Telecom/1996-04-telecom-walnutcreek.iso/back.issues/1992.volume.12/vol12.iss801-850

Text File | 1992-11-15 | 990KB | 24,257 lines

Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa15204;
          26 Oct 92 0:43 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA09998
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 25 Oct 1992 22:07:16 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA12900
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 25 Oct 1992 22:06:55 -0600
Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1992 22:06:55 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #801

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 25 Oct 92 22:07:00 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 801

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Stolen Cell Phone (Craig Heim)
    Re: Stolen Cell Phone (Jim Rees)
    Re: Stolen Cell Phone (Gregory Youngblood)
    Re: Stolen Cell Phone (Jack Faley)
    Re: Message Center and Call Waiting (Maxime Taksar)
    Re: Message Center and Call Waiting (Jeff Bennington)
    Re: Message Center and Call Waiting (Steve Forrette)
    Re: Message Center and Call Waiting (John Boteler)
    Re: DC to DC Convertor Needed (Alan L. Varney)
    Re: DC to DC Convertor Needed (Kenneth A. Becker)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Craig Heim)
Subject: Re: Stolen Cell Phone
Date: 25 Oct 92 13:38:51 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer Inc.


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Jim Rees) writes:

> 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.

You are assuming that the verification service can get the billing
info and that it can hold the call for pre-call validation.  That
hasn't been possible until recently.  The IS-41 standard has just
recently evolved far enough to implement.  There have been some
extremely successful trials using pre-call validation with IS-41 over
X.25 to the verification services that have virtually eliminated
Tumbling Fraud in a local area.  Nationwide is still an issue.

OK, that takes care of Tumbling Fraud.  Here's the Cellular Fraud
problem of the 1990s: CLONING.  How do you handle a bandit who has
programmed his phone to the ESN and MIN of a valid subscriber?
Interesting problem isn't it?

Comments?

> 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.

I'm with you.  The cost of cellular fraud is definitely a major factor
in the cost of cellular service to the honest customer.  Although we
are not responsible for fraudulent calls (tumblers and cloners), we
end up paying for it with higher monthly service bills.


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] (Jim Rees)
Subject: Re: Stolen Cell Phone
Date: 25 Oct 1992 16:20:52 GMT
Organization: University of Michigan CITI
Reply-To: [e-mail]


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

> The thief either knows what he's doing, or he doesn't... 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 the fone ...

Actually, the ESN is not part of the NAM and is not trivially changed
(like the NAM is).  In some phones it's nearly impossible to change,
in others it's as simple as burning a PROM, but I've never seen a
phone where you could change it from the front panel.

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

Subject: Re: Stolen Cell Phone
From: srcsip!tcscs![e-mail] (Gregory Youngblood)
Date: Sun, 25 Oct 92 16:55:11 CDT
Organization: TCS Consulting Services


[e-mail] (Jim Rees) writes:

> 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.

First, phone numbers can change faster than anything else, so why
bother tracking the phone number of stolen phones? Only the ESN is
"unchangable".

Cellular phone companies are a service provider.  If the calls were
not permitted to take place (roamers) until after the phone had
cleared, then the call would have timed out and the customer would
have been inconvencienced.  There is a fine line drawn between
security and customer convenience.  Customer convenience must and will
always play a more important role than security, at least until the
small amount of fradulent calls that do go out cost the carrier more
than inconvenienced customers.

Since each phone only has in theory, one esn, then a single database
of equipment is all that is needed.  Using the two clearing houses
(GTEIS and EDS or APEX) which have a link to each other as well as to
all the cellular carriers taht use them is sufficient to block the
calls.  Stolen phones are blocked, period.  The only way to unblock an
esn listed as stolen is to have the carrier that reported it stolen to
clear that esn.  This helps avoid anyone else just clearing the
esn,and using the phone.  When phones are taken and atttmpeted to be
activated elsewhere, the esn is checked.  If stolen, then the phone
has a good likelyhood of being recovered.  This is based on my
understanding of the systems from working with them at the cellular
system level.

As to mapping pairs of ESNs to phone numbers, another reason that
would be difficult is for the multiple phone number phones, which can
have up to eight phone numbers on some phones, with one single ESN.
What's to stop having the database pairs updated with a new phone
number for that ESN after the phone is stolen.  That is all that it
would take if pairs were matched, as you can not have a single ESN to
single phone number without annoying a LOT of people, myself included.

Every effort is made by the carriers to stop fraudulent calls.  I
myself have written programs to run through call records pullnig
calling patterns attempting to skip-trace a phone and track it.  The
system isn't 100 % full proof, and it works from the stand point that
most of the poeple are not going to have access to the specialized
equipment needed to catch esns or reprogram or retransmit phone esns,
AND that most people are not going to have access to anything to allow
them to tumble ESNs.

To prevent tumbling ESNs, software now looks at patterns.  If the
pattern is suspiscious, it blocks the calls from that ESN.  It makes
things annoying sometimes with a valid phone has a suspisious pattern,
but that occasional inconvenience is worth the added protection.

Just as in computers and computer networks, houses, cars and any type
of security system, it is not 100% efficient.  It strives to be as
thorough as possible while still maintaining a level of convenience to
those that are forced to use it.  It has been seen in the past that
the most secure systems are the most inconvenient to use.  Cellular
carriers strive to make the cellular phone the most convenient way to
communicate.  If it were not convenient and easy, people would be less
likely to use it, and cellular carriers would lose money.  From my
viewpoint, that is the what I see happening.

I hope as things move to more digital systems things will be more
secure.  Until then, the security measures used now work as well as
can be expected, with a minimum amount of delays.


Greg
TCS Consulting Services   P.O. Box 600008   St. Paul, MN  55106-0008
 ..!srcsip!tcscs!zeta                 ..!src.honeywell.com!tcscs!zeta

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

From: [e-mail] (Jack Faley)
Subject: Re: Stolen Cell Phone
Date: 25 Oct 92 23:24:16 GMT
Organization: Sb


  My parents' cellular phone was stolen out of their car in front of
their house.  They didn't realize it was gone until the morning at
which time they called it in and had the service terminated.  During
the night they used the phone to call about ten people which we got a
list of from our cellular company.  We turned this into the police
hoping they would get some leads from the numbers and get the phone
back.  The police did nothing at all.  I got a copy of the list and
decided to use CNA to find out the people who were called.  As it
turns out CNA was no longer available.  I don't have reason to use it
much so I'm not sure when it happened but I'm in the 412 area code and
I think the CNA also served 814.  Does anyone know what happened to
it? Or how I can find out who owns the numbers called without calling
them up asking them then getting hung up on?


Thanks,

[e-mail]      or      [e-mail]

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

Date: Sun, 25 Oct 92 11:47:49 -0700
From: [e-mail] (Maxime Taksar KC6ZPS)
Subject: Re: Message Center and Call Waiting


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

> [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]

I think, however, that the difficulty lies in the fact that here in
Pac*Bell land, one can only cancel call waiting when one originates
the call (unless one has three-way calling).

If one *receives* a call that is important, and one wants subsequent
callers to be put through to voicemail, then one has a problem.


Maxime Taksar              KC6ZPS           [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: When this has come up in the past here, several
readers pointed out that some telcos extend a flash dial tone even if
there is no three-way calling on the line and this dial tone can be
used for apparently only one purpose: to dial *70.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Jeff Bennington)
Subject: Re: Message Center and Call Waiting
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Jeff Bennington)
Organization: Mellon Capital Management Corp., San Francisco
Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1992 19:04:27 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Justin Leavens) writes:

> [Moderator's Note: You do NOT have to 'get rid of call waiting'. All

[stuff deleted]

> call. The *70 will trigger the busy condition needed to force newly
> arriving calls to forward to voicemail.   PAT]

Pat,

    You goofed!  I just checked with Pacific Bell's Message
Center, and they state that disabling call waiting will NOT cause
subsequent calls to be forwarded to voice mail.  Instead, callers will
get a busy signal.  Stupid programming on PacBell's part!

I like what GTE Mobilnet has done out here.  If I ignore the call
waiting tone for a few beeps, callers WILL be forwarded to my cellular
voice mail.


Jeff Bennington     Mellon Capital Management Corp, San Francisco CA
[e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: I didn't goof! IBT sells voicemail (they took it
over from Ameritech as of this past weekend) two ways: transfer on no
answer and/or transfer on busy. You can have it either/both ways. Of
course there has to be a 'true busy' condition; call-waiting will not
provide this without the *70 provision. IBT does not offer the
arrangement GTE Mobilnet does, with transfer out of call waiting after
a few rings, however Ameritech Mobile does.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: Message Center and Call Waiting
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA
Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1992 18:04:54 GMT


> [Moderator's Note: 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.

Pat, it's *70 for cancel call waiting.  *67 is for toggling the Caller
ID blocking option.  You are going to get the wrath of the CPSR for
this misinformation.  After all, someone might have read your message,
not having previously known about cancel call waiting, and tried it on
their line with per-line blocking, thus turning delivery ON for their
call.  They will innocently call a random business to test their
cancel call waiting, but since their number is delivered, they will
soon be deluged with so many telemarketing calls that their CO is
overloaded such that 911 no longer works, which of course will cause
someone to die as a result of not getting aide in a timely manner, and
they will end up filing a lawsuit against YOU for being the original
source of this misinformation.  Be careful!


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: You are correct. I knew the difference and this got
past my proofreading somehow.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (John Boteler)
Subject: Re: Message Center and Call Waiting
Organization: Express Access Public Access UNIX, Greenbelt, Maryland USA
Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1992 07:55:21 GMT


> [Moderator's Note: You do NOT have to 'get rid of call waiting'.

Speak for yourself. Call*Waiting is a hateful, Communist plot
unleashed on us to destroy our hearing and amplify our daily nervous
stress levels. :?

> As somebody pointed out to me by E-mail, there are two varieties of
> Call-forward-on-busy...

o Call Forward-No Answer: forwards after n rings.

o Call Forward-Busy: forwards if called line is busy.

PS: "Cattle mutilations are up."


[e-mail] (John Boteler)


[Moderator's Note: Clever retort!  When IBT took over voicemail from
Ameritech as of this past weekend, the first thing they did was change
the system around a lot. We have a new voicemail system; new phone
numbers to call for messages, etc.  An interesting aspect of the new
system is that when calling for messages *from your own phone* you no
longer have to identify yourself with a user ID number. It knows who
you are. You need merely enter a password. When calling from another
phone you need to enter the user ID as well. An additional security
feature on the new system (which by the way was reduced in cost from
10.95 per month to 5.95 per month) is the 'security log' feature. If
you turn this on for your account, you are required to recite your
name and time of day whenever you call in. Then it plays the recording
of you (or whoever) saying this same thing on your previous call. If
you do not hear *your voice* on the log record, then you know someone
has been tampering with your mailbox. You may not know *who*, but you
at least know someone has been there and you can change the password,
etc. We also get live operator assistance for problems with voicemail
by touching the zero key anytime while online with voicemail.  PAT]

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

Date: Sun, 25 Oct 92 09:26:42 CDT
From: [e-mail] (Alan L Varney)
Subject: Re: DC to DC Convertor Needed
Organization: AT&T Network Systems, Lisle, IL


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

> 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.

   True.  But assuming Ron is building something for a CO environment,
he could contact:

  AT&T Microelectronics
  800-372-2447 (800-553-2448 from Canada)

   Send email if you need a valid non-800 number.


Al Varney

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

Date: Sun, 25 Oct 92 12:50:29 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Kenneth A Becker)
Subject: Re: DC to DC Convertor Needed
Organization: AT&T


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

> 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.

I have already followed up to Mr. Greenberg by email, but I couldn't
let this one lie.  Yep, you get -48 through some terminating resistors
from the CO; however, what Mr. Greenberg was talking about was Central
Office power.  As I'm sure the readers of this group know, CO power in
the US tends to be distributed as -48 DC, from extra-large batery
banks.  Strandard practice at this time is to run DC-DC convertes with
isolation between input and output to generate +5, +12, or anything
else one might desire.  Check the latest issue of EE Times; they have
a catalog from AT&T's board-mounted power division, as well as ads in
the main paper for other people such as Vicor.


Ken Becker  [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #801
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa16565;
          26 Oct 92 1:27 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA09402
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 25 Oct 1992 22:45:34 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA13754
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 25 Oct 1992 22:45:11 -0600
Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1992 22:45:11 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #802

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 25 Oct 92 22:45:10 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 802

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: LD Transmission Quality Comparison (Alan L. Varney)
    Re: LD Transmission Quality Comparison (Steve Forrette)
    Re: LD Transmission Quality Comparison (Laird Broadfield)
    Re: LD Transmission Quality Comparison (Pat Turner)
    Re: LD Transmission Quality Comparison (Scot Wilcoxon)
    Re: How Should I Get My House Wired For Future Phone Needs? (L. Broadfield)
    Re: How Should I Get My House Wired For Future Phone Needs? (Maria Panizo)
    Re: How Should I Get My House Wired For Future Phone Needs? (Paul Schauble)
    Re: How Should I Get My House Wired For Future Phone Needs? (S. Forrette)
    Re: No Dial Tone; What's a Guy to Do? (Jack Decker)
    Re: No Dial Tone; What's a Guy to Do? (Steve Forrette)
    Re: A Few Questions About N11 Codes ([e-mail])
    Re: A Few Questions About N11 Codes (Tom Hofmann)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sun, 25 Oct 92 09:14:22 CDT
From: [e-mail] (Alan L Varney)
Subject: Re: LD Transmission Quality Comparison
Organization: AT&T Network Systems, Lisle, IL


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

> 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.

> But I agree, that the medium has no effect on echo cancellation.

   Just a comment to re-focus the discussion: The propagation delays
for terrestrial links may vary between media types.  However, the
delay observed on a given circuit for two different calls will far
exceed the media-specific delay.  Adding or removing a couple of
multiplexers into the end-to-end circuit can change the delay by
several bit-times (at 64Kbps).  This is why echo cancellation has to
re-adapt to changing circuit conditions -- and why such technology is
expensive and difficult to do "right".

   As in much of telephony, the "right" thing to do varies with the
technology, application and time frame.  For such things as echo
cancellation, it's a constant battle to "do your best" with a moving
target.  When you introduce modems into the picture, it's almost
impossible to be "right" all the time.  The modem folks are going to
tinker with their stuff to make it work over the facilities they think
represent reality.  And the transmission/switching folks are going to
tinker with echo cancellation using CPE (including modems) that they
think represent reality.  But each is using the previous level of
technology of the other -- it's no wonder that when the cutting-edges
meet, there's likely to be a mis-match.  This is very similar to
electronic countermeasures in warfare; each side is trying to
counteract the worst the other side presents.

   That's not to say that (IMHO) AT&T hasn't spent a LOT of time and
money in building the best echo cancellation products possible to
match the needs of our network, so that CPE vendors (and their
customers) won't have to modify THEIR equipment to get good
performance.  But there will always be areas for improvement.

   Echo cancellation is so important to AT&T that it has funded entire
generations of DSP research, development and deployment, instead of
buying other's technology.  Maybe someone for AT&T Micro-electronics
could give a better description of the state of the art?


Al Varney -- my opinion only.

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: LD Transmission Quality Comparison
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA
Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1992 17:56:02 GMT


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

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

>> [e-mail] (Andy Sherman) wrote:
>> 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?

The oft-quoted speed of light of 186,000 mps is in a vacuum.  Any
other transmission medium will slow it down.  Air does so to a small
degree, water more so, etc.  I believe that electricity propagates at
about 2/3 c in normal wire.


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: LD Transmission Quality Comparison
Date: 25 Oct 92 21:27:44 GMT


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

> 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?

As Pat noted, the bends in the fiber can affect the length of the path
(the little photons bonk off the walls.)  BUT!  FAR MORE IMPORTANT:
Let's remember that the figure 186,xxx mi/sec is defined as "the speed
of light in a vaccuum".  The speed of light in a vacuum remains the
same, the speed of propagation of an electrical signal varies all over
the place with media, interference, (maybe frequency too, I can't
recall.)  (Ditto the speed of "light" too, of course.)

Vague memory says that the speed of an Ethernet signal in thick coax
is 0.83c, but I could be mis-remembering.


Laird P. Broadfield     [e-mail]    ...{ucsd, nosc}!crash!lairdb

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: Sun, 25 Oct 92 17:40 EDT
From: rsiatl![e-mail]
Subject: Re: LD Transmission Quality Comparison


> Huh?  Did they just repeal the speed of light?  Where did you hear
> this?

> [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]

The speed of light (or other frequencies of electromagnetic radiation)
varies from material to material. 186,000 mi/sec holds for free space.
Light travels much slower in other mediums such as glass or water.
This is why light bends as it passes through a prism.  When refering
to optics the term index of refraction is usually used.  The index of
refraction is the ratio of the velocity of light in free space to its
velocity in a particular medium.  From my earlier post the index of
refraction for quartz glass is 1.45 this means light travels 1/1.45 of
its free space velocity or 128,280 miles/second in quartz glass.

