on fiber optic cable is said to
reach as high as 18,000 pounds per square inch.

The habits of the gopher are described as a creature that keeps a home
territory of several hundred square feet, saying that cables buried
through gopher territories are the victims of repeated gnawing
attacks. Reports have been made of gophers completely severing
all-dielectric fiber cables in Ohio, an area not previously thought to
be in the "gopher zone," and Colorado reports indicate gophers there
are a widespread threat to unprotected fiber optic lines.

Two methods are the only ones known to be effective against gopher
attack:

One is to place the nominal 1/2-inch diameter fiber cable in a 2-1/2
to 4 inch diameter rigid PVC conduit, an expense communications
companies would rather avoid.  The other is to use a cable with a
stainless steel sheath around its fiber optic contents ... which makes
the cable conductive, increasing the risk of lightning striking the
cable and literally blowing the cable in pieces. Indeed, the article
reports that one Mountain Bell fiber cut was caused by gnawing through
a two-inch outer conduit, anyway.  Larger cement or ceramic conduit
might be used, but that would increase costs of placing cable evern
more.

To attempt gopher protection, AT&T has two calbe designs in its RL
series. The first, for direct burial in rural areas, is called Primary
Rodent- Lightning (Primary RL) Sheath. It consists of a corrugated
stainless steel armor layer bonded to an outer polyethelyne jacket
that contains a surrounding layer of wire strength members. The visual
representation of this cable winds up looking very much like
transoceanic deep-sea cables that have evolved over more than 130
years of submarine telegraphy around the world, the only difference
being that the center of the cable is hollow, providing for a variety
of forms of fibers inside. The other type, called the Lightguide
Express Entry Rodent-Lightning LXE-RL Sheath, has but two strength-
member wires in its jacket and a layer of "Water-Blocking/Lightning
Tape" located under its stainless steel jacket.

The article goes on to describe how such cable types are actually
tested and rated for gopher resistance.  A sample of cable is buried
in a closed-off area (underground barricades to contain the gophers
within a confined area) with ten gophers that have nothing else to
gnaw on. Ratings of one to five indicate whether any given gopher
managed to inflict damage ranging from cutting the outer jacket to
completely biting the cable in two.  The final rating of a given cable
is the averaage of the scores of the ten different gophers placed in
the area to attack the cable.

The gophers used for the test are provided by the Denver Wildlife
Research Center of the U.S. Department of Agriculture, and the gopher
most often supplied is the common plains "pocket gopher" called Geomys
Bursarius, a small animal only 7 ot 9 inches in length that rarely
weighs more than half a pound.

The other hazard that arises to intercity fiber optic cables, since
metallic sheaths must be used to prevent gopher damage, and wires
along the cable must be added to provide "strength" so the cable can
be pulled and handled, is lightning.

One of the lesser-understood factors about buried metallic conductors
is that since they are often more conductive than the surrounding soil
they are buried in, they are better, more attractive conductors to
lightning than the dirt that surrounds them.  This means that
lightning can, and is, actually attracted to even buried cable, and
that momentary lightning currents in the metallic members of those
cable can rise high enough to actually melt a hole in the cable.

Indeed, buried fiber optic cable can be struck in open rural areas,
resulting in failure of the cable until the damaged section is
replaces.  One notable such case happened to MCI in a buried cable
west of Jacksonville, Florida, where a lightning bolt that seemed to
appear out of nowhere stabbed down into a buried fiber cable in an
open field. Even more dramatic is the piece of damaged RL cable on
display in the Charlotte, NC office of AT&T, which can be seen to have
split open from the forces exerted on it when struck by lightning.
That piece of damaged cable was struck with such force when it was
buried four feet under an open soybean field near Davidson, NC. The
cableman who repaired it stated that on the surface, a hole about the
size of a golf ball had been made in the dirt, with spherical balls of
dirt thrown back up around the hole where the lightning struck the
ground on its way down to reach the metallic elements of the fiber
cable.

So, now you have some facts to bear in mind the next time you hear
some salesman touting the apparently impervious, uniterruptible nature
of fiber optic cable plant. It has the same sort of failure potentials
that previous cables have had for decades!


Don Kimberlin - via FidoNet node 1:250/98
INTERNET: [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (david.g.lewis)
Subject: Re: Fiber to the Home
Organization: AT&T
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 17:40:46 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, Leonard.Erickson@f51.
n105.z1.fidonet.org (Leonard Erickson) writes:

> In TELECOM Digest V12#763 [e-mail] (david.g.lewis)
> writes:

>> Using your 5000 phone lines per (I'm guessing you mean) fiber pair, at
>> 64kb/s for a phone line, you're talking sending 160Mb/s to each house.
>> Let's use 155Mb/s, since that's an STS-3 SONET/SDH rate.  Anyone know
>> what an STS-3 FOT is going for these days?  I don't have any
>> up-to-date information (and if I did, I probably wouldn't be allowed
>> to post it), but I'd guess that $30k/link (both ends) is correct
>> within an order of magnitude.  Even if using ring architectures and
>> ADMs can drop your costs by a factor of two (unlikely to impossible),
>> you're talking $15k electronics costs per house.

>> Even if the cost of overlaying the fiber itself goes to zero, you've
>> just incurred a $15k per subscriber incremental cost.  At a 50,000
>> line CO, that's an investment of $750 million dollars.  For capacity
>> which will, basically, sit there until people figure out how to use
>> it.

> On the other hand, how *cheap* could a 64kb/s interface be? That's all
> it'd take to supply a "regular" phone line. And in the quantities
> involved, I'd expect the cost to drop *fast*. For the sake of
> argument, call it $50. (I've seen RS-232 to fiber adapters in that
> range).

That's a different question than the one I was answering.  I was
responding to a statement to the effect that "capacity is free, so the
telco should overbuild by a factor of 5000 because someday someone
will find a use for it."  My point was that capacity is most
emphatically *not* free; even though the cost *for fiber* is no
different whether one or 5000 equivalent phone lines is run over that
fiber, the cost of the fiber is by no means the only cost factor --
and may not even be the dominant cost factor -- in determining the
cost of providing large amounts of capacity to a user.

We could probably discuss for hours (and people do, regularly) the
economics of fiber to the home/fiber to the curb/fiber in the loop.
I'll just make some observations:

* Most RS-232 to fiber converters use multimode fibers and LED
transmitters, which are considerably less expensive than semiconductor
lasers for use with single-mode fiber.  And if you're building to
allow megabandwidth in the future, you'll build single-mode fiber.

* Depending on whose studies you believe, fiber in the subscriber loop
as far as a pedestal serving four to eight residence customers, with
copper drops from there to the demark, is somewhere between 25% above
(and dropping) to 25% below total copper distribution, on an installed
first cost (IFC) basis.  This architecture has the advantage of
pushing fiber into the loop to a certain point, with the possibility
of running it the rest of the way to the residence when the economics
improve.

* Also depending on whose studies you believe, fiber to the home is
anywhere from three to ten years away from matching copper on an
installed first cost basis.

* Regardless of whose studies you believe, all these IFC comparisons
omit from consideration cost and other factors both for and against
fiber, like cost of operations support system upgrading (against),
improved operational capabilities of fiber (for), improved quality and
reliability (for), ease of upgrading (for), and the fact that the
copper distribution plant is already there (big against).

* Telcos will generally act on whoever's studies *they* believe.
Ameritech has placed a large order for fiber in the loop equipment,
which leads me to believe that they believe that it's cheaper than
copper in some scenarios.  In general, you can expect that telcos are
somewhat intelligent when it comes to building networks, and if
something's cheaper than what they're doing now, it won't take them
*too* long to latch onto it.

> And if you need extra capacity, instead of running more lines, you
> replace the interface box at the user premises.

Indeed, this is one large advantage of fiber.

> I'm not sure whether the CO end of the fiber would be better served
> by a box capable of handling a range of line capcities, or by a
> dedicated box.

A "box" capable of handling a range of capacities without changing any
hardware is, currently, a myth.  Some systems (like AT&T's DDM-2000)
use one system framework (processor, low-speed interfaces, common
elements, etc.)  with several different varieties of optical interface
for different line speeds (e.g. OC-3 and OC-12), but if you change the
line speed, you have to at least change out the optical interface.

> Either way, at some point, in the course of upgrading, it'll be
> necessary to "move" the fiber to a different box. While this is not as
> simple as splicing copper, I doubt that it'd be *that* expensive.

Actually, done right, it's easier than splicing copper; if done right,
the outside plant (OSP) fiber terminates in a splice tray and is
spliced onto a connectorized jumper; the jumper is then connected to
whatever equipment you want.  You want to change the equipment, you
move the jumper.  Of course, you have to coordinate things so you
don't bring the user down ...

Typical Disclaimer: I don't work with this stuff, and I never did at
AT&T, so I don't necessarily know what I'm talking about, and even if
I do, it's not necessarily what my company's position is.  Anywhere.
Ever.

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

From: Toby Nixon <[e-mail]>
Subject: How Should I Get My House Wired For Future Phone Needs?
Date: 15 Oct 92 01:30:06 EDT
Organization: Hayes Microcomputer Products, Norcross, GA


My wife and I are considering building a new house (well, having it
built for us) for ourselves and our five kids.  Before we know it,
those kids are going to be teens, with heavy telecom demands.

Although we currently have just two standard POTS circuits, I want to
look ahead and get the house wired up-front to handle our needs far
into the future (maybe a mini-PBX, maybe ISDN, an intercom, whatever).

What I'm think of is having three or four-pair twisted pair cable run
from each room separately (not daisy-chained the way they normally do
it) to a punch-down block in some central location, so we can hook
things together anyway we want.  Is that a good idea?  Do you have any
other advice for us?  Thanks in advance.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Craig A. Brown)
Subject: Cost Accounting Software
Organization: University of Arkansas
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 15:47:38 GMT


The University of Arkansas is presently using the TeleMate call
accounting software from Complementary Solutions for capture and
billing of institution long distance calls.  We are considering
providing our own, billable service to students.  Based upon the
length of time it currently takes to generate billing and management
reports from TeleMate on a 486/25, we are somewhat concerned about the
impact of the additional load.

We have received material from Styker System Incorporated for their
MegaBase product which they claim is the world's fastest large
database cost accounting software.

Have any of you had any experience with this product?  Thanks in
advance for any information.

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

From: [e-mail] (Justin Leavens)
Subject: Different Rings For Different Things?
Date: 14 Oct 1992 10:25:54 -0700
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA


CLASS features such as the "Repeat Dialing" and "Priority Ringing"
that are being offered now. I am curious to know if there are any
specifications or standard in place so that these special rings could
be picked up by a modem (one in the future specifically designed to
look for these rings) or a terminal communications program.


Justin Leavens    Microcomputer Specialist    University of Southern California

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

From: [e-mail] (Ron Dippold)
Subject: It's Back - FBI Wiretap Bill
Organization: Qualcomm, Inc., San Diego, CA
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 00:28:53 GMT


According to {EE Times} this week (Oct 12.), the FBI has sent Congress
another version of the legislation to make it easier for them to
listen to any phone conversation.  "Both the House and enate are
expected to act quickly on the bill when Congress returns early next
year.

"The bill is a slightly rewritten version of legislation submitted
last spring, which was dropped after both lawmakers and the
telecommunications industry complained."

Then there's more whining from the FBI that they're apparently
incompetent to handle wiretapping with digital technology,

Unfortunately, the "slightly rewritten" isn't detailed, so there's no
specifics as to what changed.  It goes on to say that industry is
opposed, mostly because of the cost of fitting and retrofitting
everything so that the FBI can spy on people.  The FBI claims it will
"only" cost "$300 million, or around 1.5 percent of the industry's
total yearly acquisition budget."  Any government estimate of taxation
is going to be way too low, especially when applied to an industry
with the resources of the telecom industry, so we apparently have a
lower cost floor of $300 million.

"Industry has been talking to the FBI to try to get some agreement on
a private level rather than through legislation.  But the FBI says
these talks are moving too slowly and it wants its legislation to go
ahead."

I can't see any of the three major candidates vetoing something like
this once they take office, so we may have to swamp Congress again.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #780
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa25099;
          15 Oct 92 2:41 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA22571
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 15 Oct 1992 00:10:03 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA00162
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 15 Oct 1992 00:09:31 -0500
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 00:09:31 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: 19th Century Telegraphers (Book Review)


I received this interesting book review in my mail today and thought
it worthwhile sharing with TELECOM Digest readers.

PAT

  From: [e-mail] (Jim Haynes)
  Date: Wed, 14 Oct 92 18:20:09 -0700
  Subject: 19th Century Telegraphers (Book Review)


Book Review

     The American Telegrapher: a social history 1860-1900
     Edwin Gabler
     Rutgers University Press, 1988
     ISBN 0-8135-1284-0 (hardbound), 0-8135-1285-9 (paperback)

I seem to read a lot of books which are at the same time both
interesting and tedious.  This is one such book.  Written by an
academic historian for reading by other academic historians, it is
long on footnotes, theories, and statistics and short on
flesh-and-blood storytelling; yet there is enough of the latter to
entertain the casual reader.  Part I of this review is an attempt to
convey the general message of the book.  Part II is for fun: a
selection of stories about the lives and times telegraphers a century
ago.

    Part I

There are five chapters: a history of the Great Strike of 1883 as an
introduction to the world of the operators; a description of the
telegraph industry and especially Western Union; a social portrait of
the telegraphers; a study of women telegraphers; and a summary of the
labor movement and politics of telegraphers.  An epilogue compares the
situation of telegraphers in the 1880s with that of the air traffic
controllers a hundred years later.

Telegraph and railroad companies following the Civil War represented
an entirely new kind of business, one in which the company's assets
are strung out for hundreds or thousands of miles with offices and
employees sprinkled along the lines.  There were other affinities
between the two kinds of companies.  Railroads used telegraphy to
support their own operations.  Railroad rights-of-way were ideal
places to run telegraph lines, affording easy access for construction
and maintenance at a time when there were few roads.  Telegraph
business was likely to be found in the same places the railroads
served.  In many small towns the railroad station served as the public
telegraph office, as there was not enough telegraph business to
support an office for telegraph alone.  Some railroads such as B & O
operated their own public telegraph businesses.  (cf. Southern Pacific
a century later getting into the communications business.)  Other
railroads had contract arrangements with the telegraph companies,
principally Western Union, for use of rights of way, interconnection
of circuits, and providing public telegraph service at the railroad
stations.

These new kinds of businesses needed a new kind of management.  The
military became their model.  Many of the top managers were alumni of
the Civil War military telegraph system.  The companies had divisions,
rule books, general orders and special orders, and chains of command.
Management style was authoritarian.  As is the case with some
companies today, the telegraph and railroad companies then were headed
by a mixture of people who knew the business and those who were
primarily financial wizards.

Telegraph operators represented the beginning of a new social class,
the lower-middle-class white-collar employees of large corporations.
Many were the children of farmers or of city blue-collar workers.  A
great many were of Irish lineage.  For all of these telegraphy offered
a step up the social ladder as well as an escape from hard physical
labor and city slums or rural isolation.  Telegraphy was an occupation
open to women, although the majority of operators were male (and, like
the women, young and unmarried).

The national economy was fairly flat or even deflationary during the
period 1860-1890.  Western Union profits rose handsomely throughout
the period.  The operators did not share in this prosperity.  For one
thing, there was an oversupply of them.  First-class operators, who
could send and receive thirty to forty words per minute for hours on
end, were assigned to press and market reporting circuits.  They could
command pay two to three times as great as that of the second-class
operators who made up the bulk of the force.  Many operators learned
the craft by hanging around small railroad and telegraph offices;
others worked their way up from messenger and clerk jobs in larger
offices; still others were trained at a number of schools that sprang
up around the country.  Most of the latter seem to have been
disreputable if not completely fraudulent, operating for profit and
promising high pay and mobility to rural youth.  They were the
century-ago counterparts of the for-profit data processing schools of
our own times, the kind that advertised on matchbook covers and turned
out an oversupply of under-qualified graduates for high tuition fees.

Another financial problem for the telegraphers resulted from their new
social class.  Telegraphers' pay was on a par with that of skilled
blue-collar workers; but their living expenses were greater.  With the
move to suits and ties and shined shoes they felt a need to live in
middle-class housing, eat middle-class meals, and partake of
middle-class entertainments.

A few of the operators' perceptions of mistreatment by the companies
were more apparent than real.  The 1840s through 1860s had been a
period when telegraphy was just getting started.  Job opportunities
were abundant and promotions were rapid.  As the industry matured
there were fewer spectacular success stories; telegraphy even seemed
to be a dead-end job.  Other complaints had a more solid foundation.
Mergers of telegraph companies eliminated jobs.  An economic downturn
in the 1870s caused Western Union to institute across-the-board salary
reductions, which were partially offset by monetary deflation.
Operators tended to move around a lot, which allowed the company to
hire cheaper replacements for those who left.

The first attempt of telegraph workers to organize was the National
Telegraphic Union of 1863.  This was more of a mutual benefit society
than a labor union.  It provided members with sickness and funeral
benefits and aimed to elevate the character of the members and promote
just and harmonious relations with employers.  With conditions for
telegraphers growing worse after the Civil War the Telegraphers'
Protective League was formed in 1868 as a very different kind of
organization.  It was a secret organization, because there was nothing
at the time to protect its members from the unbridled power of their
employers.  Rather than relieving the sick and burying the dead it
proposed to raise the members to a financial position in which they
could take care of themselves.

The TPL felt strong enough by January, 1870 to risk a strike against
Western Union.  It failed after about a week.  There were just too
many operators seeking work, especially in the winter season; the
company was too strong; and the union was too poorly organized.  The
operators' situation continued to deteriorate through the 1870s as
Western Union reduced wages, the number of would-be operators
increased, and the company absorbed its competitors.  An attempt to
form another union in 1872 fizzled.  In 1881 Jay Gould took over
Western Union, moving the company closer to being a true national
monopoly.  By the summer of 1882 a number of regional labor
organizations put aside their differences to form the Brotherhood of
Telegraphers of the United States and Canada under the aegis of the
Knights of Labor.  The Brotherhood, unlike its predecessors, accepted
the female operators as members.

In July, 1883 the Brotherhood presented a list of grievances to
Western Union and some other firms, hoping for at least a compromise
settlement and at worst a short strike.  When the company made no
meaningful concessions the telegraphers walked out on July 19.  At
first things looked good for the Brotherhood.  About three fourths of
Western Union operators honored the strike.  Public opinion was much
on the side of the telegraphers, at least to the extent that it was
against the side of Jay Gould and the W.U. monopoly.  One competing
telegraph company settled quickly with the union; and another (B & O)
came close to, but never close enough.  Union leaders worked hard to
keep the public on their side, urging the strikers to be models of
dignity and sobriety.  The women were as valiant as the men, if not
more so, in upholding the strike.

Still, public sympathy did not feed the hungry; and the strike
dwindled until it was officially called off August 17.  Operators
wishing to return to work had to sign a pledge of loyalty; those
considered militant unionists were blacklisted by the company.  Still,
it appears the company was somewhat humbled by the power of the union
and made a few concessions to the operators.  Failure of the strike
led to some ill feeling in the larger labor movement.  The
telegraphers accused the Knights of insufficient support; the Knights
leadership felt the telegraphers had acted impulsively and without
sufficient preparation.  The Brotherhood soon withdrew from the
Knights; and union activity reverted to local groups.  Yet by 1885
there was a new organization, the Telegraphers' Union of America,
which rejoined the Knights in 1886.  This seems to have faded away by
the early 1890s along with the Knights.  Railroad telegraphers formed
the Order of Railway Telegraphers in 1886.  An Order of Commercial
Telegraphers was formed in 1890 but never amounted to much, and allied
itself with the railway telegraphers in 1897-98.  The next attempt to
form a union didn't happen until 1907, with the Commercial
Telegraphers' Union of America, which also suffered disaster in a
strike against Western Union.

Gabler concludes with a discussion of a number of labor and political
issues affecting telegraphers.  One of the Brotherhood's demands had
been equal pay for equal work, male and female.  This seems to have
been widely hailed as the Right Thing to do.  I wonder whether the
male telegraphers supported the demand because it was right; or if
they supported it because they knew if the companies had to pay men
and women the same they would hire only men.

Some wanted a craft union, with membership limited to telegraphers,
with an apprenticeship program that would raise the quality of
operators while reducing their numbers.  There was some interest in
government licensing of operators.  Others favored an industrial
union, open to all Western Union employees.  Some objected to the
secret fraternal rites that were a feature of the Knights of Labor;
Catholic workers were forbidden to become members of secret
organizations of any kind.  The operators wanted to protect their new
middle-class image by being models of respectability and sobriety;
some of the linemen on the other hand had no scruples about cutting
wires to increase pressure on the companies during a strike.  Some
felt that telegraphy should be a government monopoly, as was and still
is the norm in Europe.  Some saw salvation in a worker-owned
cooperative, if they could only convince the banks or the government
to put up the money necessary to establish the system.  Others sought
to improve the status of the working classes through political action;
quite a number were attracted to the United Labor Party of Henry
George.  A hundred years later issues like these are still with us.

    Part II

Dr. Gabler had access to a vast amount of material: census records,
archives of the telegraph companies, contemporary newspaper accounts,
magazines published for the edification and amusement of operators,
and even novels in which telegraphers were used as characters.  The
footnotes and bibliography take up 48 pages.  One page in the book is
an illustration of advertisements in a telegraphers' magazine of 1883.
They include a book on shorthand, a book of money-making secrets, a
book on the mysteries of love-making, a book on fortune telling, watch
charms with microscopic pictures, a book of advice to the unmarried, a
package of stationery, a book on politeness, a book of letters for all
occasions, playing cards with marked backs, a book of magic tricks, a
book on business, and a book on ballroom dancing.  The theme is that
these appealed to working-class young adults who felt a need to learn
how to behave properly as members of the middle-class.

A number of telegraph operators rose to prominence.  Thomas Edison and
Andrew Carnegie are the best known; Theodore N. Vail was a founder of
AT&T; others found success in business or politics; and almost all the
upper management of Western Union was drawn from the ranks of
operators.  In 1885 there were five doctors and one dentist
moonlighting as telegraph operators -- maybe medicine and dentistry
didn't pay all that well in those days.

Thomas Edison, as a young telegrapher in the 1860s, would work a full
day and then stay in the office at night, listening to a press circuit
to get high speed code practice.  Later he worked the Boston end of a
New York circuit with an operator named Jerry Borst.  Operators formed
friendships with their counterparts at the other end of the wires.
The telegraph companies insisted that operators should work at
whatever circuits they were assigned.  Edison and Borst conspired to
change three characters of the code, so that nobody else could copy
their transmissions and they could always work together.  Cockroaches
were such a problem in the office that Edison devised a bug zapper to
protect his lunch from the little beasties.

Friendships over the wires were nourished during lulls in traffic by
exchanges of jokes and local news, and by checker games.  Sometimes
love and courtship blossomed too.  At other times operators were rude
to one another.  On one occasion two operators got so angry at each
other that they arranged to meet at a town halfway between their posts
and settle the matter with fists at 1:00 AM.  "Salting" (sending too
fast for the receiving operator) was a frequent source of irritation.
Salting was also part of the common practice of hazing new operators.

Operators frequently got privileges, such as free passes to theaters
and on trains.  With the chronic oversupply it was common for
operators to travel back and forth across the country looking for
work, or for better conditions.  Operators didn't get vacations, paid
or otherwise; but in the summer months telegraph offices would open in
the resort towns where the rich took their vacations, and operators
could find work there.

In 1883 Western Union employed 444 telegraphers in New York City, 96
in Boston, 88 in St. Louis, and 83 in Chicago.  This seems to support
a conjecture of mine that W.U. was weakened all its life by
overattention to serving New York City and insufficient effort to
develop the business in other parts of the country.

There was friction between the city operators and the rural operators.
The city operators were proud of their skills, and wanted to move the
traffic.  They resented they way country operators would frequently
interrupt transmissions.  The country operators, usually working in
railroad depots, countered that telegraphy was but a small part of
their duties.  They had to answer questions from the public, sell
tickets, meet trains, tend switches and signals, handle freight, and
keep the lamps burning.  They commonly worked shifts as long as twelve
or even sixteen hours.

Development of duplex and then quadruplex operation greatly increased
the pressure on operators, as the receiving operators could not
interrupt the senders.  Gender stereotyping held that only male
operators had the stamina to handle these heavily-loaded circuits; yet
the book cites a number of examples of women who worked these
circuits.  Women were consistently paid less than men.  The companies
were well aware that women were a bargain compared with men, and
continually tried to replace men with women.

Nellie Welch had full charge of the telegraph office in Point Arena,
California in 1886.  She was eleven years old.

Western Union and the Cooper Union Institute in 1869 jointly started a
free eight-month telegraphy course for women.  It lasted through the
early 1890s, turning out about 80 graduates a year.  They would first
take non-paying jobs assisting regular operators, and then be hired as
operators on lightly loaded city circuits.  This school was much
despised by men for its contribution to the oversupply problem,
thought it probably hurt the opportunities for women more than those
for men.

Beginner and less-skilled operators were called "plugs" or "hams."
(Note the endless controversy over the origin of the term "ham" for
amateur radio operators.)  The schools that turned out these operators
were called "plug factories."

Craft magazines sought to shame operators who taught telegraphy.  They
were urged to pass on the secrets of Morse only to brothers, sisters,
sons, and daughters.  At least one railroad operator quit his job
rather than cooperate with a student placed with him by the company.

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

[Moderator's Note: My thanks for this very interesting article.
Digest readers are encouraged to send book reviews and other special
articles like this to Telecom for distribution on the net.   PAT]












Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa26745;
          15 Oct 92 3:23 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA03667
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 15 Oct 1992 00:43:41 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA13051
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 15 Oct 1992 00:43:25 -0500
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 00:43:25 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #781

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 15 Oct 92 00:43:20 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 781

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: East German Pay Phone (Martin McCormick)
    Re: East German Pay Phone (Dick Rawson)
    Re: East German Pay Phone (Tom Coradeschi)
    Re: East German Pay Phone (Eric Tholome)
    Re: College Phone System AGAIN! (Scott Fybush)
    Re: College Phone System AGAIN! (Jeff Dubin)
    Re: N-1-1 Codes for Relay Services (Curtis E. Reid)
    Re: N-1-1 Codes for Relay Services (Ralph Hyre)
    Re: Why No Sprint Service Here Since Thursday? (Tom Streeter)
    Re: Why No Sprint Service Here Since Thursday? (David G. Lewis)
    Re: Seeking Information on SS7 Packets (Alan L. Varney)
    Re: Seeking Information on SS7 Packets (Jack Adams)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Re: East German Pay Phone
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 92 11:54:54 -0500
From: [e-mail]


A few ways one could have a hook switch with no moving parts are:

    The ear piece of the handset could have a reed switch in it
and the hanger could be magnetic.  When the receiver was on the hook,
the reed switch could be pulled open.

    Another variation on that idea would be to have a Hall-effect
transistor as the switching device and the magnet in the hanger, as
before.  I have actually seen such a chip.  It is a three-terminal
device.  You put power on one pin, ground another, and the third one
is open until a magnet is brought near, at which time it suddenly goes
to ground.  It's really neat.

    Finally, it's possible that there could be a photo cell in the
hanger with a light source so that the handset blocks it when in
place.

    My own belief is that it is a magnetic switch.  It's quite
possible that the switching element is in the metal plate near the
hanger and that the permanent magnet in the ear piece of the handset
is what actuates it.  If a reed switch is used, the metal plate near
the hanger would be a better location for it because those things tend
to open and close when beat on.  The normal movements of a handset in
a user's hands would probably cause this to happen all the time which
would be quite frustrating to say the least.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Dick Rawson)
Subject: Re: East German Pay Phone
Date: 14 Oct 92 18:58:58 GMT
Organization: BT North America (Tymnet)


>> The most interesting thing is that the hanger for the handset did
>> not appear to move for off-hook indication.

> That reminds me.  At the end of May I was in what used to be East
> Berlin, and made a call from a pay phone there ...
> That phone, too, had no obvious moving parts for off-hook detection.
> ... Anyone know how it worked?

Speculation: perhaps the phone box detects the permanent magnet that
is likely to be in the handset's earpiece.  A reed relay would be
low-tech and reliable (like the burglar-alarm door switches), but I
question if it is sensitive enough.  A Hall-effect flux detector would
work, but is it economical enough?  A metal panel shouldn't bother a
STEADY magnetic field, although it attenuates an alternating field.


Dick

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

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 92 9:22:37 EDT
From: Tom Coradeschi <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: East German Pay Phone
Organization: Electric Armts Div, US Army ARDEC, Picatinny Arsenal, NJ


[e-mail] (Mark Brader) writes:

> The most interesting thing is that the hanger for the handset did
> not appear to move for off-hook indication.

> That reminds me.  At the end of May I was in what used to be East
> Berlin, and made a call from a pay phone there (specifically, it was
> in one of the city center S-Bahn stations, either Friedrichstrasse or
> Alexanderplatz).

> That phone, too, had no obvious moving parts for off-hook detection.
> The hanger was metal, and the other end of the handset rested against
> a small metal plate, so I wondered if it was be passing a small
> current through the handset, but the handset seemed to be plastic.
> Anyone know how it worked?

Magnetically operated reedswitch would be my guess. (Magnet in
handset, reedswitch in phone housing, driving a relay if needed
[shouldn't be].)

> There were no directories, so I needed to call directory assistance to

[...]

> After several repetitions of this, I pulled out the guidebook I was
> carrying and found the *3*-digit code that *it* had given for dialing
> West from East Berlin (849, I think).  I tried this and it worked.
> The mind boggles.  Now that I think of it, it also rather boggled at
> the fact that, unless my hotel listing included some out-of-date
> numbers, West Berlin telephone numbers could be five, six, seven, or
> eight digits long ...

Typical, actually. I've had occasion to deal with US Army
installations in Germany (former West Germany, naturally:-}). One guy,
in particular, has a ten-digit phone number and an eleven-digit fax
number (different exchanges, although within the same city).


tom coradeschi    <+>    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Eric Tholome)
Subject: Re: East German Pay Phone
Date: 14 Oct 92 13:50:24 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Eric Tholome)
Organization: ESF Headquarters, Berlin, FRG


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

> [stuff deleted]  I knew East and West Berlin
> were still separate for telephone purposes, but I was still surprised
> when they were surprised that I didn't say "West Berlin" when I gave
> the address.

Well, I thought I'd let you know that the two (east and west) Berlin
telephone networks are now pretty much integrated. We (in West Berlin)
recently received a letter telling us that from now on, we wouldn't
have to dial any special code to reach East Berlin. In other words, at
least from the west, one can dial ANY Berlin number after the dial
tone, without having to figure out in which part of the city it is.

I assume that either your experience is a couple months old, or it
isn't symmetric, i.e. people calling from East Berlin still have to
differentiate the two types of calls. I must admit I've never given a
call from East Berlin ...

[stuff deleted] West Berlin telephone numbers could be five, six, seven, or
eight digits long ...]

I believe this is true in all Germany. They like to be able to give
short telephone numbers to big advertisers or companies. I must say I
don't really like it: you never know whether you got all the digits!
Also, people never know how to group the digits. For example, my
number at work has eight digits, which I can write 82 09 03 25, but my
home number only has seven digits, which I usually write 262 51 22.
Some people write them differently (e.g. 820 903 25). That's kind of
confusing.


Eric Tholome  ESF Headquarters       internet: [e-mail]
              Hohenzollerndamm 152   UUCP:     [e-mail]
              D-1000 Berlin 33       Ph.:      [phone]
                          Germany    Fax:      [phone]

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

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 92 21:10 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Scott Fybush)
Subject: Re: College Phone System AGAIN!


[e-mail] (Bob Kupiec) writes:

> ...at LaSalle University.  We have been running on
> two PBX's (one for campus offices, one for campus dorms) and AT&T ACUS
> for the dorms for the past few years.  We were equipped with free
> local calls, free 800, Call Waiting, Three-Way Calling and Call
> Forwarding with all the frills.

This reminds me of my experience at Brandeis University, from which I
graduated this past May.  Single PBX there, free local calls,
call-waiting for $25 a semester (a bit steep compared to $2.58 a month
from NETel), free 800, no other frills.

> Now things have changed ...

> Everything was fine until I returned for the fall semester.  They
> decided to consolidate the two switches into one NCR switch.  So far
> there has been nothing but trouble.

> 800 access to all 800 numbers are BLOCKED (except for the 445 ACUS
> prefix) and without an ACUS plan you can't call 800!  What about
> calling card users?  The Telecom Operations guy gave me the useless
> "800 numbers were forwarded to 900 numbers and we don't want to be
> stuck with the bill" response.

When the first of the 800-to-900 scams appeared in 1991, I paid a
visit to the system administrator (someone who it's good to know ...
if you can get this person to tell you the truth, they can be
extremely valuable) to let her know the scam existed.  Her response
wawas to block that single number.  Better than your campus' solution,
to be sure, but still mostly a reactive solution.  The campus system
manager almost has to get burned by a number before knowing that it
should be blocked.  And of course the current user of Mystic
Marketing's old 800 number is now inaccessible from Brandeis.

> Call Waiting sometimes does not work for incoming off-campus calls.
> There is NO way to block Call Waiting!  This give me a fit, because
> how am I supposed to use the modem?!

At least Brandeis gives students the option of not buying the service.
Now that I have REAL phone service from NETel, I do have Call Waiting
(not my choice :-), but I can turn it off with *70.

> Also, the Telecom Operations person told me one of the tie lines seems
> to be messed up because some on-campus calls connect with very faint
> audio.  He also can't seem to find which one it is to disable it
> either.

> No Three-Way and no Call-Forwarding enabled.  Also, and the previous
> poster mentioned, there is NO WAY to get a local or LD Operator!  NO
> 9-0 and no 9-00.  Only the campus operator.

> I just hope that 9-911 works in case of an REAL emergency!  (How
> should I test this?)

9-911 is probably blocked, but for good reason.  If there's an
emergency on campus, you should be calling your campus public safety
dispatcher.  They can contact ambulance, fire, or local police if
needed.  However, a well-designed system should intercept 911 or 9-911
and send them to the campus dispatcher.  How many people remember that
the campus emergency number is, in my case, 3333?

> The latest development is the ACUS codes don't even work!  For the
> last few days there has been no way to call home from the campus
> telephones.  I think I should ask for my "phone service" deposit back
> because I sure don't get any.

You have my condolences.  My feeling in reading the last few posts on
this thread, as well as in my dealings with Brandeis Telecom (check
the archives for plenty of griping about them!) is that campus
telecommunications needs should be handled by professionals.  If the
campus can't afford to hire someone who can manage the system properly
 -- and that means making sure there are enough trunks in and out to
handle all traffic, ensuring access to all available telecom services
that an "off-campus" user would have access to (and this includes 800,
900, 700, 10XXX-0, 950, weather and time/temp lines, and international
direct dialing), fixing problems with the system quickly and properly,
and at the same time providing protection against fraud -- then the
campus should leave the job to the pros at the local telco.  I'd
rather pay $15 or $20 a month for decent, reliable, telco POTS service
than have to put up with the really cruddy "service" that so many of
these campus systems seem to offer.  I'm paying a total of about $30 a
month for service now (not including toll charges and taxes), and it
is far superior in all regards to the Brandeis system.

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

Organization: The American University - University Computing Center
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 13:32:25 EDT
From: Jeff Dubin <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: College Phone System AGAIN!


You have a problem with faint audio also?  Twice a week or so, I'm
talking normally and all of a sudden I can't hear the other person,
even though s/he can hear me fine.

I guess my phone service isn't so bad after comaring it to yours!  If
you don't already, I'd demand a pay phone on your floor.  At least
that way you can call somewhere!


Jeff Dubin       [e-mail]    [e-mail]

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

Date: 14 Oct 1992 09:34:33 -0400 (EDT)
From: Curtis E. Reid <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: N-1-1 Codes for Relay Services


In a message received on 12 Oct 1992, 18:28 attmail.com!cinpmx!
cdid![e-mail] wrote:

>> Dialing 5-1-1 or 7-1-1 from anywhere in the country to access a
>> state's relay service will be easy to remember, quicker, and will

> Wouldn't this be a case where a 950-XXXX number is warranted?
> (950-TRS1 or 950-TDD1).  One could even imagine the XXXX mapping
> the the LD carriers which seem to provide these relay services
> in many states.

> This would seem to be easier to implement for most LECs, and
> it would also consume less of the remaining number space. An
> added benefit is that 950 numbers typically incur no message
> unit charges or other toll charges.

You're probably right; however, I believe that 950-xxxx is a local
implementation and so is the N-1-1.  It still requires the FCC to make
them consistent throughout the country.

Also, it's easier to remember the N-1-1 than the 950-xxxx number which
is probably why TDI made the proposal to FCC.

As a matter of fact, there is one state that did a similar
implementation: Maine.  The Relay Service numbers for Maine Residents
are: 955-DEAF and 955-DPRS.


Curtis E. Reid                [e-mail]
Rochester Institute of Technology/NTID    [e-mail] (DECUS)
P.O. Box 9887                716.475.6089 TDD/TT 475.6895 Voice
Rochester, NY 14623-0887        716.475.6500 Fax

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

From: cinpmx!cdid![e-mail]
Date: 14 Oct 92 12:47:52 GMT
Subject: Re: N-1-1 Codes for Relay Services


> Dialing 5-1-1 or 7-1-1 from anywhere in the country to access a
> state's relay service will be easy to remember, quicker, and will

Wouldn't this be a case where a 950-XXXX number is warranted?
(950-TRS1 or 950-TDD1).  One could even imagine the XXXX mapping the
the LD carriers which seem to provide these relay services in many
states.

This would seem to be easier to implement for most LECs, and it would
also consume less of the remaining number space. An added benefit is
that 950 numbers typically incur no message unit charges or other toll
charges.

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

From: [e-mail] (Tom Streeter)
Subject: Re: Why No Sprint Service Here Since Thursday?
Organization: University of North Carolina at Asheville
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 20:57:39 GMT


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

> It's due to the recent torrential rains in western SC, that flooded a
> Sprint DMS-250 switch (that was underground I believe).  Will take
> quite a while to get things back to normal.  We are affected here in
> central and eastern NC as well. My primary private net and 800 service
> is with Sprint.

Hmmmmmmm ... odd.  I'm with Sprint in Asheville (western NC) and
haven't had any problems.  We're just 50 miles or so from Greenville.

I *am* glad it quit raining, though.


Tom Streeter                                |   [e-mail]
Dept. of Mass Communication                 |   704-251-6227
University of North Carolina at Asheville   |   Opinions expressed here are
Ashevillen, NC 28804                         |   mine alone.

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

From: [e-mail] (david.g.lewis)
Subject: Re: Why No Sprint Service Here Since Thursday?
Organization: AT&T
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 13:58:24 GMT


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

> I haven't seen anything on this, and I'd expected people to be jumping
> all over it.

> Sometime on Thursday evening 10/8/92 the SPRINT switching centre in
> Fairfax, South Carolina, went down completly. Various "rumors" abound,
> most of which involve the switch being under 18 feet of water. We're
> located in North Carolina, and all our SPRINT switched service is
> routed via that switch. Certainly on Friday people in the area with
> SPRINT 800 service were not getting any calls sent their way.

> It's 16:00 EDT on 10/13/92, still no service. We have dial-tone on the
> trunk, and get an all circuits are busy if we try and make a call.

Funny, I haven't seen that Sprint commercial lately.  You know, the
one where Candice Bergen says "Sprint didn't go down and leave a
kazillion people stranded ..."   ;-)


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

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

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 92 10:00:29 CDT
From: [e-mail] (Alan L Varney)
Subject: Re: Seeking Information on SS7 Packets
Organization: AT&T Network Systems, Lisle, IL


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Raum
Pattikonda) writes:

> I am not very familier with SS7 protocols. I would like to know if the
> SS7 packets contain the calling card number information for the calls
> made using the calling card. Can someone also please sugest a good
> book on SS7.

   Standard SS7 "packets" (this is telephony, so they are called
"messages") do not currently contain CC#.  However, T1S1.3 is well
along in the process of standardizing the encoding and transport of
this information, and delivery via ISDN.  I'm not aware of any
standards for determining the need for or method of collection, etc.
that would result in such transport/delivery; that's probably viewed
as an Operator Systems issue, so far.

   I won't recommend any books specifically, but most of the very
recent ones on "ISDN" have a good section on SS7.  The local Barnes &
Noble usually has a few in the Computer Communications section, and
can order others.  Note that these are tutorial-level and are not a
replacement for the real ISDN standards, available in the Q.7xx CCITT
"Blue" book or as series of T1 standards from ANSI.  Bellcore clients
(the "RBOCs" generally) also use a collection of requirements that are
more "services" oriented; briefly, the main ones for voice calls are
TR-NPL-000246 (basic SS7), TR-TSY-000317 (intra-LATA voice via SS7)
and TR-TSY-000394 (inter-LATA voice via SS7).


Al Varney - MY opinion, of course.