The index of refraction varies with wavelength as well as material.
This causes the "rainbow" of colors from a prism.

In mutimode fiber the light takes longer to arrive at the other end
due to a lot of internal bouncing arround.  This may be what Pat is
refering to, though outside plant fiber is single rather then multi-
mode.  Helical structures are sometimes used to slow down a
"wavefront" such as in a traveling wave tube (TWT).

Coax and waveguide also slow down electromagnetic waves.  The term
used here is velocity factor, with is the percent of free space
velocity for waves in that medium.  Unlike coaxial cables, velocity in
waveguides is dependant on frequency.  Circular waveguides can really
slow down waves as the WG is cut for the lowest frequency, but is
operated over three bands.

 From my last posting:

Medium               Velocity Factor         *Velocity, miles/second
Fiber                        .670             128,280
Coax (7/8" rigid)            .997             185,440
Microwave                   1                 186,000
Ethernet / "CB" Coax         .66              122,760

*Free space velocity is assumed to be 186,000.  It's actually a little
higher.

Thanks to Peter Schow and the other person who recommended "Digital
Telephony", a copy has been ordered.  My reply to ya'll bounced.


Pat Turner KB4GRZ   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Scot Wilcoxon)
Subject: Re: LD Transmission Quality Comparison
Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1992 02:32:45 GMT


> [Moderator's Note: While the 'speed of light' is approximatly 186,000
> miles per second ...

 ... in a perfect vacuum is the limit.  Actual speed differs in various
materials.


Scot E. Wilcoxon       [e-mail]
            voice: [phone]


[Moderator's Note: I received several more responses in this 'speed of
light' thread. The ones included in this issue are typical. Due to the
large backlog of stuff on hand, I'll skip the others, but thanks to
the several users who responded.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: How Should I Get My House Wired For Future Phone Needs?
Date: 25 Oct 92 21:16:28 GMT


In <[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.

Errrrmm, clarification: 10BaseT *uses* only two of the pairs.  It is
possible to make a "splitter" to pull off the other two pairs, and
even to position them in a second jack in the position of the first
two, so as to give yourself 2 10BaseT jacks from one 8position jack.
Some signals may cause more or less interference with the first
10BaseT run.

That said, I would heartily recommend running at *least* two separate
four-pair to each j-box (note: not each room, who says there's only
one outlet per room?)  If I were constructing, I would run three
four-pair, or two four-pair and a run of zipcord (speaker-level audio,
or...) and I would look into the cost of running some variety of coax
(although I'm not sure what I'd use it for; possibly video feed.)
Don't forget to plan for audio and video distribution, and remember to
leave pair available for remote-control repeaters.

Whoever suggested conduit, I'd agree with that, but it's a hefty cost,
no?  If I did have conduit put in, I'd favor 3/4", and *require* that
pull-string be left in all runs.  Blowing works fine, if you're
working with an empty conduit.


Laird P. Broadfield   [e-mail]  ...{ucsd, nosc}!crash!lairdb

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

Date: 25 Oct 1992 15:34:09 +0000 (GMT)
From: [e-mail] (Maria Panizo)
Subject: Re: How Should I Get My House Wired For Future Phone Needs?
Organization: Texas Christian University


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.

10BaseT only requires two pairs.  But I would agree with you and
advocate just about as many as you can pull without hurting yourself!


MP

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

From: [e-mail] (Paul Schauble)
Subject: Re: How Should I Get My House Wired For Future Phone Needs?
Organization: Bull HN Information Systems, Inc., Phoenix Product Division
Date: Sun, 25 Oct 92 21:33:20 GMT


With the punchdown blocks, what's the appropriate technique to take
one incoming pair and connect it to the many pairs goint out to each
room?

Also, is that available a list of mail order sources for the punchdown
blocks, jacks, &c?


 ++PLS

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

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, 25 Oct 1992 17:14:02 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Maxime
Taksar KC6ZPS) writes:

> 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?)

The 10BaseT I have on my desk at work uses RJ45 connectors and eight
conductor wire.  I just assumed that all were used.


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

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

Date: Sun, 25 Oct 92 16:43:57 CST
From: Jack Decker <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: No Dial Tone; What's a Guy to Do?


> Today, I returned home from work, and for the third time in a two
> months, had no dial tone on my voice line.

 ... [stuff deleted] ...

 > Do I call the PUC?

By all means, or better yet, take the text of your message and edit it
into a letter and SEND it to the PUC.  I would, at a minimum, state
that you want a) credit for the time you were without service, b) an
explanation of the cause of the problem, and c) the name and number of
an NET manager that will take responsibility for seeing that the
problem is corrected, and whom you can call directly should the
problem recur.

One tip: Be exceedingly polite.  The PUC people are on your side
(unless you manage to alienate them), so the tone of your letter
should be "Can you help me with this?  I'd really appreciate it if you
could help me obtain the following ..." rather than the type of letter
you might wish to write to NET right about now.

> 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?

You should ask for a service credit.  If you just take it upon
yourself to not pay, they could disconnect your service.  Of course,
you might conceivably get the PUC to decide they were wrong to do so
in your case, but you'd still be without service for a time.  Better
to get the PUC working on it from the start, and let THEM fight with
NET for you ... they have a LOT more clout, and I can assure you that
NET won't disconnect THEIR phones! ;-)


Jack Decker   [e-mail]    FidoNet 1:154/8

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: No Dial Tone; What's a Guy to Do?
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA
Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1992 03:55:19 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Adam
Shostack) writes:

> Today, I returned home from work, and for the third time in a two
> months, had no dial tone on my voice line.

> What are my options?  The service stinks, the business office doesn't
> want to cut a rebate (even for days I am without service)

> Do I call the PUC?

Definately!  I can hardly believe that they will not give credit for
days when you didn't have service.  Every telco I've dealt with had a
policy that if service went unrestored for 24 hours after you reported
it, that they would give you pro rata credit for each day you were
without service.  I would imagine that this is just not policy, but in
the tariffs per the PUCs insistance.  Complain loudly to the NET
executive offices and the PUC.

Also, you should make it clear that you are not only upset about
getting the run-around as far as your billing credit, but that the
delay in getting your service restored speaks of a much larger problem
that must be addressed.


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: A Few Questions About N11 Codes
Date: 25 Oct 92 20:03:18 GMT
Organization: The Hebrew University of Jerusalem


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Ramakrishna Chamarthy) writes:

> 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 - Emergency 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?)?

In Israel, police emergency is 100, fire department is 102, ambulance
service is 101, and directory assistance is 144. If you have a modem
you can access directory assistance yourself by logging in to 133
(it's only one message unit vs. three for using operator assisted
directory inquiry and one can be *online* for eight minutes before
getting cut off). By the way, a CD-ROM disk containing all Israeli
phone numbers is expected to be out by January with an end user price
of $100.


Josh    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Tom Hofmann)
Subject: Re: A Few Questions About N11 Codes
Organization: Ciba-Geigy Ltd., Basel, Switzerland
Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1992 07:29:47 GMT


[e-mail] (Ramakrishna Chamarthy) writes:

> 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?)?

112 is/will be the emergency number in all countries of the European
Community.


Tom

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #802
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa03266;
          26 Oct 92 10:51 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA17932
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 26 Oct 1992 08:01:37 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA14437
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 26 Oct 1992 08:01:11 -0600
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1992 08:01:11 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #803

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 26 Oct 92 08:01:15 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 803

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Eat Here and Get Gas (Paul Robinson)
    Re: Eat Here and Get Gas (Tom Coradeschi)
    Re: "Intercom-Plus" and AT&T 5E Switches (Ben Harrell)
    Re: "Intercom-Plus" and AT&T 5E Switches (John Higdon)
    Re: Modem Question (William D. Bauserman)
    Re: Modem Question (Dave Levenson)
    Re: Length of Phone Numbers in Europe (Juha Veijalainen)
    Re: Old Telephone Wiring at Network Interface (Amanda Walker)
    Re: Cellullar Internationally? (Henry Mensch)
    Caller-ID and Ring-ID (was Identa-Ring Decoding box) (Paul Robinson)
    Re: PC-Based Voicemail Systems (Timothy E. Buchanan)
    Re: Please Explain "Crossed Lines" (Steve Forrette)
    Re: Call-Advice (was College Phone System AGAIN!) (Jeff Dubin)
    Re: Pilot Frequency (Bruce Oltman)
    University Telephone Service - Correction (Robert D. Smith)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1992  16:26:17 EDT
Subject: Re: Eat Here and Get Gas


In article [e-mail], [e-mail] () writes:

> 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.

The way it works here in Dallas is that the phone is "free" when you
sign a commitment for a year or two of service. The "provider" of the
phone also hits you with their own contract that says you owe them 400
bucks if you cancel your contract with the cellular carrier before six
months. I bought my phone from a franchised dealer, who explained that
the carrier kicks back the 400 bucks to the phone seller after
providing six months of service.

I haven't seen gas stations that "give away" phones around here, but
there's a computer store and a strip joint that do.


Fred Wedemeier    pho: 214-575-6556     fax: [phone]
  timsg: fcw             inet: [e-mail]

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

Date: Sun, 25 Oct 92 12:19:39 EDT
From: Tom Coradeschi <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Eat Here and Get Gas
Organization: Electric Armts Div, US Army ARDEC, Picatinny Arsenal, NJ


Paul Robinson <[e-mail]> writes:

> 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.

I suspect that what you're really getting into is:

"Free Cellular phone with any brake job*"

Then MUCH lower, and MUCH smaller:

"*Cellular phone batteries (not included): $99."

There's an ad running in one of the local papers advertising bag
phones for $1.99, which uses just such a technique.


tom coradeschi    <+>    [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: Well, if you plan to use the phone only in the car
and/or have a wide variety of batteries and battery-eliminators in
your possession from previous cell phones, you might actually be able
to take them up on that offer and avoid having to purchase the $99
batteries from them. They probably would not like that!   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Ben Harrell)
Subject: Re: "Intercom-Plus" and AT&T 5E Switches
Organization: North Carolina State University
Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1992 23:40:00 GMT


[e-mail] writes:

> 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.

> Does anybody know why this is? It seems strange that a software feature on 1A
> switches wouldn't be on 5E switches.

This feature is provided in software feature package NTXF82AA,
available since 1991, for the DMS-100(tm) switch, and is called the
Single Line Variety Package.  It may be that P*B has chose not to
purchase it for its switches yet.


Ben Harrell   [e-mail]   or   [e-mail]

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

Date: Sun, 25 Oct 92 18:23 PDT
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Subject: Re: "Intercom-Plus" and AT&T 5E Switches
Organization: Green Hills and Cows


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

> Does anybody know why this is? It seems strange that a software feature on 1A
> switches wouldn't be on 5E switches.

Was no one listening a year ago when I screamed bloody murder about
this? There are MANY ways a 5E appears to be "dumbed down" from a 1A,
but when I spoke about it on the Digest, all the whoopie-whiz "digital
at any price" people came out of the woodwork to tell me how wonderful
the AT&T 5ESS was. Once again, people, the 5ESS is OK if you really
need ISDN, but it cannot, user-feature-wise, hold a candle to the 1A.


John Higdon  |   P. O. Box 7648   |   [phone]     |       FAX:
[e-mail] | San Jose, CA 95150 | 10288 0 700 FOR-A-MOO | [phone]

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

Date: 25 Oct 92 21:01:00 UT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Modem Question


[e-mail] writes:

> lights labeled: ERR, CTS, DCD, RD, TD, LB, PWR with one switch labeled:
> LLB & RLB ...

I am not familiar with your exact modem but my guess would be that the
LLB stands for "Local LoopBack" and RLB stands for "Remote LoopBack"
with the LB light indicating a "LoopBack" mode.

The loopback modes are quite simple -- the "local" mode forces your
modem to "loopback" all data it receives and not pass it to the pc for
interpretation.  The "remote" mode is similar but usually indicates
the remote end is looped and to expect to get back what it sends.

I also doubt that your modem is a "network stuff" modem -- why would it
have a phone and a line jack if it was?


[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Dave Levenson)
Subject: Re: Modem Question
Organization: Westmark, Inc.
Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1992 12:20:36 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Tony
Pelliccio) writes:

> In reference to [e-mail]'s question about the modem he
> has ... Lets see ... CTS is clear to send, I suspect ERR is error

> obvious, but LB ... hmmmm... couldn't tell you what that one is. I

LB, in most communications equipment, means loop-back.  It probably
indicates a test-mode selected by the local DTE or by the remote DCE.


Dave Levenson        Internet: [e-mail]
Westmark, Inc.        UUCP: {uunet | rutgers | att}!westmark!dave
Warren, NJ, USA        Voice: 908 647 0900  Fax: [phone]

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

From: FNAHA![e-mail]
Date: 25 OCT 92 08:30
Subject: Re: Length of Phone Numbers in Europe


[e-mail] (Garrett Wollman) wrote:

> I can remember when I was in Finland, that this was quite common.  In
  < some lines deleted >
> 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

Overall length for phone numbers in Finland is ten digit.  Usually
area codes are three digits long (prefix 9 + area number), but
Helsinki area has a two digit code, 90.  Thus in Helsinki you see
phone numbers from four to eight digits long.  Shorter ones are
usually reserved for large organizations, like the University, and
the longer ones are 'normal' phone numbers and extensions.

> 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.

Local telco services have normally three digit numbers, starting with
0.  International services are provided by the state owned PTL, thus
the numbers are handled like long distance calls -- they start with 9.

This same scheme is used to access mobile phones, pagers etc.  Mobile
phone networks have prefixes like 949, 950, long distance pagers 948
and so on.

As I said, local services (and emergency services) now have prefix
'0'.  This is going to change soon, because the long distance prefix
is going to be internationalized, that is, '9' -prefix is history.
This also means, that ALL emergency, local service, and long distance
numbers are going to be changed.  For example, emergency number '000'
is changed to '112' next january.

Not having fixed length numbers creates problems sometimes.  I read in
a newspaper some months ago that a hotel in southern Finland was given
a eight digit number.  So far so good, but they had a three digit area
code.  8+3 is 11, maximum length for phone numbers is 10, and they
found out they had a number that no one, expect the locals, could
call!


Juha Veijalainen   4ge system analyst
Unisys Finland   phone [phone], fax [phone]
Internet mail:   [e-mail]
** Mielipiteet omiani  ** Opinions are PERSONAL, facts are suspect

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

From: [e-mail] (Amanda Walker)
Subject: Re: Old Telephone Wiring at Network Interface
Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1992 18:35:47 -0500
Organization: InterCon Systems Corporation
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Amanda Walker)


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

> In the 'deep dark distant past', the Bell Standard for Domestic Inside
> Wiring, was three wires (Red, Green and Yellow).

Funny you should mention this.  I have discovered that the house I
just moved into is wired this way.  Darned annoying when you have two
lines.  Luckily, the NI is just below my bedroom window, so I can use
the second line while I figure out how to rewire the house without
upsetting my landlord :).

On a related note, I also discovered that only about half of the
three-prong outlets were actually grounded.


Amanda Walker

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

From: [e-mail] (Henry Mensch)
Date: Sun, 25 Oct 92 11:53:44 -0700
Subject: Re: Cellullar Internationally?
Reply-To: [e-mail]


[e-mail] (Dan DeClerck) wrote:

> Your best bet would probably be to rent a phone at the airport, but
> the price may be prohibitive.

Some of the airlines (British Airways does, at least) offer cell phone
rental at the phenomenal price of UKL10/day or so ...


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Tdarcos)
Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1992 14:30:14 -0500
Subject: Caller-ID and Ring-ID (Was Identa-Ring Decoding Box)
Reply-To: [e-mail]


In Telecom Digest 12-786, [e-mail] (Ron Bean) said the
following:

> [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. [material deleted] 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.

Who sez?

You *could* do both; they are two separate technologies.  If you had
your own PBX that had caller ID on its trunk lines, you *would* get
both.  If you have a DID trunk, the telephone company sends, as DTMF
(Touch tone) or as a pulse dial code, the last three or last four
digits (depending on how many extensions you have) of the called
telephone number.  It could, at that point, then send the burst of
data as a Caller-ID packet.  Whether the switch can use it is another
thing.  Whether the switch your calls come from can provide it is
still another.


Paul Robinson  -- [e-mail]
These (uninformed) opinions are mine alone, nobody else (is stupid
enough to be) responsible for them.

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

From: [e-mail] (BUCHANAN TIMOTHY E)
Subject: Re: PC-Based Voicemail Systems
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1992 22:50:43 GMT


[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 the Supra V32bis fax/modem which has 14.4K fax and modem
speeds. I haven't used the Fax side yet, but the modem works great
under DOS and Unix. They now offer a Caller-ID upgrade and a rom that
monitors for Fax ring tones, and a voice-mail upgrade is in the works.