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

From: vixen![e-mail] (22475-adams)
Subject: Re: Seeking Information on SS7 Packets
Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 92 14:00:21 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Raum
Pattikonda) writes:

> I am not very familier with SS7 protocols. I would like to know if the
> SS7 packets contain the calling card number information for the calls
> made using the calling card. Can someone also please sugest a good
> book on SS7.

For Alternate Billing Service (ABS) or Line Information Data Base
(LIDB) queries, yes, the calling card number is included in the
Transaction Capabilities Part (TCAP) of the SS7 message.  Different
applications CLASS(R), 800, LIDB, and AIN construct their message
components differently according to published BELLCORE Technical
Requirements documents.

In terms of recommending *A* good book, I am clueless.  Perhaps, if
enough interest exists, I (all co-authors are welcome to contribute)
might want to undertake the effort.  If there exists one or more good
texts on the subject, I'd rather not.


Jack (John) Adams       Bellcore NVC 2Z-220
[phone] {Voice}       [phone] {Facsimile}
[e-mail]  [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #781
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa27511;
          15 Oct 92 3:56 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA11897
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 15 Oct 1992 01:42:55 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA09663
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 15 Oct 1992 01:42:46 -0500
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 01:42:46 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #782

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 15 Oct 92 01:42:35 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 782

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Question About Caller ID Information Display (Darren Alex Griffiths)
    Re: Questions About Token Ring Bridge (Pat Turner)
    Re: Question For Michigan Residents (Arthur Rubin)
    Re: Question About ROLM PBX Telephones (Joseph Bergstein)
    Re: Touch Tone Question (Tom Kovar)
    Re: Touch Tone Question (Richard Cox)
    Re: Answering Machine CPC? (Bill Pfeiffer)
    Re: Answering Machine CPC? (Arthur Rubin)
    Re: Help Needed With Modem Problem (Bob Ackley)
    Re: PC-Based Voicemail Systems (Michael Rosen)
    Re: FCC Acts on Satelite Radio Plan (Frederick G.M. Roeber)
    Re: "...is the Highest Law of the Land..." (Steve Forrette)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Re: Question About Caller ID Information Display
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 92 12:27:54 PDT
From: [e-mail]


[e-mail] (Art Hunter) writes:

> The Caller-ID message is 1200 bps and resides between rings
> one and two.  There are two other ways that the specification says it
> can come.  One is when the handset is on-hook and is NOT ringing and
> the other is when the handset is off-hook and not ringing.  The latter
> is designed so that you can obtain the identification of the calling
> party (like call waiting) while you are talking to someone else.

> To date, I am only aware of the message between rings one and
> two as being implemented by the telcos.  It is just a matter of time
> for the other two applications to be implemented.

Is there a provision to send the infomration to a voice mail service?
I have PacBell's Message Center service on my phone and if the PUC and
PacBell ever get their respective acts together I would like to have a
voice recording of the calling party's phone number before messages
are received.


Cheers,

Darren Alex Griffiths         [e-mail]
Open Systems Solutions Inc.   [phone] x139
Fujitsu Ltd.                  Fax: [phone]
6121 Hollis Street            Emeryville, CA 94608-2092

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 92 16:02 EDT
From: rsiatl![e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Questions About Token Ring Bridge


> We have two token ring network running at two different buildings.  We
> try to use fiber optic cable to bridge them together.  The problem is
> the cable come out of the LAM on both side is T1 type.  Is there a
> device that converts it into fiber optic?

Several companies make what you need.  AT&T makes the FT1 which will
support B8ZS and AMI.  It's avaiable in both single and multimode
models.  ADC also makes a similar product also called FT1 (I think).
Fibermux makes a model called the Fiber [in?] Loop Convertor.


Pat Turner KB4GRZ   [e-mail]

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

Subject: Re: Question For Michigan Residents
From: [e-mail] (Arthur Rubin)
Date: 14 Oct 92 15:36:47 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Arthur Rubin)


In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Damon A.
Koronakos) writes:

> A friend of mine in Kalamazoo recently got an IBM-compatible machine.
> I would like to be able to exchange electronic mail with him if
> possible.

> Does anyone have any suggestions about how I might establish net
> access for him?  Is there something like netcom.com in the Bay Area in
> the Kalamazoo area (a cheap service which provides net access)?  I
> don't know if Prodigy/Compuserve-type services provide email access to
> the net, how much extra (if any) this costs, etc.

> Any suggestions much appreciated!!

This seems to be an FA(sked)Q here, but not FA(nswered).  I the best
answer is to check the NIXPUB (comp.bbs.misc or alt.bbs), NETPUB
and/or PDIAL (alt.internet.access.wanted,alt.bbs.lists, news.answers)
lists for info.

CompuServe, MCI Mail, (but not Prodigy) provide network E-mail.  See
the Inter-Network Mail Guild posted occasionally on comp.mail.misc.  I
don't recall exactly Compuserve's or MCI Mail's prices, but MCI Mail
charges 75 cents for sending an E-mail message of 500-5000 characters
(according to my last bill), and has a free 800 number.  There is also
an annual mailbox fee ($25?) and a graphics registration fee for
generation of paper mail ($25 per signature or letterhead).  I believe
MCI Mail is the least expensive of the services I subscribe to for
E-mail only access.


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.
My interaction with our news system is unstable; please mail anything
important.

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

From: [e-mail] (Joseph Bergstein)
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 01:26:14 -0500
Subject: Re: Question About ROLM PBX Telephones


In a message from Martin McCormick, he states:

> The Rolm PBX'S are made by Seimens, as far as I know.

ROLM PBX'x have been made by the Rolm Company since they were founded.
As I recall, ROLM actually started out manufacturing MILSPEC Nova
(Data General) computers in the early '70s.  I recall seeing them as
the console computer on early Amdahl 470 mainframes.

Rolm PBXs up to and including the current 9751 are still made by ROLM.
Since the ROLM - Siemens merger, and subsequent acquisition, the two
firms indicate that they are merging their technology platforms, but
so far Siemens does not make ROLM PBX's, per se (other than now owning
the ROLM company).

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

From: [e-mail] (Tom Kovar)
Subject: Re: Touch Tone Question
Organization: Inst.of Theor.Chemistry,Univ.of Vienna,Austria
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 17:11:20 GMT


TELECOM Moderator notes:

> [Moderator's Note: Does your system continue pulsing even after the
> connection has been established?   You might try hitting the * or #
> keys first, then the answering machine commands. Some systems will
> quit pulsing and just pass along the tones if they get the * or #
> first as a signal to not pulse but just pass along what is heard.
> Other than that, you may have to get one of the handheld touchtone
> pads which you hold up to the receiver and press ... and that is
> assuming your system won't start pulsing when it hears those tones
> also. Incidentally, in the regular course of dialing, what does the *
> and # produce? Sometimes they act like repeat dial, etc.   PAT]

Hitting */# does not change anything (either on the phone, or on the
handheld pad) - both simply send their beep, and the gate continues
pulsing. That's apparently the problem -- the gate seems not to have
noticed that the connection has been established, and pulses on and
on.

I have fould a very silly solution in the meantime -- I switch
(mechanically :-) ) the phone into the pulsing mode and dial; in this
case, the gate accepts me as a pulser, and doesn't switch into the
converting mode. After the connection is established, I switch into
the touch tone mode, and the beeps are passed through.  But this
solution is not very smart.

Anyhow, thanks,


Tom

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

Date: Wed, 14 Oct 92 20:10 GMT
From: Richard Cox <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Touch Tone Question
Reply-To: [e-mail]


Tom asked about suppressing tone-to-pulse-conversion.

We do it where necessary by using the PABX hold facility, and then
picking the call back up from hold.  At that stage the "register" that
detects the MF digits will have been dropped, and your MF should go
out unimpeded.

*Should*, I said!


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] (Bill Pfeiffer)
Subject: Re: Answering Machine CPC?
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 20:40:30 -0500 (CDT)


In a recent TELECOM digest, [e-mail] (Henry E. Schaffer) writes:

> What does "CPC" mean?  What does it detect (battery reversal?)  Why
> would an answering machine allow this to be switched off?  Is "CPC" a
> common answering machine capability/feature?

> [Moderator's Note: CPC means 'called (calling?) party control'. It
> is switchable on/off is because if a line is also equipped with
> call waiting, then the voltage drop from a call waiting signal would
> also trick the answering machine in to disconnecting.
    ...
> take your pick: fast disconnect when the voltage change is detected,
> IE no dial tone and 'please hang up now' messages (etc). You can't have
> it both ways and the switch lets you the user decide.  PAT]

Actually, you can have it both ways, sort of.  Many machines have a
three position switch labeled (something like) CPC-off-A-B.  The idea
is that there are really two cpc pulses, of differing duration, one
long and one short.  The shorter one is sent out immediately upon the
disconnection of the calling party, the other (longer duration) is
sent out just before the new dialtone (or intercept 'please hangup
now' message) comes on the line.  The call waiting CPC is closer to
the initial, shorter pulse.  So with your CPC in the 'B' position, it
supposedly will ignore the shorter, immediate pulse, and wait for the
longer one.  Result?  A bit of line noise after the hangup, but no
dialtones or hang up messages, and the machine will not dump on call
waiting tones.. I understand that with newer digital call waiting,
(the quiet kind that does not have the traditional 'cachunk' on the
other end) there is no CPC pulse.


William Pfeiffer
Moderator - rec.radio.broadcasting - Internet Radio Journal
To subscribe, send a request to [e-mail]

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

Subject: Re: Answering Machine CPC?
From: [e-mail] (Arthur Rubin)
Date: 14 Oct 92 16:10:08 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Arthur Rubin)


On my home phone answering machine, if the machine is active,
additional callers get a busy signal even though we have call waiting.
I don't know exactly why.  BTW, as stated in one of my answering
machine manuals, CPC doesn't work well in some exchanges where the
line voltage is not properly regulated.  They suggest you turn it off
if people complain that the answering machine is hanging up on them.


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.
My interaction with our news system is unstable; please mail anything
important.


[Moderator's Note: It is interesting you mention that callers get a
busy signal while the answering machine is taking a call. Usually
subscribers with call waiting will only return busy signal to callers
(instead of ringing tone and them receiving a call-waiting tone) when
the called subscriber is off hook (or otherwise connected to the
network but not off hook such as being signalled) and not supervised.
For example in the short period when you go off hook to dial a number
but before you have been 'supervised' by the central office then an
incoming call will receive a busy signal. Likewise this occurs if
someone is ringing your phone when a second party also calls you.  And
it won't even function like a 'real' busy signal at that; forward on
busy (for example to voicemail) will not work, nor will call waiting,
although hunting will. I have to wonder if somehow your answering
machine is tricking the network into thinking there has not been an
answer, in the style of the old (were they called?) 'black boxes'?
That would indeed be a curious bit of workmanship. Incidentally, I
have noticed in some Chicago CO's that if you are connected with a
phone number that does not usually supervise (such as the number for
the remote access call forwarding service) that incoming calls to you
during that time will get a busy signal in the same way.  PAT]

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

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 92 01:51:26 CST
From: [e-mail] (Bob Ackley)
Subject: Re: Help Needed With Modem Problem
Reply-To: [e-mail]


In a message of <30 Sep 92 18:08:23>, Sky Striker (11:30102/2) writes:

> Is anyone out there using a Macintosh and a MultiTech MultiModemV32
> (9600 baud)?  I'm trying to figure out what I should have the dip
> switches and the settings at.  I have the book on the modem but for
> some reason I just can't get it setup right.  I will connect fine
> except when it connects and says "Connect 9600 LAPM" then it will run
> fine for awhile then it will aways with out warning drop carrier on
> me.  Any help any one could give on figuring out what I'm doing wrong
> would be greatly appreciated.  Thanks ...

If it connects at all it's set up properly, all we're doing now is
tweaking.  You are probably getting a noise burst on (either side of)
the line long enough to cause the modem (at one end or the other) to
think it's lost the carrier, so it hangs up.  There should be a DIP
switch or a command to tell the modem to wait a bit longer after
losing carrier before it hangs up.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Michael Rosen)
Subject: Re: PC-Based Voicemail Systems
Organization: University of Denver, Dept. of Math & Comp. Sci.
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 92 03:33:45 GMT


I'm looking into possibly getting a voice mail system myself.  I've
been told that the Complete Communicator is the best (at least in the
area of fax/modem & voice mail I guess).  They have their CC Gold that
I was looking at, but it's only a 9600 baud modem and I'd like to jump
up to 14.4K.

Does anybody know of a fax/modem voice mail card that incorporates
14.4K modem speed as well?  I've heard of ZyXEL -- supposedly they
have a new upgrade that has voice mail added to their fax/modem.  Can
anyone attest to the quality of this brand of fax/modems?


Thanks,

Michael Rosen    Tau Epsilon Phi - George Washington University
[e-mail]   [e-mail] or @lambada.oit.unc.edu

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: FCC Acts on Satelite Radio Plan
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: CERN -- European Organization for Nuclear Research
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 21:11:59 GMT


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

> Federal regulators yesterday moved to clear the way for a new
> generation of radio entertainment services in which satelites would
> beam compact-disc quality directly to cars and homes.

> Skeptics say the radio business is firmly grounded in local
> information such as traffic reports, news and advertising.  Moreover,
> the huge costs of launching satellites and creating a national
> marketing organization might make the ventures collapse under their
> own weight. [...]

This is a much more popular idea in Europe, where the popular radio
stations tend to be national (e.g. BBC), and languages vary over short
distances.  I don't think it will work in the states; as the article
mentioned, European-style direct-broadcast satellite TV has been
approved for a decade, and it still hasn't taken off.


Frederick G. M. Roeber | CERN -- European Center for Nuclear Research
e-mail: [e-mail] or [e-mail] | work: [phone]
r-mail: CERN/PPE, 1211 Geneva 23, Switzerland | home: [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: "...is the Highest Law of the Land..."
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 05:30:44 GMT


> [Moderator's Note: That is a very interesting finding ... where the
> state constitution is a bit hard to change, public utility commissions
> are bought and sold all the time.  :(   PAT]

The state constitution may be hard to change in many states, but not
in California.  One of the ways is a simple majority of the voters on
a ballot initiative.  Some constitution!


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #782
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa19312;
          16 Oct 92 3:01 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA10279
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 16 Oct 1992 00:45:25 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA09146
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 16 Oct 1992 00:45:16 -0500
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1992 00:45:16 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #783

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 16 Oct 92 00:45:20 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 783

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Unhappy With the AT&T Attitude (Steve Forrette)
    Re: Unhappy With the AT&T Attitude (Jack Adams)
    Re: Old Telephone Wiring at Network Interface (John Higdon)
    Re: Old Telephone Wiring at Network Interface (Shrikumar)
    Re: Old Telephone Wiring at Network Interface (John Rice)
    Re: More LATA Nuttiness (Eppes Fork, VA and Raleigh, NC LATAs) (Eli Mantel)
    Re: More LATA Nuttiness (Carl Moore)
    Re: GTE Addresses On Outgoing Email (Jim J. Murphy)
    Re: "...is the Highest Law of the Land..." (Andrew Klossner)
    Re: What it Costs to Have the President Over (Tom Adams)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: Unhappy With the AT&T Attitude
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 22:55:06 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> John Higdon <john@zygot.
ati.com> writes:

> Some time back, I recounted a situation where calls to the UK were
> appearing on my telephone bill. These calls showed as being made on a
> weekly basis on a line that is not used in any way for outgoing calls.
> As mentioned, AT&T very reluctantly removed the charges, indicating in
> essence that since the calls were "direct dialed" they had to have
> been made from my residence, with or without my knowledge.

[unfortunate story about bad attitude from AT&T deleted]

I had a similar problem a few years ago when my carrier was Sprint.
Crossed lines with Pacific Bell caused someone else to have an
"extension" to my line upon which they decided to place lots of long
distance calls.  Sprint's attitude was the same that John got from
AT&T: "If the computer says you made the calls, then you made the
calls."  I can somewhat understand their stance.  I'm sure the
percentage of times people claim to not have made certain calls versus
the time when they really didn't is incredibly high.  But, as was the
case for both John and I, it would stand to reason that they would
take into account a longstanding customer's history of large bills and
prompt payments as a sign that they may be telling the truth.

I wanted to share a recent experience I had with the business side of
AT&T where they gave truly outstanding service in relation to the
other carriers, and which convinced me that there is (still) only one
carrier that can provide the highest levels of service that some of us
demand.

I was planning a special promotion that would be advertised on short
notice on the radio.  As such, I needed to get 800 service installed
in less than a week.  Because I had previously used Cable & Wireless's
Programmable 800 service, and really liked the fact that I could
change the routing myself instantly at any time, I gave them a call.
After explaining my rush, they promised to set me up with their
"expedite 800" program, where they can get it working in 24 hours.
This was on a Friday.  On Tuesday morning, they called me back to tell
me that HQ had rejected the order because it did not have the nine
digit ZIP code for the billing address.  Apparently, the sales offices
are required to submit the nine digit ZIP code on all orders, and when
they do not, HQ just bounces the order back to them.  I thought this
was a pretty lame excuse for delaying an "expedite 800" order, but
gave them the information (they apparently don't have a ZIP+4
directory nor are able to call the post office themselves), and took
them at their word that it would be working that day.  As of Wednesday
morning, it still was not working.

On Tuesday, after I got the first call back from C&W, I began looking
elsewhere.  I called Sprint, and they faxed me some information and a
form to sign and said it would take about a week.  Also, even though I
had requested only their 800 service, they tried to get me to sign a
letter of agency which authorized them to switch all of my 1+ traffic
to them.  When challenged, they said "Well, why would you NOT want to
switch?  You save at least 20% off of AT&T rates with our Business
Clout.  blah blah blah". Then they told me that the letter of agency
was necessary in order for them to tell my RBOC how to route the 800
calls to my regular lines, which of course is hogwash.

On Wednesday morning, in a panic since the ad was to run the next day,
I called AT&T, and humbly explained that I had tried in vain to get
800 service in a hurry from other carriers.  After taking down some
information, they said they would get it working as soon as possible.
About 50 minutes later, they called to tell me that my 800 number was
installed, working, and tested.  And the cost difference was so small
that it was not worth even worrying about other carriers.

Why could AT&T get something installed in 50 minutes that would take
the other guys a week to do?  And the other guys then wonder why AT&T
maintains such a large percentage of the market, and claim it is
because of "unfair" advantages left over from pre-divestiture.  Maybe
when they are able to provide anywhere near the level of service to
business customers that AT&T can, they will get more business.


Steve Forrette, [e-mail], I do not speak for my employer.

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

From: vixen![e-mail] (22475-adams)
Subject: Re: Unhappy With the AT&T Attitude
Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 92 12:54:09 GMT


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

> As mentioned previously, I do substantial business with AT&T each
> month. Considering the size of my bills, the idea that I would attempt
> to weasel out of even $100 is absurd. The supervisor today was put on
> notice that considering the wretched treatment that I received and the
> lack of effort AT&T put forth in resolving the problem, my search for
> a carrier that would offer even remotely similar rates/service has
> been intensified.

I empathize with John on this.  However, from personal experience, I
know that almost *ALL* of the big three seem to have this attitude to
one degree or another.  Ironically, I find AT&T to be the best ;^} of
the lot from a customer respect perspective.


Jack (John) Adams       Bellcore NVC 2Z-220
[phone] {Voice}       [phone] {Facsimile}
[e-mail]  [e-mail]

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

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 92 09:46 PDT
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: Old Telephone Wiring at Network Interface


[e-mail] (Arnold de Leon) writes:

> On the old cables I could not find the black wire.

If the cable is old enough, it will not have a black wire. The very
old station cable had only three wires in it.

> Can I simply take the yellow wire from the other cables and use them
> for the second line?  I am assuming that I can find the black in the
> sheath.

I would not do this if I were you. Ordinary jacketed station wire is
not "twisted pair" and its use for two lines over any distance is an
invitation for crosstalk. If you go back through the issues of the
Digest, you will find article after article complaining about
crosstalk between two lines in the home and the cause in most cases
turns out to be the use of D station wire for two lines.

> Should/can I ask PacBell to move both my lines to the new network
> interface box?

There is a down side to the new box. It has circuitry in it that
enables telco to isolate the pair from your equipment. Sometimes this
circuitry becomes flaky and is itself a cause of trouble. If there is
no trouble with the old protector, telco may charge you to replace it.

> Any general comments?  Any recommended reading for someone doing
> inside phone wiring?

If you are going to run multiple lines around the house in the same
cable, be sure that the cable is "twisted pair". This is usually
identified by wires bearing the colors: white/blue, white/orange, etc.
If it has red/green/yellow/black, do NOT use it to carry more than one
line.


John Higdon  |   P. O. Box 7648   |   [phone]     |       FAX:
[e-mail] | San Jose, CA 95150 | 10288 0 700 FOR-A-MOO | [phone]

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

Date: Fri, 16 Oct 92 03:34:12 -0400
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Old Telephone Wiring at Network Interface
Organization: UMass, Amherst, MA 01002 + Temporal Sys & Comp Net, Bombay, India


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

> When I opened the old network interface I had trouble finding the
> yellow/black pair.  I eventually found the yellow wires connected to a
> screw connector.  There is also a wire running from this connector to
> the new network interface.

> The wire does *not* go to any of the connectors used for phones.  Is
> it some sort of ground?  Was it used for powering Princess phones?

The wire yellow and black got to A/A1 for (I think thats what its
called) Answer supervision, used on exclusion key phones. Thats
mumbo-jumbo for I'll short A to A1 when I pick up the call.

I had exactly the same network interface configuration in my apt when
my second line was installed as you describe. That is what led to the
EASA-phone problem I bugged people on this list with a week or so ago.
:-) So I can share some acquired wisdom.

The old network interface, inside your house, has an extra RJ11 in the
bottom to which the phone line comes, and this is jumpered to the main
RJ11 jack in the middle of the panel. If the main RJ11 seems bad, you
are supposed to be able to plug you phone directly to the bottom RJ11
and get it to work there for instant debugging -- "See its not
MaBell's problem there!" (I don't understand really what great end this
achieves :-) Maybe they thought then that the RJ11 female was the
major failure point ... !) Anyway ...

The NET tech who wired my phone for me wired my existing line into the
bottom RJ11 and the new line into the front-main RJ11.  So the
Red-Green goes to the bottom RJ11, the yellow-black go to the main RJ11.

Only, the yellow-black from the bottom RJ11 continued to be remain
where they were screwed in, ie right on the lugs that were now used
for the new lines tip-and ring, ie. the yellow-black from the new
network interface in the basement.

That's fact one ... ( I discovered the facts the hard way, in reverse! :-)

Now fact two ...

My answering machine on my old line seems to do that A/A1 short
whenever it picks up the phone. Now remember, by fact one, the old
lines yello-black for A/A1 was screwed with my new line tip/ring!.
Thus it would just short the tip and ring on my new line, whenever it
picked up the call on the old line.  For a long and very painful week
I was wondering why my EASAphone on the new line would go dead only
when the answering machine on the old line picked up an irrelavant
call!

Moral: when you wire the phone to the jack, disconnect everything,
isolate the yellow-black pair from each RJ11 and tape or clip them.

Then connect the red-green of each RJ11 to the red-green or
yellow-black of the telco line.

And to think my wiring was done by the NET techie, who made that
gaffe!!

Oh, BTW, do all answering machines do that A/A1 short? Specifically
does the Uniden model AB480B do it? (single micro cassette phone cum
ans machine, beeperless remote VOX/CPC, Toll saver, memo etc, in
recent COMB catalog ?) I could really use this feature for some neat
an-swearing messages!


shrikumar ([e-mail], [e-mail])

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Old Telephone Wiring at Network Interface
Organization: Teradyne Inc., Telecommunications Division
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 92 12:46:42 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Arnold
Leon) writes:

> I just had a second line installed at our house.  Since a second
> line has never been installed here before PacBell installed a new
> network interface box for the second line.  The house is 39 years old.
> I had decided to do my own inside wiring.  My plan was to simply tie
> in the second line to the existing wiring on the second pair (yellow
> and black). When I opened the old network interface I had trouble
> finding the yellow/black pair.  I eventually found the yellow wires
> connected to a screw connector.  There is also a wire running from
> this connector to the new network interface.

In the 'deep dark distant past', the Bell Standard for Domestic Inside
Wiring, was three wires (Red, Green and Yellow). The Yellow was a
ground, which was usually used for party line ringing (Tip to ground,
or Ring to ground).

You won't find a black wire in the cable at all.

> Any general comments?  Any recommended reading for someone doing
> inside phone wiring?

I ran into this same thing when I bought my last house (built in the
early 50s). The only existing wiring was all three wire. I had to
re-wire the whole place. I'd recommend you replace all the 'three
wire' with quad or multi-pair if you want to distribute both lines
throughout the house.


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] (Eli Mantel)
Subject: Re: More LATA Nuttiness (Eppes Fork, VA and Raleigh, NC LATAs)
Organization: Extended Bulletin Board Service
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 01:57:36 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (David Esan)
writes:

> 930 is EPPES FORK, VA.  Anyone know anything about it?

Every North Carolina phone book published by Carolina Telephone (part
of United Telephone) contains a map showing all the LATAs in North
Carolina, and then lists the exchanges within each of the LATAs served
by United Telephone.

These three LATAs are **Eppes Fork**, Fayetteville, and Rocky Mount.
While Fayetteville and Rocky Mount each have several columns of
exchanges listed, the Eppes Fork LATA is listed as follows:

        Eppes Fork LATA
        Henderson
                (Eppes Fork)   252

That's Henderson, NC, by the way.  The area code directory in the same
phone book lists Henderson as being in area code 919, while presumably
there are parts of the Eppes Fork LATA in the 804 area code, yet on
the same telephone exchange.

Another curiosity I noticed, in looking at the LATA map, is that the
Raleigh, NC LATA is discontiguous.  It includes Raleigh and Goldsboro,
but these two cities are totally separated from each other by parts of
the Rocky Mount and Fayetteville LATAs.


Eli Mantel ([e-mail])

   The opinions expressed are not necessarily those of the University of
     North Carolina at Chapel Hill, the Campus Office for Information
        Technology, or the Experimental Bulletin Board Service.
           internet:  bbs.oit.unc.edu or 152.2.22.80

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

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 92 10:20:36 EDT
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: More LATA Nuttiness


You mentioned "EPPES FORK, VA".  I saw (in the Buggs Island telephone
directory, which serves South Hill, Va.) that Epps Fork (notice the
minor spelling difference) is served by Carolina Telephone on the 252
prefix, and I cannot yet determine if it is actually in Virginia (804
area) or North Carolina (919 area).

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: 16 Oct 92 03:00:00 UT
Subject: Re: GTE Addresses On Outgoing Email


Steve Forrette's comments about working regulated and de-regulated
jobs together puzzle me.

In Iowa we are not split into a regulated and a deregulated work
force.  I'm not sure why not, but it's fine with me.  It means more
job security by having more work to do, and provides a nice variety of
work experience.

There have been days when I have been dispatched to plow a drop wire
(a regulated job) and sent next to work on a PBX system at our small
local hospital (a de-regulated job).  Other times I might have a
service order for a new install.  The customer has asked for a jack
and wire to be placed in his new house.  I first work on the regulated
cable to terminate the pair at the customer's house.  Then I enter the
house and work on a de-regulated inside wire and jack.  I charge my
time accordingly.

There's no advantage in our work environment here simply because we do
both regulated and de-regulated jobs.  The important point I wanted to
make is that different work groups can work together.  In this day of
"It's not my problem", attitude, it's nice to be able to work together.


Jim Murphy    AA0JG
Internet - [e-mail]
Telemail - J.J.Murphy    America Online - Big Daddy8

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

From: [e-mail] (Andrew Klossner)
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 92 15:09:37 PDT
Subject: Re: "...is the Highest Law of the Land..."
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Tektronix Color Printers, Wilsonville, Oregon


> "where the state constitution is a bit hard to change, public
> utility commissions are bought and sold all the time."

Just as scary, and on a wider scale: the US Constitution provides that
all treaties have equal standing with the Constitution:

    "This constitution, and the laws of the United States which
    shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or
    which shall be made, under the authority of the United States
    shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every
    state shall be bound thereby, any thing in the constitution or
    laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding."

This is why some people get so excited about seemingly obscure
treaties.  The President signs it, the Senate ratifies it, and
suddenly it overrides any federal or state law with which it
conflicts.


Andrew Klossner  ([e-mail])

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

From: [e-mail] (Tom. Adams 529-7860)
Subject: Re: What it Costs to Have the President Over
Organization: Southwestern Bell Technology Resources, St.Louis, MO
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 92 13:27:50 GMT


In St. Louis we've had several presidential visits.  Most involve
shutting down a major interstate for 30 minutes, often during rush
hour.  Even the Vice President rates closing the Interstate.  After
Sunday's debate, the President spent the night in the city.  Monday
between 6AM and 7AM a police car was parked at every overpass and
every entrance ramp along a 20 mile stretch of the Interstate.
Pedestrian bridges had police stationed on foot.  St. Louis didn't
have the money to plow snow from most city streets last winter.  I
wonder if we can afford street lights and sewage treatment now.


Tom Adams   [e-mail] [e-mail]   314-529-7860

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #783
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa22556;
          16 Oct 92 4:30 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA26980
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 16 Oct 1992 02:00:03 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA08586
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 16 Oct 1992 01:59:54 -0500
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1992 01:59:54 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #784

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 16 Oct 92 02:00:00 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 784

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: LD Transmission Quality Comparison (Steve Elias)
    Re: LD Transmission Quality Comparison (Andy Sherman)
    Re: LD Transmission Quality Comparison (John Higdon)
    Re: Stolen Cell Phone (Craig Heim)
    Re: Stolen Cell Phone (Olivier M.J. Crepin-Leblond)
    Re: Stolen Cell Phone (John Gilbert)
    Re: Stolen Cell Phone (Steve L. Rhoades)
    Re: Fax Store-and-Forward Service Wanted (Steve Elias)
    Re: Fax Store-and-Forward Service Wanted (Shrikumar)
    Fax Mail Service Offered by C&P Telephone (Paul Robinson)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Re: LD Transmission Quality Comparison
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 92 12:01:10 PDT
From: [e-mail]


[e-mail] (Andy Sherman) wrote:

> First off, AT&T has had *some* optical fiber in the network for some
> time.  But the particular medium of digital transmission should matter
> not one whit for how to do echo cancellation.  The propagation delays
> are the same for all terrestrial links.

This cannot be correct.  Propagation delay depends on media type.  The
signal propagation speed in fiber is slower than that in coax cable,
for example.  It must be different for pure copper wire, also.

> Besides all that, every now and then somebody posts a throughput test
> for the big three carriers, and AT&T almost always wins.

I recall Sprint winning a number of these sorts of tests.  Lately, in
terms of audio quality, the big three are all neck and neck, to my
ear.


eli

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

From: [e-mail] (Andy Sherman)
Subject: Re: LD Transmission Quality Comparison
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 92 15:40:10 EDT


On Thu, 15 Oct 92 12:01:10 PDT, [e-mail] said:

> This cannot be correct.  Propagation delay depends on media type.  The
> signal propagation speed in fiber is slower than that in coax cable, for
> example.  It must be different for pure copper wire, also.

By how much?  All of these should have propagation speeds in the
neighborhood of c.  Is the variation enough to change the echo
cancellation, or will the trunk length dominate?

But I really probably overstated the case.  The original assertion was
that the presence of fiber in the trunk path made a difference as to
whether or not you need echo cancellation.  That is false.  Any voice
circuit, analog or digital, of sufficient length will need echo
cancellation to undo the effects of the hybrids at each end.

>> Besides all that, every now and then somebody posts a throughput test
>> for the big three carriers, and AT&T almost always wins.

> I recall Sprint winning a number of these sorts of tests.  Lately,
> in terms of audio quality, the big three are all neck and neck, to my
> ear.

Since I and most of the people who call me use the same carrier I have
no basis for comparison.  Probably they all sound similar unless you
have a very good ear.  But Higdon's modems, apparently have very good
ears, since they know the difference.


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: Thu, 15 Oct 92 13:08 PDT
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: LD Transmission Quality Comparison


On Oct 15 at 15:40, Andy Sherman writes:

> Since I and most of the people who call me use the same carrier I have
> no basis for comparison.  Probably they all sound similar unless you
> have a very good ear.  But Higdon's modems, apparently have very good
> ears, since they know the difference.

There is one variable that must be tossed in here. The Bay Area is
atypical of other areas of the country. All of the LD carriers
(including AT&T) treat this region as some sort of backwater outpost.
We were the last to "hear the pin drop" as it were. All are still
using some sort of antiquated signaling between POPs and LEC tandems.
Example: in the LA area it takes about a half-second for an AT&T call
to go through to almost anywhere. Here it takes 8 to 10 seconds.

Sprint has regular outages (from my telephone anyway) and offers no
explanation. Only recently did AT&T have digital connections between
here and other parts of the state. And you could grow old waiting for
an MCI call to complete.

The point is that the best of the big three is definitely not offered
here. Perhaps the reason AT&T comes out ahead is that its low grade
crap is better than MCI's or Sprint's low grade crap.


John Higdon  |   P. O. Box 7648   |   [phone]     |       FAX:
[e-mail] | San Jose, CA 95150 | 10288 0 700 FOR-A-MOO | [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Craig Heim)
Subject: Re: Stolen Cell Phone
Date: 15 Oct 92 13:26:03 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Stratus Computer Inc.


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

> Over this past weekend, someone broke into my car. The two items they
> removed (they wanted the whole car, but the alarm system prevented
> them from getting that. ) were my OKI 700 cellular phone and a Yaesu
> FT-727 dual band hand-held ham radio.

> I realize that I'll probably never see the HT again; but I was
> wondering what you and/or the rest of the readers think my chances of
> getting the phone back are? I called Pactel and told them what had
> happened. They turned off service to the phone immediately.

> I've heard that there is a database of stolen phone ESNs that the
> different service providers keep. What I'm not sure about is if this
> database is local to each area, or if it's a nationwide thing ...

There are actually two "Nationwide Negative Files".  One was formed by
GTE Telecommunications Services (GTETS) that services *primarily* the
B-band carriers.  The other was formed by Appex (now EDS Personal
Communications Corporation) that services *primarily* the A-band
carriers.  There are other smaller services, but these two are the
real players.

In order for carriers to set up roaming agreements with other
carriers, it is a requirement to subscribe to a fraud protection
service.  GTE offers PVS (Positive Validation Service) and EDS PCC
offers PRV (Positive Roamer Validation).  Basically, these services
connect to each switch and listen for roamer calls.  Each roamer ESN
is checked against the Nationwide Negative File of invalid numbers.
If the number is negative, the verification service sends a command to
the switch which handled the call to bar that number.  Once a number
is barred on the switch, future calls are blocked (or even better,
routed to the carriers fraud control department).  Note that one
successful call was made before the shutdown occurred.  It is possible
for a bandit to traverse the country making one call at each switch.

There is a gateway between GTE and EDS PCC used to keep the Nationwide
Negative Files in sync.  If an A-band customer roams in a B-band-only
area, the validation service may validate the ESN.

> If I report a phone stolen here in Atlanta, are the cellular service
> providers in Chicago or L.A. likely to know about it?

Atlanta will inform the verification service of the stolen phone ESN.
That will result in an entry in the Nationwide Negative files.

> If the phone does show up "active" on a cell somewhere, is it possible
> (or more importantly is it done) to try and track it down?

There have been cases where the police/FBI tracked down drug dealers
using a device to locate the phone.  It is difficult, but possible.

Sorry, but I don't think the FBI is going to go after your particular
phone.


Craig R. Heim                 |Stratus Computer, Inc.  |My opinions are my own,
Software Engineer             |55 Fairbanks Blvd.      |not necessarily are
[e-mail] |Marlboro, MA 01752-1298 |they Stratus's.

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

From: [e-mail] (Olivier M.J. Crepin-Leblond)
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1992 00:47:21 +0100
Subject: Re: Stolen Cell Phone


A friend of mine had his hand-held cell phone stolen two weeks ago. It
was grabbed from his hand as he was walking in the street and the
thief was running too fast for my friend to catch him.

Knowing that he'd never see his phone again, my friend immediately
went to a public phone box and called his cellular number. The thief
answered and after my friend showered him with insults, they had a
brief conversation about getting the phone back otherwise the number
would be cut by the phone company. The thief answered that whether
with a line or without a line, that phone was worth a lot to him and
it was tough luck for my friend before hanging-up.  My friend
immediately called the cellular company and got the number cut.

Sad day.


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]>
WARNING: Please send any reply to above addresses, NOT to FROM-field !!!


[Moderator's Note: Yes indeed, a sad day, but an all too common
scenario these days. Unfortunatly here in the United States,
particularly in urban areas, violent crime is growing by leaps and
bounds through perverse though popular ways of interpreting our
Constitution by some powerful legal organizations here.  Someone
*tried* to steal my cell phone several months ago; but the way I wrap
the strap around my neck and across my shoulders, they'd have to pull
my head off to get the phone! :) During the few seconds he was
grabbing at me I got my little cannister of Mace (attached to my key
ring) from my pocket and gave him a liberal squirt in the eyes and up
his nose. That was enough to put him down for the minute or so it took
me to hail a cab and (admittedly) leave the scene in a hurry.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (John Gilbert)
Subject: Re: Stolen Cell Phone
Organization: Motorola, Inc. Land Mobile Products Sector
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 22:25:57 GMT


> [Moderator's Note: I think the chances of recovering the phone are
> almost zilch. Yes, there is a nationwide negative listing that all the
> carriers see.  Most likely when the thief discovered the phone would
> not work any longer he sold it to some cell phone phreak for ten
> dollars ... :(   that person will try and modify the ESN or possibly
> use the phone for scrap parts, etc.  Sorry about your bad luck.   PAT]

A co-worker of mine had his phone stolen and recovered TWICE!  The
trick is to make sure that the phone is over the dollar limit that
allows it to go on the National Crime Information Computer (NCIC) data
base.  Since the phone was one of the early (expensive) units it
qualified and was returned by the police when it turned up at busts
for other offenses.  The police seem to be interested in returning
phones if incidental to other work, but have no interest in tracking
down a $300 phone by itself.  I don't know what the minimum dollar
limit for property to be posted on NCIC is.


John Gilbert   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve L. Rhoades)
Subject: Re: Stolen Cell Phone
Date: 15 Oct 1992 23:21:05 GMT
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena


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

[Stuff about getting his OKI 700 cellular phone stolen deleted]

> I called Pactel and told them what had happened. They turned off
> service to the phone immediately.                ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

I'm on my third car phone now, the previous two having been stolen.

I've always wondered if instead of the provider turning off service to
the phone, what about just leaving it on for about a week and see who
he/she calls?  (Maybe put it on a special class of service so that
long distance would be restricted, reducing the loss to the provider.)

If the thief were a teenager, chances are he'd be calling all his
friends to impress them with his new "toy".

Comments?


Steve L. Rhoades            | Voice: [phone]
Post Office Box 1000        |
Mt. Wilson, Calif 91023     | Internet: [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: Good idea! When two guys picked my pocket on the
subway a four years ago (one distracts you while the other gets in your
pocket) they got my telco calling card among other things. Although I
went back to the station where it happened, found one of the animals and
violated his civil liberties by assaulting him in the process of
holding him for police who were on the way, the one who actually got
my wallet was long gone. I notified IBT the next morning and they
turned it off, but when the bill came I skip-traced a few of the phone
numbers. I found one place where calls had originated that was a
private residence here in the city. I called the number, raised cain
and told them off. I also gave that address and phone number to IBT
and the police for their report and investigation -- what a joke! :( PAT]

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

Subject: Re: Fax Store-and-Forward Service Wanted
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 92 11:55:22 PDT
From: [e-mail]


If you are talking about a Fax S&F system where you could dial it,
enter a phone number, and have it send you a particular fax, boxes
which do this are available through Brooktrout Technology, 617 449
4100.  It is called their "flashfax" system.  Demos are available by
calling 617 449 9010.

A simpler solution for you might be to get a fax board or external
modem for your PC, or use a service similar to the IBT service Patrick
described.

Also note that the "faxback" type of fax S&F is patented by Brooktrout.
Other industry players have refused to pay royalties and instead
persist in trying to derail this patent.  Apprently yet more patent
court action is forthcoming.

Brooktrout defeated ATT in the first patent interference suit about
the "faxback patent".


eli

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

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 92 23:53:41 -0400
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Fax Store-and-Forward Service Wanted
Organization: UMass, Amherst, MA 01002 + Temporal Sys & Comp Net, Bombay, India


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

> I wonder whether someone at Zimbabwe University turns the fax machine
> off after 5 p.m. to save electricity, assuming that nobody else in the

  Perhaps not to save electricity, but to save the (expensive) fax
machine.  Each minute it is powered on, it is eating operational life
and also each minute carries the risk of that surge or spike on the
power line that will carry the fax to heavens of delight, from which
they sometimes never like to return.

  And an outage of the fax machine means service charges, probably
difficulty in getting spares, and letting that clumsy local repairman
put his dirty hands into the machine ... they tend to be an addictive
sometimes :-)

  Also perhaps, everything in the office is turned off anyway in the
evening, and by force of habit ...

  People in the US do tend to forget power line surges, lack of
support and competent repair ...  and oh, please dont make then sound
so cheap ! :-) ;-) ,-) '-)

Besides the big carriers, are there any private operators who provide
store-fwd fax services ?


shrikumar ( [e-mail], [e-mail] )

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

Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992  22:17:54 EDT
Subject: Fax Mail Service Offered by C&P Telephone


In an advertisement on page D13 of today's (10/15) {Washington Post},
C&P Telephone announced that it will offer Bell Atlantic Fax Mailbox
service for receiving faxes, in a manner similar to voice mail for
messages.

I called one of the sales people to get more information about this
service, and here are the details based on the questions I could think
to ask.  Also, their 800 number was answered at 7:55 at night, which
was a nice change.  The clerk will send me more information about it,
but here's what I got so far:

Pricing:

  -  No installation charge.  However (as noted in a separate paper
     that I received with my phone bill), the phone company is
     offering "amnesty" (even if they don't call it that) for
     service change charges during October whether this service
     has no installation charge next month is another thing.

  -  $19.95 a month.

  -  No charge to call in and retrieve messages.

  -  If used to send faxes, it's 40c per minute (about 2 pgs/minute)

  -  If a fax is transferred to another fax mailbox, it's 25c untimed
     (and the system will tell you if the destination is just a
     phone number or if it's a local fax mailbox)

  -  Will signal a pager or voice mailbox (if it's one of Bell
     Atlantic's or compatible with it, natch) when you get a fax.

Features:

   - User is assigned a separate telephone number for this service.

   - User can ask for a specific area code (in this area being
     202/301/703), 703 being easier.  Sales clerk said he also
     sold this service to someone in the Philadelphia area, so it
     might also be available there, too.

   - If the service is used to send or broadcast faxes, it will do
     automatic retries.

   - Incoming documents can be stored.

   - You can either call in and retrieve received messages from a fax
     machine, or transfer them someplace else.

Capabilities:

   - You can send a document to a maximum of 15 entries.

   - You can set up a list of people, and send to the list.

   - You can place up to 15 entries on a list.

   - You can set up up to ten lists. (Probably equivalent to the 0-9
     buttons on the Touch-Tone pad.)

   - In theory I suppose you could send a single fax to up to
     155 people at once, assuming you used all ten lists plus an
     additional five numbers.

   - 50 Page Capacity of "active" documents, (The sales clerk can't
     say what happens if a single received document is larger than
     50 pages.)

  - Can forward a received document to someplace else.
   - 25 page capacity of saved documents.

Unknown, but will be told to me:

   - What happens if a single incoming document is longer than
     50 pages.

   - If the answerback given out by the called number can be
     programmed.


Paul Robinson, [e-mail]
These (uninformed) opinions are exclusively my own, and no one else
is (stupid enough to be) responsible for them.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #784
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa23370;
          16 Oct 92 4:52 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA17182
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 16 Oct 1992 02:33:07 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA00561
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 16 Oct 1992 02:32:57 -0500
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1992 02:32:57 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #785

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 16 Oct 92 02:33:00 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 785

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Michigan Bell: Business vs Residential Rates (Gordon Burditt)
    Re: Cellular Antennae Extenders (Pat Turner)
    Re: E-Mail for Michigan Residents (Paul Robinson)
    Re: Phone Network Simulator (Paul Cook)
    Re: LEC Repair Disservice (was Happy With MCI) (Henry Mensch)
    Re: 911 Calls From Remote Locations (Marc Unangst)
    Re: Calling Card Fraud on "48 Hours" (Ron Bean)
    Re: Another List of Cellular Phone Prices (Laird P. Broadfield)
    Re: Highway Call Boxes (Laird P. Broadfield)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Gordon Burditt)
Subject: Re: Michigan Bell: Business vs Residential Rates
Organization: Gordon Burditt
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 09:02:37 GMT


> "Home based workers who use their phone lines for business more than
>  50% of the time need a business line."

> At first glance, this seems to be a pretty reasonable compromise on
> class of service billing. How one determines 50% may be open to
> discussion, but it beats the attitudes of some companies that want to
> bill business rates if you so much as publicise your phone number.

The way I read it, they could STILL want you to get a business line if
you publicize your phone number.  I think this is aimed at people who
work at home (or do a lot of overtime work at home) and spend most of
the day logged in to the company computer or have lots of telephone
conferences with other workers.

It just might manage to snag some lonely wife who calls her husband at
work a lot and has a home business but never makes any phone calls
related to that business.  It might also snag some guy who takes a lot
of work home with him, receives a USENET feed from UUNET (but he
originates the calls) on his personal machine, calls in sick once
every month or two, and makes few other calls.

If they REALLY wanted to get picky, this could cover some poor guy who
receives more telephone solicitation calls than he makes or receives
personal calls.  They might even be trying to define "a business call
is a call which terminates at either end at a business line", which is
one way they COULD measure it without listening to the calls.  That
could cause cascade reclassifications -- if my line has to become
business, then people who call me a lot are at risk of being
reclassified also.  Eventually, there are no residential lines.


Gordon L. Burditt   sneaky.lonestar.org!gordon

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 92 18:36 EDT
From: rsiatl![e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Cellular Antennae Extenders


Matt McConnell writes:

> Do these cordless antennas really work?   How so?

The principal is sound, basicly one antenna pulls in a lot of the
signal due to it's large "effective area" (gain) and transmits through
the other antenna outside the car.  To get the 3 dB increase that was
claimed, the passive repeater would have to radiate a field just as
strong at that that was passed through the windows.

I have used this technique before with a Diamond X-500 (11.7 dB at
UHF) installed upside down inside a steel building linked to a 11
element beam on the roof (13.2 dB gain) with a foot of 1/2" hardline
(for low maintainance).  It worked like a charm to enable the
receptionist in another building to be able to talk with employees
inside this one particular building which was partialy underground and
had no openings facing the main office.

Having said this, I would urge you to read the letters to the editor
in the June 1992 issue of {Mobile Radio Technology}.  Scott Wilson, a
RF engineer and manager of Cellular Technical Support for Murata,
tested several passive repeaters with a screen box inside a screen
room using a spec-an.  He found "barely measurable" emmisions from the
passive repeater with the screen box door shut.  Mr. Wilson does say
that many people report improved results with the repeater and that
this is the true bottom line.

I personaly would prefer a mag mount antenna.  While I am distrustful
of "Currents of Death" arguments, I don't mind spending 30 dollars and
time to change antennas to get a 10 dB or so increase in max. ERP and
get the transmitter away from my eyes and brain.

A side note on cellular power levels: Since I have a slug for my Bird
Wattmeter in the cellular band, I decided to leave it in line to watch
power levels as I change locations.  At one point I was just uphill of
a cellular site in TN and my phone was transmitting with three watts.
As someone (Greg Youngblood?) mentioned aparentally some RSA's do not
back off on power levels.

Who was I calling?  MCI, to report a 4W leased line had 78 dBrnco of
noise.  They tried to find the problem, but I couldn't even hear their
feeble attempts to loop the line.  I offered to do a tip tip - ring
ring hard loopback and their tech got all kinds of crazy results.  As
the day warmed up the problem "was fixed".  MCI's response was that
the tech wasn't working the DAC right, and that they couldn't find any
problems now.  At one point I measured +1.5 dBm with a 3 KHz flat
filter. MCI wasn't interested as they only spec C msg noise :-) The
problem, of course, was the LEC's OSP not MCI, but they are the ones
we have to deal with.  I'll just have to wait until next time it
happens and try my luck with the LEC, as I have since gotten the
number for the serving CO toll test board.


Pat Turner KB4GRZ   [e-mail]

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

Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992  16:58:01 EDT
Subject: Re: E-Mail For Michigan Residents


On Sun 11 Oct 1992 02:07:11 GMT, Damon A. Koronakos (Damon@sunburn.
stanford.edu) writes:

> A friend of mine in Kalamzoo [Michigan] recently got an
> IBM-compatible machine.  I would like to be able to exchange
> electronic mail with him ...

See if he can find a local BBS in the area on Fidonet, which has a
matrix area.  If it does, he can use the matrix area to send a message
to the local server which provides internet access for that fidonet
region.

If you are not sure, send a message to me on Fidonet and I'll find out
who is in your area.

My address is:
[e-mail]

Fidonet addresses are in the form z:f/n, for example, the BBS I use is
1:109/417 in the Washington DC area.  (You can see how it matches up.)
Zone 1 is North America.  Other zones are for other parts of the world
or for non-Fido networks.  Fidonet is claimed as "fully integrated"
which means anyone on Fido has an internet address.  Whether the local
sysop allows internet mail to reach them is another matter.  Whether
that sysop allows them to send internet mail is yet another.  I've
used all three types of Fidonet systems: no internet mail, incoming
only and full e-mail.

The other possibility are the pay networks.  AT&T Mail has a lousy
interface, a poor method of transferring messages, doesn't support
Kermit or Zmodem, but only charges $3 a month for a mailbox.

MCI Mail is probably the "premier" E-Mail service, and it has several
options: Pay $36 a year and get an E-mail and telex address with no
message unit charge, pay $10 a month and get the first 40 message
units, or pay $25 a month and get the first 250 message units, plus
you can add up to five additional mailboxes for $5 a month each to
this account.  I have studied my account on MCI often enough that I
decided to change to the $10 a month plan since I'm not sending that
many units, but I'm paying more than $10 a month in usage because of
the number of messages I do send.  MCI Mail includes telex send AND
RECEIVE (which AT&T charges $25 a month to obtain) otherwise both are
about the same pricing structure.

Mr. Koronakos also says:

> I don't know if Prodigy/Compuserve-type service provide email access
> to the net, how much extra (if any) this costs, etc.

Compu$erve does provide internet access but their rates are at least
$12.50 an hour to send or receive messages, and I believe they also
charge for messages sent.  On the other hand Compuserve is offering a
$7.50 a month special access plan which allows a certain number of
messages sent per month.

It was announced in this month's {Computer Shopper} that Prodigy is
bowing to repeated demands of its customers that it will offer a
gateway to Internet, first for customers using IBM computers, and next
for Macintosh users.

But a gateway cuts both ways.  I wonder what happens when someone
figures out how to have the ALT.SEX newsgroup sent to them as mail.
(At this time, you can't, to the relief of a lot of people.  :) )


Paul Robinson -- [e-mail]
These (uninformed) opinions are mine alone, nobody else is
(stupid enough to be) responsible for them.

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

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 92 18:16 GMT
From: Proctor & Associates <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Phone Network Simulator


[e-mail] (Andrew Klossner) writes:

> I want to test a modem's network interface without connecting to a
> live telephone network.  I've heard that there are devices with
> several RJ-11 jacks that simulate network interfaces, but I don't know
> where to look for them.  Can you give me pointers to such devices?

Sorry to blow our own horn again, but my employer now makes THREE
different telephone demonstrators that realistically simulate
telephone lines per Bellcore specs for North American signalling.

The 49250 Phone Demo II simulates two lines, and handles tone dialing
only.  It has real dial tone, ringback tone, and ringing, and you just
go off hook on one jack, dial any seven-digit phone number (or #) and
it rings the other line.  The price is $259.95, FOB Redmond, WA.

The next one is the 49200 Telephone Demonstrator.  It sells for
$475.00, has four lines (each with its own two-digit phone number),
handles both pulse and tone dialing, and is the one used in displays
at many AT&T phone stores.

Our new one is the 49300 Centrex Demo.  It sells for $685.00,
simulates four lines, has Caller ID (with number only) and can be
programmed for any seven or ten digit phone numbers, and to simulate
standard Centrex features in either a 5ESS or DMS environment.  It can
be programmed with a telephone, but due to the large number of
programmable options, menu driven programming software (including
serial cable) is available for $49.00.

Contact Proctor & Associates at any of the addresses (internet, USPS,
fax, etc) below for more information.


Paul Cook                        206-881-7000
Proctor & Associates        MCI Mail 399-1080
15050 NE 36th St.           fax: [phone]
Redmond, WA  98052-5317   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Henry Mensch)
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 92 11:44:00 -0700
Subject: Re: LEC Repair Disservice (was Happy With MCI)
Reply-To: [e-mail]


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

> The specific problem: on calls to invalid numbers, the recording was
> quite garbled.  What the CSR at Ohio Bell thought the problem was:

> 1) Are you sure it's not in your equipment?
> 2) It's probably a problem with your long-distance company.

> I honestly don't know how some people get jobs in the telecom industry.

Ditto. I inquired about leased-line service to my home and gave up in
disgust. I imagine there is some Pac*Bell trademark word that I could
use which will make their eyes light up, but no joy was to be had that
day ...


henry mensch / booz, allen & hamilton, inc.  / <[e-mail]>

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

From: [e-mail] (Marc Unangst)
Subject: Re: 911 Calls From Remote Locations
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1992 03:08:36 GMT
Organization: The Programmer's Pit Stop, Ann Arbor MI


In article <[e-mail]> Joseph.Bergstein@p501.
f544.n109.z1.fidonet.org (Joseph Bergstein) writes:

[Tale describing the 911 dispatcher improperly interpreting the ANI
information and dispatching the ambulance to the wrong address, due to
the PBX configuration being used.]

Ham radio operators frequently run into this when making a call to the
police or the 911 dispatcher through a repeater autopatch.  Usually,
the ham making the call will be nowhere near the actual termination
point of the line, since they're calling through a radio link.  I've
heard many stories of police/fire department/EMS showing up at an
antenna tower or a mountaintop repeater site because that's where the
ANI said the call originated from.

If you know, or suspect, that you will be connected to a E911
dispatcher who has ANI info for the number you're calling from, but
you aren't at the physical termination point of that number, it's
usually a good idea to explicitly tell the dispatcher that the ANI
info is wrong and that you're really at <such-and-such> location.
Hams also find it useful to tell the dispatcher that they are calling
over a radio link, to impress upon them that the link is half-duplex
and that they must say "over" or "go ahead" when they're finished
speaking.  Unfortunately, some E911 dispatchers will ignore both these
items and dispatch to the wrong location anyway, but at least you
tried.


Marc Unangst, N8VRH     [e-mail]

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

From: norvax!astroatc!nicmad!madnix![e-mail] (Ron Bean)
Subject: Re: Calling Card Fraud on "48 Hours"
Organization: ARP Software
Date: Thu, 15 May 1992 10:03:51 GMT


[e-mail] (Corinna Polk) writes:

> The CBS show "48 Hours" ran a show last week on scams and their lead
> story was on calling card fraud and how prevalent it was in bus and
> train stations, and in airports. They had a camera hidden on a bank of
> phones and had a reporter go in to use a phone and gave the operator
> her calling card number vocally. It was unreal to see all the people
> who leaned in towards her as she began to recite the digits.

   Maybe we should have cards that just play the DTMF digits into the
phone, like those electronic Christmas cards that play music.  They
could be programmed electronically, or maybe by punching holes in the
card to break wires inside. Then you'd just have to worry about people
with tape recorders and parabolic micrphones ...

   You could also have your business card play your 800 number, or
give one to your kid that plays your home phone number (like the
gadget that was described here recently).

   Humorous Christmas card anecdote: A few years ago a woman I worked
with got one and the switch inside broke and it wouldn't stop playing.
They finally stuffed it under a sofa cushion so they wouldn't have to
listen to it. I heard this story on a Monday, and it had been playing
all weekend!

(Imagine flipping through your rolodex and some guy's card starts
beeping at you ...)


[e-mail] (Ron Bean)
{harvard|rutgers|ucbvax}!uwvax!astroatc!nicmad!madnix!zaphod

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Another List of Cellular Phone Prices
Date: 15 Oct 92 20:55:26 GMT


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

> Three cellular phone offers appear in Luskin's {Washington Post} ad,
> October 9:

> Motorola "tote" Cellular Phone, "Transportable from car-to-car,
> Antenna & Cigarette Lighter, Full 3 watts, No Installation Required,
> Certain Cellular Telephone Company Restriction may apply."  $0.01
> (That is correct, one cent.)

> [Moderator's Note: I think that was a typographical error and meant to
> say 'cigarette lighter adapter plug', ie. you can charge or operate
> the phone from the car battery. Even though those two you mentioned
> did not include a cellular company contract in them, are you certain
> that somewhere in small print it was not otherwise mentioned in the
> ad?   PAT]

As the Moderator says, I'm sure these include a contract, but the
question is: "what is the minimum dollar value of the contract, i.e.
if you bought one, and never used it, what would you pay by the end of
the no-cancel period?"  Or, at least, that's the key question for
those of us in Kalifornia, where the PUC has decided we're not smart
enough to understand such arrangements, and must therefore pay $300 or
so for that same bag phone.  (And higher cell rates, too, but that's a
function of everyone and their nine-year-old having a cellphone.)


Laird P. Broadfield     [e-mail]    ...{ucsd, nosc}!crash!lairdb

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Highway Call Boxes
Date: 15 Oct 92 21:03:07 GMT


In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Hon Wah Chin)
writes:

> I used one last Monday on 101 in Menlo Park.  It automatically called
> CHP.  I described my location and they read back the ID number painted
> on a sign next to the phone, so I don't know whether they had the ID
> transmitted or from my location description.  The most interesting
> thing is that the hanger for the handset (with noise canceling mike)
> did not appear to move for off-hook indication.  I wasn't in a mood to
> investigate further but hypothesized some kind of magnetic sensor to
> activate an internal switch.

Um, wait a minute.  Admittedly, these could be different manufacturers,
but here's what I recall from my one use: When I opened the door,
there was a handset hanging in a dead hook (as Chin said) but there
was also a big flashing button that said "Press Me" or some such.
When I pressed it, the instrument made DTMF noises, waited through
some clicks (connection now established?) and then (perhaps in
response to the other end?) made *more* DTMFs (*not* seven digits, as
I recall).  My guess was that the second set was after a connection
had been made to CalTrans, but before a human was on, and it
identified the instrument.


Laird P. Broadfield     [e-mail]    ...{ucsd, nosc}!crash!lairdb

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #785
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa13303;
          18 Oct 92 16:19 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA22778
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 18 Oct 1992 13:49:14 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA20693
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 18 Oct 1992 13:49:05 -0500
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1992 13:49:05 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #786

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 18 Oct 92 13:49:00 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 786

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Standardizing the Information Number (Carol Preston)
    Re: Source For Installation Equipment Wanted (Bill Garfield)
    Re: Cellular Internationally? (Dan DeClerck)
    Business Lines -- Add One Today! (Tony Pelliccio)
    Re: Identa-Ring Decoding Box (Ron Bean)
    Re: Living in the Past (Jack Winslade)
    Information For a Paper Needed (Stephen Caron)
    Re: Question About ROLM PBX Telephones (Steven L. Johnson)
    Telecommunications Jitter (Yee-Lee Shyong)
    Re: Detection of Pulse Dial Codes by Info Systems ([e-mail])
    Re: ATM Technical Information Wanted (Maxime Taksar)
    Specs For Portable Cellular Car Kit Interfaces (Steve Schear)
    Message Center and Call Waiting (Justin Leavens)
    Transition 2000 (Gary Wingert)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Carol Preston)
Subject: Standardizing the Information number
Organization: Silicon Graphics
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1992 13:14:28 GMT


Does anybody know if there are any plans to standardize the local
number to call for information?  If not, does anybody know what the
algorithm is?

Where I now live, I always dial 411 for local information and
XXX-555-1212 for long distance.

When I visit my parents in Michigan, it's 555-1212 for local and
1-XXX-555-1212 for long distance.

While in Colorado, I tried various combinations of the above, and was
unsuccessful until I asked somebody walking down the street who
informed me that the local information number is 1-411, and long
distance is 1-XXX-555-1212.

BIzarre.


Carol Preston                 [e-mail]
Silicon Graphics              Telephone: [phone]
2011 N. Shoreline Blvd, MS 11L-960   Mountain View, CA  94043

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

Subject: Re: Source For Installation Equipment Wanted
From: [e-mail] (Bill Garfield)
Date: Sun 18 Oct 92 12:15:00 -0600
Organization: Ye Olde Bailey BBS - Houston, TX - 713-520-1569
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Bill Garfield)


Jim Speth <[e-mail]> writes:

> Does anyone know of a source for telephone installation equipment?
> I'm not talking about radio-shack crimpers and plugs, but rather the
> fun stuff that the telco people have.  Like linesperson's handsets, or
> the things-they-hook-to-the-lines-that-go-BEEP.  Someone must know
> what I'm talking about.

The telephone "buff" can find virtually all of the real McCoy toys and
tools in a catalog from Specialized Products Co. in Dallas, TX.  The
Arrow T-18 stapler for quad IW can be ordered from Davenport Scale &
Staple Co. in Davenport, IA.  Specialized Products Co. has virtually
everything a {real} telephone installer/lineperson needs.

 ...and perhaps a word of caution is called for: while the breakup of
AT&T revolutionized the telephone industry, allowing just about anyone
to get into the business, you can/will get yourself into _very
serious_ trouble impersonating a telco employee or tampering with MA
Bell's outside plant and distribution network or equipment.

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

From: [e-mail] (Dan DeClerck)
Subject: Re: Cellullar Internationally?
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 92 10:21:25 CDT

> I was wondering how Cellular telephones have progressed
> internationally.

> Specifically, are other countries following the technology used here
> in the US? Will there be atime when I can take my cellular phone to
> Europe and use it with out a hitch? (I realize there may be problems
> with local carrier / account sort of thing, but my question is
> primarily with the technology compatibility thing.)

Europe, in the past has had numerous incompatible cellular standards,
TACS, ETACS, NMT 450 NMT 900, to name a few. Most of Europe is
embarking on a new standard, GSM, which is entirely digital. Europe is
the first area where fully digital cellular is in general use. GSM
will not be available in the North American continent.

The US standards are AMPS (most popular) NAMPS (narrowband AMPS), USDC
(TDMA based digital cellular) and the new CDMA. These standards are
completely incompatible with any of the European standards, So,
unfortunately, your cellular phone won't work there. Your best bet
would probably be to rent a phone at the airport, but the price may be
prohibitive.


Dan DeClerck   EMAIL: [e-mail]

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

Date: Sun, 18 Oct 92 06:19:44 EDT
From: Tony Pelliccio <[e-mail]>
Subject: Business Lines -- Add One Today!


New England Telephone (and probably New York Telephone since they're
both part of NYNEX) just sent a little flyer to all business in the
area saying how adding another line to your present configuration
would actually save you money. They've agreed to drop installation
charges if you respond to the offer by such and such a date. I think
the big thing with telephone companies now is to offer services that
you wouldn't normally need to bolster their profits.  Lets face it,
call-waiting is almost $4.00 a month here in Rhode Island as are the
other services like three-way, call-forward and speed dial. That could
represent a large increase in profits for local phone companies.

On the bright side though, New England Telephone finally dropped the
$1.40 a month charge for Touch-Tone (TM) ... is it true that our
"bought" P.U.C.  is finally doing something?


Tony [e-mail]
     [e-mail]
     [e-mail]

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

From: norvax!astroatc!nicmad!madnix![e-mail] (Ron Bean)
Subject: Re: Identa-Ring Decoding Box
Organization: ARP Software
Date: Sun, 18 Jul 1992  03:35:46 GMT


[e-mail] (Steven A Rubin) writes:

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

   I was just thinking that the Caller-ID technology could be used for
this purpose, if it sent the *called* number instead of the calling
number. Of course, you couldn't have both at once, but it would allow
you to answer in 1.5 rings.


[e-mail] (Ron Bean)
{harvard|rutgers|ucbvax}!uwvax!astroatc!nicmad!madnix!zaphod

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

Date: Sun, 18 Oct 92 01:15:16 CST
From: [e-mail] (Jack Winslade)
Subject: Re: Living in the Past
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: DRBBS Technical BBS, Omaha


In a message dated 05-OCT-92, John Higdon writes:

> (Another well known telco who claims to do business in this region
> cannot take the order in this manner. First, one must explain what a
> "one-emm-bee" is. Then, since the person who answers the phone is
> completely powerless, someone has to call you

Speaking of this well-known <ahem> telco, last weekend when I attended
a regional system operators' conference, one of the speakers remarked
of a current run-in with their local phone company.

He has two lines, one for voice, and the other for data.  His data
line is lower, numerically, than the voice line, but since he did not
specify which he wanted listed, they made the first (lowest) one
listed and the other the data (unlisted) line.  He wants to use the
low one for data and the high one for voice, so he inquired about
getting the listing changed.  They (phone company) said that the ONLY
way for them to do that was to disconnect the service and reconnect it
again the other way around, thus charging him for a new installation.

I asked him if his phone company was a certain well-known three-letter
one that tends to irritate a certain guy who hides out in the desert. ;-)

He confirmed that it was indeed the case.  I suggested to him that he
mention another three-letter name in his next conversation with the
phone company, that being PSC.

Is that company capable of doing ANYTHING ?????

He also mentioned that they were going to close the local business
office and run all of their business out of some town in Egypt, at
least that's what I thought I heard him say.  The city was
Bum-something, but I forget exactly.  <big snotty grin>

Maybe their customer service number can be 286-3825.  ;-)  ;-)  ;-)


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

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

Date: 18 Oct 1992 00:12:09 -0700 (PDT)
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Information For a Paper Needed
Organization: California State Polytechnic University, Pomona


     I, along with a fellow student, am working on a paper about
networked or flat type organizations. These are organizations in which
suppliers and or subcontractors are linked together and share
information with each other.  Examples of this type of organization
would be the Baxter-American Hospital Supply ASAP system or EDI in
general.

     Just about all of our information we have found in our research
deals with the managerial benefits and detriments of this type of
organizational set up. However, since we are Computer Information
Systems majors with a emphasis in Telecommunications, we would like to
find more information of a technical nature. In a nutshell, just how
are the elements in a particular flat organization linked together?
i.e. What type of hardware are they using? Do they use leased lines?
T1?

     Any help in locating information such as this would be greatly
appreciated.  Case studies, recent articles or books, if you have seen
something that may help let me know.


Stephen Caron   CIS major   Cal Poly Pomona
[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Steven L. Johnson)
Subject: Re: Question About ROLM PBX Telephones
Organization: JvNCnet
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1992 07:46:42 GMT


[e-mail] (Lars Poulsen) writes:

> As you may know, ROLM has been the subjects of takeovers and
> divestitures. At one time it was swallowed by IBM, and then sold to
> Siemens. At the present time, I believe it is still owned by Siemens,
> but does business under the Rolm name again.

Rolm was sold in chunks to Siemens and for a while there was both a
Rolm Systems and a Rolm Company.  Now they are back to just one Rolm,
although I'm not sure of its current proper name.

There are lots of 'Siemens' phones as Stromberg-Carlson, TelPlus, and
Rolm (among others) were separate acquisitions and are still
relatively independent.  Even within a particular operating company
I'd suspect a variety of different digital interfaces if for no other
reason for compatibility with older product lines versus new designs.


Steve

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

Date: Sun, 18 Oct 92 16:18:54 CST
From: [e-mail] (Yee-Lee Shyong)
SubjectL Telecommunications Jitter


What's the JITTER in telecommunications?  How is it measured?

Thanks.


Apollo


[Moderatpr's Note: I think it is caused by the Jitterbug, a well known
form of music from the early years of this century.  :)    PAT]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Detection of Pulse Dial Codes by Info Systems
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1992 15:09:56 GMT
Organization: University of Missouri - Rolla


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

> I dialed an airline automated infomation system the other day and it
> allowed responses to be either tone or pulse encoded.

> The tones could be detected at any time, but you had to wait till
> after a beep for the pulse code to be recognised.

> What mechanism to they use to detect the pulses?

> Can you buy equipment that will respond to tones and pulses?

> Are pulses only able to be detected on an incoming analog line, or
> could they also be detected on an ISDN line from a call originating in
> the POTS network?

Pulses are momentary on-hooks, which are not sent over the network.
(Only a long on-hook is sent over the network, as a disconnect).
However, whenever a phone pulse dials, it creates clicks on the line.
These clicks are not used by the local telco switching equipment
(which senses the on-hook), but the airlines equipment could sense the
clicks and act on them.

I wonder if all their options had high numbers (say above five) so
their pulse sensing equipment could detect the regular pattern of
clicks.  (If they had an option one, a momentary noise hit might be
mistaken for a click)


Brett   ([e-mail])

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

Date: Sun, 18 Oct 92 10:25:15 -0700
From: [e-mail] (Maxime Taksar)
Subject: Re: ATM Technical Information Wanted


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

>> been able to find much information at all.

> [Moderator's Note: Actually, the banks, credit card processors and a
> few others would prefer that you not find out much information about
> the topic ... but TELECOM Digest readers will come to the rescue I am
> sure with all you ever wanted to know on the topic.    PAT]

Actually, magnetic card encoding is *far* from a big secret.  A couple
(if not all) of the schemes are ISO standards.  What you probably want
to do is find some companies that make the encoding/decoding equipment
and get some spec sheets from them.


Maxime  Taksar  KC6ZPS   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Schear)
Subject: Specs For Portable Cellular Car Kit Interfaces
Organization: Cylink Corp.
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 92 16:43:21 GMT


Does anyone on the net know where to obtain the electrical/protocol
specs for the base connectors found on cellular portable's?  I know
that there is no single standard, so I'd appreciate info on any of the
most popular brands and models.


sds

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

From: [e-mail] (Justin Leavens)
Subject: Message Center and Call Waiting
Date: 18 Oct 1992 13:16:48 -0700
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA


Does anyone have any idea why calls which go unanswered for, say three
rings, Can be automatically forwarded to my Pac Bell Message Center
mailbox, but if I am on a call already (and I have call-waiting) a
call-waiting call unanswered will not be forwarded?

Pacific Bell told me that my only other option was to get rid of call-
waiting and have busy calls go directly to my voicemail. Somehow that
doesn't seem right ... anyone know why this is? Is this universal?


Justin Leavens   Microcomputer Specialist   University of Southern California


[Moderator's Note: You do NOT have to 'get rid of call waiting'. All
you have to do is suspend call waiting for the duration of the call on
which you would rather not be disturbed. The idea seems to be that for
most users, if they are there when the phone rings they want to get
the call rather than have it go to voicemail. If you are on the phone
when a call comes in, obviously you are there. So telco presumes that
you want the new call. They do not send it to voicemail since possibly
you are delayed in getting off the first call (within three rings) or
trying to find a logical break so you can put the first call on hold,
etc. If you do NOT want the disturbance of a second call, then
indicate this by inserting *70 before dialing the first call or
flashing the hook and inserting it at some point in the first incoming
call. The *70 will trigger the busy condition needed to force newly
arriving calls to forward to voicemail.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Gary Wingert)
Subject: Transition 2000
Date: 18 Oct 1992 16:30:29 -0500
Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway


In the July '92 issue of {Playboy}, page 157, is an ad for the
Transition 2000 telephone:

"Guess Who?  Transition 2000 uses microprocessors to change voices
from male to female and female to male, providing convincing clarity
and 16 programmable disguises.

        o  Complete anonymity on all incoming and outgoing calls
        o  Traditional phone features in a contemporary design for single
           line use
        o  Screens annoying phone calls
        o  Security for people at home alone
        o  "Invisible receptionist" for small business
        o  Great amusement

$89.95 plus $5.00 for shipping and handling in USA.

To order, call 1-800-367-1400 or send check or money order to:

Questech International, Inc.
P.O. Box 79229, Tampa, Florida  33619-0229
Visa/Master Card only"

Anyone hear of this/experience this phone?  I think it would be a
great gag, but I'm not sure about the quality, etc.  I called the
number and asked for a demo, and they gave me the customer service
number: 1-800-966-5367.  I called, and a woman answered, then began
speaking to someone in rapid-fire Spanish.  It almost sounded like
someone's home, but it could be a small office.  I asked for a demo,
and some guy was supposed to call me back, but it never happened.

The photo shows a black phone with a touch-tone pad.  Below the * and
# keys are what appears to be two black buttons or knobs.  Between
them, below the Oper key is what appears to be a light, though it
might be a button.  Under the handset are two two-position slide
switches, but I can't read the legends on them.

Any info is appreciated!

Thanks,


gary wingert   [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #786
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa13850;
          18 Oct 92 16:28 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA10049
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 18 Oct 1992 14:30:34 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA20856
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 18 Oct 1992 14:30:25 -0500
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1992 14:30:25 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #787

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 18 Oct 92 14:30:30 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 787

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Old Telephones Advertised For Sale (Nigel Allen)
    Re: Caller-ID Boxes (Home Use) Information Request (Dave Strieter)
    Need Info on Applied Spectrum Tech Modem (Curtis Brown)
    Length of Phone Numbers in Europe (was East German Pay Phone) (Wolf Paul)
    DC to DC Convertor Needed ([e-mail])
    Book on Universal Phone Service (Steve Cisler)
    Re: ATM Technical Information Wanted (Joseph Bergstein)
    Help - Noisy Trunk Preventing Modem Connections (Don Barstow)
    Re: Caller-ID in Massachusetts, Again (Joel B. Levin)
    Interesting Problem With Cellular No-Answer Transfer (Steve Forrette)
    Contacts Wanted (John Pettitt)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Old Telephones Advertised For Sale
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 92 00:19:06 EDT


A company in California is selling old, "lovingly restored" dial
telephones by mail. I saw the company's ad in the {New York Times
Magazine}.  You probably won't find any bargains in the company's
catalog, but you might find some nice phones for yourself or to give
as gifts.

To request a catalog, send $3 to:
 Ring My Bell
 500 South Douglas St.
 El Segundo, CA 90245
 telephone [phone]

When I asked if the company would be willing to ship to Canada, the
person answering the phone said yes. However, I don't think the
company does much international business.

I haven't ordered anything from "Ring My Bell" yet, and I don't know
anything about the company. Still, I bet they have some interesting
stuff for sale.

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

From: gtephx![e-mail] (Dave Strieter)
Subject: Re: Caller-ID Boxes (Home Use) Information Request
Organization: AG Communication Systems, Phoenix, Arizona
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1992 19:44:09 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Chris M.
Beery) writes:

> My primary question is: Does any manufacturer make one that prints the
> data on a spool of paper rather than use an LCD display? (A combination
> would also be fine).

I don't know about spools of paper, but could you use a Caller-ID
board that plugs into an IBM-compatible PC?  You could then view the
log on your PC screen, print it on your printer, etc.  I have seen
several varieties advertised, including the WindowPhone (TM) from
AGCS.  By the way, WindowPhone does not need the PC to be turned on in
order to record your call data.


Dave Strieter, AG Communication Systems, POB 52179 Phoenix AZ 85072-2179
   *** These are not my employer's positions...just my ramblings. ***
UUCP: {...!ncar!noao!enuucp | att}!gtephx!strieterd      [phone]
INTERNET: gtephx![e-mail] | [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (curtis brown)
Subject: Need Info on Applied Spectrum Tech Modem
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1992 06:49:04 GMT
Organization: Colorado State University,


I managed to snag a modem made by Applied Spectrum Technologies, Inc.
It has DIP switches that say it can run up to 19.2K bps ($20, flea
market, what the heck). I can hook up power to it and when I type
something on the keyboard, the (external modem) lights flash.
However, My assumption came true when I realized that "this modem
dosen't recongize AT commands". Sigh. Can I still use this? And how?

Maybe this was only made for network stuff?  Other info: Has lights
labeled: ERR, CTS, DCD, RD, TD, LB, PWR with one switch labeled: LLB &
RLB standard RS-232 socket and two phone line(RJ-11) jacks labeled
LINE & PHONE model number: not sure (DVM-400 ?)  PC: 486 pc-compat.
running procomm plus 2.0

Please excuse my ignorance; my knowledge of modems is very limited Any
questions/comments/suggestions/flames/donations much appreciated.


Curtis Brown    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Wolf Paul)
Subject: Length of Phone Numbers in Europe (was East German Pay Phone)
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Wolf N. Paul)
Organization: Alcatel Austria - Elin Research Center, Vienna
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1992 09:30:52 GMT


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

> The mind boggles.  Now that I think of it, it also rather boggled at
> the fact that, unless my hotel listing included some out-of-date
> numbers, West Berlin telephone numbers could be five, six, seven, or
> eight digits long ...

That is not so unusual. In most European countries phone numbers can
be of differing length.

Here in Vienna, most phone numbers used to be 6-digit for "full lines"
and seven-digit for "quarter lines" (party lines with complex
switching to avoid cross-overs and billing problems). A few large
companies however had shorter numbers, to accommodate their long PBX
extension numbers within the CCITT maximum length of a phone number.

Now that they are slowly switching to digital exchanges (modified NT
DMS-100 and Siemens EWSD), most numbers are seven-digit, and shorter
numbers for PBX customers are becoming more common -- the more
extensions on your PBX, the shorter your subscriber number.

And moving on to smaller towns and villages you can find anything from
three to seven digits in various parts of Austria.

Area codes used to be 0 + three digits for larger towns, and 0 + four
digits for the rest of the country; they have now assigned Vienna the
area code "1" for calls from outside the country, again to accomodate
the CCITT limit on the overall length of a phone number. Some time in
the future this is supposed to work from within Austria as well, and
we may then also see single-digit area codes for a couple other larger
places.


Wolf N. Paul, Computer Center         [e-mail]
A  L  C  A  T  E  L  |  Alcatel-Elin Research Center     [phone] (w)
 --------------------+  Ruthnergasse 1-7                 [phone] (fax)
   ELIN RESEARCH        A-1210 Vienna-Austria/Europe     [phone] (h)

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

From: Ron <[e-mail]>
Subject: DC to DC Convertor Needed
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 92 6:17:19 CDT


My company is in search of a low cost DC to DC convertor that will
take -48VDC from the central office battery feed and convert it to a
regulated +12VDC at around 1 Amp, plus or minus 1/2 Amp.

The cost we are trying to get is somewhere between $40 and $60 dollars
per piece.  What we are looking for would be something like a small
box that is PCBoard mountable and less than nine square inches.

If you have any information on something like this, please e-mail me
at the following address.

Thanks,


Ron                      | Lightning Systems, INC.
[e-mail]  | [phone]  62megs
carroll1![e-mail] | 14.4k HST/V.32bis

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Cisler)
Subject: Book on Universal Phone Service
Date: 18 Oct 92 11:53:08 GMT
Organization: Apple Computer Inc., Cupertino, CA


Readers might be interested in this recent work:

Universal Telephone Service: Ready for the 21st Century?  From the
Institute for Information Studies (a joint program of Northern Telecom
and the Aspen Institute, Wye Center, Box 222 Queenstown, MD 21658

Chapters by different policy people:

Private Networks and Public Objectives, Eli Noam
What About Privacy in Universal Telephone Service? Daniel Brenner
Technologies of Universal Service, Susan Hadden
Universal Service and NREN, Barbara O'Connor
Toward a Universal Definition of Universal Service, Herbert Dordick
Globalization of Universal Telecomms Services, Joesph Pelton

Copyright 1991. No price

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

From: [e-mail] (Joseph Bergstein)
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1992 01:26:27 -0500
Subject: Re: ATM Technical Information Wanted


> Do you have or know where I can get any technical information on
> ATM machines/cards or other magnetically encoded card systems? I am
> currently taking a proseminar course at Lehigh University in
> Computer Engineering and that is my topic.  Unfortunately up to now, I
> have not been able to find much information at all.

Try the ATM machine manufacturers (e.g. IBM, NCR, Diebold, Fujitsu,
etc.). Also there may be some documentation available from the A.B.A.
(American Banker's Association) regarding standards for magnetic
encoding because of interoperability issues among different ATMs and
different banks.

You could also try contacting vendors of Point of Sale (POS) equipment,
particularly those inexpensive units made to attach to PCs.

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

From: [e-mail] (Don Barstow)
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 92 15:17:46 -0400
Subject: Help - Noisy Trunk Preventing Modem Connections


I am having a problem getting a connection to the modems at work.  I
believe the problem is in a telephone trunk.

First, I took my modem in to work, and called out from an outside line
back into the incoming modem line and was able to establish a 14.4
connection with correction and compression.  Second, I have been able
to establish 9600 and 12000 baud connections to other modems in other
geographic areas from home.  Third, other people are able to call in
to work from other areas around Boston and get 14.4 connections.

However, when I call Waltham, Ma., from Chelmsford Ma., (a distance of
15 miles) I am unable to establish any connection at 14.4.  At 9600,
the protocols usually negotiate, and the line drops two to ten seconds
afterwards.  Only at 4800 am I able to get a connection that stays up,
and even this one usually drops once an hour or so.

In addition, I have two phone lines at home, and have experienced the
same problem with both.  I have also played with many combinations of
v.42, v.42bis, and MNP5 at the high baud rates, all to no avail.

So, I don't think it is a problem between the two modems (mine is
ZOOM, work is a T3000), or a problem in my phone lines, or the phone
lines in the building at work.  The only conclusion I can come to is
that there is some very noisy trunk somewhere between Chelmsford and
Waltham.  Any comments?

Is there anything I can say to the phone company to get them to do
something about this (while staying with just a voice grade line)?

Thanks for any assistance,


Don Barstow    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Joel B Levin)
Subject: Re: Caller-ID in Massachusetts, Again
Date: 18 Oct 1992 15:14:41 GMT


John R. Levine <[e-mail]> writes:

> While talking to a nice lady at New England Tel about residential ISDN
> this morning, she mentioned that NET has re-filed for calling number
> delivery, but didn't know what blocking options were to be offered.
> Does anyone else have the details?