Timothy

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: Please Explain "Crossed Lines"
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA
Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1992 03:48:03 GMT


In my case, it was exactly as Pat desribed: someone else had my line
on their secondary pair.  In this instance, it was a second line at my
parents' house that I had installed for my use when I visited.  During
the time when my "phantom" calls were made, there had not even been a
phone plugged into that line, so there was nobody to hear the other
person, no unusual ringing, etc.  What disappointed me was that when
Pacific Bell located the spurious jumper, they just removed it and
reported this fact to me.  They made no effort to identify where it
went so that the proper people could be billed for their calls.
Devious or not, the other people should rightfully expect to pay for
their calls, even if it was their honest mistake.


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

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

Organization: The American University - University Computing Center
Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1992 19:59:07 EDT
From: Jeff Dubin <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Call-Advice (was College Phone System AGAIN!)


Great system ... if your modem is external.


Jeff Dubin    [e-mail]     [e-mail]

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

Date: Sun, 25 Oct 92 17:44:49 CDT
From: [e-mail] (Bruce Oltman)
Subject: Re: Pilot Frequency


Good story Pat.  25 years ago I was the engineer at WHPK that built
the radio which monitored WMAQ.  It was a classic five-tube superhet
with my own "solid state" voltage comparator/latch on the AGC line.

Another infamous kludge was the remote FM transmitter on/off control.
We sent 100 VDC common mode over the leased audio pair from Mitchell
Tower to Pierce where the transmitter was located.

Remember Chuck Metalitz?


[Moderator's Note: I only vaguely recall the name; I don't know
anything about him. I do seem to recall that WHPK replaced an older AM
station called WUCB which was transmitted on carrier current to the
various campus buildings.  PAT]

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

From: ROBERT SMITH <[e-mail]>
Subject: University Telephone Service - Correction
Date: 25 Oct 92 18:21:43 GMT
Reply-To: ROBERT SMITH <[e-mail]>
Organization: Stakeholder Relations, NCR Corp in Dayton,OH


[e-mail] (Bob Kupiec) writes:

> 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.              ^^^

I'm sorry to hear about the difficulties you have been experiencing
with the telephone service at LaSalle University.  I was wondering if
you really meant an _NCR_ switch.  NCR is now part of AT&T --
essentially the computer division of AT&T.  NCR does not make PBX
switches.

Anyway, I just wanted to clear up a possible misunderstanding.


Bob Smith    E-mail => [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #803
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa01729;
          27 Oct 92 2:11 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA01736
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 27 Oct 1992 00:09:16 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA24641
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 27 Oct 1992 00:08:56 -0600
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1992 00:08:56 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #804

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 27 Oct 92 00:09:00 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 804

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    The Freeway Call Box and Cellular Hacking Threads Meet (Joseph E. Baker)
    Phreaking Roadside Emergency Phones (Jim Haynes)
    More About Highway Callboxes (Marty Brenneis)
    Somebody Gets Access to Freeway Callbox Codes, Runs up Bill (David Lesher)
    Speaking of Scams (Scot Mcintosh)
    Re: Stolen Cell Phone ([e-mail])
    Re: Stolen Cell Phone (Paul Schauble)
    Re: Stolen Cell Phone (Keith Smith)
    Guyana Phone System (was Area Code 610) (David Lesher)
    Data Drop Incident Through a ROLM PBX (David Leibold)
    900 Number Bills From "Credit Collection Center" (John Nagle)
    Interest Group on X.400/X.500 (Thomas K. Hinders)
    700 Numbers From Overseas (Juergen Ziegler)
    "Gotta Go (TM)" (Lauren Weinstein)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 26 Oct 92 09:01:46 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Joseph E. Baker)
Subject: The Freeway Call Box and Cellular Hacking Threads Meet


This article has a few obvious errors, but it is easy enough to figure
out what really happened:

 From the Friday, October 23, {Los Angeles Times}:

``Hacker Taps Into Freeway Call Box - 11,733 Times''
by Jeffrey A. Perlman, Times Staff Writer

Santa Ana - An enterprising hacker reached out and touched someone
11,733 times in August -- from a freeway emergency call box in Orange
County.

A computer that monitors the county's emergency call boxes attributed
25,875 minutes of calls to the mysterious caller who telephoned people
in countries across the gobe, according to a staff report prepared for
the Orange County Transportation Authority.

"This is well over the average of roughly ten calls per call box,"
the report noted.

About 1,150 bright yellow call boxes have been placed along Orange
County's freeways to connect stranded motorists to the California
Highway Patrol.  But the caller charged all his calls to a single box
on the shoulder of the Orange (57) Freeway.

The hacker apparently matched the individual electronic serial number
for the call box to its telephone number.  It took an investigation by
the transit authority, and three cellular communications firms to
unravel the mystery, the report stated.

Officials with the transit authority's emergency call box program were
not available to comment on the cost of the phone calls or to say how
they would be paid.

But the report assured that "action has been taken to correct this
problem.  It should be noted that this is the first incident of this
type in the five-year history of the program."

 -End of article

Joe Baker    [e-mail] or [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Jim Haynes)
Subject: Phreaking Roadside Emergency Phones
Date: 26 Oct 1992 07:08:10 GMT
Organization: University of California; Santa Cruz


An article in the {Sunday San Francisco Examiner} reports "A telephone
thief tapped into an emergency telephone along a freeway, resulting in
11,733 illegal calls before officials discovered the tampering ..."

"This is well over the average of roughly ten calls per month per box" ;-)
Officials speculate the person who cracked the system sold the secret
to others.


[e-mail]    [e-mail]

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

Date: Mon, 26 Oct 92 22:59:50 PPE
From: [e-mail] (Marty the Droid)
Subject: More About Highway Callboxes


There is an article in the {SF Chronicle} about a person who tepped
into a cellular callbox and rang up several thousand worth of calls
before being caught. The article is not technical enough to say if
this was a physical or wireless break-in to the system. Apparently the
callboxes are std cellphones that dial a specific number and ID
themselves to the party that answers. They don't have any special
class of service in the system to prevent this type of fraud.

Attn cellular switch programmers: Why not have a class of service that
works like a ringdown. Then when the ESN & MIN combo of a callbox
comes in it gets connected to the proper dispatch point and nowhere
else.


Marty 'The Droid' Brenneis             ...!uupsi!kerner!droid
Industrial Magician                          [e-mail]
[phone]   ~~~  KAE7616 - 462.700 - 162.2   ~~~   KC6YYP


[Moderator's Note: Ameritech Mobile offers just such a class of
service: You go off hook (press send, actually) and it starts ringing
someplace. The tone pad on the phone is of no value at all. Some
companies doing messenger service, etc have the phones programmed that
way for their delivery personnel to call the office and be called.  PAT]

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

From: David Lesher <[e-mail]>
Subject: Somebody Gets Access to Freeway Callbox Codes, Runs up Bill
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 92 11:45:48 EDT
Reply-To: [e-mail]  (David Lesher)
Organization: NRK Clinic for habitual NetNews abusers - Beltway Annex


Clarinet reports that someone got the ESN et. al. from a Left Coast
solar-powered freeway call box and ran up 11,733 calls totaling 25,875
minutes of time. Now, since the account was supposedly restricted to
calling only specific Calif. Highway Patrol numbers, there's a ruckus
going on regarding who has to eat the calls.

I read carefully, but did not see Integretel mentioned in the story ;_]


[e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: That is a scandalous and libelous remark about
America's best loved alternate carrier!  I loved it though!  :)  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Scot Mcintosh)
Subject: Speaking of Scams ...
Organization: Naval Ocean Systems Center, San Diego
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1992 17:28:53 GMT


I've encountered an interesting tack taken by a scamster. I own an
apartment building which uses a telephone line for the entry system.
Naturally, considering what it's used for, I don't have a long-distance
carrier for it. One month, lo and behold, I find a $5+ charge for
switching to MCI. Upon calling the Pac Bell business office and
explaining the situation, I'm told that this is a not-so-infrequent
occurrence these days. According to the Pac Bell rep, some salespeople
are resorting to creating fictitious 'orders' for service on lines
that have no designated long-distance carriers.  I don't know how
accurate this explanation is, but the charge WAS there, and I sure
didn't order it.


Scot McIntosh    Internet: [e-mail]
UUCP:     {ihnp4,akgua,decvax,decwest,ucbvax}!sdscvax!nosc!psm


[Moderator's Note: Do you think Integratel brokers MCI long distance
as well as running a few 'special' services?   :)    PAT]

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

Organization: Penn State University
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1992 00:04:56 EST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Stolen Cell Phone


For those of you who mailed me for info on the above company, and
anyone else i nterested on a whole lotta telco/netwerking/telecom
stuff, write to the followi ng address or call and ask for their
catalog:

Specialized Products Company
17 Hampshire Drive, Suite 17
Hudson, NH 03051
800.527.5018    603.880.0150

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

From: [e-mail] (Paul Schauble)
Subject: Re: Stolen Cell Phone
Organization: Bull HN Information Systems, Inc., Phoenix Product Division
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 92 23:34:03 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail].
com (Craig Heim) writes:

> OK, that takes care of Tumbling Fraud.  Here's the Cellular Fraud
> problem of the 1990s: CLONING.  How do you handle a bandit who has
> programmed his phone to the ESN and MIN of a valid subscriber?
> Interesting problem isn't it?

Kerberos?


[Moderator's Note: I wish you would elaborate a little further on this
and how you think Kerberos could be implemented in cellular phones. I
suspect it would be (almost) totally foolproof. How would you do it?
How would the legitimate user get his 'ticket' each time?    PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Keith Smith)
Subject: Re: Stolen Cell Phone
Organization: Keith's Computer, Hope Mills, NC
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 92 20:16:24 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Jack
Faley) writes:

> it? Or how I can find out who owns the numbers called without calling
> them up asking them then getting hung up on?

Most public libraries have a cross-reference directory.  Try there.
(Oh yea, the LIBRARY!)

On a different thread, Why are we always trying to find INVALID ESN's?
Why not instead maintain a database of *VALID* ESN's instead, and look
them up at the top of a call, ALSO ...

It would seem to me the way to handle this security would be to use an
ESN, and a SOFT key that could be programmed into the phone.  The cell
company could do a lookup similar to a computer password file.  If the
phone is stolen flag the ESN.  If someone is "tumbling" or forging an
ESN they would also have to come up with the "key" number which could
be changed at will by the subscriber, or cell company?

If one wanted to roam one could tell their local celco, and it could
be added to a national list.

So tell me,  where is my reasoning flawed?


Keith Smith          uunet!ksmith!keith       5719 Archer Rd.
Digital Designs      BBS 1-919-423-4216       Hope Mills, NC 28348-2201
Somewhere in the Styx of North Carolina ...


[Moderator's Note: Your scheme is only flawed in the sense that there
are presumably many, many more valid ESN's than invalid ones and a
list of good numbers would be large and very difficult to manage. I
think the likelyhood of a legitimate caller being inconvenienced by
not being on the list is greater than the likelyhood of a legitimate
caller being inconvenienced by being on the negative list, and
although fraud is a serious problem, so is good customer relations.  PAT]

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

From: David Lesher <[e-mail]>
Subject: Guyana Phone System (was Area Code 610)
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 92 18:49:35 EDT
Reply-To: [e-mail]  (David Lesher)
Organization: NRK Clinic for habitual NetNews abusers - Beltway Annex


> [Moderator's Note: There are a bunch of internationally based phone
> services in New Jersey advertised to people all over the world.

> The services directed to Americans are located in the Netherland
> Antilles and one is in Georgetown, Guyana.

I'm totally incredulous re: this statement. I've been to Guyana, and
he's no Jack ... ooops - wrong quote.

I spent 30+ days in Georgetown two years ago, and have returned since.
The phone service there is as bad as Havana, and far worse than, say,
Poland was. I regularly got local calls abandoned, likely due to the
lack of interoffice trunkage. If you called back several times,
something in the switch got too warm, I guess, as dial tone would
never break. You went away for a while, and it would work again. A
very knowlegable source told me he'd counted 5000 poles in the city in
danger of collapse.  (This in a country that is 99&44/100% trees - BIG
ones!) I fixed several subscriber sets while I was there, mostly out
of boredom. The older ones were British, and appeared to be similar to
"300" series Western equipment. The newer stuff was Soviet, and was
absolute garbage. The case plastic cracked everywhere, so the
hookswitches never functioned.

International, you ask? There is no cable anywhere -- heck, there are
no ROADS anywhere. A over-the-horizon tropo-scatter station links
Georgetown to Port of Spain, Trinidad. It has 12 circuits, I think -
maybe 24. There is a small Geosat dish owned by Cable & Wireless, but
I'm not sure it works. The ONLY reliable service in the county was an
Inmarisat dish and phone owned by an ex-Texas oilman. He used it to Fax
reports back to Houston. (Don't even ask about the postal service ...)

Even if you had some magic trunkage to the real world, any kind of
recorded schlock would need power to run it. For the rest of my life,
I'll always think of Guyana whenever I hear a generator start ;_]
Rotating line power is the norm -- I don't call them rotating backouts,
because time_off >>>> time_on.

As a local said to me one night in the bar, "It's not QUITE the end of
the world ... [swig] ... but you can SEE it from here, mon."

Now, I'm not normally one to call PAT a liar, but where DID you read
about this, sir, the Weakly World News ;-?


[e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: I saw the same advertisement twice in recent weeks;
once in the {Advocate} and once in {Windy City Times}, a little paper
here in Chicago. I will spare you some of the lewdness in the text of
the ads, but the essence was that gay men were invited to call a free
'International Party Line' -- no charge except for the phone call
itself to 011-592-2 (something) ... that reads Georgetown, Guyana in
my AT&T guidebook.  Curiously, the same ad with the same wording had
appeared in the past on several occassions in the {Advocate} using a
number in the Netherland Antilles ... with city code 6 (011-599-6) and
I thought something was fishy there when the AT&T International
Operating Center told me that '6' went to Bonaire.  My book says '7'
is that city, but AT&T said '6' went there also. Like yourself, I was
a bit astounded to see such a service operating in Guyana, but if you
consider the state of the government operated phone system there, I am
not surprised the government of Guyana wants to tip the balance due on
settlements with the USA in their favor, and that would surely happen
with a few hundred (thousand, whatever) guys calling there every day
to chat with compatriots from around the globe. The Netherland
Antilles ad quit running about the time the one in Guyana started. It
might be the same people operated it in N.A. then moved it for some
reason.  PAT]

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

Date: Mon, 26 Oct 92 18:52:52 EDT
From: David Leibold <[e-mail]>
Subject: Data Drop Incident Through a ROLM PBX


Given a few postings about ROLM switches lately, this was something
that came up at York with the campus phone switch ... this came from a
local campus mailing list as indicated in the headers below.

(begin contents of posting ...)

 Date:      Mon, 27 Jul 1992 12:46:43 -0400
 Reply-To:  Eriks Rugelis <[e-mail]>
 Sender:    "Discussion on Academic Computing at York University"
             <[e-mail]>
 From:      Eriks Rugelis <[e-mail]>
 Subject:   Re: Dumped from VM1

Taylor Roberts writes:

> Further to the recent airing of mild complaints about VM1, ten
> minutes ago I was unceremoniously disconnected after having typed a
> huge message.  When I called right back, logged on, and began my
> message again, the same thing happened!

The telephone system at the Keele campus consists of four Rolm 9751
switches.  Each switch has dual CPU's for redundancy (one active, one
standby).  Each night, between 1AM and 3AM the CPU's exchange their
active/standby roles to ensure that both CPU's are fully functional at
all times.  This switch-over is transparent to voice calls but causes
DCM connections to be dropped.  Dialin to VTAM and IPNET is routed
through the Rolm on DCM's and hence is subject to CPU switch-over
induced session drops.

Yesterday morning, between 10:00 and 10:30, a CPU switch-over took
place on one of the 9751's. This caused all DCM connections through
that switch to be dropped. If you re-dialed immediately, it is
possible that you could have been dropped again for the same reason.


Eriks Rugelis    Network Operations

(end of forwarded post... courtesy [e-mail])

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

From: [e-mail] (John Nagle)
Subject: 900 Number Bills From "Credit Collection Center"
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1992 04:55:58 GMT


If you have recently received a notice from "Credit Collection Center"
of Miami FL requesting payment of 900 number charges, and you believe
the charges to be bogus, please get in touch with me.  Thank you.


John Nagle     [e-mail]

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

Date: 27 Oct 92 10:03:07-0800
From: /PN=Thomas.K.Hinders/OU=CCMAIL/O=CHAN.IS/PRMD=MMC/ADMD=TELEMAIL/C=US/@sprint.com
Subject: Interest Group on X.400/X.500


Does anyone know of an interest group covering the topics of X.400
and/or X.500?