Correct, according to this morning's {Boston Globe}. Months ago, the
Mass. DPU nixed Caller-ID without blocking, and NET went away in a
snit saying they just wouldn't do it.  Now they have changed their
minds, and they will have per-call and per-line blocking.  There was
no indication whether there would be per-call enabling on blocked
lines.

So in your state, don't let a telco say they'll pick up their marbles
and walk away if the have to provide blocking.  It's a bluff (at least
in New England).


JBL
Internet: [e-mail]    |    USPS:  BBN Systems and Technologies Division
UUCP:     [e-mail]    |           Mail Stop 6/5A
Telco:    [phone]    |           10 Moulton Street
                  N1MNF    |           Cambridge, MA  02138

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

Date: Sun, 18 Oct 92 14:27:16 -0700
From: Steve Forrette <[e-mail]>
Subject: Interesting Problem With Cellular No-Answer Transfer


I've been having a problem with my Cellular One of Seattle service
recently which I thought the TELECOM Digest may be interested in
reading about.  Recently, they installed a second Erricson switch, and
my prefix was one of those moved over to the new one.  Since they
offer free no-answer and busy transfer, my cellular number is the only
one I give out.  Most of the time, I don't take calls on the cellular
phone, though, and have it forwarded to either my home or office
number.  So, most of my incoming landline calls go through the
Cellular One switch.

Shortly after the switchover, I would often, but not always, have a
problem where my landline phone would ring, I would answer with
"Hello" and hear no response.  After a couple of seconds, I would say
"Hello?" again, and the caller would say "I already said Hi!".  In a
couple of cases, where the caller had background noise at their
location, I could clearly hear their talk path cut through a couple of
seconds AFTER I answered the call.

After a few more times of this happening, I had narrowed down the
source of the problem: all of the calls where this was happening were
in cases where the caller was calling long distance via AT&T.  Since I
knew that AT&T had implemented a change in their network such that the
forward talk path is not enabled until after answer supervision is
received from the callee, and knowing that MCI, Sprint, and the RBOCS
do not do this, I concluded that the problem was related to answer
supervision in some way.

Thinking further, it seemed that the most likely source of the problem
was with Cellular One.  Since my incoming calls go through their
switch, when I answer the call, they get the answer supervision
indication.  The cellular switch then has to recognize this, and then
return supervision on the incoming trunk where the call originally
came from.  If this process was delayed in the cellular switch for a
couple of seconds, it would produce exactly these symptoms, and only
with inbound AT&T long distance calls.

So, I called Customer Care at Cellular One, and explained that I had
an unusual problem and that I thought I knew what the problem was.
Fortunately, even though the customer service representative didn't
quite understand what I was explaining, they treated me with respect
and conceded that it sounded like I knew what I was talking about
(instead of the usual assumption that the customer can't possibly know
anything about how things work), and promised to pass the information
on to the techies and call me back.

Two weeks later, with no response, I called back.  After explaining
the problem again, the rep surprised me by saying that I was
absolutely correct, that it is a known problem that they tracked down
recently, and that they were working with Erricson to get a software
update that would correct the problem.  This was last night, so as of
yet it is not fixed, but I'm sure glad that it sounds like they are
aware of the problem and its solution.  It is interesting to note that
their first switch, which is also an Erricson, did not exhibit this
behavior.

Apparently, this was happening to Craig McCaw on HIS cellular phone,
and I can imagine that when he calls with a problem, it is given
prompt and thorough attention!  (For those of you who don't know, Mr.
McCaw owns McCaw Cellular, which is the largest franchisee of the
Cellular One service mark in the US, and I believe owns more cellular
franchises than anyone else, with the possible recent exception of GTE
Mobilnet.)

So here's my question: It would seem that this sort of problem could
happen in many places where there is some sort of "pass-through"
forwarding arrangement, now that AT&T blocks the forward talk path
until after supervision.  Are there other documented cases of a switch
which delays passing the supervision signal causing this problem (as
opposed to the problem of a switch never returning supervision, which
have been documented here before)?


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (John Pettitt)
Subject: Contacts Wanted
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 92 12:14:20 PDT


By way of introduction here is the first section of my resume:

     ENGINEERING and OPERATIONS PROFESSIONAL with ten  years
     of successful  domestic  and  international  experience
     developing high-technology  products and  organizations
     in high-growth environments.

     Effectively integrating a knowledge of systems
     engineering with excellent strategic marketing skills,
     I have created multiple product families generating
     multi-million dollar revenues, including products which
     have become the singular success templates in their
     respective market segments. In addition, by combining a
     strong entrepreneurial drive with an uncommon ability
     to identify marketplace opportunities, I have developed
     efficient, effective, and profitable organizations,
     most recently building from scratch a $20 million
     company with seven offices on four continents.

     Currently,  I  am   seeking  an  executive   management
     position within a high-growth, high-tech company, where
     I can focus on profitable marketplace opportunities and
     beat the competition's product-to-market time to ensure
     continuing growth and increasing profitability.

I am exploring the corner of the industry where networking, computing
and telecommunications meets with a view to either starting another
company or joining an early stage company/division.  To do this I am
looking for people to talk to who can increase my knowledge in a
number of areas.

In particular I am looking for senior level contacts within the
following companies:

NET, Octel, PictureTel, Auspex, Premisys Communications, Ultra Network
Technologies, Wireless Access.

I am not asking for specific leads to a job opportunity (although if
you know of one I would be glad to hear of it).  I am, however,
looking for people to talk to on an informational interview basis
either face to face (if they are in California) or on the telephone.

If you have any questions, want to see a full resume or suggestions of
people I should talk to please call, fax or email.

Thanks.


John Pettitt    Mail: [e-mail]
Voice: +1 415 967 UNIX   Fax: [phone]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #787
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa16864;
          18 Oct 92 18:07 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA25048
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 18 Oct 1992 16:05:27 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA25854
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 18 Oct 1992 16:05:12 -0500
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1992 16:05:12 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #788

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 18 Oct 92 16:05:15 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 788

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Call-Advice (was College Phone System AGAIN!) (Shrikumar)
    PCBX Information Wanted (Thomas Tengdin)
    Patent # 4,918,722 by Brooktrout on FaxBack Type Service (Michael Shiels)
    Pilot Frequency (Terence Cross)
    Re: SPRINT Outage (Paul Eggert)
    Re: ATM Technical Information Wanted (Michael G. Katzmann)
    Vital Suffolk County, NY Phones Out (Newsday via Dave Niebuhr)
    A Few Questions About N11 Codes (Ramakrishna Chamarthy)
    Caller-ID in Massachusetts (Bob Frankston)
    PBX Fraud (Carl Wright)
    Re: British Call Waiting (Rolf Meier)
    What is the "Operator Assistance Network"? (Bill Sommerfeld)
    Low Pay - High Job Satisfaction ;^> (Rob Bailey)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sun, 18 Oct 92 03:26:10 -0400
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Call-Advice (was College Phone System AGAIN!)
Organization: UMass, Amherst, MA 01002 + Temporal Sys & Comp Net, Bombay, India


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

> There is NO way to block Call Waiting!  This give me a fit, because
> how am I supposed to use the modem?!

  Here's to announce to the world "Call-Advice" :-)

  A new feature which lets you use a modem for those long long
sessions and yet be advised of calls which await your attention.  You
decide case by case, if you wish to log out gracefully and attend to
that new call, or you cant offord to log out, so you just ignore the
call.

  This feature is as-yet available only in the precints of my castle --
my home ! :-)

  NET, my telco, thinks they have provided me with Call-Waiting.

  Now I have set my modem to *not* drop a call on loss of carrier less
than 400 msec.  It does dip the CTS and CD lines however, on loss of
carrier. A Rat-Shack Piezo-beeper and a 1N4001 diode to protect
against reverse polarity delivers a loud 95dBi double beep,
"beeeeeeep-bip" when a call arrives. This beeper is connected between
CTS and CD and is set to beep when CTS is De-asserted and CD is
active.

   I can then make a decision, and within reasonable time, during
which my new caller is getting ring-back all the while, close my
editor, quit the debugger, saving state, etc ... and log out and then
de-assert DTR from my terminal. Now the modem drops the call. The
phone now rings and I pick it up!

   Of course, you can do this only when the EIA interface and the
modem's behaviour properly implemented by the modem manufacturer. And
the DTR semantics is properly implemented by the terminal
software/firmware writer. Lucky I have some older-generation modem and
terminal that do do this very correctly!

Since the modem I am calling also does not drop the call, either it
seems that the call waiting beep does not seem to corrupt the part of
the spectrum with the modem originate tones, and does not seem to
interrupt it either, or that modem also has a longer Carrier-loss
timer setting.  I am not sure which, either or both.

   Additional benefits, -- affirmative beep for connection and
disconnection. Helps when you leave your terminal logged in with a
long compile going on, and want to be alerted if the connection
breaks.

   How about that!!


shrikumar ([e-mail], [e-mail])


[Moderator's Note: Your scheme is all well and good provided the data
being passed in either direction is not critical and corruption can be
easily detected and corrected.  What if I am in the midddle of up or
downloading a big humongous binary file which is hard enough to read
and decipher under any conditions?  I would not need a buzzer to tell
me a call had arrived; I could look at the garbage on my screen. In
simple ASCII text jobs such as this Digest, that sort of accuracy is
not required. I can see obviously garbled text and reconstruct it. But
if I did any really critical or complex computing -- I do not -- then
call waiting on the line would be out of the question entirely. And in
my estimation you are very lucky the distant modem does not drop you
instantly when it sees you gone for even a second ... it must be set
up a few notches also. Do all the places you call via modem respond as
patiently to your interupptions?  PAT]

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

Date: Sun, 18 Oct 92 08:06:49 pdt
From: Thomas Tengdin <[e-mail]>
Subject: PCBX Information Wanted


I am considering using one of the PC based switches from a company
called PCBX systems on a project here.  Does anyone have any first
hand information on these things?  Do they do a reasonable job?  Do
they seem to be reliable?

Thanks in advance,


Tom Tengdin    Monterey Bay Aquarioum Research Institute.

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

From: [e-mail] (Michael A. Shiels)
Subject: Patent # 4,918,722 by Brooktrout on FaxBack Type Service
Organization: MaS Network Software and Consulting
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1992 19:30:50 -0400


Does anyone have any more information about this patent?  I called
them and asked why if they have this patent that there are lots of
people offering faxback services.  The response was they are all
getting letters from the lawyers to cease etc, etc.

They are sending me a copy of the patent text so maybe we can go from
there.


Michael A. Shiels                     [e-mail]
MaS Network Software and Consulting   [e-mail]

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

Date: Sun, 18 Oct 92 09:57:30 BST
From: [e-mail] (Terence Cross)
Subject: Pilot Frequency


Hi,

I am enquiring about a thing called 'pilot frequency' used in
transmission systems.  This pilot frequency is as pilot lamps/lights
etc. are in other things, like gas cookers, and are used to sense a
break in a line or a blocking of the line by the next switch.

Can these 'pilot frequencies' exist in all types of signalling
systems, e.g.  SS 5, SS 6, SS 7?  Or are they generally only used with
older type signalling systems?


Terence Cross                   [phone]
AXE Operation & Maintenance     ECN: 830 1498
Ericsson Expertise Irl. Ltd.    [e-mail]
Athlone, Ireland                [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: Your question brings to mind something I saw about
25 years ago and never had thought about since. I used to go spend time
during the overnight hours with a friend who was employed by WHPK, a
little FM radio station at the University of Chicago. On a shelf they
had a radio receiver with a red light on it. I asked what it was for
and the explanation I got was that it was constantly tuned to another
station, WMAQ, 670 kc (the NBC affiliate here) and that if the red
light came on, it meant that for some reason WMAQ had gone off the
air. Other than Monday mornings between 1:00 AM and 5:30 AM when it
was always off the air (forcing a weekly reset of the relay which
drove the little red light when the WHPK people would see it/get
around to it) the only time WMAQ would be likely to sign off the air
we were told was when CONELRAD took over the 670 and 1230 frequencies.
If that happened  -- CONELRAD took over those frequencies -- then a
national emergency was going on and other stations would want to
monitor the situation so they could report to their listeners as well.
WHPK staff *expected* to have to reset the relay every Monday morning;
they did *not* expect it otherwise.

So the day the Vietnam war protestors marched into the Merchandise
Mart transmission facilties for WMAQ and pulled the main fuses out to
protest whatever their grievance was with the National Broadcasting
Company, of course the loss of carrier caused a few little red lights
to go on in various two-bit college radio stations! :)

The expected confusion resulted when the one sole person on duty at
WHPK spent several minutes trying to figure out what was going on
after confirming there was no signal on 670 kc. We expect certain
things to happen at certain times: the old 'air raid sirens' we had in
Chicago were tested for one minute precisely at 10:30 every Tuesday
morning. When they were set off deliberatly as a prank one time, the
citizenry was convinced we were at war again ... ditto when the little
red lights monitoring the WMAQ signal flashed on.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Paul Eggert)
Subject: Re: SPRINT Outage
Organization: Twin Sun, Inc
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1992 17:02:28 GMT


The flooded Sprint switching center also affected UUNET, a major
Usenet and Internet hub.  On Monday, Tamara S. Bowman of UUNET
reported (<[e-mail]> in the uunet.status newsgroup)
that customers in Florida, Georgia, and the Carolinas were affected.
Sprint is rerouting lines, but Bowman writes, "because of the number
of lines being served by this node the recovery process is slow."
Full service will be restored by Thursday at the earliest, i.e. it's
taking Sprint at least a week to fix things.


[Moderator's Note: Is service restored as of Sunday afternoon?   PAT]

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

From: vk2bea![e-mail] (Michael G. Katzmann)
Subject: Re: ATM Technical Information Wanted
Date: 18 Oct 92 18:22:09 GMT
Reply-To: vk2bea![e-mail] (Michael G. Katzmann)
Organization: Broadcast Sports Technology, Crofton. Maryland.


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Josh Cohen EMT) writes:

> Do you have or know where I can get any technical information on ATM
> machines/cards or other magnetically encoded card systems? I am

> [Moderator's Note: Actually, the banks, credit card processors and a
> few others would prever that you not find out much information about
> the topic ... but TELECOM Digest readers will come to the rescue I am
> sure with all you ever wanted to know on the topic.    PAT]

I know this has come up in TELECOM Digest before.  I have a copy of
the Australian Standard 2623. "Credit Cards Part2 - Magnetic Stripe
Encoding for tracks 1, 2 & 3".  It sites several ISO standards:

ISO 1864, Information Processing- unrecorded 12.7mm wide magnetic
tape for information interchange-8 and 32 rpmm NRZI
and 63 rpmm, phase encoded.

ISO 2894, Embossed credit cards - Specifications, numbering system
and registration procedure.

ISO 3554, Bank cards - Magnetic stripe data content for track 3.

Perhaps another reader knows the ANSI equivelents to these standards.
(ANSI standards are no doubt easier to lay your hands on than ISO.)


Michael Katzmann                 Broadcast Sports Technology Inc.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~             Crofton, Maryland. U.S.A
Amateur Radio Stations:
NV3Z / VK2BEA / G4NYV / AAR3VK   opel!vk2bea![e-mail]

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

Date: Sun, 18 Oct 92 08:08:05 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Dave Niebuhr)
Subject: Vital Suffolk County, NY Phones Out


{Newsday} for Wednesday, October 14 had this article:

"The lines to emergency, police, fire and some government offices in
Suffolk County were down for almost two hours yesterday (Oct. 13)
morning because of an internal power problem resulting in many calls
not going through.

But Suffolk County police said no disasters occurred during the time
that the lines were down, and callers still could be put through with
the assistance of an operator.

An internal power problem affected the switch that serves police and
fire emergency calls to 911, said Maureen Flanagan, a New York
Telephone spokeswoman.  The exchanges of 8-5-2, 8-5-3 and 8-5-4 (why
the dashes, I don't know - dwn) for police, fire and government
offices were also affected, she said.

Flanagan said the problems surfaced at 6 a.m. at the central office
for 911 calls on Suffolk Avenue in Brentwood.  Workers immediately
began to reprogram the switch, so that calls would be routed
accurately (I wish NYTel would do this with my routing problem - dwn).
Some lines were reopened by 7:30 a.m., and things were back to normal
by 8:40 a.m., Flanagan said.

Throughout the 100-minute outage, callers could have been connected by
the operator, Flanagan said.  Workers were still studying the
breakdown last night to prevent it from recurring, Flanagan said.

The police department did not receive any calls later indicating it
had missed important emergencies in the interim."

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

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



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

Date: Sun, 18 Oct 92 09:37:16 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Ramakrishna Chamarthy)
Subject: A Few Questions About N11 Codes


Can someone please answer a few questions about N11 codes?

What service does each of the N11 codes represent?  Have all of them
(services and the associated codes) been identified/defined?

I know that (only in US, I suppose):

  411 - Directory Inquiry service
  911 - Emenrgency Attention/Help (in life threatening situations) service

What about other countries?  What type of services (I am more interested
in this) and what are the codes?  Are they same countrywide/continentwide
(e.g., Europe?)?

How are the N11 codes decided for each of the service, in terms of
user factors such as ease of use, less likelihood of misdial by
interswitching the adjacent digits, not dialing N11 (by mistake) when
you do not want to etc., for the ones that are used in critical
situations (Emergency) as opposed to the ones used in relatively
casual situations (Directory Inquiry)?

For example, in case of Emergency Attention/Help,

How is 911 better than any other 9 X1 X2 (X= 0-9, X1 may not be equal
to X2)?

Who administers these codes in US?


Thanks,    Ramakrishna      E-mail: [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: I think your employer Bellcore administers them.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Caller-ID in Massachusetts
Date: Sun 18 Oct 1992 09:52 -0400


According to recent (i.e., a few days ago) newspaper stories, NET has
decided to offer Caller-ID here.  Does anyone know the details?  Will
there be a separate code to enable and disable?  Did they change the
policy because the appropriate rev of software became available as
opposed to any real policy decisions?

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

From: [e-mail] (Carl Wright)
Subject: PBX Fraud
Organization: UMCC
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1992 14:19:22 GMT


Could someone please explain why companies seem to think that the
carriers are responsible for PBX fraud?

There are many analogous crimes where we don't blame the equipment
manufacturer or the service provider?

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

From: [e-mail] (Rolf Meier)
Subject: Re: British Call Waiting
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1992 13:28:19 -0400
Organization: Mitel. Kanata (Ontario). Canada.


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail].
hounix.org (Charles Mattair) writes:

> (or at least the rationale) but what's the excuse now?  Don't they
> have to add additional equipment to convert pulse to TT for most
> switches?

Not additional equipment, but hardware which is there anyway.  Dial
pulses are detected by counting transitions on the switch hook
indicator, and DTMF is detected by a DSP.  Both processors are there
anyway doing other tasks.  Service is changed by typing on a keyboard.
The easiest is to default to both pulse and DTMF, and disable DTMF
only to get somebody to subscribe to the service.


Rolf Meier    Mitel Corporation

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

Date: Sun, 18 Oct 92 11:39:22 -0400
From: Bill Sommerfeld <[e-mail]>
Subject: What is the "Operator Assistance Network"?


Anyone ever hear of these people?  They appear to be operating out of
the Pacific Time Zone.

I got a phone bill recently which contained a line item from them,
charging me roughly $5.00 for a two-minute credit card call, placed
from a payphone in a restaurant in Norwalk, CT, to Cambridge MA.  The
bill mentioned "Billed on behalf of AMNET", or something like that (I
don't have it in front of me at the moment). The kicker is that the
call was never completed (the person we were calling wasn't home, and
they don't have an answering machine).

I called up the customer service number, and they agreed to cancel the
charge.

Has anyone had any problem with getting credits from OAN to go
through?  Other horror stories?

Send mail to me at "[e-mail]", and I'll summarize if
there's interest and/or quantity.


Bill


[Moderator's Note: OAN is just another alternate operator service with
the same attitude all of 'em have: ripoff the coin phone users of
America as much as possible.    PAT]

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

Date: 18 Oct 92 01:49:31 EDT
From: Rob Bailey <[e-mail]>
Subject: Low Pay - High Job Satisfaction ;^>


All this talk of credits people are getting on their accounts and
problems with carriers reminded me of how dealing with a fly-by-night
or new, inexperienced company can be a small benefit.

I was about one hour from installing a cellular mobile phone (CMT) in
my auto many years ago when I found out that claims by the salesman of
local calling area had been greatly exaggerated (the local calling
area now in West Virginia is substantially larger than any "normal"
phone's, so it is frequently cheaper to use my car phone than to pay
C&P's rates for 50 or 60 miles). I called the carrier (Independant
Cellular Network -- a little landline carrier from Florida) and
cancelled the install.

Guess what came in the mail next month ... a bill for one month's
service PLUS the $40 installation fee I had been assured anyway would
be waived.  Hmmm ... one lie leads to two more which leads to a bogus
bill. I was glad then I had backed out. To make a long story shorter,
MANY phone calls over successive months demanding to be REMOVED from
their computer continually resulted in one month's credit, but then
next month's bill would appear with new charges. Finally, someone got
the idea of crediting my account for the month that hadn't come around
yet so my rantings would at least be postponed a month.

Sure enough..next month a bill that said "CREDIT: $35.53". I wrote on
the bill "SEND CHECK" and returned it. You'll never guess what I got
one week later! Although $35 for about five hours of very frustrating
work isn't good pay, it sure was the last laugh to have them pay me
when I had never done ANY business with them ;^> I'm a Cellular One
customer now, by the way.


Rob [e-mail] (still trying to get those Caller*ID
                                 packages together, folks!)

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #788
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa19239;
          18 Oct 92 19:16 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA01837
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 18 Oct 1992 16:58:22 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA28246
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 18 Oct 1992 16:58:11 -0500
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1992 16:58:11 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #789

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 18 Oct 92 16:58:00 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 789

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Stolen Cell Phone (Joel Upchurch)
    Re: Stolen Cell Phone (Craig Heim)
    Re: Stolen Cell Phone (Robert L. McMillin)
    Re: Stolen Cell Phone (David Lesher)
    Re: Stolen Cell Phone ([e-mail])
    Re: Operator -- Live or Memorex? (Andy Sherman)
    Re: Operator -- Live or Memorex? (Kris Harris)
    Re: How Should I Get My House Wired For Future Phone Needs? (S. Forrette)
    Re: How Should I Get My House Wired For Future Phone Needs? (G. Hlavenka)
    Re: AT&T vs A Cable Company (Joseph Malloy)
    Re: LD Transmission Quality Comparison (Steve Elias)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Re: Stolen Cell Phone
From: upchrch![e-mail] (Joel Upchurch)
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 92 04:18:55 EDT
Organization: Upchurch Computer Consulting, Orlando FL


TELECOM Moderator notes:

> Constitution by some powerful legal organizations here.  Someone
> *tried* to steal my cell phone several months ago; but the way I wrap
> the strap around my neck and across my shoulders, they'd have to pull
> my head off to get the phone! :) During the few seconds he was
> grabbing at me I got my little cannister of Mace (attached to my key
> ring) from my pocket and gave him a liberal squirt in the eyes and up
> his nose. That was enough to put him down for the minute or so it took
> me to hail a cab and (admittedly) leave the scene in a hurry.  PAT]

You were lucky. In some cities if the police showed up they might have
took the mugger to the hospital and thrown you in jail for assault.
:-( Also peoples reaction to Mace vary a lot, and in a lot of cases it
doesn't work at all or it may just make them madder. Next time you
Mace somebody, run away and catch a cab around the corner.


(If your mail bounces use the address below.)
Joel Upchurch/Upchurch Computer Consulting/718 Galsworthy/Orlando, FL 32809
[e-mail] {uiucuxc,hoptoad,petsd,ucf-cs}!peora!joel [phone]


[Moderator's Note: What you say is sad but true. There are people
working hard in the USA to insure the rights of criminals are never in
any way violated ... but Mace *is* a legal product here. At my age, I
can't run very far very fast.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Craig Heim)
Subject: Re: Stolen Cell Phone
Date: 18 Oct 92 12:43:15 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer Inc.


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Steve
L. Rhoades) writes:

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

> [Stuff about getting his OKI 700 cellular phone stolen deleted]

>> I called Pactel and told them what had happened. They turned off
>> service to the phone immediately.                ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> I'm on my third car phone now, the previous two having been stolen.

> I've always wondered if instead of the provider turning off service to
> the phone, what about just leaving it on for about a week and see who
> he/she calls?  (Maybe put it on a special class of service so that
> long distance would be restricted, reducing the loss to the provider.)

> If the thief were a teenager, chances are he'd be calling all his
> friends to impress them with his new "toy".

In fact, many cellular carriers go one step further.  Instead of
*blocking* the calls, the carrier changes the origination class of
service to route *ALL* calls regardless of dialed digits (except for
911) to the carrier's fraud control department.  Usually, the
termination class of service is set so the phone cannot receive calls.
This works only on the home switch.  When the phone roams, the
verification service handles it by barring the ESN on the roam switch.

The technique used on the local switch is also used for subscriber's
who haven't paid their bill.  The carrier routes all calls to the
credit department.


Craig R. Heim                 |Stratus Computer, Inc.  |My opinions are my own,
Software Engineer             |55 Fairbanks Blvd.      |not necessarily are
[e-mail] |Marlboro, MA 01752-1298 |they Stratus's.

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

Date: Sun, 18 Oct 92 05:29:42 -0700
From: [e-mail] (Robert L. McMillin)
Subject: Re: Stolen Cell Phone


The Moderator notes:

> [Moderator's Note: Good idea! When two guys picked my pocket on the
> subway four years ago (one distracts you while the other gets in your
> pocket) they got my telco calling card among other things. Although I
> went back to the station where it happened, found one of the animals and
> violated his civil liberties by assaulting him in the process of
> holding him for police who were on the way, the one who actually got
> my wallet was long gone. I notified IBT the next morning and they
> turned it off, but when the bill came I skip-traced a few of the phone
> numbers. I found one place where calls had originated that was a
> private residence here in the city. I called the number, raised cain
> and told them off. I also gave that address and phone number to IBT
> and the police for their report and investigation -- what a joke! :( PAT]

All the more reason drugs and other victimless crimes should be
legalized.  Along with this, we need a more general review of that
which we criminalize.  The problem law enforcement faces is that we
now have far too many laws and not enough cops.  Either we get serious
about enforcement -- and pull out the National Guard every day, not
just during riots (talk about community policing!) -- or we reduce the
number of laws on the books and start to more realistically assess
what we can and cannot control.  Common thievery should get much more
attention than it has, simply because of its great implications for
the poorest people.  We know what needs to be done.  We are Americans.
All we need is the strength to admit our mistakes, and the will to
change the laws.


Robert L. McMillin                     | Voice:    [phone]
Hughes Aircraft/Hughes Training, Inc.  | Fax:      [phone]
Los Angeles, CA                        | Internet: [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: There is no such thing as a 'victimless crime'. All
crimes have victims. That's why the acts thus described are called
'crimes', because some one or more people, or perhaps an entire
community were harmed. Just because there are instances where
victimization is a long, very slow and almost indiscernable process
does not mean victimization does not occur -- just that you cannot
easily detect it without perhaps a good knowledge of history and a
scope of view which extends beyond your own immediate interests.  PAT]

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

From: David Lesher <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Stolen Cell Phone
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 92 18:29:59 EDT
Reply-To: [e-mail]  (David Lesher)
Organization: NRK Clinic for habitual NetNews abusers - Beltway Annex


Note that the 'hot lists' only work in the U S of A.

Many phones head south of the border to countries where such details
are not bothered with.


[e-mail]

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

Organization: Penn State University
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1992 16:03:28 EDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Stolen Cell Phone


Well, like some people have been saying, the chances are that you
won't get your phone back, unless the thief is an idiot, like some of
the thieves in some other posts are. The thief either knows what he's
doing, or he doesn't. If he doesn't, he'll sell the phone to someone
who does know about cell phones. If he does, he'll attempt to
re-program the NAM (numeric assignment module), which contains the ESN
and SID; both of which have to be altered to mask the true source of
th e fone ... also the MIN (mobile identification number) has to be
reset.

 ...but really this is no big deal, and is done all the time ...


pC

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

From: [e-mail] (Andy Sherman)
Subject: Re: Operator -- Live or Memorex?
Date: Sun, 16 Oct 92 14:46:42 EDT


Lauren Weinstein noticed a difference in volume between an AT&T
operator's greeting and the rest of the conversation.  He guessed (and
verified with an operator) that the greetings were recorded.


Pat replied:

> [Moderator's Note: Actually this is not new. Illinois Bell operators
> have used these recorded greetings for a few years now. In many cases
> they do not have to speak at all as in the case of a call to DA where
> the recording greets the caller, the caller gives his request and the
> operator merely types it in, then the computer announces the number
> the operator selected from the listings. I thought AT&T had been using
> this for quite awhile also, although not with a standard response in
> the system. (It was up to each operator to record what they wanted to
> say there.)   PAT]

The ability to record some number of phrases is a feature of the OSPS
Operator's Console, which has been in use at AT&T for several years.
The use of this feature is considered a convenience, so it is up to an
individual operator to use it or not as s/he sees fit.  If you're
noticing it more, then the feature must have gained more acceptance
and is being used more.  (Note that when I was trained to be a strike
replacement OSPS operator, they did not even attempt to teach us how
to use this feature).  I've heard tell of an operator who recorded a
whole bunch of phrases and then had competitions with herself to see
if she could get through an entire shift without actually speaking!


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

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Operator -- Live or Memorex?
Organization: Drake University, Des Moines, Iowa, USA
Date: Sun, 16 Oct 1992 03:13:38 GMT


An interesting note to pre-recorded operator greetings:

Once I called the 00 Operator and heard the female greeting.  I asked
for an area code and the reply came from a man!!  I wonder if the
operator changed genders all of a sudden ...

This was this summer in the Chicago area where I live, but here in
Iowa the AT&T 00 operator still had to say the greeting for each
caller.  Same for US WEST 0 operator and DA.  Oh well, someday
not-so-new technology will reach us.


Kris Harris
PO Box 2410
Des Moines, IA  50311-0410
[phone]      [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: How Should I Get My House Wired For Future Phone Needs?
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1992 20:48:27 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Toby
Nixon) writes:

> What I'm think of is having three or four-pair twisted pair cable run
> from each room separately (not daisy-chained the way they normally do
> it) to a punch-down block in some central location, so we can hook
> things together anyway we want.  Is that a good idea?  Do you have any
> other advice for us?  Thanks in advance.

I think some would advocate more than just four pairs.  10BaseT will
take four pairs all by itself, so if you want to plan for that in the
future, you will need more than four pairs.

Recently, I've been considering moving, and have been looking around
at various apartments.  The inside wiring situation is not good as you
can imagine.  Earlier this year, I got a brochure from US West which
describes what requirements inside wiring should meet.  For new
construction, they say that the absolute *minimum* should be four pair
wire, with each pair individually twisted.  But, in my looking at new
apartments, none of them seem to be built to the so-called minimum
requirements for new construction.  So, this must not be covered in
any sort of enforcable building code.  What I have found is a lot of
quad wire, which can be particularly bad in an apartment situation
where you can have a long run from the apartment to the demarc.  Some
at least use telephone wire for the telephone wiring (imagine that!)
that has each pair individually twisted.

Do the telcos have any power to enforce their minimum inside wiring
requirements for new construction, such as (threatening to) refuse
service if the requirements are not met?  It's not like four pair
telco wire is a lot more expensive than two pair -- I think that
contractors need just a bit of a push in the right direction.


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (gordon hlavenka)
Subject: Re: How Should I Get My House Wired For Future Phone Needs?
Organization: Vpnet Public Access
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1992 03:29:12 GMT


> What I'm think of is having three or four-pair twisted pair cable run
> from each room separately (not daisy-chained the way they normally do
> it) to a punch-down block in some central location, so we can hook
> things together anyway we want...

I just redid the wiring here.  Our "new" (to us) house had just been
remodeled, and they installed all new four-conductor station wire :-(
We had massive crosstalk, because the new wire wasn't twisted-pair ...

I pulled a home run from each room down to the entry point in the
basement.  Used AT&T-made network wiring; 4 UTP rated for 10BASE-T.
So I can esaily have two lines in each room, with two pairs spare.  I
could even run ethernet and phone, although somebody's sure to tell me
there will be a problem with that.

Each room is punched down to its own 8 positions on the right side of
a punchdown block, and the phone lines are punched down on the left
side.  Things then get connected with bridging clips in the middle.
It all looks very clean and impressive, and (most importantly) it
WORKS.  No more RGYB birds'-nest in the rafters for me!


Gordon S. Hlavenka   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Joseph Malloy)
Subject: Re: AT&T vs A Cable Company
Organization: Hamilton College - Clinton, NY
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1992 17:08:08 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> John Higdon <[e-mail].
com> writes:

> In the last month, I have had two problems with "wire companies". One
> was with my cable company (TCI Cablevision of San Jose); the other
> with AT&T. The difference in response between the two companies is
> remarkable.

[summary: cable good, AT&T bad]

> The next time you consider cable companies to be slime and telephone
> companies to have class, please remember these two notable exceptions.

In the localities in which I've had both cable tv and telephone
service (with AT&T always my LD provider), I have never had a
complaint with AT&T.  I have yet to find a cable company that was half
as responsive as AT&T.  Heck, I have yet to find a cable company
that's half as good as New York Telephone, and I have a list of
complaints about them!

My two cents: AT&T good, cable TV *real* bad ...


Joe

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

Subject: Re: LD Transmission Quality Comparison
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 92 13:31:27 PDT
From: [e-mail]


[e-mail] (Andy Sherman) wrote, quoting me:

>> This cannot be correct.  Propagation delay depends on media type.  The
>> signal propagation speed in fiber is slower than that in coax cable, for
>> example.  It must be different for pure copper wire, also.

> By how much?  All of these should have propagation speeds in the
> neighborhood of c.  Is the variation enough to change the echo
> cancellation, or will the trunk length dominate?

The variation is enough to force interestingness in ethernet
implementions on fiber. (Ethernet distance limit is dependent on
propagation speed.)

I think the difference is something like .03c between fiber and coax.

> But I really probably overstated the case.  The original assertion was
> that the presence of fiber in the trunk path made a difference as to
> whether or not you need echo cancellation.  That is false.

Do you mean trunk path as in CO or LD POP to your ear?  If so, sure
that's false.

But do you assert that the presence of fiber in either the trunk or
long haul path *will not affect* the desired echo cancelling
algorithms in any way?

> Any voice circuit, analog or digital, of sufficient length will need
> echo cancellation to undo the effects of the hybrids at each end.
> Since I and most of the people who call me use the same carrier I have
> no basis for comparison.  Probably they all sound similar unless you
> have a very good ear.  But Higdon's modems, apparently have very good
> ears, since they know the difference.

But aren't all Higdon's modems Telebits?  Do all manufacturer's modems
like ATT best?


eli

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #789
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa20693;
          18 Oct 92 20:01 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA31970
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 18 Oct 1992 17:54:07 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA05501
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 18 Oct 1992 17:53:58 -0500
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1992 17:53:58 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #790

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 18 Oct 92 17:54:00 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 790

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: GTE Addresses On Outgoing Email (John Higdon)
    Re: GTE Addresses On Outgoing Email (Steve Forrette)
    Re: Help Needed With Modem Problem (Thomas K. Hinders)
    Re: Help Needed With Modem Problem (Keith Smith)
    Re: Help Needed With Communications and Computers (Anonymous by Request)
    Re: East German Pay Phone (Joseph Malloy)
    German Phone Numbers (was East German Pay Phone) (Harris Boldt Edelman)
    Re: Length of Phone Numbers in Europe (was East German Phone) (G. Wollman)
    Re: 911 Calls From Remote Locations (Gregory Youngblood)
    Re: 911 Calls From Remote Locations (Dick Rawson)
    Re: Stolen Cell Phone (Jim Rees)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sun, 18 Oct 92 10:31 PDT
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: GTE Addresses On Outgoing Email


[e-mail] writes:

> In Iowa we are not split into a regulated and a deregulated work
> force.

> There's no advantage in our work environment here simply because we do
> both regulated and de-regulated jobs.  The important point I wanted to
> make is that different work groups can work together.  In this day of
> "It's not my problem", attitude, it's nice to be able to work together.

This is all very nice and cosy, but as a former employer of some size
it disturbs me to imagine just who is picking up the cost of having
you on the payroll. Every employee represents some major fixed costs:
health insurance, fixed-rate employer contributions for Federal
programs, and miscellaneous health and safety provision. In addition,
tools, test equipment, and other issue must be provided to each
employee doing plant work.

Now then, just who provides all of this? Would it be the "unregulated"
side of the telco? That would not make much economic sense to any
business. Why would a company want to ruin its competitiveness by
bearing a price structure that would support those able workmen? You
can bet the farm that the costs of supporting ANY employee that does
ANY regulated work at all comes 100% out of the regulated ratebase.

Can you imagine the record keeping that would be involved if the fixed
costs were distributed fairly between the de-regulated and the
regulated sides of the business? And you can bet that few PUCs could
sort it all out. So while you may think that it is just ducky that you
work on "both sides of the fence", the regulated customers of your
employer are being taken to the cleaners.


John Higdon  |   P. O. Box 7648   |   [phone]     |       FAX:
[e-mail] | San Jose, CA 95150 | 10288 0 700 FOR-A-MOO | [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: GTE Addresses On Outgoing Email
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1992 07:51:42 GMT


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

> Steve Forrette's comments about working regulated and de-regulated
> jobs together puzzle me.

> In Iowa we are not split into a regulated and a deregulated work
> force.  I'm not sure why not, but it's fine with me.  It means more
> job security by having more work to do, and provides a nice variety of
> work experience.

Perhaps I misinterpreted what you meant in your original post.  What I
invisioned was you doing unregulated and so-called "competitive" PBX
installations, and using your contact inside the "regulated" part of
GTE to your advantage.  You can see how a "competing" company in the
same area who also sells PBXs would not have the same level of contact
and flexibility with the regulated side of the telco as you do.  This
sets up an inherently uneven playing field, which is supposedly not
supposed to happen when telco gets involved in unregulated, "competitive"
areas of the industry.

I suppose the same argument could be made of your inside wiring
duties, although it would be stretching it to say that contact with
the regulated telco side helps you do inside wiring better.  But it
would most definately be of use in the installation and maintenance of
a PBX.


Steve Forrette, [e-mail], I do not speak for my employer.

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

Date: 18 Oct 92 13:01:10-0900
From: /PN=Thomas.K.Hinders/OU=CCMAIL/O=CHAN.IS/PRMD=MMC/ADMD=TELEMAIL/C=US/@sprint.com
Subject: Re: Help Needed With Modem Problem


With regards to modems and the Macintosh.  The "standard" Apple
supplied modem cable does not support RTS/CTS flow control (often
referred to as hardware flow control).

As a test, set the communications software to XON/XOFF (often referred
to as software flow control) and see if your results are different.

Also, try configuring the modem for low speed operation (with both
types of flow control).

I do not have a pinout of properly wired cable, we discovered the
problem when hooking up a Shiva Telebridge, and we found that it would
only work with the Shiva provided cable. Shiva's explanation was that
the Apple supplied modem cable was not wired correctly for hw flow
control.


         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] (Keith Smith)
Subject: Re: Help Needed With Modem Problem
Organization: Keith's Computer, Hope Mills, NC
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 92 18:52:29 GMT


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

> In a message of <30 Sep 92 18:08:23>, Sky Striker (11:30102/2) writes:

[MT 932 ...]

>> except when it connects and says "Connect 9600 LAPM" then it will run
>> fine for awhile then it will aways with out warning drop carrier on
>> me.  Any help any one could give on figuring out what I'm doing wrong
>> would be greatly appreciated.  Thanks ...

> tweaking.  You are probably getting a noise burst on (either side of)
> the line long enough to cause the modem (at one end or the other) to
> think it's lost the carrier, so it hangs up.  There should be a DIP
> switch or a command to tell the modem to wait a bit longer after
> losing carrier before it hangs up.

The MultiTech modems *ALSO* have a maximum number of retransmits
function that is default at 12.  After 12 packet re-transmits the line
will drop.  This is defeated by saving AT$R1 (I think. The book is at
home write again if you don't have it.)


Keith Smith          uunet!ksmith!keith            5719 Archer Rd.
Digital Designs      BBS 1-919-423-4216            Hope Mills, NC 28348-2201

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

From: Telecom Reader <[e-mail]>
Date: 18 Oct 92 18:51:39 GMT
Subject: Re: Help Needed With Communications and Computers


I keep seeing this silly notion, from everybody from Tim Leary to Ted
Turner, that communications technologies and "samizdata" made the
revolutions in eastern Europe "inevitable."  If that's so, then which
communications technologies did the anti-Communist rebels in Europe
have that the pro-democracy organizers in China don't?

When the Soviet tanks rolled up to the Russian Capitol during the
coup, were there any more fax machines or video cameras there than
there were when the Chinese tanks rolled into Tienenmen Square?  No,
there weren't.  So why did the Red Chinese tanks roll over their
protesters and the Soviet tanks not?  Communications and computers?
Fat chance.