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

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

Date: Mon, 26 Oct 92 13:24 MEZ
From: Juergen Ziegler <[e-mail]>
Subject: 700 Numbers From Overseas


Hi TD readers,

I am a regular reader of TD, therfore I am familliar with 700 numbers.
Well, the idea of a lifetime and personal telephone number is great,
but the way this is accomplished in the USA does not make sense to me.
Basically I do criticize the fact, that there are different 700 number
spaces for the different IECs. For you guys in the USA this is not
much of a problem, since you enjoy 10xxx dialing, but such dialing
is not available from overseas. So calls to 700 numbers can not be
completed as regular international telephone calls. To call such
numbers you need a calling card from AT&T, MCI, SPRINT, ... and use
their expensive "USA DIRECT"-like services. As a result the majority
of international customers can not call 700 numbers, since they do not
have such calling cards.

I find this very STUPID!!! It took quite a long time to make inter-
national dialing as easy as today. Now, the country with the world's
most advanced telecommunications infrastruture creates this odd
system.  Why??? Why was the 700 number space not used like the 800/900
number space? Or why are not free are codes assigned for those
services. So that "700" service from AT&T could be 720, from MCI 730,
from SPRINT 730, ... I hope the current situation will be revised
ASAP, so that callers from overseas will be able to call a "700"
number as easy as calling any other regular telephone number.


Juergen   [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: You are missing the point, Juergen. 700 numbers are
intended as internal arrangements in the USA. This is much the same
thing with 800 numbers, although not exclusively. 700/800 are for use
inside the USA by callers within the USA. Most people with 800 numbers
do not wish to pay for overseas calls; I assume most people with 700
numbers have specialized interests in those numbers also. All 700
numbers can be reached via their regular ten digit equivilent, and
people with 800 numbers who wish to pay for international traffic get
the equivilent of an inwats line originating in the country they wish
to receive calls from. I don't complain because some company in
Germany receives toll free calls on the (German) equivilent of 800 --
something we here in the USA cannot dial internationally. I assume if
they want USA callers they will put in an 800 number here as we know
it and can use it. Every country has certain telephone codes for its
own internal use; the USA has 700, 800 and 900.  Why do you think it
is 'stupid'?   If you wish to bypass network arrangements and use a
service like 'USA Direct' to get into the USA and then call outbound
to a 700/800 number, suit yourself. Of course it will cost more.  PAT]

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

Date: Mon, 26 Oct 92 21:33 PST
From: [e-mail] (Lauren Weinstein)
Subject: "Gotta Go (TM)"


Greetings.  I stumbled across an amusing ad in today's {L.A. Times}.

The graphic shows a little box plugged into a phone via a pair of
modular connectors.  The device, called the "Gotta Go (TM)", has a
single button on the top and requires a nine volt battery.  What's all
this for?  The whole point is simply to simulate the "click" of call
waiting (well, 1A call waiting, anyway) to the party at the other end,
so you can claim you "gotta go" to another call when you want to get
rid of them.  All this high tech for $14.95!

Good old P.T. Barnum knew what he was talking about!


 --Lauren--

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #804
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa03066;
          27 Oct 92 2:55 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA24923
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 27 Oct 1992 00:49:52 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA29574
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 27 Oct 1992 00:49:35 -0600
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1992 00:49:35 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #805

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 27 Oct 92 00:49:40 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 805

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Cordless Phones: Handset to Base Handshake? (Bill Pfeiffer)
    Re: Cordless Phones: Handset to Base Handshake? (Mikel Manitius)
    Re: Fax Store-and-Forward Service Wanted (Brent Capps)
    Re: Fax Store-and-Forward Service Wanted (Tony L. Hansen)
    Re: How Should I Get My House Wired For Future Phone Needs? (L. Broadfield)
    Re: How Should I Get My House Wired For Future Phone Needs? (Doug Rorem)
    Re: PictureTel Video Conference Experience (Thomas Lapp)
    Re: Picturetel Video Conference Experience (Mark Morrissey)
    Re: FCC Modem Tax Scare Plagues Local BBS ...>Again< (Bill Campbell)
    Re: FCC Modem Tax Scare Plagues Local BBS ...>Again< (Mike Riddle)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Bill Pfeiffer)
Subject: Re: Cordless Phones: Handset to Base Handshake
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1992 03:51:27 -0500 (CDT)


In a recent TELECOM Digest, [e-mail] (Eric E.
Snyder) writes:

> What prevents a near-by party with a cordless phone from dialing out
> using my base unit and making charges on my phone line?

> Any pointers to how security is maintained would be appreciated.

> [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). 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]

Here is a brief history of how cordless phones and security evolved.
First of the breed were strange units which looked like desk phones,
with a *LONG* telescoping whip on the rear of the unit (about three
feet).  These units used a 49mhz FM signal from phone to base, and a
27mhz AM signal from base to phone.  The 27 mhz signal sat between
channel 3 and 4 on CB, so the noise and bleedover was horrendous on
the receive end of the cordless, but almost inaudible on the distant
end.  (Pat should remember these, he had one).

The next incarnation was the 'one piece' style we are familiar with
today, but much larger and heavier.  These beauties used the same
49mhz fm from handset to base, but replaced the 'CB' channel with one
of five channels from 1630khz to 17xxkhz, also narrow band fm.  These
frequencies were in a guard band between standard broadcast, and the
low marine band.  The 1.7 mhz signal was fed 'carrier current' into
the power line while the 49.* mhz was received via the whip on the
base.  The handset had a ferrite loopstick in it, similar th that
found in pocket AM radios (for receiving the 1.7 signal) and a short
whip (to send the 49 signal to the base).  However, the atmospheric
noise created by thousands of phones operating on the 1.7mhz band,
caused this spectrum to get crowded, and interfere with some
navigational beacons which shared the spectrum.

Next came the 49-46 mhz units in common use today.  In time, five
extra channels were added to both the 49 (handset to base) and 46
(base to handset) channels.  Now, in an ever increasing attempt to
outwit crowded frequencies, the new 900mhz units have appeared.  One
good point about the old 1.7mhz units was that since the portable's
receive antenna was internal, the unit could receive a ringing signal,
at full range, without having the antenna extended.  However, it was
vulnerable to many stray ringing signals from nearby bases, on the
same power line as ones house, causing annoying false rings :-(

*** SECURITY ***

The original 'desk model' phones and the early 'one piece' phones used
something called a 'guard tone' to verify authenticity.  Basically a
simple high-pitched whistle was superimposed over the conversation
audio.  The base had a small chip in it (LM566) which would detect the
tone and open the line.  One of several tones were pre-set in the
portable, and the base was adjustable.  If no tone was heard by the
base, or the tone was of the wrong pitch, the unit would not open the
line.  This tone was sufficiently above the 300-3000hz response of the
phone circuit so it could easily be filtered out prior to injection
into the line.  However there was a high degree of repetition on guard
tones, so there was still a lot of security holes.  Also, the
existence of that tone, made DTMF (touch-tone) dialing impossible.
The phones pulse dialed by interrupting the guard tone and pulsing the
line relay in the base.

Finally, with the advent of inexpensive digital chips, the phones
started to be equipped with 'digital security codes'.  In this scheme,
a short data burst is sent to the base just as the portable is
switched to the 'talk' mode.  Another burst is sent as the portable is
switched off. If the portable and base's bit stream did not match, no
connection would be made.  In most of these units, a set of dip
switches on the base AND portable could be set to any of a couple
hundred combinations. (While there are theoretically thousands of
combinations, practical limitations of the inexpensive chips and
dip-switches, usually kept these choices to about 200-250)

Interesting side benefit, besides better audio and the ability to tone
dial, was the fact that in many cases the base would not instantly
hang up if signal was lost momentarily due to range limits.  Often the
base needs that 'hang up' signal to disconnect.  So, if you are out in
your yard and you accidentally step out of range for a moment, you
will not lose your call.  Also, in some units, the 'ring' signal sent
to the portable to signal an incoming call, is also digital, thereby
reducing the annoying habit of earlier phones to respond to ringing
from a neighbors cordless base.

Another common form of security is an interlock which prohibits the
base from picking up the line *at all* if the portable is resting on
it's charger contacts.

There is probably more to add, but I won't drone on any longer.  Hope
this helps.


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


[Moderator's Note: Bill is correct about me having an early cordless
phone. My first one was about 1967-68, but honestly Bill, I do not
remember it operating on Channel 3-A of Citizen's Band. (27.995 mz).
It was as described: a typical 500 set with a rotary dial, but totally
different insides than a desk phone, obviously.  I know its receiving
ability was far better than its transmission ability: I could walk a
good block away from home with it and if a call came in, the remote
unit (the piece you carried around which looked like a 500 set) would
chirp, but it could not make the trip back to the base. I'd go off
hook to answer; the base would continue sending those signals to make
it chirp, thinking there was no answer.  I'm sure this one was in the
range of 1700-1730 kc.  And it was expensive! I think I paid about
$400 for the unit ... they were considered really hot items!   PAT]

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

Date: Mon, 26 Oct 92 10:27:08 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Mikel Manitius)
Subject: Re: Cordless Phones: Handset to Base Handshake?


> What prevents a near-by party with a cordless phone from dialing out
> using my base unit and making charges on my phone line?

In addition to the security codes PAT mentioned, many new models will
not provide access over the air at all if the handset is in the
cradle.


Mikel Manitius    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Brent Capps)
Subject: Re: Fax Store-and-Forward Service Wanted
Organization: Atlas Telecom Inc.
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1992 20:25:05 GMT


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

> 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.

Truth Is Stranger Than Fiction Dept.: they're trying to save _paper_,
not the fax machine.  Slimey fax paper is real hard to come by in
Zimbabwe.

> Besides the big carriers, are there any private operators who provide
> store-fwd fax services ?

Yep -- my company does (shameless plug!)


Brent Capps   [e-mail] (gay stuff)
[e-mail] (telecom stuff)

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

From: [e-mail] (t.l.hansen)
Date: 26 Oct 1992  23:09 EDT
Subject: Re: Fax Store-and-Forward Service Wanted


[e-mail] (Tony L Hansen) wrote:

>>> 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.

> this number doesn't work from the sf bay area ...

Drat! The number is usually advertised as 1-800-MAIL-672. I
mistranslated the L into a 3 instead of a 5. So make that
1-800-624-5672. Sorry for the mistake.


Tony Hansen
[e-mail], [e-mail]
att!pegasus!hansen, attmail!tony


[Moderator's Note: Henry Mensch <[e-mail]> also wrote to say the
original message was in error. Sorry I did not catch it either.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: How Should I Get My House Wired For Future Phone Needs?
Date: 26 Oct 92 21:06:08 GMT


In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Paul
Schauble) writes:

> With the punchdown blocks, what's the appropriate technique to take
> one incoming pair and connect it to the many pairs goint out to each
> room?

The classic "66" block, while it's not "recommended" prceedure, will
take several conductors into the same clip, sometimes as many as six.
(Reliability descends as an exponential function of the number of
wires.)  While this is not SOP, it *is* such a common practice that
much of the resistance to 110 blocks is from installers who like to do
this (and can't on 110s.)

Closer to correct is to use both sides of a 66M for one pair, and use
bridge clips, thus getting you one "in" and three "outs" on each row
(rather than an in and an out on each side of each row.)

Genuine, according to the bible, is to use a 66B block, which is one
in and three (five?) outs as supplied.

> Also, is that available a list of mail order sources for the punchdown
> blocks, jacks, &c?

The usual Jensen, Specialized, and Black Box will mail them to anyone,
and charge an arm and a leg, Anixter will happily set up a will-call,
check-on-delivery account for anyone (but it helps if you know what
you want, although they do have catalogs), and Graybar ditto (but it's
like battling the Justice Department to get a catalog from them.)


Laird P. Broadfield     [e-mail]    ...{ucsd, nosc}!crash!lairdb

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

From: [e-mail] (Doug Rorem)
Subject: Re: How Should I Get My House Wired For Future Phone Needs?
Organization: University of Illinois at Chicago
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1992 04:39:47 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.

You might consider using 'smart house' wiring.  I saw a demo house
wired using this in Algonquin, IL (far NW Chicago suburb). They used
connectors from Molex which included : a duplex electrical outlet with
6 pins on each outlet (for appliance control), and a video/telephone
connector set the size of a duplex outlet stacked above.  The latter
consists of a video in and out jack and an RJ45 (8 conductor) jack.  I
don't know what the pin assignments are for the telephone jack, i.e.
whether it's for multiline, ISDN, etc ... I believe AMP makes stuff
for this 'smart house' standard also.  Molex' address is:

Molex Incorporated
2222 Wellington Ct.
Lisle, IL 60532

(708)-969-4550 voice
(708)-969-1352 fax


Doug Rorem  (I have no connection with Molex or AMP)
University of Illinois at Chicago    [e-mail]

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

Date: Mon, 26 Oct 92 18:24:32 EDT
From: Thomas Lapp <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: PictureTel Video Conference Experience


[e-mail] (Brad Houser) writes:

> I had the pleasure/frustration of using Picturetel Video Conferencing
> last week.

I've been using PictureTel's equipment most of the summer for both
point-to-point (two points) and multipoint (more than two).  Let me
see if I can add to what Brad has said without repeating him!  I was
told that the cost for a unit is about $60,000 which isn't too bad.
We have several portable systems which contain one monitor and uses
picture-within-picture for the near-end camera.  In addition to a
document camera, you can get a second camera on tripod.  The control
box controls tilt, pan, and zoom on either camera (and with
point-to-point mode, you can also control the FAR END camera).  The
controls have two columns -- one for what is shown at the near end,
the other what is sent to far end.

Brad talks about a 1/4 second delay, although I've noticed it appears
to be longer than that -- closer to one or two seconds round trip.
This results in people interrupting each other a lot.

> The video is much lower quality than regular video, but then
> again it is being digitized (and compressed?)  to squeeze over the
> phone lines.

The video "repaints" anything that moved.  A co-worker who used it for
the first time a few weeks ago described it as a "Max Headroom*" type
of effect.  Brad mentions the requirement of dialing two numbers.  I'm
not sure of the reason for this either, unless it is truly half-duplex
transmission.  The 1-700 telephone numbers are switched 56K bps
circuits.  According to the PictureTel menu's, in theory you can
connect at up to 384Kbps (obviously via leased line only at this
point).

For more than two locations, one has to go through a "video conference
bridge" where everyone calls one location and are all switched
together for the conference.  The location generating audio becomes
the far-end to all other sites.  We noticed that going through a video
bridge degrades picture quality a little more than just
point-to-point.

I must admit that I'm one of those "gadget types" as well as having
some professional experience with both radio and TV, so it took me a
number of meetings before I could stop going ga-ga over the technology
and actually participate in the actual meeting content :-)

* - apologies to readers outside the USA and UK who may not have
  seen this short-lived TV series and may not know the name.


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] (Mark Morrissey)
Subject: Re: Picturetel Video Conference Experience
Date: 26 Oct 92 17:08:38 GMT


In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Brad Houser)
writes:

> I would be interested in learning more about the technology.  Does
> anyone know where I can find more info?

I would send email to Mark Abel (my boss) who is the manager of the
ADL CSC Communications group in ASTG.  We are looking at research
potential with them.  I am not sure what can be said outside of our
group, however, as the non-disclosure is pretty restrictive.


Mark Morrissey               [e-mail]
Senior Engineer              Architecture Development Lab
Intel Corp., Portland, OR.   [phone]
#include <disclaimer.h>

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

From: [e-mail] (Bill Campbell)
Subject: Re: FCC Modem Tax Scare Plagues Local BBS ...>Again<
Organization: Celestial Software, Mercer Island, WA
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1992 07:17:34 GMT


In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Clint
Fleckenstein) writes:

> 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.

My cynical, paranoid side asks, is a "cry wolf" ploy to get people to
ignore a real attempt to get this kind of tax through?  After all the
FBI wants us to pay to make it easy for them to stick their nose in
our traffic.


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: Tue, 27 Oct 92 07:36:30 CST
From: [e-mail] (Mike Riddle)
Subject: Re: FCC Modem Tax Scare Plagues Local BBS ...>Again<
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Inns of Court, Papillion, NE


In a previous message, [e-mail] (Clint Fleckenstein))
writes:

> 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.

Well, I think I'm the "guy" that managed to get the 89-79 business
started on many of the BBSes.  But I'm not particularly amused that
the BBS crowd only *now* managed to find out, when I've been trying to
get response started for over a year.  Especially since the reopened
comment period closed for new submissions Sept. 30, and closes for
replies Oct.  30th.  But in *all* of my comments, I've been careful to
include docket numbers and dates.  Anyone who wants to check it out
and form their own conclusions is welcome to check out the Federal
Register for July 11, 1991, and then refer to the documents cited.  In
fact, if you *don't* refer to the actual documents, you will
completely miss what I consider to be the particularly odious aspects
of the ESP access charge rulings.

During the comment and appleal period, I've made available in
electronic form copies of all the pertinent FCC documents, and I've
also been the moderator of GEnie's *FCC RoundTable, which was set up
especially to air the issues.

I've still got all the files online at the BBS I operate, available to
first-time callers.  1-402-593-1192.  Unfortunately, I'm still
one-hopped from the big cable in the sky, so you can't ftp from me.  I
don't know whether any ftp sites ever picked up any of this.  You
might try ftp.eff.org, since they were at least looking into the
issue.  Or if you have a GEnie account, the RoundTable is still up at
page 1175, *FCC.

(In addition to the "standard disclaimer," let me state that I'm an
independent contractor and do *not* speak for GEnie or omahug.org or
anyone else but myself.)


          <<<< 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   (1:285/27.0)

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #805
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa04986;
          27 Oct 92 4:06 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA03402
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 27 Oct 1992 01:49:23 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA28238
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 27 Oct 1992 01:49:03 -0600
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1992 01:49:03 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #806

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 27 Oct 92 01:49:00 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 806

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Non-Critical, Real-Real-Cheap International Bandwidth Wanted (H. Shrikumar)
    Blocking International Calling (Sean Donelan)
    Traffic Engineering References Wanted (Anthony J. Lisotta)
    Swiss Phone (Tritel Ronco): Can it Work? (Joel M. Snyder)
    Information Needed About Willcon Satellite (Arlindo Ribeiro)
    Radio Modems (Patrick E. Meyer)
    Illinois Bell Fixes Pay Phone At Last (Andrew C. Green)
    Charge-by-Use Policy? (Alasdair Grant)
    Async Access to Client-Server Database: Please Help! (John Casavant)
    ATI2400etc. V.42bis/MNP5 Trouble (G. Steve Arnold)
    Contel Becomes GTE (John Higdon)
    Call Forwarding + Caller ID = ? (Paul Barnett)
    NYTel Phones Disable Keypad (Steve Kass)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 26 Oct 92 21:27:04 -0400
From: [e-mail] (H.Shrikumar)
Subject: Non-Critical, Real-Real-Cheap International Bandwidth Wanted


  Typical telephone demand calls are geared to give service within
some rather tight service constraints. Normally you'd expect even an
international connection within 30 seconds to a minute.  Matter of
fact (some IXCs, I believe, would charge you for letting the remote
phone ring for longer than 45 seconds, since it ties up trunks.)

  I wonder if there exist any plans that one could use to buy very
very LOW PRIORITY BANDWIDTH ... which for want of a better word I'd
call "request bandwidth" (as different from demand bandwidth).  My
intended application (bulk file transfer) would not mind having to
wait for even half an hour or more for a call requested to materialize
and would not mind calls getting dropped several times. Also I could
conceivably sign up for calls at designated hours or even precise
times.

  I'd wish to call one particular international number and transfer
bulk data, my protocol can error-correct and checkpoint and thus
recover easily from repeated line drops.

  I wonder if I could buy any unused bandwidth lying with one of the
international carriers or the IRCs, at a much cheaper price ... and in
return I don't tread on any existing traffic by being willing to wait
for the call indefinitely (perhaps they'll call me back to avoid tying
up the LEC-IXC trunk) and/or by calling/being-called whenever they
have empty slots in their international lines, and by being willing to
drop the connection whenever they need the bandwidth.

  (BTW, does someone know what % of the bandwidth on international
trunks goes unused, by time of day and/or traffic patters?)

  To help you understand, this is sort of analogous to the
ridiculously cheap tickets you can get on airlines if you give up lots
of privilages, since this kind of price structure helps with airline
planning and market. (Of course, I do realise that the telecom
industry is very different from the airline industry.)

  I dont really think I have heard of any such service plan ... but
you never know till you've asked :-)

  I'd appreciate any pointers that may or may not lead to anything
that I could use.

  The alternative I am working on currently is to make an arrangement
to ride on some existing leased line that crosses the ocean. I would
share a proportional cost of the line with the original leasee, in
exchange for allowing me to send my bursts of data during his silent
minutes.


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

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Blocking international calling
Date: 26 Oct 92 09:44:02 CDT
Organization: Data Ressearch Associates, Inc.


I have a need to set up a POTS line without the ability to make
international calls, but still allow domestic long distance.  AT&T
told me they can block all long distance service, but not just
international calls.

I thought I had read of carriers blocking pay phones from making
international calls.  Is there some magic phrase the customer service
people would understand to block international calls on a line?


Sean Donelan, Data Research Associates, Inc, St. Louis, MO
Domain: [e-mail], Voice: (Work) [phone]


[Moderator's Note: What you probably read about is AT&T's illegal
practice of red-lining certain neighborhoods and areas of major cities
by prohibiting the use of their own calling card (both the standard
calling card and the Universal Card) on calls to certain other
countries. As a practical matter, there is no other way to place an
international call from a payphone unless you want to drop several
dozen coins in the box every few minutes if no one is available to
authorize a third number billing for you. So AT&T does not prohibit
international calls to certain countries from certain neighborhoods
 from payphones, they just made it extremely inconvenient.

The reason AT&T takes this stance is because of their ignorant belief
that people from those countries are likely to cheat on payment. If
you are trying to call Israel, Jordan, Pakistan, Iraq, Iran, or most
other middle-east countries, and you are calling from some area AT&T
thinks is very transient and full of immigrants, then they refuse to
handle the call on a calling card from a payphone.  Many times it is
simply left up to the operator handling the call whether or not to
accept a calling card as payment to those points. If your voice has an
accent, or the number you are calling from is in the wrong part of
town, then you are refused a connection.  Is this illegal? Yes. AT&T
has gotten sued about it, but you know how that goes. If you complain
loud enough and long enough, perhaps to the FCC, then a flunky at AT&T
calls and tells you it was all a terrible mistake by 'an operator who
had not been trained', and they give you a couple of $5 long distance
gift certificates to smooth things over. But the technical
considerations quoted to you were correct: either you block all long
distance calling, or none at all in most cases.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Anthony J. Lisotta)
Subject: Traffic Engineering References Wanted
Organization: Numerical Aerodynamic Simulation Facility NASA
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 92 14:52:04 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Anthony J. Lisotta)


I am in the process of doing capacity planning for a future upgrade of
our network.  However, I have had problems finding good reference
materials on _DATA_ Traffic Engineering/Analysis.  Every book and
article I have seen so far have been dealing with VOICE traffic
analysis.

Are the methods the same for data as voice, and if not, does anyone
know of some good references on DATA Traffic Engineering ?

Please respond directly to me and I will post a summary.


Thanks in advance.

Anthony (Tony) Lisotta
Network Development Engineer     [e-mail]
NASA/CSC   Numerical Aerodynamic Simulation
415-604-4634     NASA Ames Research Center

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

Subject: Swiss Phone (Tritel Ronco) - Can it Work?
From: [e-mail] (A virtually vegetal non-entity)
Date: 26 Oct 1992 23:46 MST
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: University of Arizona MIS Department - Mosaic Group


In a recent trip to Geneva, I came across a rather attractive
telephone laying in the street (actually, it was just outside the
office of the phone company, leaving me to believe it had literally
"fallen off a truck").  Naturally, I retrieved the phone and brought
it home.

Now: can I use it?  Unclear.  It has an RJ-11 on its back, and the
handset uses the standard "small" RJ (does this one have a number)
that I'm used to on all my other phones.  However, when I plug it in,
I get dead silence.

Any advice?  The phone has "Tritel Ronco" written on the handset.
Aside from the usual ten number push buttons (arranged in two rows),
it also has an asterisk, octothorpe (#), "H", "D", large dot, and
double up-arrow buttons.  On the back is a simple switch with "IMP"
(presumably pulse dial) and "FO" (touch tone?) positions.  Can any of
our Swiss readers assist?


Joel M Snyder, 1103 E Spring Street, Tucson, AZ, 85719
Phone: [phone] (voice) .4095 (FAX) .4093 (data)
BITNET: jms@Arizona  Internet: [e-mail]  SPAN: 47541::telcom::jms

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

Date: Mon, 26 Oct 92 11:48
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Information Needed Ahout Willcon Satellite


Hello!

Does anybody know about the Willcon Satellite receiver?  I need some
information such as how can I tune a channel and other features.

Thanks a lot.


Arlindo Ribeiro de Loyolla Filho.

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

Date: Mon, 26 Oct 92 13:36:29 CDT
From: [e-mail] (Patrick E. Meyer)
Subject: Radio Modems


Can anyone please suggest companies that I can contact about radio
modems.


Thanks in advance,

Patrick     email: [e-mail]

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

Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1992 10:18:10 CDT
From: Andrew C. Green <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Illinois Bell Fixes Pay Phone At Last


A followup note to my complaint about six months elapsing after my
first complaint about a downtown pay phone being out of order: This
morning I found that Illinois Bell has suddenly fixed it.  A bright
blue sticker on the outside of the pedestal weather shield proclaims
"Genuine Illinois Bell Telephone!", and inside is a completely new
phone with a new number of [phone].  In deference to the
traffic noise, it comes equipped with a "LOUD" button to boost the
handset volume.

Better late than never, I suppose!


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Alasdair Grant)
Subject: Charge-by-Use Policy?
Organization: U of Cambridge, England
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1992 13:34:58 GMT


Is it likely that the amount of data sent will be incorporated into
charging for B-ISDN?  I notice that phone companies are still charging
fixed rates for international calls no matter how much silence there
is, but there will surely be a lot more demand for charge-by-use when
bursty data services are introduced.  And what about users of private
ATM networks (where the charging may be in 'funny money', but still
useful for internal resource control)?

I know people talk of B-ISDN like electricity, but is it the case that
once you switch on a piece of equipment of a certain rated amperage,
you will be charged at a fixed rate even if it has a varying
consumption?

Hope this makes sense.

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

From: [e-mail] (John Casavant)
Subject: Async Access to Client-Server Database: Please Help!
Organization: Martin Marietta
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1992 21:08:41 GMT


Is it possible to "dial into" a Unix server that is on the internet
from a remote PC workstation running a Windows 3.1 front-end?  The PC
would access a Sybase database and queries would return data over the
async connection.

I know we could get a leased line, but I'm trying to work a solution
that would use a 14.4 or 19.2 modem. :)

We are running FTP's TCP/IP with eithernet connections on our local
workstations.  I know there "has to be a way".


John Casavant

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

From: [e-mail] (G. Steve Arnold)
Subject: ATI2400etc. V.42bis/MNP5 Trouble
Organization: Bowling Green State University B.G., Oh.
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1992 21:11:56 GMT


    Ok, here's the deal. I've had an ATI 2400etc. (v.42bis/MNP5)
modem for almost two years and have just recently had an oppotunity to
use the v.42bis and MNP5 features. My problem is that I can't seem to
get the silly thing to transfer a text file appreciably faster than in
asynchronous mode (no hard. compression). In standard mode, I'll pull
in about 230 cps (235 on a good day, 220 on a bad day). In MNP5 mode,
though, I've only seen 235cps no matter what I've done (transferring a
text file) and with v.42bis only 266 cps (text file.) Am I doing
everything I should be doing?

Screen updates are noticibly faster, but they are quite bursty (not
smooth), which can be expected. I've set my DTE speed (comm. software)
to 9600bps and mysetup string is AT &F2 &C1 &B1 S7=100 S11=50 ^M. I
played with this all night last night and couldn't get anywhere near
the 400cps people have reported under MNP or 550cps with v.42bis. Is
there anything else I can do that I'm missing? I realize the line
noise is an issue (this explains some of the sluggish burstiness) and
that the modem may be falling back to 1200 carrier to preserve the
line integrity (I can't tell -- internal modem) but it seems that
something is amiss. I've tried xmodem,ymodem-g and zmodem transfers
(oddly, xmodem only chunks through at about 128cps, but I never use it
so it isn't optimized in any sense of the word ...)

    Anyone got any ideas or experience with this sort of thing?
I'm gonna try again tonight and see if I can get it.

    P.S. It appears I may be confused about something. Is v.32bis
a protocol INHERENT to 14.4bps modems? i.e., is it wrong to say that
v.32bis is a protocol which is a subset (in some sense) of the v.42bis
protocol?  and thus available on non-14.4 modems? or is v.32bis simply
the way 14.4 modems work, even though v.42bis may provide better
throughput. I guess what I want clarified is the relationship between
v.42bis and v.32bis.  Just curious ...


Thanks,

G. Steve Arnold    Dept. Math and Stats.
BGSU    [e-mail]

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

Date: Mon, 26 Oct 92 02:01 PDT
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Contel Becomes GTE


Contel bill insert:

                    Proposed Plan Filed to Merge
             Contel of California with GTE California

On September 14, 1992, GTE Filed with the California Public Utilities
Commission (CPUC) its plan to merge Contel of California with GTE
California. If approved by the CPUC, the merger could be implemented
as early as January 1, 1994.

On March 13, 1991, the CPUC on an interim basis approved the merger of
GTE Corporation and Contel Corporation provided their respective
California sibsidiaries continue to operate separately until the CPUC
grants final approval for the merger.

Under the proposed plan, GTE believes that the merged company would
realize savings from greater efficiencies and elimination of redundant
functions. GTE California proposes to pass along to customers of the
merged companies a permanent $8.2 million reduction in costs in 1994
and an additional reduction of $3.6 million in 1995. GTE proposes that
the reductions would initially be in the form of an approximate one
percent credit on the charge for basic telephone service.

GTE believes that customers may receive additional benefits if the
merged company's earning rise above the benchmark rate of return level
established for GTE California in the CPUC's incentive regulation
decision. Any earnings above the benchmark are shared equally between
the company's customers and shareholders.

Under the merger plan, GTE California will establish a division
headquarters in Victorville, site of the current headquarters for
Contel of California, and maintain a presence in all communities
currently served by Contel of California.

GTE California serves approximately 3.1 million customers in 330
communities, mostly in southern California. Contel of California
serves approximately 312,000 customers in California.

        *** end quote ***

I do not know who might believe this self-serving nonsense from GTE
California, but one look at the way the GTE/Contel merger has been
going across the country reveals that the above is pure fantasy. GTE
does not even maintain a presence in Palm Springs, the center of its
"eleventh LATA" black-hole empire. And as we know, GTE is in the
process of pulling its entire business office presence out of the
entire state of California.

High desert Contel customers will, over the coming year, be relieved
of their very community-oriented local telco, employing friends and
neighbors. It its place they will get a pile of 800 numbers so that
they can talk to people with southern accents who will not know the
difference between Victorville and victimize. Regardless of the lies
being told to Contel customers, the new GTE customers will be lucky to
find a grocery store that has a telephone bill collection agreement,
let alone a business office.

Contel California has traditionally been a progressive and responsive
operation. Within its small scope, it has provided telephone service
to rural customers that is second to none. It is a sad and unfitting
end to have it now swallowed up by the most evil of empires. It will
also be most interesting to watch the service go to hell in the
process. I will undoubtedly be reporting on this in the coming year.


John Higdon  |   P. O. Box 7648   |   [phone]     |       FAX:
[e-mail] | San Jose, CA 95150 | 10288 0 700 FOR-A-MOO | [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Paul Barnett)
Subject: Call Forwarding + Caller ID = ?
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1992 15:39:27 GMT
Organization: Engineering, CONVEX Computer Corp., Richardson, Tx., USA


Has anyone had experience with the eventual results if a person at
555-1111 calls 555-2222, which is set to forward to 555-3333?

Would a caller ID display at 555-2222 show anything (assuming the SW
Bell method of ringing the phone once), and would the caller ID
display at 555-3333 show 555-1111 or 555-2222?

Is all of this dependent on the switch that does the call forwarding?
Specifically, I have my mobile number set to forward to my house after
three rings, and I give my mobile number to my friends.  Would caller
ID be useful under these circumstances?


Paul Barnett             Internet: [e-mail]
Convex Computer Corp.      Office: 214-497-4846
Richardson, TX        Mobile/Home: 214-236-8438

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

Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1992 13:50 EST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: NYTel Phones Disable Keypad


Last night I tried six times to check my voice mail from four
different NY Tel payphones near 2nd Ave and 4th St in Manhattan.  I've
never had any trouble there before, but this time, after calling and
connecting, I was never able to get through entering my mailbox
number, password and commands before the keypad was disabled (four
times) or I was disconnected (twice).

AT&T was kind enough to give me credit for the calls, but I don't
really see how it was their fault.  I called 611 and reported the
problem, but I have to wonder what's up.  I've never seen a BOC phone
disable the keypad before.  Any ideas?  Or should I just buy my own
tone generator and forget about it?