No, it has a lot more to do with the fact that Premier Gorbachev had
already failed to suppress dissent so many times, as in the frequent
coal miners' strikes, that President Yeltsin had had time to organize,
build recognition, and so he was able to rally the people to a common
leadership.  And even more than that, it had to do with the fact that
since the Soviet Union had pursued political liberalization more
enthusiastically than economic liberalization, not to mention the
idiocy of trying to keep up with our SDI spending, that their economy
was in such a sad state that the tank commanders sincerely believed
that Yeltsin was more likely to keep them employed and fed.

Deng Xiaopeng and his successors are much, much smarter than that.
They've ruthlessly, relentlessly crushed all hints, no matter how
minor, of yearning for political freedom or democracy.  (The tanks may
not have run over that one brave student, but I suspect that the
torturers in the slave labor camp he's been sent to are less
compassionate.)  At the same time, they've run full-tilt ahead with
economic liberalization, and standards of living are rising steadily.
So when THEY give an order to tank commanders to run over the occupied
sleeping bags of unarmed students, the tank commanders know that if
they obey, they'll get paid, and if they don't, they'll get crushed,
so they do it.

It may also have something to do with the fact that the Chinese
government has done a much better job of disarming its people than the
Soviet government ever did.  But it had nothing at all to do with how
many laptop computers or modems or radios or television sets or
Polaroid cameras or fax machines or VCRs or photocopiers the people
had, and everything to do with to whom the army felt the most loyalty.

P.S.  I am sending this in anonymously because I work for a
multinational that is very, very deeply in bed with the national Bank
of China.  A couple times a week I walk past a trophy they gave us to
thank us for our friendship and loyalty.  What I am saying would be
looked at very, very askance by my current employer.  I am usually
proud of where I work ...  but when I think of how we've cuddled up to
the Butchers of Beijing, the genocidal invaders of Tibet, I'm sad and
somewhat embarrassed at what I'll do to stay off the breadlines.


[Moderator's Note: The author is known to me, and is a regular writer
here, but he requested that the header be altered to obscure his
identity.  I don't usually like to do this.  Exceptions are rare.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Joseph Malloy)
Subject: Re: East German Pay Phone
Organization: Hamilton College - Clinton, NY
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1992 12:53:25 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> Tom Coradeschi <tcora@pica.
army.mil> writes:

> Typical, actually. I've had occasion to deal with US Army
> installations in Germany (former West Germany, naturally:-}). One guy,
> in particular, has a ten-digit phone number and an eleven-digit fax
> number (different exchanges, although within the same city).

German phone numbers are amusing.  In larger cities such as Berlin,
they often seem to be in a format just like US phone numbers (i.e.,
xxx-xxxx).  But smaller cities, with fewer people, have shorter phone
numbers (a friend in Tuebingen has a five digit number).  The
difference is in the area code (Vorwahlsnummer): in major cities it
may be only two digits, in smaller cities it can be five or more
(Tuebingen's area/city code is 07071, not all that different from
their local equivalent to 911, by the way!).

As an aside, I once spent some weeks in Halle, in what was then still
the German Democratic Republic (i.e., in the good old communist days)
and wanted to make a call to my spouse at home in the US.  The only
place I could do this from was the main post office.  I went, asked
about it, and was told that since they closed at 6 PM and it was now
already almost 4 PM there probably wouldn't be enough time to get the
call through.  I asked if we could try anyway, and they were happy to
oblige, thought it took the counter clerk, her supervisor, and that
supervisor's supervisor to figure out how to do it.  Well, I waited,
and about 45 minutes later, as I was wandering around the P. O.
looking at whatever was there, I heard this cry, "USA Zelle 2" (i.e.,
USA connection in booth 2).  As one might imagine back then, *every*
head turned to see who the renegade was ...

Worst connection of my life.  I kept it short since they didn't know
the rates ("Berlin will call us and tell how much to charge you when
you're done" -- how's that for service?).  Turned out to be 39 Marks
(which, at the forced exchange rate, was about $24 -- for less than 2
minutes!).

Makes even Sprint look good!


Joe     [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: Hey that even makes COCOTS and AOS outfits look
pretty good!  :)  Makes me wonder why the alternate operator services
and COCOTS have not tried to get into places in Europe where they
would be right at home ... the citizens wouldn't know any better.  PAT]

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

Date: Sun, 18 Oct 92 07:20:51 UT
From: Harris Boldt Edelman <red-eft![e-mail]>
Subject: German Numbers (was East German Pay Phone)


I remember the first seven-digit numbers coming into use in
Berlin-Zehlendorf in the Spring of 1971, when I was there as a foreign
exchange student.  The instructions from Deutsche Bundespost Berlin
were explicit: write the numbers in groups of two proceeding from
right to left, letting the odd, seventh digit stand alone.  Eric's
home number would thus be written 2 62 51 22.

Some months beforehand, telephone service from West to East Berlin had
resumed on an operator-handled basis after having been discontinued
years before (I don't know whether service had remained in place until
the borders were sealed on 13 August, 1961, or whether it had already
been discontinued by then).  The calls were routed via a long path,
from West Berlin through West German points, thence through East
German points and back to East Berlin.  Newspaper reports of the
service in its first days gleefully noted that as the manual call
setups were completed, the long-distance operators greeted each other
with "Berlin, this is Berlin."

At the time, I predicted to friends there that Germany would be
reunited in twenty years.  They laughed, told me I was dreaming ...


Harris  <red-eft![e-mail]>

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

From: [e-mail] (Garrett Wollman)
Subject: Re: Length of Phone Numbers in Europe (was East German Pay Phone)
Organization: University of Vermont, EMBA Computer Facility
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1992 20:32:16 GMT


I can remember when I was in Finland, that this was quite common.  In
Helsinki and environs, the "area code" was (9x) [the 9 being the
equivalent of 1 in most of the US, and x was either 0 or 1, I forget
which]. The exchange code was three digits, and the subscriber number
could be from one to four digits.  For example, the University of
Helsinki's main switchboard was (9x) 191 1; but extension 1234 was 191
1234.  In the other populated areas, area codes were 9xx and local
numbers were mostly six digits, and in really rural areas, area codes
were 9xxx plus five digits.  At the time when I was there (88-89),
WATS service was just starting up; AT&T USA Direct was (9800) 100 10.

All the operator and special service numbers were quite long; I
remember being surprised that to get an international operator
required dialing 92022.  And there were always street maps of the
local area in the front of the phone books.

Maybe there's someone out there with friends at PTL who can tell us a
bit more about the numbering scheme there.


Garrett A. Wollman  [e-mail]
uvm-gen!wollman     UVM disagrees.

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

Subject: Re: 911 Calls From Remote Locations
From: [e-mail] (Gregory Youngblood)
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 92 23:11:43 CDT
Organization: TCS Consulting Services, St. Paul, MN


[e-mail] (Marc Unangst) writes:

> In article <[e-mail]> Joseph.Bergstein@p501.
> f544.n109.z1.fidonet.org (Joseph Bergstein) writes:

[Tale describing the 911 dispatcher improperly interpreting the ANI
information and dispatching the ambulance to the wrong address, due to
the PBX configuration being used.]

> If you know, or suspect, that you will be connected to a E911
> dispatcher who has ANI info for the number you're calling from, but
> you aren't at the physical termination point of that number, it's
> usually a good idea to explicitly tell the dispatcher that the ANI
> info is wrong and that you're really at <such-and-such> location.
> Hams also find it useful to tell the dispatcher that they are calling
> over a radio link, to impress upon them that the link is half-duplex
> and that they must say "over" or "go ahead" when they're finished
> speaking.  Unfortunately, some E911 dispatchers will ignore both these
> items and dispatch to the wrong location anyway, but at least you
> tried.

Unfortunately this is also happening in a lot of cases where cellular
phones are used to call 911.  In some cases there is a 'flag' that the
operators see telling them the phone is cellular, and to ask for a
location.  In other cases where I personally have had to call 911
during a hurricane in Galveston, Texas where a bicyclist (yes a
bicylcist in the middle of a hurricane ... threw me also) was blown
into or hit by a car.  I was on the phone with the operator for three
or four minutes trying to impress upon them that the accident was at x
location and not y.  If I would have been one of our customers then,
and didn't realize what was going on, it could have been much worse.

I've worked with a couple of 911 coordinators in several areas, and if
the phone company is organized right, and the 911 coordinators are
able to set things up properly, a lot of the confusion is avoided.
Special numbers are used in some cases, instead of routing 911, the
switch will actually dial a special number for 911 emergency.  In one
state I had to break up the towers in to regions and then route 911
calls to special number for each area so that the calls would be
handled at the closest 911 center to the actual cellular caller.

As technology continues to go towards mobile communications, 911
technology is going to have to learn to adapt, and 911 operators need
to be trained in how to ask the right questions.  About four years
ago, I believe Houston Texas was trying something like that.


Greg
TCS Consulting Services   P.O. Box 600008   St. Paul, MN  55106-0008
[e-mail]                    ..!srcsip!tcscs!zeta

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

From: [e-mail] (Dick Rawson)
Subject: Re: 911 Calls From Remote Locations
Date: 18 Oct 92 15:48:00 GMT
Organization: BT North America (Tymnet)


> Ham radio operators frequently run into this when making a call to the
> police or the 911 dispatcher through a repeater autopatch.  Usually,
> the ham making the call will be nowhere near the actual termination
> point of the line, since they're calling through a radio link.

You might try stating that you are not (or no longer) at the scene;
that's quite plausible for a traffic accident, because you could have
driven past it, and gone somewhere else to phone.

In Silicon Valley, the ham repeaters used most often for emergency
autopatch calls generally do not call 911, but the specific seven or
ten digit emergency number for the appropriate jurisdiction (out of
dozens).  There are two reasons: the problem of the misleading E911
location display; and the delay caused by calling the 911 center
appropriate for the repeater site, and waiting for the operator to
transfer the call to the correct (if you're lucky) jurisdiction.


Dick Rawson, N6CMJ

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

From: [e-mail] (Jim Rees)
Subject: Re: Stolen Cell Phone
Date: 18 Oct 1992 15:49:45 GMT
Organization: University of Michigan CITI
Reply-To: [e-mail]


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail].
stratus.com (Craig Heim) writes:

> There are actually two "Nationwide Negative Files" ...

Why is this system so lame?  It's clear that the right way to do this
is a data base that maps [ESN, phone no] pairs to billing info.  This
data base would be queried on every call attempt.  The ESN should
obviously never be transmitted in the clear.

My understanding of the Negative File is that every call (or at least
the first call, which is all you need with a tumbler) is assumed valid
unless the ESN is on the negative list.

The current system is so obviously prone to fraud (tumblers, ESN
theft, etc) that it borders on negligence on the part of the service
providers.

I suspect the answer is that it's cheaper for the service providers to
bill honest customers for fraud losses than for them to provide the
proper level of security.  As an honest customer, I resent having to
pay for the service provider's negligence.


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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #790
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa21638;
          18 Oct 92 20:27 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA27147
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 18 Oct 1992 18:16:58 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA02265
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 18 Oct 1992 18:16:48 -0500
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1992 18:16:48 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #791

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 18 Oct 92 18:16:45 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 791

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: A Small Tutorial on Networking Stuff (Brad S. Hicks)
    Re: More LATA Nuttiness (Eppes Fork, VA and Raleigh, NC LATAs) (B Harrell)
    Re: LD Transmission Quality Comparison (Pat Turner)
    Re: Michigan Bell: Business vs Residential Rates (Ben Harrell)
    Re: E-Mail For Michigan Residents (David H. Close)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: mc/G=Brad/S=Hicks/OU=[e-mail]
Date: 18 Oct 92 17:05:33 GMT
Subject: Re: A Small Tutorial on Networking Stuff


I think I can clarify Lars Poulsen's explanation of X.400 just a bit,
and eliminate some confusion between X.400 and X.500 in the process.

Lars's explanation of an RFC822 ("Internet mail") address is quite
coherent and complete.  It consists of <almost_anything>@<path>, where
<path> is the chain of systems, as a hierarchy, that mail would have
to go through to get there from one of a relatively small number of
widely known hosts or gateways, like ".edu" (the domain controller for
US colleges), or ".nl" (the PTT in the Netherlands).  Each step in the
path is a short non-case-sensitve ASCII string, no spaces (not much
punctuation at all permitted, I think), separated by periods.  The
idea is that if you're [e-mail], and you're sending to
[e-mail], your mailer will realize that we have "y.z.com" in
common and just send it direct, but if your mailer hasn't the foggiest
idea how to reach "y.z.com" or even "z.com", by all the Godz, at least
it knows how to reach "com"!

X.400 works a lot like that.  It has nothing to do with directory
services or central administration thereof (that's X.500, which is
still experimental).  An X.400 address is a set of fields, of which
three are mandatory: country, "domain", and last name (X.400 calls it
surname).  Country and domain identify an electronic mail service,
like country "US" and domain "MCIMAIL".  So if you're the only person
on the ParaMail system in Parador with the last name of Snorkelmeyer,
your address would probably be country "PD", domain "PARAMAIL",
surname "Snorkelmeyer".

Note that in RFC822, you can have multiple domains within a country,
and everybody everywhere is assumed to know where they are.  I suspect
that it chafes at some PTT-type-folk that the US has multiple domains
that they have to keep track of; why can't we make those ".com.us" and
".edu.us" and ".bitnet.us" and be like everybody else?  Well, in the
X.400 spec, they got their revenge.  The lowest common denominator
there IS the country code.

First Address Complication: The X.400 committee differentiates
arbitrarily between domains that sell mailboxes to anybody (PTTs, big
e-mail vendors) and domains that are company e-mail systems.  It calls
the former administrative domains (I have no idea why), usually
abbreviated ADMD, and the latter private management domains, or PRMDs.
So if your last name is still Snorkelmeyer but you've moved to the US
and gone to work for ACME, and ACME gets its X.400 gateway via Three
Initial Corporation, your address is country "US", ADMD "TIC", PRMD
"ACME", surname "Snorkelmeyer".

There are other fields, entirely optional and loosely defined, that
e-mail vendors CAN use to differentiate between mailboxes.  They
include given name (first name), initials, generation ("Jr.", "III",
etc.), and up to five levels of corporate hierarchy, called
organization and organization units 1-4.

Second Address Complication: Notice that this does NOT include
anything like user IDs or any other numeric identifier, or any other
fields.  The X.400 committee defined on field as semi-free-form text,
up to 255 characters, of the form <field>!<value) separated by
semicolons (";").  This field is the "domain-defined attributes", or
DDA, and that's why MCI Mail X.400 addresses often look like country
"US", ADMD "MCIMAIL", surname "Smith", DDA "ID!5551212".

Third Address Complication: The biggest difference between the X.400
spec and the RFC822 spec is that the X.400 spec doesn't even HINT at
the idea of a user interface.  On the Internet side, if somebody's
address is [e-mail], then any time you need to send a
piece of mail to Joe Blow, from any system (just about), no matter
where or what software you're using, you address it to
[e-mail].

The X.400 spec says NOTHING about how to represent all of those
fields, and no one system can be described as common.  This makes it
complicated to put an X.400 address on your business card, to say the
least.  CompuServe encompasses the whole thing in parentheses and
separates each <field>=<value> pair with semicolons.  SoftSwitch uses
<field>=<value> or <field>="<value>" pairs separated by spaces ...
except where they use commas instead.  MCI Mail uses <field>=<value>,
one to a line, except that the ADMD is entered on the External Mail
System prompt and it won't let you enter a country code.  (Where two
or more PTTs have the same ADMD name, MCI Mail makes up its own
pseudo-ADMDs for them.  Sigh again.)

And the abbreviations for the field names aren't even vaguely
standardized, especially generation (g, gen, ge, gq) or organizational
unit 1 (org1, ou1, o1, u1, unit1).  So if you don't know how your
e-mail system abbreviates them, you can have a hard time there, too.
The better X.400 client software packages just present a full-screen
form and let you fill in the fields.  (Here at MasterCard I wrote a
HyperCard stack that lets you fill in the fields, makes sure you have
the mandatory ones, and then translates this into an X.400 address in
SoftSwitch's preferred abbreviations, inserts quotes and carriage
returns as necessary, and copies it to the clipboard.  Sigh.)

Final Address Complication: And if that doesn't even begin to address
the fact that there are several conflicting "standards" for how to
translate an address between RFC822 and X.400.  Sprint uses
/<field>=<value>/ groupings to the left of "@sprint.com".  AT&T uses
your choice of that or <prmd>!<givenname>_<surname>@mhs.attmail.com.
If you use the latter, then any fields other than country (assumed
"US"), ADMD (assumed "attmail"), PRMD (sometimes abbreviated),
givenname, and surname get sandwiched in before the "@" in the "slash"
format.  This should explain why my mail sometimes arrives from
"mc!Brad_Hicks/OU1=0205295" and sometimes as
"mc/GN=Brad/SN=Hicks/OU1=0205295" ... and why I usually give it, any
more, as mc![e-mail], since the org unit 1 isn't
needed to establish a unique address at our PRMD.

Novell, at least, came up with an official way to translate X.400
addresses into MHS addresses.  They use a defined format for the
extended addressing field: you put anything you want in the mailbox
field, fill in your gateway for the post office field, and then fill
in the extended address field, so my address would be (from memory, I
could be wrong) something like "BHICKS@GATEWAY (Brad Hicks) { X400:
C=US, A=ATTMAIL, P=MASTERCARD, SN=HICKS, GN=BRAD }".  It is, I admit
highly redundant.  And the MHS gateway developers I've heard from are
mad, because they wanted to use the extended address field for their
own purposes and resent Novell's taking it away from them, the way
they did the comment field.  So much for standards.

(I won't even go into the irritations you find when you try to gateway
an X.400 e-mail system in QuickMail, which absolutely will not let you
have an address longer than 140 bytes, and sometimes gives you trouble
with anything over 32 bytes.)

There are also X.400 specifications for the body of a message, and how
to handle attachments, and how to send them in batches from one mail
system to another or from a mail system to a user interface.  Unlike
RFC822, they are NOT based on the lowest common denominator of ASCII
text files; this means that to handle some "exotic" message type like
voice or multimedia or graphics, instead of having to go through the
gyrations the Internet is with RIME, all they have to do is define a
new "body type" value.  (Of course, being an international committee,
it takes them about as long to agree on a single integer and a file
format as it took the Internet Engineering Task Force to figure out
how they wanted to encode odd file types in ASCII.  It took them four
years, 1984-1988, just to agree to use body type 14 for unformatted
binary data.  Sigh one last time.)



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

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

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

From: [e-mail] (Ben Harrell)
Subject: Re: More LATA Nuttiness (Eppes Fork, VA and Raleigh, NC LATAs)
Organization: North Carolina State University
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1992 23:41:05 GMT


[e-mail] (Eli Mantel) writes:

> In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (David Esan)
> writes:

>> 930 is EPPES FORK, VA.  Anyone know anything about it?

> Every North Carolina phone book published by Carolina Telephone (part
> of United Telephone) contains a map showing all the LATAs in North
> Carolina, and then lists the exchanges within each of the LATAs served
> by United Telephone.

> These three LATAs are **Eppes Fork**, Fayetteville, and Rocky Mount.
> While Fayetteville and Rocky Mount each have several columns of
> exchanges listed, the Eppes Fork LATA is listed as follows:

>        Eppes Fork LATA
>        Henderson
>                (Eppes Fork)   252

> That's Henderson, NC, by the way.  The area code directory in the same
> phone book lists Henderson as being in area code 919, while presumably
> there are parts of the Eppes Fork LATA in the 804 area code, yet on
> the same telephone exchange.

I happen to know something about this curiosity, because I was Program
Planning Engineer for Carolina Telephone from 1980-1983.  We redrew
all of our Exchange Area Maps during this time, and in addition I
wrote the LATA justification filings for the Rocky Mount,
Fayetteville, and Eppes Fork LATA's.  Eppes Fork is on a jut of land
that sticks up into on of the man-made lakes on the Roanoke River,
where the lake crosses the North Carolina-Virginia border.  So it and
a couple of other juts of land are in Virgina, but are connected to
the NC side of the lake.

It is a long way around that lake, so Contel of Virginia (used to be
Continental Telephone Company -- now its GTE) which has the legal
franchise to serve the area from the Virgina PUC, many many moons ago
contracted with Carolina Telephone of NC to serve the area, which is
adjacent to its Henderson, NC, exchange (for a fairly healthy fee of
course ...).  Because it is in VA, it has to be part of the 804 area
code.  Therefore, all toll switches in the country have always been
programmed to send toll calls to the Henderson, NC, switch (which is
in the 919 NC area code, when the terminating DN is the 804-NXX-XXXX
for Eppes Fork.

It has to be treated as a separate LATA, because all intrastate toll
revenue collected by all telcos in NC is still "pooled" and then
divided up between the telcos based on their investment costs and
expenses -- the old pre-divestiture separations process that still
lives on.

> Another curiosity I noticed, in looking at the LATA map, is that the
> Raleigh, NC LATA is discontiguous.  It includes Raleigh and Goldsboro,
> but these two cities are totally separated from each other by parts of
> the Rocky Mount and Fayetteville LATAs.

Not exactly true.  The Selma, NC, exchange (just north of Smithfield,
NC) bridges the two much larger Southern Bell exchange areas, but is
only about five miles wide from north to south, although it is much
wider from east to west.  It is just to narrow to show up on most LATA
maps I've seen.


Ben Harrell      [e-mail]
Senior Manager, Costing and Tariffing
Northern Telecom Inc.   Research Triangle Park, NC

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

Date: Sun, 18 Oct 92 12:15 EDT
From: rsiatl![e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: LD Transmission Quality Comparison


Andy Sherman writes:

>> This cannot be correct.  Propagation delay depends on media type.  The
>> signal propagation speed in fiber is slower than that in coax cable, for
>> example.  It must be different for pure copper wire, also.

> By how much?  All of these should have propagation speeds in the
> neighborhood of c.  Is the variation enough to change the echo
> cancellation, or will the trunk length dominate?

First let me say I agree with Andy, the problem will be there
regardless of prop. velocity, as the distances vary by several orders
of magnitude.  Regardless, I decided to look up Vp of fiber as I can't
recall having to set it when using an Optical Time Domain
Reflectometer (OTDR) as you do when using a TDR.  Anyway from the CRC
HB of Chemistry and Physics quartz glass has an index of refraction of
around 1.45 for wavelengths slightly shorter then those used for fiber
optics.  I would assume this would be close to the results one would
get from silca glass.

For coax, the closest numbers I can find are from Myat, Inc for 7/8"
50 ohm rigid aluminum transmission line for the broadcast industry.  V
in this line is 99.7% of c.  This compares with 66% for RG58 (10BASE2
ethernet) coax.

For microwave (digital or analog) V would be very close to 1.
(Neglecting of course the circular and rectangular waveguides at each
repeater site which might make the link slower than coax if
multiplexing on the circular waveguide is used).

Thus:

Medium               Velocity Factor
Single Mode Fiber            .670
Coax                         .997
Microwave                   1

So does this prove AT&T's network only sounds better because they lack
the superior high tech outside plant of MCI and Sprint.  I think not.

Remember when Sprint ran the ads showing them blowing up the tower
because they were going to fiber optic quality.  Forgeting the LEC
tail circuits, can anyone hear the diffrence in BER between fiber and
digital microwave*.  Again I think not.  Can anyone guess as to the
loss of redundancy that comes with an "all fiber optic network".

* Remember that the ad was for PIC / FON card service not ISDN or DDS.

Speaking of Sprint, someone mentioned them being an IXC, LEC and
cellular carrier.  They also own North Supply, which puts them in the
CPE market as well.  This may get to be real interesting as United
craftspeople refer to Sprint the IXC as "us". Actual comment: "He quit
using us [the IXC] and went to MCI, then bitched that we [the LEC]
couldn't move his 56's fast enough.  The craftsperson said the problem
was a late work order from MCI.

I know how this works; right now I have a new leased line (not Sprint)
that is out of spec.  I almost sure that the problem is that the
Tellabs card is set up for unloaded cable while the loop is loaded.
Regardless it will be a week before United will dispatch a tech to the
site. This is on a new circuit that they were supposed to test.


Pat Turner KB4GRZ   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Ben Harrell)
Subject: Re: Michigan Bell: Business vs Residential Rates
Organization: North Carolina State University
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1992 23:15:35 GMT


[e-mail] (Gordon Burditt) writes:

>> "Home based workers who use their phone lines for business more than
>>  50% of the time need a business line."

>> At first glance, this seems to be a pretty reasonable compromise on
>> class of service billing. How one determines 50% may be open to
>> discussion, but it beats the attitudes of some companies that want to
>> bill business rates if you so much as publicise your phone number.

[text deleted]

> They might even be trying to define "a business call is a call which
> terminates at either end at a business line", which is one way they
> COULD measure it without listening to the calls.  That could cause
> cascade reclassifications -- if my line has to become business, then
> people who call me a lot are at risk of being reclassified also.
> Eventually, there are no residential lines.

Across the country, the local exchange tariffs of the telcos define
residential and business service by the use of the customer premise
being served, not by how much the line is used.  This results in
definitions such as the one above, or the fact that you advertise a
number as a business.

This is completely illogical from a cost causation standpoint and
harks back to the days of government mandated "universal service at
the lowest possible cost to the average residential user".  The great,
great majority of people in this country do not understand that local
phone line rates structures have been set -- by historical design --
to be exactly the opposite of their cost to provide, ie the
residential line user, on average, is the most expensive to provide;
the business line user is the next most expensive to provide; and the
PBX trunk user is the cheapest to provide.  The tariff rates on the
other hand are just the opposite, except it a few stated in the NYNEX,
Bell Atlantic, and Ameritech regions that enforce local usage charges
equally on all three types of services and enforce the same basic
charge for each.

Hope this helps a little.


Ben Harrell     [e-mail]
Senior Manager, Costing and Tariffing
Northern Telecom Inc.   Research Triangle Park, NC

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

From: [e-mail] (David H. Close)
Subject: Re: E-Mail For Michigan Residents
Date: 18 Oct 1992 18:41:53 GMT
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena


[e-mail] writes:

> The other possibility are the pay networks.  AT&T Mail has a lousy
> interface, a poor method of transferring messages, doesn't support
> Kermit or Zmodem, but only charges $3 a month for a mailbox.

AT&T Mail, as many of us know, also includes a "UNIX" interface option
at the same $3 per month.  This eliminates the problem of their user
interface since the user interface is controlled by your local system.
All you need is uucp capability.  And they will call you when mail is
received, eliminating the delay inherent in polling them.

For the longest time, I could never find anyone at AT&T knowledgeable
or willing to discuss a UNIX connection.  However, in the last few
months at least, just mentioning "UNIX" is sufficient to get to a
person who can take care of uucp connection needs.


Dave Close, [e-mail], BS'66 Ec

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #791
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa23040;
          18 Oct 92 21:14 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA16465
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 18 Oct 1992 19:07:42 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA07709
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 18 Oct 1992 19:07:28 -0500
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1992 19:07:28 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #792

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 18 Oct 92 19:07:30 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 792

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Electronic Access to ITU (e.g. CCITT) Documents (Robert Shaw)
    The Campaign is Online in Area 516 (Dave Niebuhr)
    E911 Problem in Area 516 Fixed (Dave Niebuhr)
    Pay Per View Uses 810 Prefix in DC Area (Paul Robinson)
    Voice/Data Over Same T1 Line (Philip Green)
    SS7 Standards (Tarl Neustaedter)
    Help Needed With Old Kellogg Phone (Ron Heiby)
    AT&T Wins Two Malcolm Baldridge National Quality Awards (AP via P Robinson)
    Westinghouse, Bell Join in Venture (Washington Times via Paul Robinson)
    Notes on the Network (Pat Turner)
    Information Request: Audiovox Prestige Cell Phone (Doug Fields)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1992 09:52:43 +0100
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Electronic Access to ITU (e.g. CCITT) Documents


The International Telecommunication Union (ITU), a United Nations
Agency based in Geneva, Switzerland, has announced a new electronic
document distribution service called Teledoc.  The ITU consists of
five permanent organs including the General Secretariat, the
International Frequency Registration Board (IFRB), the International
Radio Consultative Committee (CCIR), the International Telegraph and
Telephone Consultative Committee (CCITT) and the Telecommunications
Development Bureau (BDT).

The Teledoc service makes available public ITU documents in a database
called the ITU Document Store.  The ITU Document Store organizes ITU
documents into hierarchical groups: each group can contain additional
groups and/or documents.  Remote access to the ITU Document Store is
planned via:

- electronic mail (auto-answering mailbox)
- interactive VT interface (planned for early 93)
- Internet FTP (planned for early 93)

The first available interface is the Teledoc Auto-Answering Mailbox
(TAM), an X.400-based document server.  Mail messages can be sent to:

(X.400) S=teledoc; P=itu; A=arcom; C=ch

or

(Internet) [e-mail]

Commands to the TAM must be placed in the mail message body (not in
the subject field).  The commands are simple.  For example:

HELP
LIST CCITT
LIST CCITT/REC

will send the TAM help file and a list of the contents of the CCITT
and CCITT Recommendations group (only lists of CCITT Recommendations
and some summaries are available as of Oct 92).  The HELP file
describes how to retrieve individual documents.  For additional
information about Teledoc, please contact:


Robert Shaw    Teledoc Project Coordinator   Information Services Department
International Telecommunication Union  Place des Nations
1211 Geneva, Switzerland   Voice: [phone]/5554
FAX: [phone]  Internet: [e-mail]
X.400:G=robert;S=shaw;P=itu;A=arcom;C=ch   MCI: rshaw

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

Date: Sun, 18 Oct 92 09:13:12 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Dave Niebuhr)
Subject: The Campaign is Online in Area 516


{Newsday} is offering the presidential campaign in an online format.

It works like this:

  1. From a PC with a modem and telecom software, dial [phone];
  2. Once connected, type HH (caps only) and press the ENTER key;
  3. At the *, type 2129250058 and press the ENTER key;
  4. Follow the prompts to view the files of your choice.  You can
     read the files online or, using your telecommunications program
     capture and print them for reading later.

There is no charge for the services (probably the call forward but
there will be one for the initial call if exchange 665 isn't in a
person's "free" calling area.

The number [phone] is NYTel's packet switching number and does
a call-forward to [phone] In Manhattan.  Essentialy the final
number is for {Newsday's} online news service.

Five options are given once one is finally connected:

  1. Bush's Position Papers
  2. Clinton's Position Papers
  3. Excerpts from Perot's Book
  4. My Comments
  5. Exit

I chose number four and was presented with a number of prompts:

  First Name:
  Last Name:
  Street Address:
  Town:
  State:
  Telephone Number:

I answered the first and second and ignored the rest (what a great way
to gather information for a subscription database via telemarketing).
If they do call me and ask for me by my listing name (not my real
name) then I'll know that they recorded the phone number even though I
paid for the call myself (the 665 number is a charge of 13.3 cents
minus a discount of 65 percent per minute).

If on the other hand, if I receive a call from {Newsday} using my real
name, then I'll know that NYTel gave it to {Newsday}.

A third possibility arises: {Newsday} calls me on my second line
(which I used) and asks for me or tries to sell me a subscription
using my real name (which I used), then I'll know that they are
gathering database information.

Another question arises: I'm using 2400 baud so I'm assuming that the
answering modem is auto-baud.  Is that a correct assumption?  I'd love
to try this at work at 9600 baud but I have to have an account number
for dial-out calls via computer.

BTW: The name and address in the sig below are real, not ficticious.


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

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

Date: Sun, 186 Oct 92 09:18:20 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Dave Niebuhr)
Subject: E911 Problem in Area 516 Fixed


I reported the other day that Suffolk County, New York's, 911 service
was disrupted due to a breakdown in the switch in a central office.
This problem also affected calls to certain exchanges containing
county phones.

NYTel and the County agreed after this happened and instead of wasting
time trying to isolate the problem, that NYTel would immediately
install a #4ESS switch in that CO and use it as a backup.  Only then
would they address the first problem.

According to the report in {Newsday}, the police, fire and emergency
services couldn't determine if any calls for assistance were missed.

I like to take potshots at NYTel now and then, but this time I'm going
to thank them for their response to what could have been a serious
problem if it had gone on longer than it did.


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

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: 18 Oct 92 15:18:06 GMT
Subject: Pay Per View Uses 810 Prefix in DC Area


[The following comment was originally written November 27, 1991]

    With the introduction of the 410 area code in Maryland and C&P
Telephone's subsequent list for of which prefixes are local and which
are distant 301 numbers, I had to create a local exchange list for
changing numbers.  In the middle of doing this, I discovered in the
telephone directory for the Metropolitan area there is a local
exchange listed as an entry:

   810  Pay Per View

While it is not present in the list of Washington, DC exchanges, it is
also listed for area code 703.  This number, however, conveniently is
NOT in the 301/410 prefix splits also published by C&P Telephone.  Now
the question comes up; will this be a "triplex" exchange in which the
same number dialed from any of the three jurisdictions in Washington
call the same place, like time, weather, telephone repair or a 976
number, and is thus "pay per view" in that respect, or is it to be
like the current 800 numbers with ANI (automatic non-blockable
caller-id) being used in it will be established on 810 numbers such
that the connection is never made; you simply call it and the
telephone company's computer generates a signal for an order of some
kind and says "your order has been processed"?

I think this is a way for the telephone company to generate new
business; they want to get some of the money going to 800 service
companies that provide ANI to Cable-TV companies (and other
point-of-purchase processors) that allow them to have people
automatically order a service. If I'm correct, in other words, it's
set up as an "explosive" line: many more circuits and a lot more lines
to handle extra-heavy traffic.  Los Angeles had one of those:
213-520-xxxx was used for extremely heavy call in numbers so that
people didn't clog up circuits used for ordinary business or
residential lines.  By having lots of extra circuits, it keeps the
ordinary people from being squeezed by the extra-heavy users.

At that time I dialed operator; she had no listing for 202, 301 or 703
for an 810 exchange even though it's listed in the C&P book for 301
and 703.  From a Maryland telephone I dialed 810-1000 and 810-0000.
Instead of getting three-tone and "Sorry your call cannot be completed
 ..." I got three-tone and "all circuits are busy now."  I did,
however, get the first recording on dialing 703-810-1000. Interesting.

Looking back at this, I dialed the number 810-1000 and 810-0000 from a
Maryland telephone.  Now it is giving off the "cannot be completed"
recording.

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

From: Philip Green <[e-mail]>
Subject: Voice/Data Over Same T1 Line
Organization: National Radio Astronomy Observatory, Socorro NM
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 92 16:39:13 GMT


I am currently looking into combining voice and data between two sites
approximately 50 miles apart. Each site has a PBX and routers.  It
appears to me that I have two choices;

#1 Buy something along the lines of a ADC Kentrox drop/add units
   that will provide v.35 connections to my routers and pass the
   rest to the PBX at T1 rates
or,

#2 Since one of the PBXs may not support a T1 interface we would
   need to have a device that would supply the routers with a
   v.35 connection plus the analog connections to the PBXs.
   We could use a multiplexor for this but they are much more
   expensive that the drop/add units.


Are there any other choices and is there something that exists between
the multiplexors and drop/adds that can be used?


Thanks,

Phil Green         [e-mail]     NRAO    505.835.7294

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

From: [e-mail] (Tarl Neustaedter)
Subject: SS7 Standards
Date: 18 Oct 92 22:56:55 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer, Inc.


There was a question on books describing SS7 in an earlier post. I
emailed a response, but figured it would be worthwhile posting a
specific description of the standards involved:

There are two variants of SS7 -- ANSI and CCITT (as well as a hybrid in
use by a certain phone system that I won't talk about).

The standards of interest with the ANSI version are:

    ANSI T1.111 - MTP, Message Transfer Part
    ANSI T1.112 - SCCP, Signalling Connection Control Part
    ANSI T1.114 - TCAP, Transaction Capability Application Part

There are also T1.110 (overview) T1.113 (ISDN) and a couple of others
relating to administration and testing, but I don't have copies of
them so I don't know what they really contain.

To order from ANSI, call them at 212-642-4900. Or write to American
National Standards Institute, 11 West 42nd Street, New York, NY. They
require payment in advance, so you'd better call to find prices
($28.00-$50.00 per standard).

The standards of interest with the CCITT version are known as the blue
books. The ones relating to SS7 are:

CCITT Blue Book Volume VI, Specifications of Signalling System No. 7;

Fascicle VI.7, Recommendations Q.700-Q.716 (overview, MTP & SCCP)
Fascicle VI.8, Recommendations Q.721-Q.766 (TUP, DUP, ISDN, ISUP)
Fascicle VI.9, Recommendations Q.771-Q.795 (TCAP & test specifications)

The blue books are particularly intimidating; They are each around 500
pages of dense type and incomprehensible diagrams. But they are
invaluable for dealing with a customer who says that his TFP with an
invalid OPC didn't generate the correct response (that is, "none" :-).
And in the back of each of the blue books is a glossary of
abbreviations with cross-reference, which lets you bark acronyms with
the best of them.

If you are going to be writing applications sitting on top of SS7 (my
guess at the larger portion of interest on this group), you are
probably interested only in the overview and TCAP.


Tarl Neustaedter    [e-mail]
SS7 project leader    Stratus Computer, Marlboro, Mass.
Disclaimer: My employer is not responsible for my opinions.

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

From: [e-mail] (Ron Heiby)
Subject: Help Needed With Old Kellogg Phone
Organization: Motorola Computer Group, Schaumburg, IL
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1992 20:36:28 GMT


A friend of mine recently purchased a very old telephone, and would
like to get any information about it that he can.

The phone claims to have been made by "Kellogg Switchboard & Supply
Co." of Chicago, IL.  The Inspection Sticker has "Code # F2358".  The
same number is embossed into the wood case.  It looks like a number
"2" was originally under the "5".  The main box is a wood box about
7x9x4 inches in size, with hand crank and bells.  Attached to it is a
"candlestick" unit.  There is no dial.  The back of the mouthpiece
says, "PAT'D - NOV.26.1901- MARCH 19.1907.- APRIL 14.1908".  The back
of thw switch-hook says "F118".  Inside, there are screw-posts for
"T", "G", and "R" (which I assume are Tip, Ground, and Ring), and for
"B1", "2", "4", and "B".

Of particular interest to him is how he can hook this phone up in any
way to the normal IL Bell home service that he has.  I assume that he
will have to disconnect at least the magneto, and probably the bells,
but I don't really know what I'm talking about.  Any info or help
would be appreciated.


Thanks!

Ron Heiby, [e-mail]    Moderator: comp.newprod

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

Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1992  02:22:02 EDT
Subject: AT&T Wins Two Malcolm Baldridge National Quality Awards


      Associated Press (Pg D11 - Edited)

     New York, Oct 14 - AT&T won two Malcolm Baldridge National
Quality Awards, becoming the first company to do so in the same year,
the Commerce Department said today.  The first one was to the
Transmission Systems unit of Morristown NJ, the other was AT&T
Universal Card of Jacksonville, Fla.

     The phone company's Transmission Systems unit makes telephone
equipment such as electronic devices that send phone calls over
fiber-optic lines.  The Universal Card is a combination credit card
and AT&T phone-charge Card.

     The awards are named for the late Commerce Department secretary.
The award is not given for specific products or services, but rather
for the processes the company uses to ensure the quality of its
output.


Paul Robinson -- [e-mail]
I alone am (stupid enough to be) responsible for the content
of these messages.

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

Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1992  17:45:29 EDT
Subject: Westinghouse, Bell Join in Venture


Westinghouse, Bell join in venture
{Washington (DC) Times} Oct 6, 1992, Page C3

Bell Atlantic Corp of Philadelphia and Westinghouse Electronic Systems
of Linthicum said they will introduce a new two-way data transmission
system in Baltimore using cellular telephone technology.  The
technology sends bursts of data during the spaces in voice
communications and is more reliable than other cellular methods, the
companies said.

Westinghouse, which will buy the service and resell it, plans to
market the system first to cargo haulers for tracking pickups and
deliveries.  The service should start early next year.

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 92 01:20 EDT
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Notes on the Network


I'm finally going to break down and order a copy of Notes on the
BOC/IntraLATA Network. As the current edition was written in 1990 and
published in 91, I was wondering if any of the Bellcore people on the
net are aware of any plans to revise the book.  I would hate to spend
400 dollars only to find out that a new edition is in the works.  Most
of the info would be unchanged, but still ...

Also if anyone has any a suggestion on a good digital telephony
textbook or manual for a friend with a EE degree.  He wants more then
MIS/ William Stallings type books, but something a little less dry
then the CCITT blue books.  I don't seem to have come across any thing
like what he wants.  As far as ISDN, I loaned him Fred Goldstein and
Gary Kesler's books on the subject.

What I think he wants is something that covers line codes (B8ZS, AMI,
and prehaps HDB3), SF and ESF framing, codecs, etc.  What he doesn't
need are conputer network texts or "The Joys of T1" type books.

Any sugestions?


Pat Turner KB4GRZ   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Doug Fields)
Subject: Information Request: Audiovox Prestige Cell Phone
Organization: Yale University, CS, New Haven, CT, Admiral's Account
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1992 08:16:24 GMT


First off, I never envisioned that I'd ever get a cellphone, so I've
always ignored that topic here, so forgive the questions.

Obviously, though, I did get one: an Audiovox Prestige hand held. It's
a nice unit, and seems to work well, although the battery life is
nowhere near as advertised.

I had two questions:

1) Does anyone have the programming instructions for this phone? I
Have enough to get me into the "program" mode but I do not know what
happens once there. Also, any other information on this phone,
undocumented features, etc., would be greatly appreciated.

2) Could someone point me to an archive of information relating to
cellular technology? I'd like to learn how the system works, what the
various switches's features are, etc. I'm currently Metro Mobile
(A-side) in CT, but that shouldn't affect anything.

And some more specific questions:

In the phone's info mode, where it shows the channel, signal strength,
etc., it also shows a "color code." What is this?

Does anyone have this phone? Any drawbacks, notes, hints on its use?

Thanks in advance for any replies.


Cheers,

Doug Fields    [e-mail]    203-436-3082 VOICE
  PP-ASEL   [e-mail]    661-2996 FAX
   N1NJN          fiedoup@yalevm           -2873 DATA

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #792
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa18095;
          19 Oct 92 9:57 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA27298
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 19 Oct 1992 07:12:19 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA03776
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 19 Oct 1992 07:12:10 -0500
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1992 07:12:10 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #793

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 19 Oct 92 07:12:00 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 793

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Please Explain "Crossed Lines" (Will Martin)
    Need Advice on Home Phone/Intercom (Larry DeMar)
    Number Three Sprint May be Gaining Ground (Washington Times via P Robinson)
    Re: AT&T Public Phone 2000 (Ron Jarrell)
    No Dial Tone; What's a Guy to Do? (Adam Shostack)
    Merlin 1030 System (Allan D. Griefer)
    Signalling on T1 Lines (Mike Klopfer)
    "Intercom-Plus" and AT&T 5E Switches ([e-mail])
    International Country Code System (Georg Schwarz)
    Wanted: Recommendation For IBM-PC DTMF Board (David Neal)
    Having the Media Over (Sean Donelan)
    FCC Modem Tax Scare Plagues Local BBS ...>Again< (Clint Fleckenstein)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sun, 18 Oct 92 9:54:23 CDT
From: Will Martin <[e-mail]>
Subject: Please Explain "Crossed Lines"


Recent postings, such as Mr. Higdon's, described incorrect billings
due to the local telco having "crossed lines" which somehow linked the
posters' local line with that of another person. I must confess to not
quite understanding just how this works ... could someone explain just
what is happening with this situation? I can understand it if there
are two different pairs just simply paralleled, but this seems to be
different or more complicated. If this happened to me, I would expect
that the phone on the line in my house would be just like an extension
to the phone in the other location, and vice-versa. Calls to either
number would ring both phones. If I picked up the line when the other
party was talking, I'd hear their conversation. (Of course, if there
is just a modem on the poster's line, this would be harder to notice.)
Any toll calls made from either phone would appear to come from both
of them in this case. Calls from me to that other number would always
get a "busy" signal, and vice-versa.

But the situation described appears to be more complex. No one
mentioned that they were getting calls on the crossed-line phone for
another party. They didn't hear other peoples' conversations on their
phones.  All that happened was that calls made from the other phone
showed up on their bill. What is happening to cause this, but yet
*not* cause the other aspects I mentioned?

Were these calls being billed to BOTH phones, the one that actually
made them and the other one, the posters' line? Are we speaking here
of some problem in the billing and accounting process, not in the
actual telephone connections in the switch or in the field? Is the
billing software charging these calls to the wrong phone because it
hits a match in a table first, or the number is numerically lower, or
some reason like that? Or what?

And how was the problem fixed? In software or in a hardware repair?


Regards,

Will   [e-mail] OR [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: A cable from the CO coming down the street or on
the poles behind your house will have maybe a couple hundred 'pairs'
on it to serve the neighborhood. Each pair branches off -- in other
words is spliced into -- at numerous places along the length of the
cable. This maximizes the use of each pair of wires; if you are not
using that pair, then someone else can instead. They give up their
service and you ask for additional service: the same wire pair which
served them last month serves you instead this month. All that has to
be done is the splice into the pair at your house gets connected to
the pair inside the cable and the people down the street are supposed
to have their access to that particular pair cut off. Picture an
electrical outlet in the wall: When I no longer want to have my radio
plugged in there, I take it away; you plug your computer in the same
socket instead. In common parlance, this type of wiring on phone
cables is called 'multiples'. We say the pair is multipled at various
locations back to the CO.

Now sometimes the installers forget to 'open up' the pair at the place
where it previously was in service, and once you get dial tone turned
on at your house, the same dial tone is going to pop up on some pair
of wires at the place down the street because the installer did not
cut the splice or branch of the pair off at the pole. Maybe it goes
unnoticed for awhile, then one day the people living down the street
are looking at *their* phone line and they discover not only is there
dial tone on the pair assigned to them, but lo and behold, there is
dial tone on the yellow/black pair of wires in their modular box also.
They've only got one legitimate line and dial tone; the other one
would not be there at all had the installer disconnected that particular
pair of wires outside their house or in the basement of their house or
wherever it is 'multipled' in addition to where it belongs at the
time, namely at your place.  So maybe these folks (or do you say pholks?)
are sneaky and they only use the newly discovered dial tone to make long
distance calls or premium 900 calls, and then only late at night when
they assume the rightful owner will probably be in bed asleep. Or
maybe the rightful owner is at work all day, etc ... You are correct
in what you say that if you happened to go off hook while *they* were
making a call on the stolen pair/dial tone, you would hear each other.
But it is rare both would go off hook at the same time. If they left a
phone plugged in on their newly discovered illicit pair, then when you
got a call their phone (on the illicit pair) would ring also.

Then there are cases where new service is being installed and the
installer comes out to the premises to look for the right pair. He
finds a pair with dial tone all right -- *your* pair! -- but he thinks
it is the pair for the new subscribers. Outside plant records are very
inaccurate at some telcos. So the new subscribers make their outgoing
calls in good faith on your dial tone; what do they know about the
phone network? The number which was actually assigned to them got
derailed in the process and is still ringing open to the wires on the
pole in the alley because the installer grabbed the wrong pair when he
was up there opening one splice (or multiple) and connecting another
for the new people. We are seeing more and more of this kind of
careless and inaccurate pair selection since the ruling was made which
allows subscribers to hook things directly to the demarc ... a demarc
which may have dusty, old and unlabled pairs on it running all over
the neighborhood!  In any large urban area, a older (40-50 year) high-
rise building will have a rat's nest of a demarc in the basement with
a couple hundred pairs used between the tenants of the high-rise and
the rest of the people in the neighborhood. Often times the demarc is
left unlocked; you guess the consequences!  If the general public knew
how unsecure their telephone service is against snoopers and dial tone
thieves there would be a big uproar. The reality is most people are
still ignorant about the workings of their phone and the wires which
get service to them.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Larry DeMar)
Subject: Need Advice on Home Phone/Intercom
Organization: Chinet - Public Access UNIX
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1992 16:41:54 GMT


I'm looking for advice on two (or more) line phones that also provide
intercom functions for a house that is wired in parallel point to
point (no "home run" wiring).  There is such a phone shown by DAK this
month on page four of their catalog (made by a company called "TT
systems").

The DAK phone allows you to call any extension by number, and has a
"page" button that will put your voice out of the speaker of each
phone (each unit is also a speakerphone).

Not bad for $150, however, my experience is that most of DAK's stuff
is over-runs and close-outs.

If anyone has seen this phone, or knows about other phones with
similar capabilities, please send e-mail with this information.

Also, has anyone come out with a two-line 900 MHz phone?  I have a
Tropez, and while it has gotten low marks from some people in this
group, I have been thrilled with its performance.


Larry DeMar    Email:  chinet![e-mail]

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

Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1992  22:35:07 EDT
Subject: Number Three Sprint May be Gaining Ground


Number Three Sprint May be Gaining Ground
By Kent Gibbons
The {Washington Times}, (10/14, Pg C1)

   Sprint may have made the most headway in long distance lately.

   Though still number three in the U.S. market for carrying
interstate calls, Sprint Corp. said yesterday its long-distance
business measured in minutes of calls rose in its fiscal third
quarter.

   Though the growth was just 3.2 percent over the second quarter, it
was probably enough to gain market share in the tightly contested
battle with American Telephone & Telegraph Co. and MCI Communications
Corp., analysts said.

   The call volume led Kansas City-based Sprint to what it said was a
quarterly record for profits: $115 million or 52 cents per share of
stock on $2.33 billion in revenues.  That excludes $6 million, or 3
cents per share, charged for retiring some debt early.  The same
period last year, Sprint made $97 million, or 44 cents per share, on
$2.21 billion in revenues.

   Sprint's stock rose 75 cents yesterday, closing at $25 per share.
AT&T and MCI shares also rose.

   MCI, based in Washington [DC], is scheduled to release its earnings
next Wednesday.  AT&T will probably announce its quarterly results
within two weeks.

   John Bain, who follows the industry for Raymond James & Associates
in St. Petersburg, Fla., said Sprint is "finally going in the right
direction."

   He added that Sprint's efforts are motivated partly by timing: it
wants Centel Corp. shareholders to approve a controversial acquisition
of that company by Sprint.  Centel holders would get Sprint stock for
their shares, so the higher Sprint's stock, the more likely they are
to bless the merger.

   Sprint said it gained ground partly with new products, including
its "The Most" plan for residential customers and its "Clarity and
Business Clout" plans for businesses.  Sprint said it also did a
better job of hanging on to the customers it already had.

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

From: [e-mail] (Ron Jarrell)
Subject: Re: AT&T Public Phone 2000
Date: 18 Oct 92 19:20:52 GMT
Organization: Virginia Tech (VPI & SU)


I made a data call back to to the office while at a conference on one
of these beasties. Four months later one of our internal telecom
people call me to discuss something wierd with my phone billing.
After four weeks of going back and forth, calling AT&T to find out
what in hell this charge was, they finally got the answer that it was
a data call on a public phone 2000, which I had charged to my office
phone's C&P card.

Our people were REALLY disgruntled over the billing, and even more so
over the fact that it took them over a month to get AT&T to EXPLAIN
the charge to them.  AT&T ended up cancelling the charge and apologizing.


Ron Jarrell    Virginia Tech Computing Center    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Adam Shostack)
Subject: No Dial Tone; What's a Guy to Do?
Organization: Aiken Computation Lab, Harvard University
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1992 23:05:48 GMT


Today, I returned home from work, and for the third time in a two
months, had no dial tone on my voice line.

Last week, the dial tone disapeared around 7PM Friday, and was
restored noon on Sunday.  A few weeks prior, service disapeared and
was not restored for about a week.  I was told they were having major
problems, and each day that the line would be available the next day.

Each time, I have asked for a message to be put on the line, or that
the calls be forwarded to what is normally my modem line.  Each time,
NET has refused to do so, claiming that they are incompetent.  (By
which I mean they can't figure out if the problem is in the switch or
in the wiring somewhere.)

What are my options?  The service stinks, the business office doesn't
want to cut a rebate (even for days I am without service), and worst
of all, I can't switch to an alternative local telephone company.

Do I call the PUC?  Do I flame my way up NET's "service" structure?
Do I shoot random telco employees?  :) Should I politely decline to
pay for service not recieved?  Can they cut off my line (more than
usual) if I don't pay for time I don't get a dial tone?

Please give me some advice.


Adam Shostack   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Allan D. Griefer)
Subject: Merlin 1030 System Equipment Wanted
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1992 23:48:19 GMT


I'm looking for all sorts of used (CHEAP!) equipment for a Merlin 1030
system for the local Boy Scout office.  If anyone has some available,
please send me E-mail on it.

Thanks.


Al Griefer, KC6ZTW        [e-mail]
EMT-1A, AHA CPR Instructor    San Jose, CA

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

From: [e-mail] (Mike Klopfer)
Subject: Signalling on T1 Lines
Date: 18 Oct 1992 22:00:24 -0500
Organization: National Instruments, Austin, TX


I am interested in finding out what standard my local telephone
company uses for signaling on a multiple voice channel T1 connection.
Is this standardized nationwide or is it up to local LECs. I would
appreciate any information on such standards and how I might get
access to them.  Also I'm interested in the service that I believe is
called direct inward dialing where the telephone company provides you
with the last four digits of the number being dialed so it can be
routed automatically.  Thanks.


[e-mail]

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

Subject: "Intercom-Plus" and AT&T 5E Switches
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 92 13:47:53 MST
From: [e-mail]


Pac*Bell offers a custom calling feature called "Intercom-Plus" which
lets you dial *51, *52, or *53 and hang up, giving a distinctive
ring-back so that you can use your phone to talk to somebody at
another station.

Yesterday, I called up Pac*Bell to order this service, and they told
me that it wasn't offered in my service area. This surprised me, since
I knew that I was served by a 5E switch, and I thought that 5E
switches supported all features that 1A switches supported.

Well, I had a specialist call me back, and she told me that from her
list, only AT&T 1AESS switches suported this feature, and this was the
only feature that she knew of that you could get on a 1A but not a 5E.

Does anybody know why this is? It seems strange that a software feature on 1A
switches wouldn't be on 5E switches.


Kevin

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

From: [e-mail] (Georg Schwarz)
Subject: Internatational Country Code Numbering System
Organization: ZRZ/TU-Berlin
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1992 18:50:03 GMT


Does anyone know when the international country code system (with +49
for Germany, +81 for Japan etc.) was introduced?



[Moderator's Note: It was at least 20 years ago. When the first
central offices in Chicago were converted to ESS back in 1972-73 they
had international dialing capability.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (David Neal)
Subject: Wanted: Recommendation For IBM-PC DTMF Board
Organization: Chevron
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1992 02:47:53 GMT


I'm trying to put together a BBS based aircraft scheduling system. It
would be on an IBM PC running MS/DOS or UNIX.

Ideally, I would like to also offer a touch-tone interface to the
database. Clearly, I need a board that has a TSR I can communicate
with while running other software, or an interface defined well enough
that I can write my own TSR or Unix device driver.

I can summarize if there is enough interest.


David Neal -- [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Having the Media Over
Date: 18 Oct 92 18:32:24 CDT
Organization: Data Research Associates, Inc.


Last week Washington University in St. Louis hosted a presidential
debate.  In addition to having President Bush, Gov. Clinton, and Mr.
Perot running around our fair city (actually it was in Clayton, a
suburb where I also live), we had several thousand "media" folk.  In a
period of 6-1/2 days 3,000 phones, a new cellular tower, and
additional power transformers were installed at the debate site.  In
addition a hundred additional lines were installed in the hotels where
the Bush and Clinton campaigns were spending the night (Clinton the
night before the debate, Bush the night after the debate).  No mention
of where Perot was staying, which seemed to frustrate the media.

I suspect most of the telecommunications were installed for the use of
the media and campaign rather than any national security reasons.  At
the debate site there was very little diversity in the routing of the
phone lines.  Basically they all went to the basement of KETC Channel
9 (the local PBS station) located adjacent to the debate site to hook
up to the fiber optic trunk going on to Southwestern Bell's system.
One interesting thing was the difference between the reported number
of phones (3,000) and the reported number of lines (600).  While
normal traffic may justify this, I thought the "event" nature of the
debate would mean that every phone would be in use with reporters
filing stories.  Of course, I got this information from published news
reports, so the information could just be wrong.

Southwestern Bell seemed to have 10-20 trunks on site the entire week
before the debate (any time of the day or night that I drove by there
was always some kind of activity going on).  No mention was made
whether the cellular tower was installed by the wireline carrier, or
the "B" carrier, but I suspect it was SWBT's.  While I'm sure it was
all done legally, I still think it is amazing how they could have
gotten all the permits required for all the construction, radio
towers, etc in such a short time.

A note about the motorcades, and blocking off traffic.  All of the debate
participants received the motorcade treatment.  Perot's was only three
cars, while the President's seemed to have dozens of cars stretched out
almost a mile.  The streets aren't blocked for secrecy (way too many people
know), and it only provides a minor amount of security.  The biggest reason
is to prevent traffic accidents, both with the motorcade and among drivers
as the motorcade passes.  While there was the time a teenager drove into
the side of the President's motorcade (the teenager had the green light at
an intersection), the accidents are usually among cars not involved with
the motorcade.  The  problem is drivers stop watching where they are driving
and watch the motorcade and tend to drive into cars front of them.  I
believe (and who knows maybe the Secret Service would even agree with me) a
better solution would be to make the President's motorcade smaller, but the
political realities (not security) require the press, local mayors,
congresspeople, chief of police, party faithful, etc to ride along.  Getting
that number of vehicles through traffic is going to cause problems anyway
you do it.


Sean Donelan, Data Research Associates, Inc, St. Louis, MO
Domain: [e-mail], Voice: (Work) [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Clint Fleckenstein)
Subject: FCC Modem Tax Scare Plagues Local BBS ...>Again<
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1992 03:15:25 GMT
Organization: North Dakota Higher Ed Computing Network


Well, here's the scoop.  Local users are posting new posts, as part of
Docket 89-79 "Open Network Architecture Basic Service Element
Pricing".  These posts once again purport a charge to Extended Service
Providers on a per minute basis, which, of course, would then be
passed on to the consumer, etc, etc, etc.

I've been on the net for almost six years, and have seen this kind of
crap come up again and again.  This guy supposedly cites sources, but
I haven't seen this anywhere else. The poster says he got the info
from a network somewhere.  What's the deal?  I remain skeptical ... how
do I prove/disprove this?

Is there a source of information regarding this, or is it just one of
those 'send this sick kid postcards' things that gets posted
everywhere?  I'd like to put this to rest for once and for all.


Clint Fleckenstein   <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Master Control/Operations, KFYR TV 5 / KQCD TV 7              .5k EX Pilot
My login and conduct don't belong to Meyer Broadcasting.         DoD #5150

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #793
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa20239;
          19 Oct 92 10:32 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA24502
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 19 Oct 1992 08:03:33 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA06420
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 19 Oct 1992 08:03:24 -0500
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1992 08:03:24 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #794

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 19 Oct 92 08:03:30 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 794

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: How Should I Get My House Wired For Future Phone Needs (Steve Welch)
    Re: How Should I Get My House Wired For Future Phone Needs (Stangenberger)
    Re: Unhappy With the AT&T Attitude (John R. Ruckstuhl Jr.)
    C&W Attitude (was Unhappy With the AT&T Attitude (Mark W. Schumann)
    Re: PC-Based Voicemail Systems (Will Gridweed)
    Re: Answering Machine CPC? (Shrikumar)
    Re: What it Costs to Have the President Over (J. Philip Miller)
    Epps Fork, VA (William D. Bauserman)
    Re: Another List of Cellular Phone Prices (John Higdon)
    Followup on Viking Ringdown Boxes (Lars Poulsen)
    Re: Phone Network Simulator (Jon Sreekanth)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Steve Welch)
Subject: Re: How Should I Get My House Wired For Future Phone Needs?
Organization: Scientific Computing Division/NCAR Boulder, CO
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1992 06:05:11 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(gordon hlavenka) writes:

>> What I'm think of is having three or four-pair twisted pair cable run
>> from each room separately (not daisy-chained the way they normally do
>> it) to a punch-down block in some central location, so we can hook
>> things together anyway we want...

[stuff deleted]

> I pulled a home run from each room down to the entry point in the
> basement.  Used AT&T-made network wiring; 4 UTP rated for 10BASE-T.
> So I can esaily have two lines in each room, with two pairs spare.  I
> could even run ethernet and phone, although somebody's sure to tell me
> there will be a problem with that.

You might want to go ahead and try it, no matter what they say.  I
chickened out and installed Ethernet transceiver cables, which have
been totally problem free (but quite expensive).  What scared me off
was not telephone inteference, but TV and radio inteference, which my
installer (who seemed very competent) warned me about first.  Also,
thin Ethernet is no harder than CATV wire to pull, and if you can
afford a star configuration to a smart hub, that might be a good way
to go if the noise or EMI is too bad on the phone wire.

> Each room is punched down to its own eight positions on the right side of
> a punchdown block, and the phone lines are punched down on the left
> side.  Things then get connected with bridging clips in the middle.
> It all looks very clean and impressive, and (most importantly) it
> WORKS.  No more RGYB birds'-nest in the rafters for me!

I hear you on the no more rafters.  However, I'd strongly recommend
anyone doing this much work to pull six-pair, at least.  I started out
with three lines in, and went to four lines a couple of years later.
The six pair to the punchdown blocks has been extremely handy.  For
instance, I've got a fax/modem switch in a central location, and with
the six pair, I can run the fax line first to the switch only, and
have the three seperated lines come out of it back to the punchdoen
block (fax, modem and downstream voice calls).  This requires seven
pair, really, but I don't run one of the voice lines to that point.
So, you see six pair is only just enough for me.


Steve Welch    <[e-mail]>    Voice: 303-530-2661
National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, CO  USA
also: Complex Systems Research, Niwot, CO   Fax: [phone]

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

Date: Sun, 18 Oct 92 20:52:03 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Al Stangenberger)
Subject: Re: How Should I Get My House Wired For Future Phone Needs?


For new construction, my advice would be to install conduit (1/2" or
3/4" EMT) from each room back to a central point.  Then the choice of
cable is not nearly as critical, and there is room for new technology
such as fiber.

Maybe someone familiar with fiber could recommend a minimum radius for
a conduit bend if fiber installation is anticipated (of course this
depends on the size of the cable).


Al Stangenberger                    Dept. of Forestry & Resource Mgt.
[e-mail]          145 Mulford Hall - Univ. of Calif.

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

From: [e-mail] (John R Ruckstuhl Jr)
Subject: Re: Unhappy With the AT&T Attitude
Organization: EE Dept at UF
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 92 00:22:49 GMT


In comp.dcom.telecom, [e-mail] (John Higdon) writes:

> As mentioned previously, I do substantial business with AT&T each
> month. Considering the size of my bills, the idea that I would attempt
> to weasel out of even $100 is absurd. The supervisor today was put on
> notice that considering the wretched treatment that I received and the
> lack of effort AT&T put forth in resolving the problem, my search for
> a carrier that would offer even remotely similar rates/service has
> been intensified.

Recently, I was billed by AT&T for a 3:20 LD call.  I didn't remember
the call, but I recognize the called number, and it is quite likely
that I did make a call to the number as billed.  But I thought it was
highly !unlikely! that one of my calls could be of such duration.

I called customer service and asked about possible explanations for
what I thought was an error.  The customer service rep couldn't
provide any good explanation, and maybe she believed that I was having
a memory fault, but when I claimed I didn't think such a call from me
could last more than an hour, and she checked my call history for the
past few months, she credited my account for 2:20 of the 3:20 call in
question.

I'm satisfied -- I didn't think my claim sounded very persuasive, and
it's easy for me to believe that I did call that day for between 0:30
and 1:00.  And she was polite.  :)

So, here's my telecom question:

If one recognizes the called number on the bill:

1.  How likely is it that the call was not even made?
    I think it is very unlikely.

2.  If the call was indeed made, how might the duration billed be
    incorrect?

    Anecdotes?


Best regards,

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

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

From: wariat![e-mail]
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 92 19:49 EDT
Subject: C&W Attitude (was Unhappy With the AT&T Attitude)
Organization: Akademia Pana Kleksa, Public Access UNI* Site


[e-mail] (Steve Forrette) writes:

> Because I had previously used Cable & Wireless's Programmable 800
> service, and really liked the fact that I could change the routing
> myself instantly at any time, I gave them a call.

[story about C&W's stupidity in failing to complete the order in a
remotely timely manner deleted.]

C&W has permanently lost any chance of obtaining my business based on
their remarkably poor attitude on a billing problem I had recently.  I
had been on hold for Borland Tech Support for about half an hour (!)
and was then suddenly disconnected, with a message that directed me to
call a certain 800 number for further information.  "Hot Dog!" says I,
"Borland must be handing out toll-free support to make up for the long
wait!"

No such luck.  It was a C&W customer service number, where the rep
told me that either Borland must have hung up on me, or I had dialed 1
and timed out.  In neither case would they compensate my employer for
the half-hour's worth of wasted LD time.  Both scenarios seem to me to
be (to put it politely) hogwash.  Giving them the benefit of the
doubt, though, why on earth would I get a C&W customer service message
when my party hangs up on me?  I dunno.


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


[Moderator's Note: Why do you feel that when the party you were
calling left you on hold for half an hour that the carrier who handled
the call for you owes you for the half hour call? Wouldn't that be the
responsibility of Borland? They're the ones who mishandled the call.
After the connection was broken for whatever reason (because Borland
then carelessly disconnected, etc) and you remained off hook anyway
for a minute or so longer, then you got the message to call the 800
number if you were having trouble of some kind. At least I think so.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Will Gridweed)
Subject: Re: PC-Based Voicemail Systems
Date: 19 Oct 1992 02:29:17 GMT
Organization: University of California, Santa Cruz


[e-mail] (Michael Rosen) writes:

> Does anybody know of a fax/modem voice mail card that incorporates
> 14.4K modem speed as well?  I've heard of ZyXEL -- supposedly they
> have a new upgrade that has voice mail added to their fax/modem.  Can
> anyone attest to the quality of this brand of fax/modems?

    I have their plain 14.4k v32bis/fax modem(no voice mail) and
it works great. They now have a 16.8k protocol in the new roms(I don't
have them though), as well as caller id support and distinctive ring
support. They cost more than the supra/boca v32bis modems, but the
upgradability and quality make it worth it for me.


Will    [e-mail]

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

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 92 02:10:26 -0400
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Answering Machine CPC?
Organization: UMass, Amherst, MA 01002 + Temporal Sys & Comp Net, Bombay, India


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

> On my home phone answering machine, if the machine is active,
> additional callers get a busy signal even though we have call waiting.

> [Moderator's Note: ...  machine is tricking the network into thinking
> there has not been an answer, in the style of the old (were they
> called?) 'black boxes'?  That would indeed be a curious bit of
> workmanship.

  Is that possible at all?

  Come to think of it, can I disable call waiting when I am
*recieving* a call? (As different from *67 before originating a call.)
I sure can't enter *67 before I pick up the handset, and I'd surely
not do that after I have picked up the handset ... the tones would
mildly surprise the caller, DTMF is non-harmonic and very very jarring :-)
especially when you hear that instead of a "hello" !


shrikumar ( [e-mail], [e-mail] )


[Moderator's Note: Many phone switches are set up to allow the person
receiving a call to flash at any point in the connection, receive new
dial tone, enter *67 and be reconnected to the conversation which was
in progress. This is especially true if the called party has three-way
calling which would allow another 'call' to be placed anyway. Try it
on your phone the next time you get a call and see if it works.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (J. Philip Miller)
Subject: Re: What it Costs to Have the President Over
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 92 0:29:53 CDT

> [Moderator's Note: It costs plenty. Of course with a deficit of umpty-
> trillion dollars, I guess it is a small outlay by comparison. Do you
> know how Perot got to the debate Sunday night?  He flew on a
> commercial airline with a couple aides, and took a taxi from the
> airport to the hall. On the plane, he greeted people who came up to
> him to wish him well, etc.   PAT]

I suppose Perot has flown commercial, but the local stories in St.
Louis were that he flew in his private jet.


  J. Philip Miller, Professor, Division of Biostatistics, Box 8067
      Washington University Medical School, St. Louis MO 63110
  [e-mail] - Internet  [phone] [362-2694(FAX)]


[Moderator's Note: News reports here were that he just showed up at
the auditorium when it was time without a big entourage -- just a
few people.  PAT]

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

Date: 18 Oct 92 14:16:00 UT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Epps Fork, VA


Epps Fork/Trading Post area of Virginia is served by Carolina Tel
under an agreement with Contel of VA (dba GTE Virgina now).  If you
are familiar with the area you know that, while this area is part of
VA it is on the "North Carolina side" of the lake.  This made the cost
of placing facilities unreasonable (at the time of the agreement) so a
contract was reached that Contel would own (and pay for) the OSP
facilities and CTT would provide the maintenance and service (to make
a long story short).

These 300 or so people have EAS to Henderson, Norlina, and Warrenton
NC. The exchange is 252 out of Henderson.  FYI, currently there are
negotiations under way for GTE/VA to take back total control of these
customers (by their petition, Mr. Higdon :).)

Usual Disclaimers apply.


Bill Bauserman   [e-mail]

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

Date: Sun, 18 Oct 92 10:52 PDT
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: Another List of Cellular Phone Prices


[e-mail] writes:

> Or, at least, that's the key question for those of us in Kalifornia,
> where the PUC has decided we're not smart enough to understand such
> arrangements, and must therefore pay $300 or so for that same bag
> phone.  (And higher cell rates, too, but that's a function of everyone
> and their nine-year-old having a cellphone.)

I will tell you who is making out like a bandit on the California
deals: the dealers. Even though they are not allowed to tie service
into the price of a phone, the service providers STILL give a $300
kickback to the dealer for signing you up. And even with that healthy
incentive, most have the nerve to charge the customer an ADDITIONAL
$25 for an "activation fee".

So when I went in to Western Appliance and bought my Motorola bag
phone last year for $250, there were some mildly long faces when I
announced that I would be using a current account and would not need
"activation". But then as a face-saving measure, the saleman asked
which carrier it would be used on. When I told him GTE Mobilnet, he
produced complete programming instructions which even gave the unique
system data for GTE. (Had I said Cellular One, he would have given me
those instructions as well.)

So in California, since you are going to have to pay full price for
the phone AND rip-off cellular rates, you might try negotiating a
piece of that sign-up incentive fee that the dealer will get after you
have left the store. But Mr. Broadfield is correct: this is another
example where the customer gets screwed as the result of bumbling
regulatory effort. Just more of the usual from the good old CPUC.


John Higdon  |   P. O. Box 7648   |   [phone]     |       FAX:
[e-mail] | San Jose, CA 95150 | 10288 0 700 FOR-A-MOO | [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Lars Poulsen)
Subject: Followup on Viking Ringdown Boxes
Organization: CMC Network Systems (Rockwell DCD), Santa Barbara, CA, USA
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 92 05:32:15 GMT


A couple of months ago, I reported that I had found some very useful,
inexpensive ringdown boxes made by Viking Electronics. They were only
$106/each. Well, it turns out that you get what you pay for.

The big problem with these boxes was that they would occasionally burn
up. Melted plastic, acrid smoke, you know the situation. After burning
three, we discovered that the power supply is not current limited, and
when both sides go off-hook at the same time, it overloads.

The boxes might still be useful for some one-way applications
(elevators etc), but for our intended use, this won't do. We have
returned all our boxes for a full refund.

Our modem test area will be using a couple of Panasonix KX-T30810
switches instead ....


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] (Jon Sreekanth)
Subject: Re: Phone Network Simulator
Organization: The World
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 1992 16:19:48 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Proctor & Associates) writes:

Teltone (800-426-3926 or 206-487-1515) makes line simulators TLS-3 and
TLS-4. The cheaper -3 has two RJ11's and can have one conversation;
the -4 has four jacks, and can have two independent conversations. We
bought a couple of TLS-3's earlier this year (about $300-something).
Apart from the fact that the on-hook battery voltage is 24V, not 48V,
and the ring is square, not sinewave, it's a fairly nice unit.

> The 49250 Phone Demo II simulates two lines, and handles tone dialing
> only.  It has real dial tone, ringback tone, and ringing, and you just
> go off hook on one jack, dial any seven-digit phone number (or #) and
> it rings the other line.  The price is $259.95, FOB Redmond, WA.

We considered this, and liked it better because the battery voltage
was 48, but what killed it for us was we use # as a command introducer
in the gadget we were demo'ing. We were afraid that if the 49250
responded to the # and started ringing the other outlet, it would
cause great confusion. The Teltone uses * instead of #, and that was
OK with us.  It was minor, but it swayed the decision. Maybe a good
idea to have a few dip-switch customizations on a product like this.


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

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #794
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa27400;
          20 Oct 92 4:20 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA24538
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 20 Oct 1992 02:10:08 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA15097
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 20 Oct 1992 02:08:26 -0500
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1992 02:08:26 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #795

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 20 Oct 92 02:08:30 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 795

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Question About ROLM PBX Telephones (Mike Morris)
    Re: Highway Call Boxes (Mike Morris)
    Re: Retail Videoconferencing? (Mark Cheeseman)
    Re: E-Mail For Michigan Residents (Mark W. Schumann)
    Re: LD Transmission Quality Comparison (John Rice)
    Re: DC to DC Convertor Needed (Rich Greenberg)
    Re: Modem Question (Tony Pelliccio)
    Re: N-1-1 Codes (Tony Pelliccio)
    Re: SPRINT Outage (Matthew Waugh)
    Re: Message Center and Call Waiting (Shrikumar)
    Re: What it Costs to Have the President Over (Michael Peirce)
    Re: What it Costs to Have the President Over (Barry Mishkind)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Mike Morris)
Subject: Re: Question About ROLM PBX Telephones
Organization: College Park Software, Altadena, CA
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1992 21:46:07 GMT


[e-mail] (Joseph Bergstein)
writes:

> In a message from Martin McCormick, he states:

>> The Rolm PBX'S are made by Seimens, as far as I know.

> ROLM PBX'x have been made by the Rolm Company since they were founded.
> As I recall, ROLM actually started out manufacturing MILSPEC Nova
> (Data General) computers in the early '70s.  I recall seeing them as
> the console computer on early Amdahl 470 mainframes.

Correct.  I have an old sales brochure for a Rolm version of the Nova
4.  And when I got a tour of the MCI switch in downtown LA years ago
(long before MCI had 950- access, and way before 1+ access) the
controlling computers were Rolms.


Mike Morris   WA6ILQ    PO Box 1130   Arcadia, CA. 91077   818-447-7052
All opinions must be my own since nobody pays me enough to be their mouthpiece

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

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 92 14:34:39 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Mike Morris)
Subject: Re: Highway Call Boxes


[e-mail] writes:

> Along the highway, out in the country in California anyway, there are
> emergency telephone call boxes, with phones which connect you directly
> to the Highway Patrol or some such agency.

I wrote:

> They are self-contained cellular phones.  Supposedly they have
> tamper and tilt-over switches, but I doubt it -- there's been one laid
> flat in Eagle Rock (near Pasadena) now for almost two weeks.  The
> solar panel disappeared on day four.

Steve Forrette,  [e-mail] wrote:

> They do indeed have tamper alarms.  There was a case a few months back
> of someone on I-580 in the Altamont Pass area taking them down to
> steal.  When the CHP dispatcher saw the tamper alarms going off in
> succession for a few of the boxes, they got an officer out there
> pronto, who found a pickup truck with various call box parts in the
> bed.

Well, that call box (specifically #134-122) is still flat, at about
three weeks now.  Thursday night the box was still on the pole, Friday
morning it was gone -- but the pole was still there.  And Friday
morning the first callbox west of the 101-5 junction on the westbound
101 was flat (I couldn't read the number).  This morning the solar
panel is missing ...

I can't belive that nobody notices things like this. Supposedly the
Highway Patrol has it's "beats" set up so a officer covers a beat
every two or three hours.  CalTrans (CA. Dept of Transportation -- the
freeway builders / fixers) has a maintenance station less than five
miles away.  Somebody from there has to drive that route to get to
work.  Nobody cares to report this stuff?  The tamper alarms are
disabled at the central site?

And somebody has to realize that LA has a high techie-to-general
populace ratio, and that a solar panel that's free for the taking from
a downed call box is going to evaporate.  It wouldn't take much to
have a tilt-over/tamper alert be sent to the nearest CalTrans
maintenance station (which are all over the place) who could send out
a two-man crew and a big pickup truck to pick up the entire assembly
before the technological vultures got to it.  No special equipment
needed, just wheels, muscles and a little bit of brains.  Oh yeah --
that's what is missing -- brains.  (Sarcasm intended).


Mike Morris   WA6ILQ   PO Box 1130  Arcadia, CA. 91077  818-447-7052
All opinions must be my own since nobody pays me enough to be their mouthpiece

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

From: Mark Cheeseman <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Retail Videoconferencing?
Organization: Your Computer Magazine, Sydney, Australia
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 92 10:15:01 GMT


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

> Reminded by someone else's post hypothesizing full-motion switched
> service, I've been wondering for a while why there aren't services out
> there that provide a meeting room with a videoconference setup, on a
> by-the-hour basis.  (Maybe there are, and I just haven't found them.)

Here in Australia, our now ex-monopoly, Telecom, has such a service
between capital cities (and maybe other centres as well). Its
popularity soared during a domestic pilots strike a few years back,
but dropped back again when it became easier to fly again.

I think most people would rather travel interstate than across the
city to the teleconferencing studio (I certainly do).


Mark Cheeseman, Your Computer. [e-mail]  Fido: 3:712/412.0
Phn: [phone]  Fax: [phone]  AMPRnet: coming RSN!

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

From: wariat![e-mail]
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 92 19:40 EDT
Subject: Re: E-Mail For Michigan Residents
Organization: Akademia Pana Kleksa, Publi Access UNI* Site


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

> Mr. Koronakos also says:

>> I don't know if Prodigy/Compuserve-type service provide email access
>> to the net, how much extra (if any) this costs, etc.

> Compu$erve does provide internet access but their rates are at least
> $12.50 an hour to send or receive messages, and I believe they also
> charge for messages sent.  On the other hand Compuserve is offering a
> $7.50 a month special access plan which allows a certain number of
> messages sent per month.

That "special access plan" is now the only available plan for new
users.  It allows a certain number of free email messages per month
and charges after that.

For members who chose not to switch over to the new billing plan,
there is no charge per message, only for online time.


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

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: LD Transmission Quality Comparison
Organization: Teradyne Inc., Telecommunications Division
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 92 23:41:51 GMT


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

> [e-mail] (Andy Sherman) wrote:

>> First off, AT&T has had *some* optical fiber in the network for some
>> time.  But the particular medium of digital transmission should matter
>> not one whit for how to do echo cancellation.  The propagation delays
>> are the same for all terrestrial links.

> This cannot be correct.  Propagation delay depends on media type.  The
> signal propagation speed in fiber is slower than that in coax cable,
> for example.  It must be different for pure copper wire, also.

Huh?  Did they just repeal the speed of light?  Where did you hear
this?

But I agree, that the medium has no effect on echo cancellation.


J.R.


[Moderator's Note: While the 'speed of light' is approximatly 186,000
miles per second -- about seven times around the earth in a second I
guess -- I think that depends on it going in a straight line without
any bends, curves, etc in its path. Don't things like that cause it
(light) to slow down a little?  Certainly the fiber bends and twists
along its path a little from time to time. Might that matter?   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Rich Greenberg)
Subject: Re: DC to DC Convertor Needed
Organization: Hatch Usenet and E-mail.  Playa del Rey, CA
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1992 00:32:48 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> Ron <acct069@carroll1.
cc.edu> writes:

> My company is in search of a low cost DC to DC convertor that will
> take -48VDC from the central office battery feed and convert it to a
> regulated +12VDC at around 1 Amp, plus or minus 1/2 Amp.

That's going to take something like 1/4 amp from the phone line.
(Ignoring conversion losses.)  If there is any wire distance getting
to the CO or PBX, there will be a significant voltage drop there.

I doubt the local telco would appreciate this.


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

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

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 92 21:53:09 EDT
From: Tony Pelliccio <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Modem Question


In reference to [e-mail]'s question about the modem he
has....  Lets see ... CTS is clear to send, I suspect ERR is error
correction active, DCD is probably Data Carrier Detect, PWR is
obvious, but LB ... hmmmm... couldn't tell you what that one is. I
know this HST has a whole bunch of lights but at least it tells you
what they are on the bottom. :)

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

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 92 22:05:57 EDT
From: Tony Pelliccio <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: N-1-1 Codes


As for N11 codes the following have been used since the early part of
this century:

411 - Directory Assistance
911 - Emergency
611 - Repair Service
211 - Way, way, way back before direct dial was available you dialed
      211 for ALL long distance calls.

I like the use of 611 for repair, and it shows through with RI's
repair number ... 1-555-1611.


[Moderator's Note: Before 911 was for emergencies it along with 511
and 711 were frequently used as temporary gateways between subscribers
with automatic dialing and manual service customers in the same local
calling area. (The '0' operator only assisted the customers with
dialed call completion, like now.) 811 was used for 'priority long
distance during the Second World War by military and government people
with sufficient rank to demand an immediate connection even if all
circuits to some place were busy. After the war ended, 811 was kept
around for long distance calls originating in hotels, institutions and
other places where a PBX operator had to keep the time and charges for
billing back to the individual calling extension.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Matthew Waugh)
Subject: Re: SPRINT Outage
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 92 02:41:55 GMT
Organization: Data General Corporation, RTP, NC.


> [Moderator's Note: .......  The word is the service will be out for a
> long time; maybe a month or more.

Our service came back late this week. A few translation problems in
call handling still exist. I have no idea if we were re-routed to
another switching centre, but since we use a VPN from SPRINT I cannot
imagine we were slammed.