Steve Kass, Dept of Math and CS       [e-mail]
Drew University, Madison NJ 07940     201-514-1187

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #806
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa15877;
          28 Oct 92 3:17 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA09728
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 28 Oct 1992 01:07:11 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA15274
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 28 Oct 1992 01:06:56 -0600
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1992 01:06:56 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #807

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 28 Oct 92 01:07:00 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 807

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Use of Kerberos for Cellular Phone Protection? (Paul Robinson)
    Information Wanted on Antique Danish Phone (Jeff Garber)
    Who is Marsha? (Jeff Garber)
    California Call Box Experience (Brian Gordon)
    "Call Home" Special Case For Calling Cards? (Will Martin)
    Phase-Locking the World (Steve Warwick)
    UK Dialtone Competition? (Charles A. Hoequist)
    Re: Guyana Phone System (was Area Code 610) (David Lesher)
    Re: Guyana Phone System (was Area Code 610) (Carl Moore)
    Are CCITT Standards Available on CD ROM? (Ton Koelman)
    Telephone Quotations (Ed Campbell)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1992  17:43:18 EST
Subject: Use of Kerberos for Cellular Phone Protection?


The following message is cross posted to Info-Vax and to TELECOM
Digest in the hopes that we may be able to find an answer to an
important topic.

In a message in TELECOM Digest Vol 12, No. 804, from
pls@[e-mail] (Paul Schauble) who quotes the following:

> Craig Heim writes:
>> Here's the Cellular Fraud problem of the 1990s: CLONING.

>> How do you handle a bandit who has programed his phone
>> to the ESN and MIN of a valid subscriber?

> Kerberos?

The Moderator of TELECOM Digest wanted to know how Kerberos could be
implemented in cellular phones:

> I suspect it would be (almost) foolproof.  How would you do it?  How
> would the legitimate user get his 'ticket' each time?

I have asked the Info-Vax group the question 'What is Kerberos?'  and
gotten some answers but I still don't quite understand it.  But I do
want to pass on to them the question that the Moderator of TELECOM
Digest asked:

> How would / could you implement Kerberos for use on cellular phones?

This is getting to the point that it is off-topic for info-vax, so
please respond to me (and/or) to telecom.

To TELECOM Digest, I ask Pat, what is Kerberos and what is a 'ticket'?

Info Vax subscribers who get this message are asked to offer
suggestions to me at [e-mail] and/or to [e-mail]
in order that anyone who has ideas on how to implement Kerberos on a
Cellular phone could be attempted.


Paul Robinson -- [e-mail]
These (uninformed) opinions are mine alone; no one else is
(stupid enough to be) responsible for them.


[Moderator's Note: Kerberos is a rather sophisticated (IMHO) method of
security. I know that, for example, in order for me to do maintainence
work on the Telecom Archives -- which is in the public directory at
lcs.mit.edu -- it is necessary for me to rlogin to a work station at
MIT, obtain a 'ticket' from the 'ticket granting ticket' which is then
recognized by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu for a short amount of time of
read/write privileges on that machine by myself. I am not sure how it
works. A job called 'nfsauth mintaka' runs in the background all the
time I am working there. I can't just rlogin on mintaka; I have no
account there, nor can anyone write to the public directory there
using ftp.  But when I get my 'ticket punched', I can go to the
archives and edit or write all the files I want -- for that limited
amount of time. I've spent long sessions there and had my 'ticket run
out of time', and this necessitated cd'ing back to the work station
and asking for another ticket. I've been told to only ask for a
ticket from my login shell; not from (for example) a shell I call
while within Emacs or elsewhere; for to do so makes the 'ticket
granting ticket' very unhappy and very flaky.   PAT]

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

Date: Wed, 28 Oct 92 04:17 GMT
From: Jeff Garber <[e-mail]>
Subject: Information Wanted on Antique Danish Phone


Last weekend I aquired a phone from a Danish antique store. Maybe a
Scandanavian phone enthusiast can tell me what it is I've got. The
lady at the shop said she thought the phones (there were 3 of them)
were from the 1940's. By looking at the outside of it, I thought that
sounded about right.

My phone is Ivory in color (the other two at the shop were black) and
it has stamped on the bottom 211.251 M. 51. F-1, and there's a letter
T with a circle around it. The underside of the handset says KRISTIAN
KIRKS TELEFONFABRIKER A/S. The phone is very heavy. It's styled like a
normal desk phone, except there is no dial. It has a lever where the
dial would normally be. This lever rests facing left, and you push it
to the right with your thumb, then it springs back to the left. This,
I assume, is to signal the operator.

This phone also has cloth handset and line cords (one of the three in
the shop had a coiled handset cord, instead of cloth).  So far so
good, except ... there's a plug on the end of the line cord (it has
four vertical prongs arranged in a sort of circle, and a horizontal
prong in the middle). That makes me think that either Denmark used the
plug-in method long before we did, or someone stuck the plug on the
end later (all three phones in the shop had the plug). It doesn't look
like an add-on to me, and the plastic on the outside of the plug
matches the color of the phone exactly. After I got the thing home, I
unscrewed the receiver and microphone covers.  Underneath I found
neither of them hardwired in. They are the pop-out type that touch the
contacts when they are placed in the handset.  Also after I got it
home, I noticed two little studs protruding from the bottom of the
phone along a track where they can slide. This seems to be a ringer
adjustment, as I can see the gongs on either side of the track inside.
I don't know why there are two studs. Moving one causes the other to
move the same distance and the same direction (maybe there was some
kind of lever attatched to the studs?).

So what I want to know is how old is this phone? Is it an older phone
and did the Danish have advanced ideas in phone manufacturing, or is
it a newer phone (1970's?) designed to work in rural areas where there
is no dial service and no common battery, and signalling the operator
with the manual lever is necessary? If it helps, there is a little
"window frame" on the front for a phone number card to be inserted,
and the card has the handwritten phone number of HusGy 103.


[e-mail]

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

Date: Wed, 28 Oct 92 04:18 GMT
From: Jeff Garber <[e-mail]>
Subject: Who is Marsha?


Last week I had a meeting with some salesmen from Octel because my
company is shopping around for a new voicemail system and I happen to
like Aspen (we currently have Wang DVX :( ). I had mentioned something
about Jane Barbe to one of them, and he said that their new systems
feature Marsha instead of Jane, but Jane was still available if we
really preferred her. So who is this Marsha?

Unfortunately we will not be getting Aspen at all because they can't
integrate with our crappy Merlin II phone system (neither could Wang
or ANYONE else that we've talked to so far, but we'll try AT&T since
they have voicemail and they make this crappy Merlin II.)


[e-mail]

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

Date: Tue, 27 Oct 92 12:27:20 PST
From: [e-mail] (Brian Gordon)
Subject: California Call Box Experience


Last Friday evening, I had the joy of a blowout on I-280 in the San
Jose area of Northern California, and rolled to a stop just a hundred
yards or so past one of the relatively new "call box" cellular phones.

I walked back and picked up the receiver (no obvious mechanical trip
involved).  It started ringing -- four rings, followed by a higher
pitched ring, answered reasonably quickly by a female voice,
"California Highway Patrol".  I explained my problem and asked if she
could call Triple-A, which she could.  Since the call box was on one
side of an overpass (Wolfe Road) and my car was on the other (i.e. I
had walked back under the overpass to reach the box), I explained that
my car was on the side of the road just past the Wolfe Road
overcrossing.  She replied that she had my location as "past Lawrence
Expressway" -- which is a mile or two further down the road.

Unfortunately, she said that she had to report that as the location to
the Auto Club.  I asked, half in jest, if she would also tell them
that when they couldn't find me there, to look back at Wolfe Road
where I was.  She was not real amused.

Since her estimate was that it would be less than 30 minutes until the
truck arrived, I went back to the car and listened to the radio, read,
etc. for 45 minutes, and then returned to the call box.  The second
use was a bit different:

Lift handset.
Dial-tone
Four low pitched rings
Six high pitched rings
Recording: "This is the CHP.  All operators are busy, and your call will be
        routed to the next available operator."
Five high pitched rings
click/silence
Dial-tone
Four low pitched rings
Six high pitched rings
Recording: "This is the CHP.  All operators are busy, and your call will be
        routed to the next available operator."
Five high pitched rings
click/silence
Dial-tone
Four low pitched rings
Six high pitched rings
Recording: "This is the CHP.  All operators are busy, and your call will be
        routed to the next available operator."
5 high pitched rings
click/silence

After 20 minutes of this, it got boring, but the truck did appear.  As
I had suspected, he had been wandering around in the area for quite a
while, and had had difficulty finding me, since I was a couple of
miles away from where he had been sent.

Had I known the problems ahead, it would have been faster and easier
to walk the mile or so up the ramp and to a phone booth in a local
shopping center, reported an accurate location direcvtly to the Auto
Club, and been able to get back to them in a reasonable manner if
things went poorly.  The only advantage to the call box was that I
could keep within sight of the car while waiting.

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

Date: Tue, 27 Oct 92 9:52:48 CST
From: Will Martin <[e-mail]>
Subject: "Call Home" Special Case For Calling Cards?


Since I haven't been traveling lately due to reduced budgets, it's
been a while since we last used a telco calling card or the
calling-card feature of our AT&T Universal card. However, my wife was
away this past weekend and used the Universal card to call me at home.
It had been so long that both of us had forgotten about the need for a
PIN when using the card that way, and she didn't know the PIN. She was
able to get it from the Universal card service people by calling the
800 number and giving personal data that identified her (my mother's
maiden name -- appropriate since she was away at a genealogical
conference! :-).

This caused me to think again about something I had long felt would be
a good idea -- that calling-card calls to one certain number (most
probably the owner's home number, but let's make it a single number
specifiable by the card-holder in writing, and changeable only on a
limited basis with some day's leadtime, such as by sending in a
written paper form only) would be put through *without* a PIN being
needed.

This would have several benefits:

1) "Shoulder surfing" and similar types of calling-card fraud would be
reduced. If one could call home with a calling card without keying in
or speaking the PIN, someone surreptitiously discovering the card
number would still not have the PIN, and thus have no way to use it
for the usual types of international calling and the like which
constitutes most such abuse. I would venture to guess that a large
percentage, maybe more than half, of calls made with a calling card
from places like airports and bus terminals, where such fraud is
rampant, are calls from an individual to their home number. (Does
anyone have any hard statistics on this?)  All those calls would be of
no value to the "shoulder surfer", since they could not find out the
PIN. Of course, other calls would still be vulnerable to this
technique, but at least it would be an improvement.

2) Giving a calling card without a PIN to children, friends, or
relatives would let them call home only, and yet the card would not be
available for abuse by them, their friends, or people who might steal
it from them.  In the case of a credit card which also has a calling
card feature, like the AT&T Universal card, not knowing the PIN would
limit the possible abuse of the card, at least preventing it from
being used to get cash advances.  This would eliminate the problems
(previously discussed on Telecom) of the "call home" special calling
card which was *supposed* to only be usable to call the home number,
but which could be used to call other numbers if the user was clever
and found workarounds like using the # to make subsequent calls on
Airfone, etc.

3) It would eliminate problems like the one my wife encountered from
not knowing the PIN, and reduce the open-vulnerability of PINs, which
most people end up writing down because they cannot remember the
half-dozen or more PINs they end up with, when all the different cards
they might have are totaled up. If you don't need the PIN to call
home, and you normally don't use the card in ways where PINs are
required, you probably will not carry it written down with you. (After
all, you can call home PINless and have someone there tell you what it
is! :-)

Sure, this is limited. Some people will say "I want to be able to call
my spouse's office number too" or other such extensions. I don't think
such enlargements of the scope of PINless calling would be a good
idea. It would be a special-purpose feature with this one limited
application, and adding more numbers would cause problems with the
telco database which would be needed to implement this. (I'm
envisioning a single added field to the card-validation database,
which the software would check -- that field would contain the
PINless-callable number. Calls to that number without a PIN would go
through; calls to any other number without a PIN would be rejected, or
a PIN prompted for. Do the people on the list who know about this
software and database feel this is feasible?)

If this feature was adopted, the scope for abuse of a lost calling
card without a PIN printed (or written! :-) on it will be limited.  If
the calling-card number is not the same as the home (or other
PINless-callable) number, the finder or thief wouldn't even know what
number could be called without a PIN.  If the card was one of the old
style which used the home number, they could make harassing or
annoyance calls to that number using the calling card, but the
legitimate card holder could stop that quickly by calling to have the
card number deactivated entirely, which would be the normal action in
any case if a card is lost or stolen.  I had been thinking that
instituting this feature would also require that the card issuer be
less willing to give out the PIN via a phone call, as they did for my
wife, but perhaps this restriction would not be necessary, if enough
personal data is asked for to absolutely identify the person calling
as legitimate.  (Regarding item #2 above, the ID data would have to be
able to exclude family members and identify the exact individuals who
are authorized to know the PIN, so simple stuff like "mother's maiden
name" would not suffice. Something more elaborate would be needed...)

Perhaps a long distance company which is maintaining its own private
database, like the AT&T one which contains the Universal card
pseudo-numbers, could set this up on its own as a service to its
patrons, and this would serve as a phased introduction of this to the
entire calling-card universe? If anyone out there works for such a
firm and wants to put this in as a suggestion and make some money off
the idea, feel free to do so! (Or maybe this already exists in some
fashion and I don't know about it? Details, please, if so!)


Regards,

Will   [e-mail] OR [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Warwick)
Subject: Phase-Locking the World
Date: 27 Oct 92 19:26:26 GMT
Organization: DSC/Optilink Access Products


Please excuse me for getting this off my chest, but I can't stand it
anymore!

How come the local, long distance telephone companies, broadband
digital service providers and other carriers of digital signals can't
get together and develop a single precision source for timing
distribution???  I mean really, wouldn't synchronous systems be a
little easier to design if you could get some agreement on what you're
synchronised to????


Thanks for that moment of disgruntlment.


s.

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

Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1992 09:54:00 +0000
From: "Charles (C.A.) Hoequist" <[e-mail]>
Subject: UK Dialtone Competition?


A query for the telecommies in the UK: my manager last week insisted
that he had been told by reliable sources that competition for local
service is allowed in the UK, and not just by Mercury, but by a lot of
small local companies.

Can this be? I lived in the UK 1986-88 and never saw anything of the
sort, but up-to-date information would be appreciated.  Is there a
choice of local dialtone providers? If not, is there legislation for
such in the Commons, or any other move that would provoke my manager's
belief?

Thanks for any info.


Charles Hoequist   |Internet: [e-mail]
BNR Inc.           | 919-991-8642
PO Box 13478, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709-3478

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

From: David Lesher <[e-mail]>
Subject: Guyana Phone System (was Area Code 610)
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 92 17:36:48 EDT
Reply-To: [e-mail]  (David Lesher)
Organization: NRK Clinic for habitual NetNews abusers - Beltway Annex


Pat commented about my Guyana posting. Just want to add a few clean-up
facts. First, Bonaire is part of the Netherland Antilles, so I'm not
surprised re: a city code change. (FWIW, the physical distance between
Curacao and Georgetown is small. The time gap is about 60-75 years ...)

The phone system in Guyana was just sold to a private firm, A.T.I. or
A.N.I. or such. They were based on Trinidad, I believe, but it might
have been elsewhere in the islands.

I can not understand how anyone hopes to profit on calls with a
connection percentage in the 5-10% range. Remember the very limited
trunkage into the country ...


[e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: Least we forget, Georgetown was the headquarters
for a few years for the infamous Jim Jones, of People's Temple in San
Fransisco whose 900+ sheep/followers died in what came to be known as
the "Kool-Aid Kommunion" -- grape drink laced with cyanide -- in the
jungle of Guyana.  The Reverend Mr. Jones was Commissioner of Public
Housing in San Fransisco: the only place in the USA where politicians
are so eager to prove how broad-minded and liberal they are that they
would install an insane person like that in public office, then close
their eyes to his activities rather than risk being thought of as
racist or homophobic!   PAT]

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

Date: Tue, 27 Oct 92 11:29:37 EST
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject:  Re: Guyana Phone System (was Area Code 610)


The Netherlands Antilles number was +599-6868.  How long are numbers
under +599-7?

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

From: [e-mail] (Ton Koelman)
Subject: Are CCITT Standards Available on CD ROM?
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: SHAPE Technical Centre, NL
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1992 11:16:46 GMT


Are any of the ISO and/or CCITT standards available on CD-ROM?


Ton Koelman   e-mail: [e-mail] (NeXT Mail Welcome!)
SHAPE Technical Centre, P.O. Box 174, 2501 CD  The Hague
The Netherlands  (voice: 31-70-3142429, fax: [phone])

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

From: [e-mail] (Ed Campbell)
Subject: Telephone Quotations
Date: 27 Oct 92 23:13:35 GMT


Do you know of any quotes concerning the telephone, that you are
willing to share , eg "Do you know who I've always depended on?. Not
strangers, not friends. The telephone. That's my best friend" -
Marilyn Munroe.


If I get any replies I will summarise.