However, I do believe that residential customers in some parts of
North Carolina were slammed to alternative carriers. The big question
is, will they get slammed back? By slammed I mean their default long
distance carrier was changed without notification, regardless of it
being for their own good. I guess the Baby Bells still do know what's
best for you. So did they slam everyone to AT&T, or did they use some
complicated formula, or did they just divide everyone up. What happens
when people who didn't know they got changed to AT&T refuse to pay
their long distance bills -- I mean they chose SPRINT for it's rates
and quality of service, why should they pay AT&T's rates and get it's
service quality when they didn't choose to :-). So many questions, so
little time.


Matthew Waugh          [e-mail]
RTP Network Services       Data General Corp.
RTP, NC. (919)-248-6034

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

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 92 02:12:41 -0400
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Message Center and Call Waiting
Organization: UMass, Amherst, MA 01002 + Temporal Sys & Comp Net, Bombay, India


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

> Does anyone have any idea why calls which go unanswered for, say three
> rings, can be automatically forwarded to my Pac Bell Message Center
> mailbox, but if I am on a call already (and I have call-waiting) a
> call-waiting call unanswered will not be forwarded?

> [Moderator's Note: You do NOT have to 'get rid of call waiting'. All
> you have to do is suspend call waiting for the duration of the call on
> which you would rather not be disturbed. The idea seems to be that for

  I am not sure what, but there is something in our Moderator's
comment makes me want to add a line ...  :_)

  As somebody pointed out to me by E-mail, there are two varieties of
Call-forward-on-busy, and if you talk to the telco persitently enough,
and sound knowledgable enough (in other words sledge-hammer your way
thru) you can get call forwarding-on-busy set up to transfer after
three beep-beeps on call waiting. At least so it seemed when I almost
got call-fwd-on-busy on my other line in the house from NET, before I
decided at the very last moment that I do want it all that bad.

   And whats more, you can do this separately for each differential
ring number that you own.

   PAT, we must remember that conversations are not flat, they are not
even monotonic (tho' they canbe monotonous :-) so there are moments
when I want an interruption and moments when I don't within the *same*
call.  And when I am going thru a sensitive part of one conversation,
I would rather have the new incoming call transfer to the voice-mail,
than to lose it altogether. Maybe the moral is "not to get into a
situation where you are likely to have the possibility of two
sensitive conversations at the same time :-)"

   What I don't know is does the differential ring-service also imply
a differential beep-beep in call-waiting?

   Also, I wonder if its possible to specify no call-waiting if the
call I picked up was for my data-number, but call waiting active if I
answered a call on my voice number, if I have both call-waiting and
Ring-mate serive. Or maybe it is ...

   BTW, how can I disable call waiting on a call I recieve?  Say, I
have one line for voice, and a fax machine that picks up the call when
I am not around ... there does not seem anyway for the fax machine to
say, "I'm picking up this call, so no call waiting". Seems to be all
or nothing.


shrikumar ( [e-mail], [e-mail] )


[Moderator's Note: Yes, there is a different call waiting signal for
calls on the distinctive ringing line. They call it distinctive call
waiting. Seriously ... the 'beep beep' has a little different cadence
to it, just as the ring does. You install suspspend call waiting on a
call you receive by flashing the hook, dialing *67 and getting dropped
back into the call which was in progress automatically in places which
offer that feature. Some COs require you to have three way calling in
order to use *67 on incoming calls; otherwise there would be no reason
for flashing the hook. Some CO's let you flash just for the *67 part
with or without three way calling. In Chicago, the distinctive ringing
numbers (you can have two plus the main number) can be programmed at
the CO to either follow along with the main number on whatever it does
or to act independently. I have my distinctive ringing number set up
to NOT follow the call forwarding on the main line. It will just 'ring
through' regardless. I have it programmed to interupt with call waiting
however. Some people just have it return a busy signal if it or the
main number is in use. My distinctive ringing number also follows the
main number into voicemail, but only on a 'true busy', that is, when
*67 has been activated. If the main line is off hook without a
connection or being run, etc, then calls on the distinctive ringing
line also get a busy signal.     PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Michael Peirce)
Subject: Re: What it Costs to Have the President Over
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 92 14:13:52 PST
Organization: Peirce Software
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Michael Peirce)


In article <[e-mail]> ([e-mail]),
wrote:

> In St. Louis we've had several presidential visits.  Most involve
> shutting down a major interstate for 30 minutes, often during rush
> hour.  Even the Vice President rates closing the Interstate.  After
> Sunday's debate, the President spent the night in the city.  Monday
> between 6AM and 7AM a police car was parked at every overpass and
> every entrance ramp along a 20 mile stretch of the Interstate.
> Pedestrian bridges had police stationed on foot.  St. Louis didn't
> have the money to plow snow from most city streets last winter.  I
> wonder if we can afford street lights and sewage treatment now.

Here in Silicon Valley they've been shutting down a freeway for about
an hour for the last couple of days simply for an airshow!

US-101 is right next to Moffet Naval Air Station and the Blue Angels
are practicing for this weekend's show.  They have a couple of
maneuvers that take them right over the highway and they don't want
people to be startled into having an accident.

BTW: This is last airshow at Moffet since it will soon no longer be a
Naval Air Station.


Michael Peirce      --   [e-mail]
Peirce Software     --   Suite 301, 719 Hibiscus Place
                    --   San Jose, California USA 95117
voice: [phone] fax: [phone]
AppleLink: peirce & America Online: AFC Peirce

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

From: [e-mail] (Barry Mishkind)
Subject: Re: What it Costs to Have the President Over
Organization: Datalog Consulting, Tucson, AZ
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 92 02:47:05 GMT


[e-mail] (Tom. Adams 529-7860) writes:

> In St. Louis we've had several presidential visits.  Most involve
> shutting down a major interstate for 30 minutes, often during rush
> hour.  Even the Vice President rates closing the Interstate.  After

Maybe, right after the "no new taxes" pledge, we could get candidates
to pledge to make their visits less "regal" ?


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


[Moderator's Note: Lots of luck with that idea!  :)      PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #795
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa26232;
          21 Oct 92 4:18 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA11585
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 21 Oct 1992 01:53:08 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA10436
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 21 Oct 1992 01:52:23 -0500
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1992 01:52:23 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #796

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 21 Oct 92 01:52:27 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 796

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Picturetel Video Conference Experience (Brad Houser)
    Credit For Dropped Handoff Calls ([e-mail])
    Strange Beeping Noises (Roger Black)
    Cordless Phones: Handset to Base Handshake? (Eric E. Snyder)
    Need Help With Jack For Second Line (Bob Sloan)
    High European Phone Rates (was East German Pay Phone) (Wolf Paul)
    Why I Stick With AT&T (John Higdon)
    AT&T International Information Now Dialable From Canada (Dave Leibold)
    Eat Here and Get Gas (Paul Robinson)
    911/611 1/0+700 (Shing Pui-Shum Benson)
    Phantom CO'S (Ray Normandeau)
    Charity Begins at Home, and Ends With the Phone Bill (David Leibold)
    What is Van Eck Phreaking? ([e-mail])
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Brad Houser)
Subject: Picturetel Video Conference Experience
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Intel Corporation, California Technology Development
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1992 15:01:57 GMT


I had the pleasure/frustration of using Picturetel Video Conferencing
last week.  The system is set up with special conference rooms Intel's
Santa Clara headquarters.  There are two large (>= 27") monitors at
one end of the room and a "cyclops" camera on a box above one monitor.
The camera can be controlled from a console in front of the main
speaker.  It allows left/right/up/down panning, plus zoom.  Four
presets allow you to store settings for different people.  Normally
one monitor (closest to the middle) is for watching the "far end" and
the other is for watching your self. The controls allow you to also
control what you are watching at the "far end".  There is a 1/4 second
delay, for both video and audio when you are connected to the other
end.  The video is much lower quality than regular video, but then
again it is being digitized (and compressed?)  to squeeze over the
phone lines.

There is a document camera in the ceiling which can send live video,
or a "snapshot" can be sent and stored in video memory at the other
end.

When dialing another site, a menu stores 30 something numbers, and one
can direct dial.  The interesting thing was that there are two numbers
required, both to a 700 area code.  (All the numbers in the menu,
regardless of their geographic location use 700).  I was told by our
technical guy that there are two modes, 56kb and 112kb.  I guess that
depends on how many lines you use or the equipment at each end.

We had problems connecting to the other end.  The connection went
through, and they could see us, but we couldn't see them.  Sound
worked fine.  Our main monitor had an error message that said
something like "Data rate too low for second channel". After repeated
attempts to dial, there were setup failures.  Finally, they gave us a
new set of numbers, and we were able to connect, but again with only
video in one direction.

One thing I learned is that if I dialed the two numbers in the wrong
sequence, I got a picture of myself (with the time delay) similar to
what I could see by dialing a test loopback number.  Is this how two
sites send pictures to each other, each using one line?

I am encouraged by the technology, but it still has it's problems.
For some reason, the people we were calling could only answer calls,
as they go through some distribution center or something like that.

I would be interested in learning more about the technology.  Does
anyone know where I can find more info?


[Brad Houser           Intel: Home of the Pentium (TM)               ]
[                            [e-mail]                   ]
[[phone]                                                Woof!]

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

Date: 20 Oct 1992 10:14:34 -0500 (CDT)
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Credit For Dropped Handoff Calls


Hi,

Can someone enlighten me on credit given for dropped handoff calls
when using cellular phones? Who gets the credit -- the initiator or
the receiver? What happens if the initiator is not a cellular
subscriber but the receiver is?  Does the credit depend on the
duration of call before it was dropped? Are there any articles dealing
with credit policies?


Thanks.

Sridhar ([e-mail])

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

From: [e-mail] (Roger Black)
Subject: Strange Beeping Noises
Organization: Colorado SuperNet, Inc.
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1992 16:55:36 GMT


Recently I received a strange phone call.  It consisted of four or
five low-pitched beeps of about one second duration separated by 1.5
to two seconds of silence:

  beep ... ... beep ... ... beep ... ... beep ... ... beep

This was followed by about about twenty seconds of silence and then a
dial tone.

I am not the only person in this area to receive such calls.  I only
got two of them, about five minutes apart, but I know one person who
has received dozens of them.

Does anyone have a clue what this might be?


James Roger Black    [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: It was probably a fax machine misprogrammed to call
your number (or the other numbers where you have been told the calls
were received.) If it only happens once in a while, you really don't
have any practical recourse -- just treat it as a wrong number. The
beeping is the machine's way of asking for another machine to 'speak'
to it. As for the person who has received 'dozens of calls', I suggest
he make an effort to stop the problem by getting telco to track down
the originator. Call Trace might be one technique he could use.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Eric E. Snyder)
Subject: Cordless Phones: Handset to Base Handshake?
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Date: 20 Oct 92 17:03:57 GMT


What prevents a near-by party with a cordless phone from dialing out
using my base unit and making charges on my phone line?  Since, there
are only ten pairs of cordless phone frequencies, what ensures that
only my handset can talk to my base unit?  Is there some sort of ID
code transmitted between the units or is it only distance which
prevents neighbors from using my phone line?

Any pointers to how security is maintained would be appreciated.


Thanks,

Eric E. Snyder    Department of MCD Biology
University of Colorado, Boulder    Boulder, Colorado 80309-0347


[Moderator's Note: Many years ago, the only protection against this
problem was distance. There was only one frequency in use; I think it
was around 1730 KC. People could even tune in cordless phones on
regular AM radios if the tuning dial was warped a little. As more
folks got cordless phones, the distance between them disappeared, and
the solution was to go to 46-49 megs with ten channels, the assumption
being it was unlikely any two nearby cordless users would have units
on the same channel (the phones were packaged and sold randomly on the
different frequencies). Security was so bad for awhile that 'cruising
for dial tone' -- that is, driving down the street with your remote
unit up to your ear listening for someone else's line so you could
sneak a call in -- was a common thing. Now there is something like an
ID code -- a sort of ESN for cordless phones -- that is passed between
the base and the remote and must be satisfied before the two will talk
to each other at all. There are thousands of code combinations; these
plus the choice of ten frequencies make the theft of phone service via
cordless phone a lot more difficult although still not impossible.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Bob Sloan)
Subject: Need Help With Jack For Second Line
Organization: Dept. of EECS, University of Illinois at Chicago
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1992 19:27:06 GMT


I've just moved into a Chicago high-rise build in 1971 and I want a
second line.

    I've paid the local phone company to set it up, but wanted to
do my own wiring.

    We have old-style four-prong jacks, and I was told that if I
was lucky, I could plug in a four-to-modular converter, then plug a
one-line to two-line modular converter to that, and then plug in the
phones.  I'm not lucky.  Both phones are on the same number.

    I open up the plate, and I find an old round jack with screws
at 3, 6, 9, and 12 and no labels whatsover.  Each screw has a loop of
wire with insulation scraped off in the middle attached to it.  The
colors don't match the standard code or any alternates listed in the
ATT phone book.  I seem to recall white with blue bands, white with
brown bands, gray and green.  (I think they had bands as well.)

    To add to the fun, all the phone jacks in this apartment are
fush mounted next to an electric outlet, with one long plate covering
all three.  The jack is physically attached to a 2" x 2.25" metal
frame, which is screwed into a bracket in the wall at two opposite
corners.

    Questions:

1.  Am I correct in assuming that these are indeed the classic red,
green, yellow, and black wires, and I just have to figure out which
one of the four! mappings is going to work?

2.  Is there any place in the world where I could buy a flush mounted
modular jack of the same size to replace these with?

3.  Alternatively, if I try all 24 different ways of connecting these
wires to this jack, and use the four-prong to modular converter plus the
modular one line to two line converter, is one of them likely to make
my two lines work?  (The current jack looks very symmetric, so I'm a
bit worried.)

4.  Advice?


[Moderator's Note: The trouble is you will hear misleading dial tones
and think all is well when it isn't, for example getting tip one and
ring two or ring one and tip two connected to the phone. I think a
good starting place would be to make the assumption that the wires on
3 and 12 go together and the wires on 6 and 9 go together. That would
keep your symetry intact if it does exist as you say. You might also
assume the color combinations are red/green for line one, yellow/black
for line two, and white/blue for line three. The reason I suggest the
3/12 and 6/9 combinations is because that would be similar to the
modular plugs currently in use which go (1/6, 2/5, and 3/4) or
(1/4, 2/3) if it only has four contacts in the plug. Above all, listen
closely as you work. Dial some test number: do you hear two dial
tones, one maybe a split second later arriving than the other? When
dialing do you hear the call being set up twice, or ringing and busy
at the same time?  If so, then you've got the two pairs tied together
in error somehow. Have someone call each of your lines, one at a time.
If they hear ringing for a second then 'popping' or a switch from
ringing to rapid busy tone, etc ... you've got the wires from one pair
mixed with the other pair somewhere. See if these suggestions help.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Wolf Paul)
Subject: High European Phone Rates (was East German Pay Phone)
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Wolf N. Paul)
Organization: Alcatel Austria - Elin Research Center, Vienna
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1992 08:00:32 GMT


Commenting on an article by [e-mail] (Joseph Malloy),
our esteemed Moderator notes:

> [Moderator's Note: Hey that even makes COCOTS and AOS outfits look
> pretty good!  :)  Makes me wonder why the alternate operator services
> and COCOTS have not tried to get into places in Europe where they
> would be right at home ... the citizens wouldn't know any better.  PAT]

What idiots do you take us for? We only put up with these rates
because telecommunications in many places is a government monopoly (by
constitutional law, which would take a two-thirds majority in the
legislature to change), which is exactly why COCOTS and AOS outfits
cannot get in any more than legitimate alternate phone companies which
might cause rates to go down ...


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, 20 Oct 92 21:40 PDT
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Why I Stick With AT&T


Recently I recounted a serious glitch in the way AT&T's front line
customer handling. As a result, I have received much e-mail
recommending various other carriers.

Now let me dump on Sprint just a bit. Tonight while attempting to
establish a new UUCP connection to a site on the east coast, we found
that calls in the eastbound direction were screwing up. So I enabled
my modems' speakers and listened. (I was using my secondary Sprint
account for the calls.) Instead of being connected to the distant
modem there was a recording: "We're sorry. Your long distance service
has been temporarily discontinued. Please call customer service for
assistance.  48-8-70"

A call to Sprint customer service was next to useless. First she could
not find my account from any of my phone numbers. After digging in my
"paid invoices" shoebox, I managed to obtain the account number. She
had me answer "dummy" questions such as "did you dial 10333 before the
area code and number?", etc. After determining that there were no
delinquent bill problems and that the eight phone numbers were
correct, she told me that they would look into it.

In the meantime, it is not fortunate that there is always AT&T to fall
back on?


John Higdon  |   P. O. Box 7648   |   [phone]     |       FAX:
[e-mail] | San Jose, CA 95150 | 10288 0 700 FOR-A-MOO | [phone]

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

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1992 00:37:18 -0400
From: [e-mail] (Dave Leibold)
Subject: AT&T International Information Now Dialable From Canada


AT&T's assistance line for international calling, 1 800 874.4000, is
now dialable from Canada. This is the service which provides things
like country codes and city codes for given places, plus other
information on international calling.

There is also a regular number which can be called collect from
outside North America, but that number doesn't seem handy at the
moment.


for faster replies: [e-mail] or [e-mail]
Dave Leibold - via FidoNet node 1:250/98
INTERNET: [e-mail]

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

Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1992  21:08:08 EDT
Subject: Eat Here and Get Gas


In Bethesda, MD, at the corner of East/West Highway and Wisconsin
Avenue, a place is selling cellular phone tie ins.  If you drove over
there, you would say that you don't understand how, when the only
things on that corner are a post office, a police station, a building
for rent and a Chevron gasoline station.

In front of one of these places is a sign:

"Free Cellular phone with any brake job."

Obviously they aren't giving these phones away and taking a loss on
them, considering the competition in gas stations, I don't think they
can raise something else to cover the difference.  This implies that
the kickbacks the cellular companies are paying for subscribers are so
lucrative that the gas station can pay the full cost of the phone.

This is becoming almost as funny as those taglines on messages that
say "Free Bank with purchase of a toaster."


Paul Robinson -- [e-mail]
These (uninformed) opinions are mine alone, nobody else is (stupid
enough to be) responsible for them.


[Moderator's Note: 'Eat here and get gas' reminds me of the old Pixley
and Ehlers restaurant chain in Chicago thirty years ago, when there
were as many of them around as there are McDonald's today. Gawd, those
places were horrible!  Getting a bad case of gas was the least of the
problems one might encounter from those all night eateries with winos
and bums laying asleep at the tables with the one cup of coffee they
bought entitling them to sit in there out of the cold.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (SHING PUI-SHUM BENSON)
Subject: 911/611 1/0+700
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1992 04:49:27 GMT


I recently saw a few posts about 611, and on a local BBS someone
mentioned that 611 here (in 303) is the same as 911.  Well, no one
here really knows what's up, so I wonder if you might be able to tell
me why the phone companies have another 911?

Also, someone here mentioned poking the 700 area code.  Well, I recall
a few companies and (not to mention any names) high billing
conferences accessed from 700, but I think those began with 0+700,
while I hear different things are accessed with 1+700.  Is this
becoming another 800/900 thing?  Is 0+ or 1+700 correct?  Will there
be a 600 soon?

Sorry if it seems like I'm asking too much, but I've just pondered
these for a while, and no one else here locally seems to know the
answers either.


Thanks for any responses.

Shing


[Moderator's Note: 611 is *not* the same as 911. If it so happens that
in some community calls to 611 wind up with 911 then there is a
problem. 611 is used for repair service by many telcos. Maybe in 303-land
repair service needs some repairs done, eh?  :)   There are both 0+700
and 1+700 style numbers, doing different things, and yes, there are
some high-priced calls there, but 700 is not instrinsically a premium
service as is 900/976. And unlike all other telephone numbers where
the terminating point for the number is agreed upon by all carriers;
ie dialing 312-PIG-4000 will connect you with the Chicago Police HQ
regardless of carrier used to place the call; each carrier has
complete control over the 700 number space to use as desired. What a
700 number gets you on AT&T is not what it will get you on Sprint.  PAT]

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

Subject: Phantom CO'S
From: [e-mail] (Ray Normandeau)
Date: 20 Oct 92 15:35:00 GMT
Organization: Invention Factory's BBS - New York City, NY - 212-274-1243v.32bis
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Ray Normandeau)


[e-mail] writes:

> I want to test a modem's network interface without connecting to a
> live telephone network. I've heard that there are devices with
> several RJ-11 jacks that simulate network interfaces, but I don't
> know where to look for them. Can you give me pointers to such
> devices?

Command Communications
("Inventor of the original Fax switch")
Phone [phone]
Fax   [phone]

makes something called the PHANTOM CO which lists for $159.00 It
should do what you want.

I own their ASAP TP-300+ Phone/Fax switch with which I am very happy.
Their Fax switches are available thru many discount outlets, but I
doubt that the Phantom CO is.

I would like a Phantom CO to connect my Fax to my IBM PC Fax card as I
use my Fax machine as a graphic scanner; but I don't want to pay
$150.00.

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

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 92 23:30:06 EDT
From: David Leibold <[e-mail]>
Subject: Charity Begins at Home, and Ends With the Phone Bill


A report from the Canadian Press notes that Penny Brock of London,
Ontario, opens her home to the homeless to help them get on their feet
again. Unfortunately, one of the boarders decided to place 346 calls
to the Dominican Republic as well as other long distance charges,
resulting in a $4000 phone bill for Brock, and a skipping boarder she
and her lawyer cannot find.

This is mild compared to last year when Brock's home was destroyed by
another boarder who decided to light up some grease on a stove and
consequently burned down the house. Another boarder smashed Brock's
car up one time.

Bell Canada Terms of Service 9.1 section states: "Customers are
responsible for paying for all calls originating from, and charged
calls accepted at, their telephones, regardless of who made or
accepted them."


[e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: The USA tariffs all read about the same way noting
that the subscriber is responsible for the use of his instruments.
Telco does not take sides in disputes ... just pay the bill!  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: What is Van Eck Phreaking?
Date: 20 Oct 92 18:08:13 +1000
Organization: University of New South Wales


Hi,

   Just a quick query.  Can someone explain to me what is Van Eck
phreaking?


Best Wishes,

Henry     University of NSW,   Sydney Australia.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #796
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa27068;
          21 Oct 92 4:46 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA08420
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 21 Oct 1992 02:18:39 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA28018
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 21 Oct 1992 02:18:09 -0500
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1992 02:18:09 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #797

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 21 Oct 92 02:18:15 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 797

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: A Small Tutorial on Networking Stuff (Syd Weinstein)
    Re: A Small Tutorial on Networking Stuff (Randal L. Schwartz)
    Re: A Small Tutorial on Networking Stuff (Tony Harminc)
    Re: A Small Tutorial on Networking Stuff (Brad S. Hicks)
    Re: How Should I Get My House Wired For Future Phone Needs? (Jim Rees)
    Re: How Should I Get My House Wired For Future Phone Needs? (Andrew Dunn)
    Re: How Should I Get My House Wired For Future Phone Needs? (Maxime Taksar)
    Re: How Should I Get My House Wired For Future Phone Needs? (A. Klossner)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Syd Weinstein)
Subject: Re: A Small Tutorial on Networking Stuff
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Datacomp Systems, Inc.  Huntingdon Valley, PA
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1992 13:46:50 GMT


mc/G=Brad/S=Hicks/OU=[e-mail] writes:

> Lars's explanation of an RFC822 ("Internet mail") address is quite
> coherent and complete.  It consists of <almost_anything>@<path>, where
> <path> is the chain of systems, as a hierarchy, that mail would have
> to go through to get there from one of a relatively small number of
> widely known hosts or gateways, like ".edu" (the domain controller for
> US colleges), or ".nl" (the PTT in the Netherlands).  Each step in the
> path is a short non-case-sensitve ASCII string, no spaces (not much
> punctuation at all permitted, I think), separated by periods.  The
> idea is that if you're [e-mail], and you're sending to
> [e-mail], your mailer will realize that we have "y.z.com" in
> common and just send it direct, but if your mailer hasn't the foggiest
> idea how to reach "y.z.com" or even "z.com", by all the Godz, at least
> it knows how to reach "com"!

I'd like to correct a small mistake here.  FQDN's (Fully Qualified
Domain Names) are translated to either an Internet Address (dotted
quad as in 127.0.0.1) or a MX (Mail Exchanger address (again a dotted
quad).  The mailer connects directly to the dotted quad address for
delivery.  There is no 'forwarding' (not counting the MX concept, its
a direct delivery to the MX).

What is handled right to left via the FQDN is translation of the name
to number.  If your Domain Name Server (DNS) knows (has cached) the
full name, it will return the dotted quad immediately.  If not, IT
(not the MAILER) will start pulling off left hand parts asking who to
ask to know more about the name.  Eventually, after putting them back
together, it has an answer on what dotted quad to pass back to the
mailer.  All the mailer sees is the dotted quad (plus perhaps its
equivalent name) and works with that.  Its the DNS that does the
lookup.


Sydney S. Weinstein, CDP, CCP          Elm Coordinator - Current 2.4PL02
Datacomp Systems, Inc.                 Projected 3.0 Release: ??? ?,1994
[e-mail] or dsinc!syd      Voice: [phone], FAX: [phone]

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

Subject: Re: A Small Tutorial on Networking Stuff
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 92 08:16:23 -0700
From: Randal L. Schwartz <[e-mail]>


> Note that in RFC822, you can have multiple domains within a country,
> and everybody everywhere is assumed to know where they are.  I suspect
> that it chafes at some PTT-type-folk that the US has multiple domains
> that they have to keep track of; why can't we make those ".com.us" and
> ".edu.us" and ".bitnet.us" and be like everybody else?  Well, in the
> X.400 spec, they got their revenge.  The lowest common denominator
> there IS the country code.

Because it was supposed to go the *other* way.

There's no need for ".com.nl" and ".com.au" and ".com.uk".  The
top-level domains of com, org, edu, mil, net, and gov were clearly
intended from the beginning to be international in scope.  It was the
silly PTTs that started deciding that they weren't going to let the
Americans have the root nameservers for *their* commercial domains
that created the country codes.

In fact, ".us" is merely a hack so that the small UUCP systems and
one-man shops could get a domain in the early days, and is targeted to
go away as soon as everyone there has migrated to the com or org
domain.  (Most small shops are starting out in com now, rather than
even considering .us.)

Sigh.  So much bickering.


Randal L. Schwartz / Stonehenge Consulting Services [phone]
[e-mail] (guest account) [e-mail] (better for permanent record)

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

Date: Mon, 19 Oct 92 20:34:05 EDT
From: Tony Harminc <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: A Small Tutorial on Networking Stuff


[e-mail] (Lars Poulsen) asked:

> WHAT IS X.25 ?

> X.25 is the reference number for a CCITT document that describes how
> a computer might connect to such a network over a synchronous line
> such as a DDS-1 (56 kbps) link.

> The first two large commercial X.25 networks were Telenet, (which was
> started by some BBN people that had worked on the ARPAnet, but soon
> sold out to GTE) and TYMNET, which was owned by a computer service
> bureau called TYME-SHARE, and was originally mostly used to access
> that service, which was the Compu-Serve of its time. (Today, I think
> TymShare is gone, and only the network is left.)

In fact the first commercial X.25 network was Datapac, which started
business in 1977.  Telenet and Tymnet, although they had both been in
business for some years before that, offered only their own proprietary
interfaces and didn't offer X.25 services until around 1980.

For reasons I've never understood X.25 is often called a "European
protocol" by many people.  But is essentially what was developed by
Bell Northern Research (BNR) in Ottawa under the name SNAP (Standard
Network Access Protocol) in the early 1970s.


Tony Harminc

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

From: mc/G=Brad/S=Hicks/OU=[e-mail]
Date: 20 Oct 92 20:48:57 GMT
Subj: Re: A Small Tutorial on Networking Stuff


Thank you to all of you who wrote to compliment me on my little X.400
mini-tutorial, but even bigger thanks to the few of you who whacked my
pee-pee for screwing up my description of RFC822 mail handling.  They
say that you never really know a subject until you try to explain it
to somebody else.

To clarify my clarification: In the example I gave, where you're
trying to send to "[e-mail]"; if your machine doesn't know
how to find x.y.z.com, it doesn't send the message to y.z.com, or to
z.com, or to com, to be routed.  What I =think= it does is queries the
y.z.com, or z.com, or com name server for the TCP/IP address of
x.y.z.com, and then it sends the mail direct.  If this is still wrong,
discipline me again, please.  :-)

Or, to clarify the clarification of the clarification: I'm not
directly connected to the Internet, and know little about it that I
didn't read in a book somewhere.  If, after knowing this, you believe
me on that subject, you deserve to.  ;-)

It occurred to me that there's one more VERY important difference
between RFC822/Internet electronic mail and X.400, and it was worth
sending in.

The =real= Internet is, for all practical purposes, one big LAN.
Everybody's on the same addressing scheme, and it's all-points-
addressable through packet switching.  Which implies that if you plug
a box that's Internet mail capable (RFC822 under TCP/IP) anywhere into
the Internet, it is =by definition= able to send mail to and receive
mail from everywhere on the Internet, right?

In the wonderful world of X.400, this is emphatically =not= true.
X.400 mail is not packet switched, or anything like it, and connecting
to one ADMD does =not= guarantee that you can connect to all of them,
and nothing like it.

Let's suppose a new ADMD appears in the world.  Let's pick on Embarc
Systems, since they're new.  Embarc got a domain (country "US", ADMD
"EMBARC") and interconnected with GE's X.400 email service (I forget
the ADMD).

I get my mail via country "US", ADMD "ATTMAIL"; some of you are on
ADMD "MCIMAIL".  We can both send to GE.  And GE can send to ADMD
"EMBARC".  Can we send mail to people on ADMD "EMBARC"?  Not yet.

You see, X.400 mail systems block and return all mail that they don't
have explicit routing instructions for, and those routing instructions
are just plain never put in until both parties are in full agreement
on who pays for what, how much, and when.  So the setting up of a new
ADMD is a =big deal=.

Eric Arnum's newsletter, {Electronic Mail and Micro Systems} or
{EMMS}, publishes a list a couple times a year showing all of the
known, registered ADMDs and which ones are interconnected.  It's
getting so that everybody connects to almost everybody else, even in
Europe where every PTT is (at least one) ADMD.  But it's important for
anybody thinking about X.400 to understand that X.400 interconnection
is =not= automatic, and it's not commutative, either.  When choosing
an X.400 ADMD, ask what ADMDs they're connected to.

Then there's the other non-interconnects that have to do with
security.  ATTMAIL and MCIMAIL are interconnected, but that doesn't
mean that MCIMAIL X.400 users can send to (for example) country "US",
ADMD "ATTMAIL", surname "Hicks", domain-defined attribute
"ID!fax(b)3142756228".  Why not?  Because "ID!fax(b)" is what AT&T
Mail uses to let those of us who are PRMDs under them to send faxes.

A few common address translations, here in the United States:

CompuServe 76012,300 "J. Brad Hicks" translates to country "US", ADMD
"COMPUSERVE", PRMD "CSMAIL", surname "Hicks", DDA "ID!76012.300".

AT&T Mail !jbhicks (if it existed, and it doesn't) would translate to
country "US", ADMD "ATTMAIL", surname "Hicks", DDA "ID!jbhicks".

MCI Mail J. Brad Hicks (407-3044) should translate to country "US",
ADMD "MCIMAIL", surname "Hicks", given name "J. Brad", DDA
"ID!0004073044".  Surname and given name are enough for some
addressees, but only if they're unique.  I know it works for other
people, but the odd first name seems to throw off MCI's X.400
translator, as I have never successfully gotten mail through to it
 from AT&T Mail.

If there are more, I'd love to hear it, but as far as I know, those
are the only US public e-mail services that are also X.400 ADMDs or
PRMDs.  It seems to me that GEnie could, but as far as I know they
don't.  When I asked them a few months ago, both America Online and
AppleLink said they had no plans to interconnect with any X.400 ADMDs.


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

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

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

From: [e-mail] (Jim Rees)
Subject: Re: How Should I Get My House Wired For Future Phone Needs?
Date: 20 Oct 1992 16:36:29 GMT
Organization: University of Michigan CITI
Reply-To: [e-mail]


[ various stories of house phone wiring... ]

Pre-wiring is for sissies.  I live in an old house, and with a
combination of conduit, pull strings, and junction boxes, along with
my cordless drill, I can pull new cable anywhere in the house.  I have
ISDN, three analog lines, an intercom line, and two lines for power
(-48 and 10 vac for lights on the Princess, Trimline, and six-button
key sets) going everywhere.  I never pull less than four pair, it's
not worth the effort.  I use coax for networking (ethernet and Apollo
token ring) to avoid the RFI problems of 10-base-T.

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

From: Andrew M. Dunn <mongrel![e-mail]>
Organization: A. Dunn Systems Corporation, Kitchener, Canada
Subject: Re: How Should I Get My House Wired For Future Phone Needs?
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 92 17:51:15 GMT


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

> In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Toby
> Nixon) writes:

>> What I'm think of is having three or four-pair twisted pair cable run
>> from each room separately (not daisy-chained the way they normally do
>> it) to a punch-down block in some central location, so we can hook
>> things together anyway we want.  Is that a good idea?  Do you have any
>> other advice for us?  Thanks in advance.

> I think some would advocate more than just four pairs.  10BaseT will
> take four pairs all by itself, so if you want to plan for that in the
> future, you will need more than four pairs.

10BaseT only takes two pairs.  One for transmit (TX+, TX-) and one for
receive (RX+, RX-).

Typical 10BaseT wiring does use an eight-circuit RJ45 connector, but only
pins 1, 2, 3 and 6 are actually used.

Four-pair should give you room for a 10BaseT network and two voice
circuits, or some such combination.


Andy Dunn ([e-mail])  ({uunet...}!xenitec!mongrel!amdunn)

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

Date: Tue, 20 Oct 92 19:16:52 -0700
From: [e-mail] (Maxime Taksar KC6ZPS)
Subject: Re: How Should I Get My House Wired For Future Phone Needs?


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

> I think some would advocate more than just four pairs.  10BaseT will
> take four pairs all by itself, so if you want to plan for that in the
> future, you will need more than four pairs.

I beg to differ.  *My* 10BaseT that I've been working with only uses
two pair.  I certainly agree with you that one would want more than
just four pair running around a house, but two pair *should* be
sufficient for Ethernet.

(Or is there some other 10baseT that requires more than two pairs?)


Maxime Taksar    KC6ZPS     [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Andrew Klossner)
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 92 13:43:20 PDT
Subject: Re: How Should I Get My House Wired For Future Phone Needs?
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Tektronix Color Printers, Wilsonville, Oregon


Toby Nixon writes:

> What I'm think of is having three or four-pair twisted pair cable run
> from each room separately (not daisy-chained the way they normally do
> it) to a punch-down block in some central location, so we can hook
> things together anyway we want.  Is that a good idea?

Yes, that's what I just did.  I ran three-pair wire from a wall of
punchdown blocks in the attic to each of 52 phone outlets throughout
the house I just built.  I won't actually plug in 52 phones, but I
applied the philosophy behind placement of electrical power outlets:
there should always be one close by in case you need it.

For the time being, I've connected them all together at the punchdowns
and installed dual-RJ11 wallplates for my two POTS lines.  I have the
flexibility to put a small PBX in the attic, and/or run AppleTalk on
some lines.

In retrospect, I should have run four-pair wire instead of three-pair.

> Do you have any other advice for us?

I ran an RG-58 coax cable loop throughout the house for Ethernet
10Base-2 (thinnet).  I ran two RG-6 video cables from the attic to
each of 20 boxes for universal TV/FM-radio antenna access: one wire
for cable TV, one wire for the rooftop antenna.  I also ran a good
deal of three-pair wire to a central point for a security (burglar
alarm) system.

Steve Forrette writes:

> I think some would advocate more than just four pairs.  10BaseT will
> take four pairs all by itself, so if you want to plan for that in the
> future, you will need more than four pairs.

But you can't use 10Base-T in the home if you live in a populated
area.  The emissions from 10Base-T violate FCC limits.  If your
network causes interference on your neighbor's television set, the FCC
says it's your responsibility to stop emitting, i.e., shut down the
network.  That's why I ran 10Base-2 throughout my house.

> For new construction, they say that the absolute *minimum*
> should be four pair wire, with each pair individually twisted."

Absolutely.  Untwisted wire has no place in the system.

> But, in my looking at new apartments, none of them seem to be
> built to the so-called minimum requirements for new construction.  So,
> this must not be covered in any sort of enforcable building code."

That's right.  The enforced building codes (in the US) are silent on
the topic of telephone wiring, other than to specify grounding at the
interface.


Andrew Klossner  ([e-mail])
 (uunet!tektronix!frip.WV.TEK!andrew)

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #797
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa19237;
          22 Oct 92 4:02 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA01092
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 22 Oct 1992 01:16:38 -0500
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA31190
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 22 Oct 1992 01:15:56 -0500
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1992 01:15:56 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #798

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 22 Oct 92 01:16:00 CDT    Volume 12 : Issue 798

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Integratel Sticks Me With Charges (TELECOM Moderator)
    Voice/Data Over Same T1 Line (Myron Hattig)
    Fiber Optics (Lori A. Tracewell)
    Living With Fiber (Chris Kennedy)
    T-1 For Datacomm (Myron Hattig)
    Area Code 610 (Spyros Bartsocas)
    Working Assets Resells What? (Ted Shapin)
    SS7 Information Correction (Jack Adams)
    Charged-For Services (was British Call Waiting) (Jack Decker)
    Help me Find Protocols, Please (Clarke Stevens)
    MCI For Those Who 'Gotta Have It' (Paul Robinson)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1992 00:18:54 -0500
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Subject: Integretel Sticks Me With Charges


On my personal phone bill this month, I got a page in the long
distance section from an outfit called "Integratel" with some collect
calls made to me -- or so they claim.

Three calls were charged to me on 9-16 and 9-18 at odd hours in the
middle of the night. There were two interesting things about this;
one, that Integratel was unable to tell me *the name* of the person
calling and two, the price of the calls.

These calls all came from 'South Dade, FL' and were priced at merely
two dollars *per minute*.  Two of the calls were one minute each and
one was three minutes. Yes, I know the first minute might be the most
expensive considering an operator surcharge, but they were $2.00 each
and the three minute call was $6.00, so apparently the additional
minutes are $2.00 as well ... kind of steep I think, considering AT&T
gets 11-12 cents per minute during the night for the same call.

All they could tell me was that they are the billing agents for
various small long distance companies, and they would have no way of
knowing who placed the call. I asked them in that case, what is the
name and phone number of the long distance company you are dealing
with on this call?

The answer I got was "American Tel-Net", 160 Saratoga Avenue, Santa
Clara, California 95051.  No telephone number available. A check with
408 directory assistance revealed no such company listed in Santa
Clara.  To add to the mystery, the calls were all from "South Dade,
FL". I checked with 305 directory assistance and found a listing for
"American Tel-Net" in South Dade, but when I called the number, a
computer answered me (in voice) and asked for my password ...

Back to Santa Clara to check out the 160 Saratoga Avenue Building. The
lobby directory had these listings:

 From the lobby directory at 160 Saratoga Avenue:

First Floor

30 JSL Financial Services
38 Liberty Systems, Inc.
46 Santa Clara Sports Therapy

Second Floor

32 Kreider and Schmalz, CPA's
40 Bacon & Associates
41 Metaplus
42 Paul J. Roy, Ph.D
   Donald D. St. Louis, D. Min.
   Linda Surrell, M.A.
   Sue Patigalia Shoff, Ph.D
   Denise Priestley Roy, M.A.
   Mitch Saunders, L.M.F.C.C.
44 VRS Billing Systems
50 Jean Bayard, Ph.D
   Robert T. Bayard, Ph.D
   Lydia M. Norcia, M.S.
   Lois Smallwood, L.C.S.W
   Barbara Reeves, M.S.


This is the complete listing of occupants in the building.

Numbers 38, 40, 41 and 44 from the above list look interesting to me,
but for the total charges on my bill of $14.00 I am not going to spend
much time looking further into this.

I told Integratel that since my lines have called number screening on
them, and collect or third number billings are not accepted, they
would have to remove the charges. The lady told me they did not
subscribe to the national data base that the big carriers use, so
they had no way to prevent the calls on my bill from being there, but
they would add me to their own data base of phone numbers not to be
charged in the future.

I then called Illinois Bell and told them I would not pay for that
portion of my bill which came from Integratel. They said I would have
to get Integratel to issue the credit, which I had already demanded
 from that company anyway. We'll see how long the charges sit there
before getting removed.

One thing to remember in situations like this is that your local
telephone company cannot disconnect your service for failure to pay a
long distance carrier. They can request that you specifically identify
the part not being paid so that your short-payment gets applied
correctly and not just across the whole account.

I also suggested to IBT that if they are going to bill for all these
outfits then at the very least they ought to require the carriers to
observe the national data base of screened numbers in the process. The
IBT rep said to me they were not allowed to dictate those terms to the
other carriers, AND they had to accept them for billing purposes no
matter if they were schlock outfits or not.

The IBT rep also thought $2 per minute on long distance calls in the
middle of the might from Florida to Chicago was a bit steep. We'll see
if Integratel credits the account or if next month I really have to
get nasty with them. They claim someone specifically said to 'call
collect' and that when called, the person accepted the calls. Seems a
bit odd to me, with my 800 lines, inexpensive AT&T rates and all.