Ed.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #807
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa04761;
          29 Oct 92 2:05 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA01244
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 29 Oct 1992 00:01:24 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA10627
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 29 Oct 1992 00:01:01 -0600
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1992 00:01:01 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #808

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 29 Oct 92 00:01:00 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 808

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    HoHoCon '92 : Updated Announcement (dFx International Digest)
    Newspaper Wins Use of '511' Telephone Number (Wash. Post via P. Robinson)
    Statistics on Unlisted Telephone Numbers and Demographics (Bill Paterson)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (dFx International Digest)
Subject: HoHoCon '92 : Updated Announcement
Organization: South Coast Computing Services, Inc.
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1992 05:05:20 GMT


[Updated Announcement - October 27, 1992]

dFx International Digest and cDc - Cult Of The Dead Cow proudly present :


                              The Third Annual

                               X M A S C O N

                                    AKA

                               H 0 H 0 C O N


                           "WE KAN'T BE ST0PPED!"


Who:   All Hackers, Journalists, Security Personnel, Federal Agents,
               Lawyers, Authors and Other Interested Parties.


Where:                         Allen Park Inn
                             2121 Allen Parkway
                           Houston, Texas  77019
                                   U.S.A.
                            Tel: [phone]
                            Hou: [phone]
                       Fax: [phone], Ext. 350


When:      Friday December 18 through Sunday December 20, 1992



                          HoJo's Says NoNo To HoHo
                          ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

HAY!^@!*%!$1#&! We beat our own record! This year, thanks to one
certain person's complete stupidity and ignorance, we managed to get
kicked out of our first chosen hotel four months in advance. Needless
to say, this caused some serious confusion for those who called to
make reservations and were told the conference had been canceled.
Well ... it hasn't been. The story is long, but if you wish to read
exactly what happened, check out CuD 4.45.

The conference dates are still the same, but the hotel has changed
since what was originally reported in the first update, which made
it's way throughout Usenet and numerous other places, including CuD
4.40. If you haven't heard about the new location, please make a note
of the information listed above.


                          What Exactly Is HoHoCon?
                          ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

HoHoCon is something you have to experience to truly understand. It is
the largest annual gathering of those in, related to, or wishing to
know more about the computer underground (or those just looking for
another excuse to party). Attendees generally include some of the most
notable members of the "hacking/telecom" community, journalists,
authors, security professionals, lawyers, and a host of others. Last
year's speakers ranged from Bruce Sterling to Chris Goggans and Scot
Chasin of Comsec/LoD. The conference is also one of the very few that
is completely open to the public and we encourage anyone who is
interested to attend.

Or, as Jim Thomas put it in CuD 4.45:

"For the past few years, a conference called "XmasCon" (or HoHoCon)
has been held in Texas in December. As reported previously (CuD
#4.40), it will be held again this year from 18-21 December. For those
unfamiliar with it, XmasCon is a national meeting of curious computer
aficionados, journalists, scholars, computer professionals, and
others, who meet for three days and do what people do at other
conferences: Discuss common interests and relax."


                           Hotel Information
                           ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The Allen Park Inn is located along Buffalo Bayou and is approximately
three minutes away from downtown Houston. The HoHoCon group room rates
are $49.00 plus tax (15%) per night, your choice of either single or
double. As usual, when making reservations you will need to tell the
hotel you are with the HoHoCon Conference to receive the group rate.

Unlike our previously chosen joke of a hotel, the Allen Park Inn is
not situated next to an airport and this may cause a small
inconvenience for those of you who will be flying to the conference.
The hotel is centrally located so you can fly in to either
Intercontinental or Hobby airport but we are recommending Hobby as it
is 15 miles closer and much easier to get to from the hotel. Here's
where it may get a little confusing:

If you arrive at Hobby, you will need to take the Downtown Hyatt
Airport Shuttle to the Hyatt, which departs every 30 minutes and will
cost you $6.00. When you get to the Hyatt, get out of the shuttle with
your luggage (for those who may not of figured that out yet) and use
any of the nearby payphones to call the Allen Park Inn (521-9321) and
tell them you need a ride. It's just like calling Mom when you need a
ride home from glee club!  The hotel shuttle will be around shortly to
pick you up and take you to the aforementioned elite meeting place,
and that ride is free. If all this is too much for you, you can always
take a cab directly to the hotel which will run you about $20.

If you arrive at Intercontinental, you will need to board the Airport
Express bus and take it to the Downtown Hyatt ($9). Once there, just
follow the same instructions listed above.

We are in the process of trying to get the hotel to provide constant
airport transportation during the conference, but they've yet to give
us a definite answer. It is quite possible that we will have our own
shuttle to bus people between the airports and hotel, so if you'd
prefer a faster and more direct method of transportation, it would be
helpful to mail and let us know what time you'll be arriving and at
what airport. This will give us a chance to coordinate things more
efficiently.

Check-in is 3:00 p.m. and check-out is 12:00 noon. Earlier check-in is
available if there are unoccupied rooms ready. Free local calls are
provided, so bring dem 'puterz. I don't know if cable is free also, so
those who wish to rekindle the memories of yesteryear may want to
bring their screwdrivers. The hotel has both 24 hour room service, and
a 24 hour restaurant, The Nashville Room. Call it a wacky coincidence,
but the hotel bar is called the ATI room and like most of Houston's
similar establishments, closes at 2 a.m. Good thing Tony still works
at Spec's ...

This time around, the hotel is placing the conference guests in the
rooms surrounding the courtyard/pool area. We are once again
encouraging people to make their reservations as soon as possible for
two reasons -- first, we were told that if you wait too long and the
courtyard rooms are all taken, there is a chance that you'll be
situated at the complete opposite end of the hotel, which isn't so bad
if you don't mind walking all that way back and forth outside in
December. Secondly, there is no other hotel exactly next door to this
one (the closest is about five minutes away or so), so if for some odd
reason all the rooms get rented, you'll get to do some nifty traveling
every night.

                                 Directions
                                 ~~~~~~~~~~

For those of you who will be driving to the conference, the following
is a list of directions on how to get to the hotel from most of
Houston's major freeways that bring traffic in from out of town:

I-45 North or South: Exit Allen Parkway on the inside (left side) of
the freeway. Take the Studemont/Montrose exit off Allen Parkway, then
make a u-turn at the bridge and head back towards downtown. The hotel
will be on the right hand side.

290: Take 290 to 610 South, then take I-10 East towards downtown. Exit
Studemont. Right on Studemont, left on Allen Parkway. The hotel will
be on the right hand side.

I-10 West: Exit Studemont. Right on Studemont, left on Allen Parkway.
The hotel will be on the right hand side.

I-10 East: Take I-10 East to I-45 South and follow the same directions
 from I-45 listed above.

I-59 North or South: Take I-59 to I-45 North and follow the same
directions from I-45 listed above.

Call the hotel if these aren't complete enough or if you need
additional information.


                             Conference Details
                             ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

HoHoCon will last three days, with the actual conference being held on
Saturday, December 19 in the Hermitage Room, starting at 11:00 a.m.
and continuing until 5 p.m. or earlier depending on the number of
speakers.

We are still in the planning stages at the moment, primarily due to
time lost in finding a new hotel and getting contracts signed. We have
a number of speakers confirmed (yes, Goggans will be speaking again)
and will try to finalize the list and include it in the next update.
We are definitely still looking for people to speak and welcome
diverse topics (except for "The wonders and joys of ANSI, and how it
changed my life"). If you're interested in rattling away, please
contact us as soon as possible and let us know who you are, who you
represent (if anyone), the topic you wish to speak on, a rough
estimate of how long you will need, and whether or not you will be
needing any audio-visual aids.

We would like to have people bring interesting items and videos again
this year. If you have anything you think people would enjoy having
the chance to see, please let us know ahead of time, and tell us if
you will need any help getting it to the conference. If all else
fails, just bring it to the con and give it to us when you arrive. We
will also include a list of items and videos that will be present in a
future update.

If anyone requires any additional information, needs to ask any
questions, wants to RSVP, or would like to be added to the mailing
list to receive the HoHoCon updates, you may mail us at:

                            [e-mail]
                           [e-mail]
                       [e-mail]
                            359@7354 (WWIV Net)

                           or via sluggo mail at:

                           Freeside Data Network
                             Attn: HoHoCon/dFx
                             11504 Hughes Road
                                 Suite 124
                               Houston, Texas
                                   77089

We also have a VMB which includes all the conference information and
is probably the fastest way to get updated reports. The number is:

                                713-866-4884

You may also download any of the conference announcements and related
materials by calling 713-492-2783 and using the username "unix", which
is unpassworded. The files will be in the "hohocon" directory. Type
"biscuit" if you wish to gain an account on the system. You can find
us there too.

Conference information and updates will most likely also be found in
most computer underground related publications, including CuD,
Informatik, NIA, Mondo 2000, 2600, Phrack, World View, etc. We
completely encourage people to use, reprint, and distribute any
information in this file.


                Stupid Ending Statement To Make Us Look Good
                ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

HoHoCon '92 will be a priceless learning experience for professionals
(yeah, right) and gives journalists a chance to gather information and
ideas direct from the source. It is also one of the very few times
when all the members of the computer underground can come together for
a realistic purpose. We urge people not to miss out on an event of
this caliber, which doesn't happen very often. If you've ever wanted
to meet some of the most famous people from the hacking community,
this may be your one and only chance. Don't wait to read about it in
all the magazines and then wish you had been there, make your plans to
attend now! Be a part of what we hope to be our largest and greatest
conference ever.

Remember, to make your reservations, call [phone] and tell them
you're with HoHoCon.

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

Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1992  18:17:34 EST
Subject: Newspaper Wins Use of '511' Telephone Number


Newspaper Wins Use of '511'   {Information Services Venture Gets Number}
{Washington Post, Oct 28, Pg G1}
By Cindy Skrzycki, Washington Post Staff Writer

   In West Palm Beach, Fla., when you call 911, you get police and
emergency services.  When you call 411, you get the phone company and
directory assistance.

   Soon, when you call 511, you will get the local newspaper, the Palm
Beach Post, the paper's parent company said yesterday.

   Callers dialing the three-digit code will zip by the newspaper's
switchboard and tap directly into a database of electronic information
services such as sports scores, stock quotes, political speeches,
weather reports and, eventually, classified advertising.

   The use of 511 by the {Palm Beach Post}, which is owned by Cox
Enterprises Inc., in Atlanta, is the first time a non-telephone
company has been granted commercial use of a three-digit phone number.

   In this case, Cox Enterprises will pay Southern Bell, a subsidiary
of BellSouth Corp. that serves the West Palm Beach area, for the use
of the number and the billing services that the phone company will
provide.

   The two-year experimental service that cox hopes to inaugurate in
West Palm Beach in a few months is expected to open the door to
similar deals in which the nation's regional telephone companies would
work with competitors such as newspapers.  In many cases, newspapers
now offer news, sports scores and other information by phone, but
readers must dial a regular seven-digit number or a 900-number.

   The use of a three-digit number by a commercial enterprise other
than a phone company also is a victory of sorts for media companies
and other information services providers.  They are worried that their
role in the emerging market for new information services will be
stymied by the phone companies and their control over local telephone
networks.

   Phone companies also are expected to offer enhanced directory
services to 411 callers, providing information far beyond simple
telephone numbers.

   "We hope to become a gateway of information to the local
community," said James McKnight, vice president of telecommunications
for Cox Newspapers, a division of Cox Enterprises.

   "This will be easy to dial, easy to remember, at a modest fixed
price.  We think it puts us on a more equal footing" with the phone
company, he said.

   McKnight said Cox has requested that it be allowed to offer a
similar service in the 12 markets where it has 17 newspapers.

   Similarly, The Washington Post Co. has had discussions with Bell
Atlantic Corp. about offering enhanced electronic information services
that would allow callers to use a three-digit number. said Elizabeth
Loker, vice president of systems and engineering for The Post.

   Bell Atlantic said it has more requests for three-digit codes than
the number of such codes available.  The company is contemplating
letting a variety of customers use a single three-digit code; callers
would then reach an electronic menu that would offer them a choice of
information providers.

   BellSouth said it was considering using a lottery system to assign
the codes.

   Until now, the use of three-digit numbers has been confined largely
to 911, 411 and 611, the last number sometimes used as a quick way to
reach phone companies for repairs.

   But demand for the three-digit codes has grown with the advent of
information services such as those Cox plans to offer.

   Since three-digit numbers in the world of telephones are a finite
resource -- the only ones widely available are 211, 311, 511, 611, 711
and 811 -- the Federal Communications Commission has gotten into the
act and is considering whether phone companies should have to offer
what it calls "abbreviated dialing arrangements" to their customers.

   In the meantime, the FCC's general counsel told BellSouth to go
ahead with its deal with Cox.

   The Florida Public Service Commission ruled on Oct. 20 that
Southern Bell had to make available the same system it uses for 411,
giving the newspaper the technical underpinnings for its new service.

   McKnight said the newspaper will pay $25,000 to the phone company
to get the service up and running.  Then the paper will pay ten cents
for every call up to five minutes long, and two cents per minute after
that.

   Callers, who will be able to order information either over the
phone or by facsimile, probably will be charged 25 to 50 cents a call.

   "We want it to be a flat-rate call to the consumer," McKnight said.
"Not like this 900-stuff where you get a bill for $25 and you don't
know how or why."

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

Date: Wed, 28 Oct 92 09:23:32 EST
From: Bill Paterson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Statistics on Unlisted Telephone Numbers and Demographics


Dear TELECOM Readers:

The University of Kentucky Survey Research Center is compiling
information on Kentucky unlisted phone numbers and associated
demographics.  We are interested in the trends in Kentucky versus the
national trends with unlisted numbers and their demographics.  Does
anyone know where such national information may be found?


Bill Paterson     University of Kentucky Survey Research Center
403 Breckinridge Hall    University of Kentucky   Lexington, KY 40506-0056

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #808
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa21971;
          29 Oct 92 11:00 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA25403
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 29 Oct 1992 07:37:45 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA29565
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 29 Oct 1992 07:37:28 -0600
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1992 07:37:28 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #809

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 29 Oct 92 07:37:30 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 809

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Hayes Press Release: Hayes Participation in TRIP '92 (Toby Nixon)
    Caller ID in Washington State (US West) (Larry Gilbert)
    Very Weird Telephone Problem (David Fiedler)
    ISDN in Irving, Texas (R. Steven Rainwater)
    Re: No Dial Tone; What's a Guy to Do? (Adam Shostack)
    Can I Have My Cake And Eat It Too? (Arthur L. Shapiro)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Toby Nixon <[e-mail]>
Subject: Hayes Press Release: Hayes Participation in TRIP '92
Date: 28 Oct 92 16:21:06 EDT
Organization: Hayes Microcomputer Products, Norcross, GA


Notice: The following Hayes press release is provided for news and
information purposes only and is not intended to be construed as a
commercial advertisement or solicitation.

                                               FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
                                                              H-2792


HAYES TO HOST OPEN HOUSE DURING TRANSCONTINENTAL ISDN PROJECT 1992

        Atlanta, GA, 28 October 1992 -- Hayes Microcomputer Products,
Inc. will join more than 70 organizations throughout the country who
are participating in the TRanscontinental ISDN Project 1992 (TRIP '92)
during the week of 16 - 20 November.  TRIP '92 is the nationwide
celebration that will launch the beginning National Integrated
Services Digital Network (ISDN).

        Hayes Microcomputer Products will be offering the world's
first Online Open House ISDN Bulletin Board System for ISDN from its
World Headquarters in Norcross, Georgia.  A second Open House will be
held in Pacific Bell's Executive Communications Center in San
Francisco at 370 Third Street. Presentations at the San Francisco site
will be held twice daily at 9 a.m. and again at 10:30 a.m., each
lasting approximately 1 1/2 hours.  Reservations may be made by
calling 415/904-9987.  Another Open House that Hayes is supporting
will be held at the offices of Sumeria, Inc., a division of IDG,
publishers of Macworld magazine, located at 329 Bryant Street.
Presentations about Sumeria's work on publication of electronic
magazines will be held daily at 2 p.m., and will last approximately
one hour.  Reservations may be made by calling 415/904-0833.
Additional Hayes demonstration sites include Comdex in Las Vegas in
Hayes booth #4143 of the North Hall, as well as at Bellcore in Lisle,
IL.

        Kicking off TRIP '92 on Monday, 16 November, the first call
will be made over the National ISDN network from the TRIP '92
headquarters in Reston, Virginia, just outside of Washington, D.C., to
sites in Chicago, IL, Huntsville, AL, and Pasadena, CA.  At the same
time, more than 70 ISDN user companies and organizations, with
approximately 150 locations in 26 states, four Canadian provinces,
parts of Europe, Asia and Australia, will open their doors to the
public to showcase their ISDN applications.  TRIP '92 is being
sponsored jointly by the North American ISDN Users Forum (NIU) and the
Corporation for Open Systems (COS).

        Hayes Microcomputer Products is a member of the North
American ISDN Users Forum, an organization established in 1988 under
the auspices of the National Institute for Standards and Technology.
 The forum provides users of ISDN technology the opportunity to
influence developing ISDN technology to reflect their needs.  The
Corporation for Open Systems, through its ISDN Executive Council, is
working to accelerate the implementation, deployment and usage of ISDN
products and services.  Its members represent ISDN users, computer and
telephone equipment manufacturers, telephone service providers, and
manufacturers of telecommunications switches.