Patrick

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

From: kentrox![e-mail] (Myron Hattig)
Subject: Voice/Data Over Same T1 Line
Organization: ADC Kentrox, Portland OR
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1992 17:25:11 GMT


Phil,

What type of port is on your PBX?


Myron Hattig  [e-mail]    Phone:[phone],FAX[phone]
ADC Kentrox,  14375 NW Science Park Drive, Portland, OR  97229

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

From: [e-mail] (Lori A Tracewell)
Subject: Fiber Optics
Organization: The Ohio State University
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1992 18:40:36 GMT


I am working on a report on Fiber Optics at Ohio State University and
am getting confused. If you have any opinions or information which may
be helpful to me please feel free to respond. I am also looking for
the social impact which converting to fiber may have.

Thank you.


Lori Tracewell

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

From: bit!mainecoon![e-mail] (Chris Kennedy)
Subject: Living With fiber
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 92 9:16:24 PDT


Given the recent discussion regarding the virtues (or lack thereof) of
using fiber in local loopish applications I thought I'd share my
experience living with such a system.

Between '83 and '89 I lived in Alameda, CA, which until '87 or so had
a fiber CATV system vended by Times Fiber.  Fiber backbones connected
to largish cabnets which contained subscriber cards of roughly a VME
form factor.  From each subscriber card a *pair* of fibers ran to a
"football", basically an enclosed bulkhead from which the customer
drops were made.  On the customer side the fiber pair terminated in a
wall mounted enclosure which sported a connector for the wall-mounted
power wart, coax and a RJ45 connector.  The RJ45 was used to connect
to the display/keypad box which you were supposed to stick on top of
your TV; however given the obscene monthly fee for remotes most people
simply stuck the keypad near their viewing position and learned not to
trip over the cable.

When powered up the subscriber card shipped the selected channel and
FM (if subscribed) down one fiber to the termination point where it
was converted to RF; the other fiber carried commands from the
termination point to the subscriber card.  In the absence of commands
the termination point would generate keep alive pulses; if the
subscriber card timed out waiting for a command or keep alive it
decided that you'd turned off the "converter" and would supress the
video feed.

The system suffered from overengineering; in particular the four fiber
segments per subscriber drop was somewhat incompatable with the skill
level of the people who installed the stuff.  Three people showed up
to install my drop; one guy would dress a connector onto a fiber,
another would shine a light down the far end, and the third ran back
and forth carrying messages to the tune of "he still can't see the
light/he sees the light now".  Watching these guys work was amazing ...

The keypad was labeled with the promise of then-wonderous things:
yes/no/vote keys, PPV support.  Unfortunatly support for such features
was never offered.  The system was intolerant to weather; when it got
hot the low VHF band would vanish; when cold the FM band would sink
into the noise.  Channel-selection to authorization time was the
better part of a second; it got worse on the hour when the networks
would break for commercial and everyone in town started hitting the
channel up/down buttons.

In '87 TCI bought out Alameda cablevision and proceeded to "upgrade"
the fibre system by replacing it with coax.  Removal of the fibre
system was straightforward; two trucks drove down a street; the first
cut loose the fibre; the second tossed the fibre into the back of the
truck; when they came upon a subscriber card enclosure a guy would
climb the pole and *kick* it off into the back of the truck.


Chris Kennedy            | [phone]      | [e-mail]
BIT (Quincy), Inc.       | [phone] fax  | Standard disclaimers, etc.
1580 E. Main St, POB 4094| [phone] home |
Quincy, CA 95971 USA     | [phone] fax  |

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

From: kentrox![e-mail] (Myron Hattig)
Subject: T-1 For Datacomm
Organization: ADC Kentrox, Portland OR
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1992 18:28:32 GMT


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

> This is something I've long wondered about.  If I have a Cisco (for
> example) router connected to another router somewhere with a T-1
> circuit is it one serial stream at 1.54Mbs or is it broken into 24
> channels?  I would guess that if they supported the 24-Channel
> arrangement they would also have an option to have one stream.  I
> quess the question is then; does datacom commonly use T-1 in a 24
> channel arrangement?

A Data Service Unit (DSU) is used to pass data over a T1 line. A DSU
can have one or more Data Ports. Each Data Port could be connected to
a different source of data (e.g. a LAN through a router). A DSU must
be configured so the data coming from the data port is mapped into
some combination of the 24 channels. The Data Port port rates are
either multiples of 56Kbps or 64Kbps which is a single DSO channel
rate at 1.544Mbps.

(64kbs of data x 24) + (8kbps framing/signaling/fdl bits) = 1.544 Mbps.

The maximum port rate on a Data Port is (64kbs x 24) = 1.536 Mbps.

The data coming into the data port is copied into the first available
bit of the first available channel mapped to that data port.

This allows data from more than one data port or even voice data from
a PBX to be mapped into different channels of the same T1 line. Many
of these applications require a point to point connection or
Fractional T1 because it is required for the Data Ports on each end of
the T1 or FT1 to be the same type of data and bandwidth.

Direct answers to your questions above:

If you send serial data at 1.544Mbps it is not T1 because the framing,
signalling, and Facility Datalink bits are not transmitted. No device
can connect to a T1 service without these overhead bits.

Datacomm does use all 24 channels quite commonly. The router example
above is probably the most common. The only draw back is the T1 or FT1
data can only go to one destination.

SMDS, ATM, and Frame Relay encode their packets into the T1 channels.
The CO providing the SMDS, ATM, Framed Relay service decodes the T1,
looks at the fast packet and switches it to one of many locations.
Companies can save a lot of money using SMDS, ATM, or Framed Relay
because these technologies require fewer T1 and FT1 lines.  SMDS, and
ATM get really neat when used over a T3 line.

By the way, a Channel Service Unit (CSU) just retransmits the data
portion of a T1 signal after striping the received framing bits. This
is voice data from a PBX, a channel bank, or some other type of T1
Mux. The FCC requires a CSU to be between Customer Premise Equipement
(CPE) and the Network to provide the correct T1 signal into the
Network. This requirement prevents CPE from taking down the Network.
In regards to an earlier comment, if an application did not need
framing bits, it would not be going over a Public Network and would
not need a CSU.

A Digital something? Cross Connect something? (DACS) must have framing
because its purpose in life is to rearrange or cross connect the 24
DS0 channels. The DACS must have framing bits to determine where the
DSO channels are.


Myron Hattig    [e-mail]   Phone: [phone], FAX [phone]
ADC Kentrox,    14375 NW Science Park Drive, Portland, OR  97229

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

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 92 09:08:32 +0200
From: [e-mail] (Spyros Bartsocas)
Subject: Area Code 610


Recently the Greek newspapers are filled with ads of '900' type of
services located in Australia and North America.  Examples of prefixes
used are 609-490, and 609-426.  Are these local 976 type prefixes?  A
lot of these are 610-204-xxxx numbers.  Where is 610 located?


Spyros Bartsocas    [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: There are a bunch of internationally based phone
services in New Jersey advertised to people all over the world. The
newspapers in Spain have ads for a Tarot practictioner in New Jersey
and some astrologers, etc.  The services directed to Americans are
located in the Netherland Antilles and one is in Georgetown, Guyana.
Those guys make a profit on their free services ('no charge to the
calling party except the cost of an international call' is the way
many of them advertise) by getting kickbacks from the international
long distance carriers and the telecom administrations of the world
who want to play that game.  610 is in Canada and is used for the old
TWX (typewriter exchange) service that Western Union used to operate
and I guess Bell Canada operates now. 610 is not dialable from voice
telephones in the USA or Canada; it can be dialed from the Telex and
TWX (now known as Telex II) networks. The overseas places advertising
phone phun on 610 probably have it wired a special way in their
networks; it probably translates to some other number and winds up
here in the States, quite possibly in New Jersey with the others.
They may have it on 610 (with some special tricks on their end) to
deliberatly keep it unavailable to USA people on whom there would be
no money made if the service is here in the States.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Ted Shapin)
Subject: Working Assets Resells What?
Date: 21 Oct 92 21:48:14 PDT
Organization: Beckman Instruments, Fullerton, CA


Working Assets Long Distance claims rates lower than AT&T, MCI, and
Sprint.  But they must be a reseller, eh?  Whose lines do they resell
and how can they be lower?


Ted


[Moderator's Note: I think the consensus here recently was they resell
Sprint, and they buy network space from Sprint in such quantity that
they get it cheap enough they can underprice (regular) Sprint service
and still make a profit.   PAT]

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

From: vixen![e-mail] (22475-adams)
Subject: SS7 Information Correction
Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 92 14:18:56 GMT


A few days ago, I responded to a post concerning the availability of a
"book" on SS7 and stated that I was unaware of such a book's
existance.  On reconsideration, I found the April, 1992 issue of
Proceedings of the IEEE which featured six articles on SS7 ranging
from an excellent overview to specific applications and various user's
perspectives.  Hopefully, this will help the original poster with his
quest.


Jack (John) Adams        Bellcore NVC 2Z-220
[phone] {Voice}        [phone] {Facsimile}
[e-mail]   [e-mail]

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

Date: Wed, 21 Oct 92 22:39:25 CST
From: Jack Decker <[e-mail]>
Subject: Charged-For Services (was British Call Waiting)


In message <[e-mail]>, [e-mail].
hounix.org (Charles Mattair) wrote:

> I can understand why the US telco's initially charged for touchtone
> (or at least the rationale) but what's the excuse now?  Don't they
> have to add additional equipment to convert pulse to TT for most
> switches?

I have wondered the same thing.  Many state PUC's have seen fit to
eliminate the charge for Touch Tone but others (such as the Michigan
Public Service Commission) have not.  I wish that all Michigan readers
would take the time to write the MPSC and ask that the chrage for
Touch Tone be eliminated, particularly since we have one of the
highest charges in the nation here (about $2.50 per month on Michigan
Bell lines).  And, Touch Tone is one of the few aspects of telephone
service that is still regulated by the MPSC under our new
telecommunications act.

But I'll mention one other charge that I question, and that is the
charge for unlisted numbers.  Why should the telcos charge extra money
for NOT providing the service of listing your number?  Now, I can
understand that at one time having an unlisted number meant that
directory assistance would probably get many calls from folks wanting
your number, so the unlisted charge helped cover those expenses.  Now,
however, directory assistance is charged for in most areas and is a
real cash cow for the phone companies, so you'd think that it would
actually benefit them when people have unlisted numbers (unless they
don't charge for the call when the number cannot be provided, and to
my knowledge that's done only in Canada.  Pity).

(Canadian readers will recognize that line from an old commercial for
a brand of tea that was only available in Canada ... but I digress ...)

Given the increasing privacy concerns of folks and the valid desire to
not have your number published as sucker bait for every telemarketer
who can get his hands on a phone book, I would like to see PUC's
re-think the idea of the extra charge for an unlisted number.  I know
there are free ways to achieve NEARLY the same effect (listing a
phoney name in the book, for example) but you really shouldn't have to
go through that, or pay an extra charge in order to refuse the
"service" of being listed in the directory.


Jack Decker   [e-mail]    FidoNet 1:154/8


[Moderator's Note: The BOCs maintain, that contrary to what some
people may think, the use of the paper directory to look up numbers is
the default for the vast majority of their customers. Only a few
subscribers use directory assistance they claim, and some of these
are serious abusers, thus the charge started in recent years. Now with
non-published numbers, there will be nothing in the directory, thus
forcing many subscribers who would otherwise look there first to call
directory assistance. This in turn, they claim, causes a heavier work
load for DA, thus the charge to make up for the 'extra work' non-pub
customers cause DA.  Of course now they are collecting from both ends;
the non-pub customer who 'causes them extra work' and the inquiring
party they are trying to teach a lesson to my making *them* pay as
well in exchange for not having to use the book. I'd say the BOCs
should not be able to have it both ways.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Clarke Stevens)
Subject: Help me Find Protocols, Please
Date: 21 Oct 92 19:52:35 GMT
Organization: GTRI/AERO


Can anyone tell me where to find (preferably an ftp site) information
on G.722 (apparently a compression protocol) and H.221 (a transmission
protocol?)?  If there is no online source, a written source or brief
explanation would be helpful.

I would really appreciate it.


Thanks,
J. Clarke Stevens               |  Georgia Tech Research Institute
[e-mail]  |  [phone]

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

Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1992  17:00:13 EDT
Subject: MCI For Those Who 'Gotta Have It'.


In another product tie-in, if you purchase certain Pepsi Products,
such as Mountain Dew, you can get 1/2 hour of free calls on MCI,
subject to various fine print.

In other related news:

In another point, a few people asked me what the connection between
the gas station giving away a cellular phone and the title of the
article - "Eat here and Get Gas".

It was a pun on the combination of gas stations and restaurants where
you could buy food and get gasoline at the same place; it became a pun
in that people would eat at a place and get stomach gas, so I was
using that as the description of a gas station that ties an unrelated
business into its operation.

On a related point which Pat brought up, unfortunately some
restaurants on public highways that truck drivers had to eat at had
food which was as bad as the Pixley and Ehlers restaurants of Chicago.
As a result, truck drivers on CB radios tend to refer to ANY
restaurant as a 'choke and puke.'


Paul Robinson -- [e-mail]

These (uninformed) opinions are exclusively mine; no one else is
(stupid enough to be) responsible for them.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #798
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa09721;
          25 Oct 92 3:55 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA30990
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 25 Oct 1992 01:24:35 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA00499
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 25 Oct 1992 01:24:08 -0600
Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1992 01:24:08 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #799

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 25 Oct 92 01:24:00 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 799
                       ^^^
Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Administrivia: Fall Behind; Usually I Stay That Way (TELECOM Moderaotor)
    Re: Integretel Sticks Me With Charges (Doug Sewell)
    Re: Integretel Sticks Me With Charges (Paul Robinson)
    Re: Integretel Sticks Me With Charges (Bruce Carter)
    Re: Integretel Sticks Me With Charges (Tom O'Connell)
    Re: Integretel Sticks Me With Charges (Gregory Youngblood)
    Re: Integretel Sticks Me With Charges (Jerry Sweet)
    Re: Integretel Sticks Me With Charges (Joseph Bergstein)
    Re: Integretel Sticks Me With Charges (Carl Moore)
    VRS Billing Systems is Probably the Culprit (TELEOCM Moderator)
    Telephone Scams (was Anyone Heard of a Marketing "Promotion") (M. Solomon)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Subject: Administrivia: Fall Behind; Usually I Stay That Way
Date: Sun 25 Oct 1992 06:00:00 GMT


Don't forget this is the day we fall behind, as in spring ahead, fall
behind. Places observing Daylight Savings Time in the USA turn their
clocks back to Standard Time as of this morning.

Speaking of falling behind :) ... due to circumstances beyond my
control I was unable to work on any Digests for two days. Sometimes
other tasks just build up to the point they have to be given my
priority attention. I'll try to get a few issues out Sunday evening
and Monday morning to you.  Let's say the extra hour Sunday morning
mad it possible for me to get this issue out.  :)


PAT

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

From: [e-mail] (Doug Sewell)
Subject: Re: Integretel Sticks Me With Charges
Organization: Bush in 92 ? NOT!
Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1992 02:54:03 GMT


[e-mail] (TELECOM Moderator) writes:

> On my personal phone bill this month, I got a page in the long
> distance section from an outfit called "Integratel" with some collect
> calls made to me -- or so they claim.

> Three calls were charged to me on 9-16 and 9-18 at odd hours in the
> middle of the night. There were two interesting things about this;
> one, that Integratel was unable to tell me *the name* of the person
> calling and two, the price of the calls. [$2/minute]

$2/minute collect call?  This sounds familiar.

While I can assume that PAT isn't a regular user of the various dial-
up-and-chat and similar services, I stumbled across an ad for one
yesterday.  It had a 1-800 number and didn't require a credit card.
The fine print said that the call would be billed as a $2/minute
collect call from some innocuous-sounding firm.

I guess this is the latest idea of the dial-a-porn and dial-a-friend
services for separating people from their money.


Doug Sewell, Tech Support, Computer Center, Youngstown State University
[e-mail]       [e-mail]    <internet>!cc.ysu.edu!doug

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: 25 Oct 92 16:05:35 GMT
Subject: Re: Integretel Sticks Me With Charges


In Telecom Digest 12-798, in a message of: Thu, 22 Oct 1992 00:18:54
-0500 Patrick Towson <[e-mail]>

> On my personal phone bill this month, I got a page in the long
> distance section from an outfit called "Integratel" with some
> collect calls made to me -- or so they claim.
> I told Integratel that since my lines have called number screening
> non them, and collect or third number billings are not accepted,
> they would have to remove the charges. The lady told me they did
> not subscribe to the national data base that the big carriers
> use, so they had no way to prevent the calls on my bill from
> being there, but they would add me to their own data base of
> phone numbers not to be charged in the future.

I wonder about this.  It it very expensive to subscribe to this
national data base?  My suspicion is that failing to do so would give
a company an excuse for all sorts of fraud.  How expensive can it be
to subscribe to this?

> I then called Illinois Bell and told them I would not pay for that
> portion of my bill which came from Integratel.

Lucky you.  (See below)

> They said I would have to get Integratel to issue the credit, which
> I had already demanded from that company anyway. We'll see how long
> the charges sit there before getting removed.

> One thing to remember in situations like this is that your local
> telephone company cannot disconnect your service for failure to
> pay a long distance carrier. They can request that you specifically
> identify the part not being paid so that your short-payment gets
> applied correctly and not just across the whole account.

BZZZZZT.  This is probably true in Illinois.  It is not necessarily
true elsewhere.

I had an issue like this about two years ago.  There were two phone
lines in my apartment, one mine, one belonging to a relative, both on
separate bills; he pays his and I pay mine.  The relative decided to
cancel phone service, so they stopped paying the bill and made all the
calls they wanted to.  The phone company (C&P Telephone of Washington,
DC) sent a notice that it was going to disconnect the service.  They
did not.  In fact they sent out four separate notices but never
disconnected until three months went by.  By then, the relative had a
phone bill of $3,000.  Even the relative was surprised, HE expected
the service to be stopped after the first notice.

Cut to about two months later.  I find my phone service has been cut
off.  I went to a pay phone and discover that because that relative is
at the same address, C&P decided it can cut off MY phone service
because the relative didn't pay their bill. The C&P rep told me that
they had a tariff that permitted this.  I asked her about the fact
that we live over a doctor's office at the same address.  Are they
planning to cut off HIS bill?  And if this person was working at the
Pentagon, would they cut off THEIR phone service?

I was astounded.  I went down to the telephone company office, and
after the usual pulling teeth routine (phone companies routinely
discourage people from reading them), I was able to get to read the
tariff schedules.

Two things stood out.  One is that C&P Telephone CAN disconnect a
phone for non-payment of carrier charges.  The second thing was that
they did NOT have a tariff allowing them to disconnect one person's
service for nonpayment by another.

When I pointed this out, they checked and said my service would be
restored in an hour.  It was.

> I also suggested to IBT that if they are going to bill for all
> these outfits then at the very least they ought to require the
> carriers to observe the national data base of screened numbers
> in the process. The IBT rep said to me they were not allowed to
> dictate those terms to the other carriers, AND they had to accept
> them for billing purposes no matter if they were schlock outfits
> or not.

I suppose IBT has never heard of tariff requirements for Inter
eXchange Company (IXC) billing services.  I note how interesting it is
that telephone companies are oh-so-careful to have lots of tariffs to
protect themselves against liability, but when it comes to protecting
customers against being defrauded, the idea of a tariff to require
this seems to be unthought of.

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

From: [e-mail] (Bruce Carter)
Subject: Re: Integretel Sticks Me With Charges
Organization: Boise State University - CBI Product Development
Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1992 06:13:31 GMT


Greetings Patrick,

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

> On my personal phone bill this month, I got a page in the long
> distance section from an outfit called "Integratel" with some collect
> calls made to me -- or so they claim.

> 44 VRS Billing Systems

Integratel and VRS Billing both handle the party line dial a kink kind
of thing with a minor twist.  You call an 800 number, pick your
poison, then a machine calls you back collect (at whatever per minute,
some have gone over to saying $x/half minute to make it sound like
less, I guess).  If you accept the call, it hooks you into whatever
your pleasure was, usually a party line with a bunch of horny guys and
maybe one paid operator.  Integratel (and at least one other outfit
called Pilgrim Communication) bills back those (usually $2.00/minute)
calls on your phone bill.  VRS (and another outfit called IBS)
apparently bills people directly who use a credit card instead of via
the normal credit card billing.

We had a bunch of these return collect calls coming to our central
operator due to the fact that any phone on the campus phone system
(Ericsson MD110) returns the main number as the called from location
to Caller ID or anything else off campus.  As it is an 800 number, the
telecom people are having trouble justifying blocking it.  I think
they are trying to get the dorm numbers blocked at the other end now.


Bruce Carter, CBI Product Development            [e-mail]
Simplot/Micron Instructional Technology Center   amccarte@idbsu (Bitnet)
Boise State University, Boise, ID  83725         [phone]@phone

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

Date: Sun, 25 Oct 92 10:06:00 PDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Integretel Sticks Me With Charges


I hate when that happens ...

I coordinate the billing of dormitory students here at our University,
and every month you can bet we see charges from good ole Integretel.

And last month, we too had collect calls from South Dade, Florida.
What you're looking at is an adult entertainment number where the
caller phones them up, gives their name and number, and the service
calls them back collect to talk about whatever it is they talk about
at very high rates.  We have been successful in having them remove
charges but I can see how they would be more skeptical if it was an
individual calling.  I wish you luck.


Tom

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

Subject: Re: Integretel Sticks Me With Charges
From: srcsip!tcscs![e-mail] (Gregory Youngblood)
Date: Sun, 25 Oct 92 11:59:27 CDT
Organization: TCS Consulting Services


TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]> writes:

> The IBT rep also thought $2 per minute on long distance calls in the
> middle of the might from Florida to Chicago was a bit steep. We'll see
> if Integratel credits the account or if next month I really have to
> get nasty with them. They claim someone specifically said to 'call
> collect' and that when called, the person accepted the calls. Seems a
> bit odd to me, with my 800 lines, inexpensive AT&T rates and all.

Perhaps they are gouging since the hurricane.  So. Dade County, FL,
wasn't that part of the hardest hit areas?  Something to think about.

Pehaps ...

Greg


TCS Consulting Services   P.O. Box 600008   St. Paul, MN  55106-0008
  ..!srcsip!tcscs!zeta            ..!src.honeywell.com!tcscs!zeta

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

Subject: Re: Integretel Sticks Me With Charges
Date: Sun, 25 Oct 92 15:52:18 MDT
From: Jerry Sweet <[e-mail]>


I had a similar problem with Integretel: they billed me for a long
distance call made before I even *had* my current phone number.

Although the charges appeared on my Pac*Bell invoice, Pac*Bell would
take no responsibility for Integretel's billing.

I called Integretel's billing inquiry number and thirty days later
they sent me a voucher to give to Pac*Bell to cover the charges,
EXCEPT for the taxes (three cents).  Aargh.  Well, it's not worth my
time to deal with three cents, but knowing that they were counting on
that put my back up.

So I demanded the three cents too.  I called Integretel once every
month for three months.  They take calls only during regular business
hours, and it is many minutes before you get to the front of the
queue.

Each time I called, an Integretel representative promised "the check's
in the mail."  Eventually, someone there admitted that they won't
issue checks for less than ten cents.  I insisted.  A month later, a
hand-written check for three cents arrived.

So persistence pays off.  But Integretel deserves a noogie for putting
me through all that in the first place.  Pac*Bell (or perhaps the PUC)
deserves a noogie for refusing to deal with the problem.

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

From: [e-mail] (Joseph Bergstein)
Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1992 00:21:50 -0500
Subject: Re: Integretel Sticks Me With Charges


What about filing a complaint with your state PUC or the FCC?

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

Date: Sun, 25 Oct 92 00:11:51 EDT
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Integretel Sticks Me With Charges


The archives has the earlier story about me getting a call charged for
the second time by Integretel.  Recall that a voucher was issued from
the San Jose/Santa Clara area in California.  (I don't have the
archive reference in front of me as I write this.)

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

From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Subject: VRS Billing Systems is Probably the Culprit
Date: Sun, 25 Oct 92 1:14:08 CDT


I think the outfit I am looking for is VRS Billing Systems.

Business Office:    408 296-7420

Billing Inquiries:    800 729-2800


Several readers have heard of these people. They are slime.

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

From: Monty Solomon <[e-mail]>
Subject: Telephone Scams (was Anyone Heard of a Marketing "Promotion")
Date: 25 Oct 92 15:04:06 GMT
Followup-To: ne.politics
Organization: Kronos Inc. / Waltham, MA


[Moderator's Note: This message was originally posted elsewhere. One
reply has been sent along which should be of interest to TELECOM
Digest readers, but responses should go where directed.    PAT]

I wrote:

>> Then they can use a third-party chargeback scheme via the phone
>> company,

[e-mail] (Rich Salz) writes:

> I do *not* believe this.  Please post proof.

Proof would be rather difficult to provide, and without going through
a court case, it'd probably be unethical or illegal to post specific
allegations.  But my assertion that it _can_ be done should be
believable; I've previously posted the scenario involving my March and
April phone bills.  Here's a synopsis:

    - Company XYZ sends a postcard with an 800 number on it,
      offering some promotional gimmick.

    - Recipient calls the 800 number; ANI logs the call in real-time
      into the recipient's data bank.

    - Company XYZ, under contract with company ABC which is under
      contract with company DEF which has a billing arrangement with
      New England Telephone and other providers, says "Thank you
      for your call, we will notify you."

    - Minutes or days later, company XYZ calls back and makes a
      sales pitch.  Company DEF logs this call as collect, unaware
      of any specific business arrangements between ABC and XYZ.

    - 6 or 8 weeks later, I receive a bill with a $48 collect call
      from some number in area code 212.  Given the number of
      billing parties, it's impossible for me or New England
      Telephone to investigate many specifics without incurring
      far more cost than the call.  Company XYZ goes on about its
      business knowing it can get away with it for several months,
      before collapsing itself and reforming under a new name.

    - New England Telephone throws in the towel and credits my
      account, eating the loss but only after I complained.  Many
      other people simply pay up.

This happened to me.  The above is not exactly "proof", and some of
the details above could easily be altered to suit any particular con
artist's style, but my point is simply that given the proliferation of
billing parties on the long-distance network coupled with the lack of
any legal requirement for indisputable billing authentication (such as
a signed charge slip or PIN code), there is big room for abuse.  ANI
only makes this kind of abuse easier; it's not a necessary component.

Followups to ne.politics; this discussion probably should involve
matters of public policy.



rich


[Moderator's Note: We here at TELECOM Digest know of course that this
type of thing is very common indeed.  PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #799
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa10248;
          25 Oct 92 4:12 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA01006
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 25 Oct 1992 01:48:30 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA01095
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 25 Oct 1992 01:48:04 -0600
Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1992 01:48:04 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #800

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 25 Oct 92 01:48:00 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 800

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: ATM Technical Information Wanted (Christian Weisgerber)
    Internet Mail Routing Revealed! (was Small Tutorial) (Robert L. McMillin)
    SS7 Training Courses (Followup) (Wynn Quon)
    Re: Old Telephone Wiring at Network Interface (Brent Capps)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1992 00:14:46 +0100
From: Christian Weisgerber <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: ATM Technical Information Wanted


In <[e-mail]>, Maxime Taksar write:

> Actually, magnetic card encoding is *far* from a big secret.  A couple
> (if not all) of the schemes are ISO standards.  What you probably want

Here we go ...

taken from 'ISO CATALOGUE 1992', p.64 f.

            0150 Identification and credit cards

ISO 4909:1987         Bank cards-Magnetic stripe data content for track 3
                      Ed. 2, 10 p., Code E, TC 68

ISO 7501:1985         Identification cards-Machine readable passport
                      Ed. 1, 12 p., Code F, JTC 1

ISO/IEC 7501-1:1991   Identification cards-Machine readable travel
                      documents-
                      Part 1: Machine readable passport
                      Ed.  ,  1 p., Code A, JTC 1

ISO 7580:1987         Identification cards-Card originated messages-
                      Content for financial transactions
                      Ed. 1, 13 p., Code B, JTC 1

ISO 7810:1985         Identification cards-Physical characteristics
                      Ed. 1,  3 p., Code B, JTC 1

ISO 7811-1:1985       Identification cards-Recording technique-
                      Part 1: Embossing
                      Ed. 1, 24 p., Code M, JTC 1

ISO 7811-2:1985       Identification cards-Recording technique-
                      Part 2: Magnetic stripe
                      Ed. 1,  8 p., Code D, JTC 1

ISO 7811-3:1985       Identification cards-Recording technique-
                      Part 3: Location of embossed characters on ID-1 cards
                      Ed. 1,  8 p., Code D, JTC 1

ISO 7811-4:1985       Identification cards-Recording technique-
                      Part 4: Location of read-only magnetic tracks-
                      Tracks 1 and 2
                      Ed. 1,  2 p., Code A, JTC 1

ISO 7811-5:1985       Identification cards-Recording technique-
                      Part 5: Location of read-write magnetic track-Track 3
                      Ed. 1,  2 p., Code A, JTC 1

ISO 7812:1987         Identification cards-Numbering system and
                      registration procedure for issuer identifiers
                      (registration authority: see p. 14)
                      Ed. 2,  6 p., Code C, JTC 1

                      echnical Corrigendum 1:1988 to ISO 7812:1987
                      Ed. 1,  1 p., Code  , JTC 1

ISO 7813:1990         Identification cards-Financial transaction cards
                      Ed. 3,  4 p., Code B, JTC 1

ISO 7816-1:1987       Identification cards-Integrated circuit(s) with
                      contacts-
                      Part 1: Physical characteristics
                      Ed. 1,  4 p., Code B, JTC 1

ISO 7816-2:1988       Identification cards-Integrated circuit(s) with
                      contacts-
                      Part 2: Dimensions and location of the contacts
                      Ed. 1,  7 p., Code D, JTC 1

ISO/IEC 7816-3:1989   Identification cards-Integrated circuit(s) cards with
                      contacts-
                      Part 3: Electronic signals and transmission protocols
                      Ed. 1, 14 p., Code G, JTC 1

ISO 8484:1987         Magnetic stripes on savingbooks
                      Ed. 1,  6 p., Code C, JTC 1

ISO 8583:1987         Bank card originated messages-Interchange message
                      specifications-Content for financial transactions
                      Ed. 1, 33 p., Code Q, TC 68

ISO 9019:1987         Securities-Numbering of certificates
                      Ed. 1,  2 p., Code A, TC 68

ISO 9564-1:1991       Banking-Personal Identification Number management
                      and security-
                      Part 1: PIN protection principles and techniques
                      Ed. 1, 28 p., Code N, TC 68

ISO 9564-2:1991       Banking-Personal Identification Number management
                      and security-
                      Part 2: Approved algorithm(s) for PIN encipherment
                      Ed. 1,  1 p., Code A, TC 68

ISO 9807:1991         Banking and related financial services-Requirements
                      for message authentication (retail)
                      Ed. 1, 11 p., Code F, TC 68

ISO 9992-1:1990       Financial transaction cards-Messages between the
                      integrated circuit card and the card accepting device-
                      Part 1: Concepts and structures
                      Ed. 1,  5 p., Code C, TC 68

ISO 10202-1:1991      Financial transaction cards-Security architecture of
                      financial transaction systems using integrated circuit
                      cards
                      Part 1: Card life cycle
                      Ed. 1,  9 p., Code E, TC 68


Christian "naddy" Weisgerber, Germany     [e-mail]

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

Date: Sun, 25 Oct 92 00:33:47 -0700
From: [e-mail] (Robert L. McMillin)
Subject: Internet Mail Routing Revealed! (was A Small Tutorial)


Several people have written missives recently on TELECOM Digest
concerning how X.400 and RFC822 work.  One Randal L. Schwartz
<[e-mail]> writes:

> There's no need for ".com.nl" and ".com.au" and ".com.uk".  The
> top-level domains of com, org, edu, mil, net, and gov were clearly
> intended from the beginning to be international in scope.  It was the
> silly PTTs that started deciding that they weren't going to let the
> Americans have the root nameservers for *their* commercial domains
> that created the country codes.

> In fact, ".us" is merely a hack so that the small UUCP systems and
> one-man shops could get a domain in the early days, and is targeted to
> go away as soon as everyone there has migrated to the com or org
> domain.  (Most small shops are starting out in com now, rather than
> even considering .us.)

I'm not so sure this is true. In Donnalyn Frey and Rick Adams' book,
{!%@:: A Directory of Electronic Mail Addressing and Networks} ((c)
1990 Donnalyn Frey, O'Reilly & Associates), the authors discuss .com,
.edu, etc., and have this to say about the .us top-level domain:


    ---- start of quoted text ----

US Top-level Domains

You will ...  come across top-level domains that don't fit into either
the {country} or {pseudo} classes:

    com    Commercial
    edu    Educational
    gov    Governmental
    mil    Military
    net    Networking organizations
    org    Other organizations [Perhaps the people at eff.org
        can clarify this classification for us -- rlm]

These top-level domains belong to subnetworks of the North American
network Internet and still exist for historical reasons due to the
major influence of the former ARPANET on the evolution of networks and
networks today.  These domains should ideally be subdomains of the
top-level domain US,* but at the time the domain system was
"invented," the inventors didn't think of network life outside the
United States.

                         ---

* Agreement to this arrangement seems to be highly correlated with
living outside the United States [:-)].

           ---- end of quoted text ----

The authors go on to state that "in 1988 the US UUCP network began to
encourage the use of the then-dormant top-level domain US."  Now, they
do not mention whether this had caught on at the time of publication
(1990).  Neither do they state that .us is a "hack so that the small
UUCP systems and one-man shops could get a domain in the early
days ..."  Active use of the .us domain would seem to be a fairly
recent event in Internet history.

As to HOW mail routing is performed ... again, here's Frey & Adams,
from Appendix E: How Internet Addresses are Handled by UUCP Sites:


            ---- start of quoted text ----

For hosts running IP on the real, physical Internet (as distinct from
the pseudo-, nonphysical internet of hosts capable of using this kind
of addressing), routing to reach a domain address is done in what can
be called {real time}.  For example, the mailer sees that you have
written mail to [e-mail] and so it queries a program called
nameserver running on the system.

The nameserver asks the authoritative root servers who handles mail
for some.where.edu.  The root servers return, not the actual address,
but pointers to other servers that really know all the details of
hosts inside the organizational entitiy where.edu.  These pointers are
ns (NameServer) records, and they point to servers that perform
lower-level nameservice.

The mailer now queries those servers, asking which host handles mail
for some.where.edu, and (one presumes) and address is returned by
these servers.  Then the mailer, knowing where to deliver mail an dhow
to do so, connects with the remote mailer and delivers the mail via a
protocol called SMTP (Simple Mail Transport Protocol).

If a host is not physically connected to Internet (and thus is not
directly reachable), a mailer gets back, not addresses, but rather
another type of pointer called an MX (Mail eXchanger) record.  MX
records indicate the hosts that have advertised a willingness to be
the mail exchanger for the indicated destination.  For instance, if
there were a site zebra in Denver registered as zebra.den.co.us and
you sent mail to it, the approximate sequence of events would be:

1    The mailer accepts the mail message from the user agent.

2    The mailer asks the local nameserver, "How do I get mail to
    zebra.den.co.us?"

3    The nameserver doesn't know, so it asks the root servers, "Who's
    in charge of Colorado?"  [Of course, this assumes that the
    person sending e-mail is in the United States. -- rlm]

4    Root servers, via NS records, return the information,
    "venera.isi.edu is the host in charge of Colorado."

5    The nameserver then asks venera, "How do I push mail in the
    direction of zebra.den.co.us?"

6    venera opens, "Mail addressed to zebra.den.co.us should be
    handed to boulder.colorado.edu.*"

7    The nameserver returns this answer to the mailer and caches a
    copy of the answer in case it's asked again in the near future.

8    The mailer opens an smtp connection to boulder.colorado.edu and
    sends the mail.  It assumes that the mail exchanging hosts knows
    how to detect the destination hosts for which it serves as MX
    (usually syntactically) and that it will then convert the mail
    to some other transport (probably UUCP in this case).


* boulder.colorado.edu is used as an example only.

                  ---- end quoted text ----

So there you have it.  The left to right 'tearing apart of addresses'
that Brad Hicks <mc/G=Brad/S=Hicks/OU=[e-mail]> is
approximately, but not quite, correct.  But I will refrain to take up
his call to discipline him, as this is TELECOM Digest and not
alt.sex.bondage :-).


Robert L. McMillin                     | Voice:    [phone]
Hughes Aircraft/Hughes Training, Inc.  | Fax:      [phone]
Los Angeles, CA                        | Internet: [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Wynn Quon)
Subject: SS7 Training Courses (Followup)
Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1992 16:29:29 -0400
Organization: Mitel. Kanata (Ontario). Canada.


This is a long-delayed followup to a question I asked almost a year
ago about recommendations for an SS7 training course.

Many of the responses I got suggested the Bellcore SS7 courses and
that's where I eventually went this August.

They have a general SS7 overview course and a number of
administration/maintenance courses that cover the SS7 implementations
on the major switches (DMS, 5ESS etc).  The course that caught my eye
though was the CCS Network Operations and Maintenance course.  Our
group has been going through the SS7 specs and we're quite familiar
with the protocol from the 'paper' point of view.  What we needed was
the 'real world' story.

The CCS/NORM course fit the bill in just about every way.  It's a
10-day affair that's 50% lecture and 50% lab.  The lab work consists
of hands-on sessions working with HP protocol analyzers on SS7 message
sequences that were generated in their captive SS7 network (a fairly
sophisticated setup with DMS100, 5ESS, 1AESS, Tekelec-MGTS, and
DSC-Megahub nodes).  The lecture material covered the protocol itself,
network architecture, 800 DB, LIDB and CLASS, brief overview of vendor
implemenations, SS7 routing and SS7 maintenance issues.

The lectures were quite good in filling out the details which were
missing or unclear in the specs - especially the details of SS7
message routing and network architecture.  I left the course with a
good comfortable "gut feel" for SS7 which I was missing before.
Highly recommended for folks in SS7 design and field support.  Might
be overkill if you just want to get an overview of the protocol
though.

Cost for the course was $4400 including room and board (fairly decent
living and rec facilities) at the training centre in Lisle, Illinois
which is just outside of Chicago.

Thanks to the following for their responses to my initial request for
recommendations.

 Russ Nelson <[e-mail]>
 [e-mail] (Raymond C Jender)
 [e-mail] (Vance Shipley)

If you're interested in this or any of their other courses their
number is 800-832-2463 (USA), 708-960-6300, 800-638-3382 (Canada)


Wynn Quon   Mitel Corp.  Kanata, Ontario

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

From: [e-mail] (Brent Capps)
Subject: Re: Old Telephone Wiring at Network Interface
Organization: Atlas Telecom Inc.
Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1992 00:07:54 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> John Higdon <[e-mail].
com> writes:

> [e-mail] (Arnold de Leon) writes:

>> Can I simply take the yellow wire from the other cables and use them
>> for the second line?  I am assuming that I can find the black in the
>> sheath.

> I would not do this if I were you. Ordinary jacketed station wire is
> not "twisted pair" and its use for two lines over any distance is an
> invitation for crosstalk. If you go back through the issues of the
> Digest, you will find article after article complaining about
> crosstalk between two lines in the home and the cause in most cases
> turns out to be the use of D station wire for two lines.

[...]

> If it has red/green/yellow/black, do NOT use it to carry more than one
> line.

1. As John points out, distance is a factor.  The thing to remember is
   that even twisted pair comes unwraveled sometimes, especially when
   you're cross connecting, and that those short spans of untwistedness
   don't cause a problem.  You can run a second line over quad as long
   as you keep the distance short; say 50' or so to be on the safe side.

2. If you're concerned about crosstalk, avoid wiring up the second line
   to every jack in the house.  Run it only to the jack nearest to your
   computer.  Extra El Cheapo phones plugged into other jacks in the house
   can contribute to a crosstalk problem, even while they're on-hook,
   because they sometimes bleed signal between the pairs.

I use quad for my second modem line in my 1922 home and have never had
a crosstalk problem.  Of course, my office is within 50' of the POP in
the basement, too.  Your installer will probably want to run the POP
for the new line outside somewhere, which is going to make it a pain
for you to cross-connect if yours is also in the basement; but if you
stand your ground with the installer and act like you know your stuff,
they will probably give in and run the POP into the basement for you.
Mine did.

An oldie but a goodie is Lee's ABCs of the Telephone, Volume 2,
"Station Installation and Maintenance" which describes older wiring in
how-to detail.

Typically you will find the yellow wire tied to ground and the black
wires all tied together.  BE AWARE that the black wire (accessory) was
occasionally used as a lazy repairman's substitute for tip or ring
when the green or red wire broke somewhere inside the walls of your
house.  Make sure it's not hot or you'll screw up both your lines.


Brent Capps    [e-mail] (gay stuff)
[e-mail] (telecom stuff)

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #800
******************************