        ISDN technology offers simultaneous voice, video, data,
graphics and signaling over a single telephone line.  Although the
service has been available locally in many areas, with the advent of
National ISDN, customers in some areas will now be able to connect
over the long distance network.

        Best known as the leader in microcomputer modems, Hayes
develops, supplies and supports computer communications equipment and
software for personal computers and computer communications networks.
The company distributes its products in over 60 countries through a
global network of authorized distributors, dealers, mass merchants,
VARs, systems integrators and original equipment manufacturers.

           ###

For further editorial information, please contact:

Beth McElveen/Peggy Ballard   Hayes Microcomputer Products, Inc.
Direct Dial:  BMcElveen- 404/840-6816, PBallard - 404/840-6812
Fax:  [phone]     MCI Mail:  PBallard

For additional product information and upgrades, customers should
contact Hayes Customer Service:

Telephone               Online with Hayes BBS
404/441-1617 (U.S.)     800/US HAYES (U.S. and Canada)
519/746-5000 (Canada)   404/HI MODEM (U.S. and Canada)
081-848-1858 (U.K.)     404/729-6525 (U.S. - Atlanta ISDN Users)
852-887-1037 (H.K.)     081-569-1774 (U.K.)
                        852-887-7590 (H.K.)


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] (Larry Gilbert)
Subject: Caller ID in Washington State (US West)
Organization: Whole Earth 'Lectronic Link
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1992 07:02:58 GMT


I just got a notice with yesterday's phone bill about US West's Caller
ID plans.  I am including most of the text of it below.  Two things
about it struck me as being unusual:

(1) It states that subscribers will be able to see callers' *names* as well as
    their numbers.  I have never heard of this feature associated with Caller
    ID before; is it unique?

(2) The Per-Line Blocking option seems a bit steeply priced, and I'm
    disappointed that it isn't offered to unlisted customers "by default".  Is
    it in line with other phone companies' per-line blocking offers?

Except for the line blocking, no mention is made of prices.  Grr.

(excerpt follows)

U S WEST(R) Communications is pleased to announce it has filed a
request with the Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission to
offer several new telecommunication services effective December 17,
1992, to our residential and small business customers.

These new services include:

  * CALLER ID: Shows the name and telephone number of who's calling
    on a small display unit attached to your phone.

  * CONTINUOUS REDIAL: Redials a busy number for you, then alerts
    you when it's free.

  * CALL REJECTION: Automatically blocks calls from unwanted callers.

  * SELECTIVE CALL FORWARDING: Forwards just the calls you choose to
    another number.

  * PRIORITY CALL: Identifies your important callers with a special ring.

  * LAST CALL RETURN: Automatically dials the number of your last
    incoming call unless the calling party's number is blocked.

  * CALL TRACE: Forwards the telephone number of an [sic] harassing
    caller to the U S WEST Security Center.

If these new services are approved by the Commission, we will provide
you with further information, including prices for the individual
services, before they become available in your area.  U S WEST
Communications currently plans to offer these services in Seattle,
Olympia, Tacoma, Bremerton and Vancouver in early 1993.  Other
locations are yet to be determined.

If Caller ID becomes available, the name and telephone number
associated with the telephone line you are calling from (calling
number) will be shown each time you call someone who has the service,
EVEN IF THE CALLING NUMBER IS A NON-LISTED OR NON-PUBLISHED TELEPHONE
NUMBER.  Because there may be occasions when you do not want your
calling number displayed, U S WEST will also be providing the
following options, without a *monthly* charge, to block the display of
your calling name and number:

* PER CALL BLOCKING: Allows you the flexibility to choose when you
want to display your calling number and when you want your number to
remain private.  Just dial *67 to block the display of your calling
name and number for an individual call only.  This service is free and
will be applied to your line automatically.

* PER LINE BLOCKING: If you don't want the flexibility of Per Call
Blocking, you may wish to choose per line blocking.  This service
automatically blocks the display of the calling name and number you
are using for all calls placed from that line.  If approved, there
will be a one-time charge of $8.00 (residence) / $13.00 (business) to
receive this service.  THIS CHARGE WILL BE WAIVED FOR A PERIOD OF 90
DAYS FOLLOWING THE INTRODUCTION OF CALLER ID IN YOUR AREA.  You will
need to contact the company to request per line blocking once the
service becomes available.

NON-PUBLISHED AND UNLISTED CUSTOMERS PLEASE NOTE: If you wish to block
display of your calling name and number, you must decide which
blocking option you prefer.  If you wish to receive per line blocking,
you must contact the company once the service is available.  As stated
earlier, there is no monthly charge for either per call blocking or
per line blocking.


Larry Gilbert  :  [e-mail]  or better yet  [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (David Fiedler)
Subject: Very Weird Telephone Problem
Organization: InfoPro Systems: Writers, Consultants, and Dragons
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 92 08:27:17 GMT


Well, I've been making telephone calls for a long time but this one
takes the cake. The MCI network department never heard anything like
it so I'm hoping someone here can explain it.

My wife and I had just returned home from visiting my sister, who
lives in another area code in California (well, she doesn't exactly
live in an area code, but you know what I mean). The phone rang, and
there was nobody there. This happens sometimes, so we didn't think too
much about it.

Then it rang again. My wife thought it might be my sister calling, to
see if we got home safely, but there was nobody there again.

The phone rang a third time. This time it *was* my sister on the line,
but it was a very bad connection, as if she was in Argentina or
something. I asked her if she had called me the previous two times,
and she said, "No, I just got home. And anyway, you just called *me*".
We determined that we had *each* heard the phone ring, and picked it
up, and found ourselves connected to each other!

This was pretty wild, but we eventually said goodbye and hung up. And
it happened *again*. My wife then talked to my sister for awhile, and
then she gave me the phone to say goodbye, but there was nobody there.
So I called her back to say goodbye properly, and noticed this
connection was much louder, as it usually sounds when you call
someone.

But wait, there's more. While we were on the phone, a call came in on
my second line (we have a mini-PBX with rollover to the second line).
At the same time, she was notified via her Call Waiting that another
call was coming in. You guessed it, we each picked up our other line,
and it was us again!

Now, I can see how maybe her cordless phone went crazy and dialed me.
But my cordless phone going crazy and dialing her at the same time?
And repeatedly? So our phones both ring simultaneously?

This was so weird that the MCI customer service lady actually
suggested exorcism. I wasn't about to admit to her that my wife and I
had already looked in the mirror to make sure we weren't already dead,
or something ... is this a pre-Halloween prank, or what?


David Fiedler    UUCP:{netcomsv,utoday}!infopro!david  AIR: N3717R
Internet: [e-mail] or [e-mail]
USMail:InfoPro Systems, PO Box 220 Rescue CA 95672 Phone:[phone] FAX:-5873

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

Date: Wed, 28 Oct 92 11:15:23 CST
From: [e-mail] (R. Steven Rainwater)
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: ISDN in Irving, Texas


Our company is planning on developing some software that will take
advantage of ISDN BRI services.  To this end we asked GTE to install
two ISDN BRI lines at our office.  We were pleasantly suprised at the
rates: $17 per line vs.  about $40 per line for our standard analog
voice lines.  Anyway, GTE told us that we were the first "official"
installation they had done since they had gotten their tariff
approved.  I tend to believe them.  Our problem is that the manuals
for our Terminal Adapters (UDS TA120s) indicated that all one had to
do is plug them into the ISDN's RJ45s jack to use them.  For whatever
reason GTE did not install RJ45 jacks for the lines.  In fact, when we
called and requested that they did this, they claimed that they did
not know how to wire them as none of their technicians had yet been
trained to do anything beyond run the wires to the wiring block.  They
also suggested (but didn't know for sure, of course) that we might
need some sort of power supply to "power the BRI service at our end".
I have no idea what this might mean.

Can anyone direct me to information on how we can get from the two
wires on our wiring block to an RJ45 jack and perhaps offer an
explanation of what this power supply is that we "might" need?
Hopefully, the terminal adapter can provided whatever power might be
needed to the line.

Also, one additional problem has come up with GTE.  The manual for the
terminal adapter indicates that the device needs to be programmed with
two numbers; a Terminal Endpoint Identifier (TEI), and a Service
Profile Identifier (SPID).  We are told to get these numbers from the
phone company but, once again, GTE claims they have no knowledge of
these things.  I've gotten numbers for several higher up GTE people
and will keep plugging away at this one, but, in the meantime, does
anyone know of a way to determine these two numbers from my end?  We
are on an AT&T 5ESS switch, if that makes any difference.


[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Adam Shostack)
Subject: Re: No Dial Tone; What's a Guy to Do?
Organization: Aiken Computation Lab, Harvard University
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1992 06:51:22 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Jack Decker) writes:

>> Today, I returned home from work, and for the third time in a two
>> months, had no dial tone on my voice line.

>> Do I call the PUC?

> By all means, or better yet, take the text of your message and edit it
> into a letter and SEND it to the PUC.  I would, at a minimum, state
> that you want a) credit for the time you were without service, b) an
> explanation of the cause of the problem, and c) the name and number of
> an NET manager that will take responsibility for seeing that the
> problem is corrected, and whom you can call directly should the
> problem recur.

Thanks to the six or eight people who suggested the same thing in
mail.  With the mention of the PUC, NET agreed to give me a months
credit, and I have a name in case of future problems.

Thanks folks!


Adam Shostack   [e-mail]

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

From: MPA15C![e-mail]
Date: 29 OCT 92 17:59
Subject: Can I Have My Cake And Eat It Too?


I've had a lot of trouble with my wife picking up the kitchen phone
(built into an answering machine) when I am using a modem in the
computer room, with predictably miserable results.  A visit to
RadioSchlock resulted in a nifty little gismo with which I'm sure most
Telecom readers are familiar, which deactivates the phone plugged into
said gismo when any downstream phones are in use.  As the modem is
downstream from the kitchen phone now plugged into this little device,
my disconnection syndrome seems to have been happily remedied.
Sometimes it WOULD be nice to use the kitchen phone when a downstream
phone has been picked up for voice usage, but I'll live with that
problem.  Maybe I'll wire a gismo-bypass switch someday.

The question involves one unexpected effect clearly related to the
installation of said gismo: I can't retrieve the answering machine's
messages remotely.  I punch in the touchtone sequence and it does
precisely nothing.  Today I took out the gismo, and as expected
successfully retrieved my messages.

Obvious questions: why, and can I do anything about it?  Are there
more complicated gismos that would let me retrieve messages (and
perhaps even have a inbuilt bypass button to solve that first minor
nuisance)?  I can't intellectually deduce the cause -- am I perhaps on
some hairy edge of a critical voltage window with the current drop of
that device pushing me too far?  TIA.


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: [ ]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #809
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa23737;
          29 Oct 92 11:47 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA10829
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 29 Oct 1992 08:00:14 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA30192
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 29 Oct 1992 07:59:56 -0600
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1992 07:59:56 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #810

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 29 Oct 92 08:00:00 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 810

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    CFP: CSAM93 Computer Congress ([e-mail])
    Call Waiting and GTED(Jack Decker)
    Hayes Press Release: Prices Reduced on ISDN Products (Toby Nixon)
    Test Recording RA 2 Channel 4 (Gerald Ruderman)
    Pet Peeve - Intercept Messages (David Bonney)
    CLASS Features vs. FX Lines (Eliot Moore)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: CFP: CSAM93 Computer Congress
Organization: University of Karlsruhe, Germany
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1992 12:06:54 GMT


******* FIRST ANNOUNCEMENT AND CALL FOR SESSIONS AND PAPERS ************


  INTERNATIONAL CONGRESS ON COMPUTER SYSTEMS AND APPLIED MATHEMATICS

                         19-23 JULY 1993

                     ST. PETERSBURG, RUSSIA

Organized by Center of Modern Communications, University of St.
Petersburg.

THE AIMS of the Congress are to provide a forum to explore common
interests and interplay across disciplines, and to bring to practicing
researchers recent advances and the state of the art in all areas of
computer science, scientific computing, software engineering, applied
and computational mathematics.  The official language of the Congress
is English and only papers submitted in English will be considered.

THE TOPICS highlighted by the Congress include, but are not limited
to: Programming Languages; Numerical Analysis; Differential Equations;
Inverse Problems; Fluid Dynamics; Quantum and Statistical Mechanics;
Applied Probability and Statistics; Theory of Computing; Scientific
Computation; Parallel Processing; Supercomputing; Optimization and
Operations Research; Software Engineering and Compiler Construction;
Symbolic Computation; CASE Tools; Fuzzy Systems; Databases; Networks;
Neural Nets; Artificial Intelligence; Expert Systems; Computer
Graphics; Computer Vision and Image Processing; Data Security;
Simulation and Modelling; Electromagnetics and Semiconductors;
Medicine and Biology; Mathematical Education; Dynamical Systems;
Economics and Management; Environmental Science; Manufacturing
Systems; Material Science;

MINISYMPOSIA PROPOSAL:

The Program Committee invites you, as a potential organizer, to submit
a proposal for a minisymposium. A minisymposium is a session of three
to six speakers focusing on a single topic.  The organizers should
submit the title(s) of the session(s) they propose to the Program
Committee as soon as possible. Minisymposium organizers are
responsible for the scientific quality of papers in their sessions,
consequently all papers invited by organizers are automatically
accepted.

CONTRIBUTED PAPERS/POSTER PRESENTATIONS:

The program will also include contributed paper sessions (20 - minute
presentation), posters, and industrial exhibits. Authors are invited
to submit to the CSAM'93 Program Committee a one page abstract and
indicate if they prefer an oral or poster session.  Authors may
suggest the title(s) of appropriate session(s) for their paper.
Manuscripts of papers presented at the Congress will be published as
CSAM'93 Proceedings after the Congress. A volume containing all
abstract of the accepted papers and description of all minisymposia
including titles and speakers known by May 1, 1993, will be available
to the participants at the Congress. Late papers and sessions, if
accepted, may be presented at the Congress and will be listed in the
Supplementum to the final program.

DEADLINES:

Minisymposium proposals: As soon as possible; Early submissions due:
February 1, 1993; Normal submissions due: May 1, 1993; Late
submissions: After May 1, 1993.

EXHIBITOR INFORMATION:

Booths and tables will be available to companies wishing to display
their products and/or services.

Send inquires  for further  information, proposals  for  minisymposia,
and two copies of the abstract to:

 Dr. Sergey S. Voitenko
 Director, Center of Modern Communications,
 University of St. Petersburg
 14th Line 29
 199178 St. Petersburg  Russia
 e-mail: [e-mail]

Outside of  Ex-USSR and  Eastern Europe proposals for minisymposia and
abstracts can be also send to Dimitri Shiriaev.
 e-mail: [e-mail]


                         FORM OF INTENTION

Name:

Affiliation:

Address:


Check as appropriate:

I plan to attend CSAM'93 and to :

 - organize a Session/Group of Sessions

 - contribute a 20 min lecture

 - present a poster

 - present a computer demonstration

Provisional title(s) of contributed session(s)/paper:

Although I have not yet decided to attend I wish to

 - stay on the mailing list

Date:                         Signature:

Please mail this form to Dimitri Shiriaev
 e-mail: [e-mail]
 Subject: CSAM93

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

Date: Thu, 29 Oct 92 07:46:02 CST
From: Jack Decker <[e-mail]>
Subject: Call Waiting and GTE


A message that appeared in comp.bbs.waffle a few days ago had some
rather sharp words about users who call BBS's while having Call
Waiting enabled (one BBS even went so far as to delete the accounts of
callers who got knocked offline by call waiting tones!  Why someone
would be THAT hard-nosed I can't imagine, but they actually said that
you could use that excuse ONCE and then your account would be wiped
out!).  I sent a message in response pointing out that folks living in
GTE-land (in Michigan, at least) may not have much of a choice, at
least not without spending extra money, and thought that readers of
the Digest might be interested in this as well (I've expanded upon my
original message a bit here).

Let me explain.  I called to inquire about the basics of getting
service established at a location in GTE territory.  One of the
optional services that I inquired about is distinctive ringing (GTE
has another name for the service which I forget offhand, but it's the
service where you can have two different phone numbers coming in on
the same line, each with its own ring pattern).

The bad news was that one additional distinctive ring number was $6.00
per month. The GOOD news(?) was that for only $6.95 per month, I could
get a features package that would not only include distinctive
ringing, but also call forwarding, three-way calling, speed calling
and, you guessed it, call waiting.  Of course, you had to take the
package as tariffed, meaning you couldn't exclude call waiting.

But that's not all.  It seems that in the land of the Great Telephone
Experiment, CANCEL Call Waiting is a separate feature that incurs a
separate monthly charge!  And, of course, CCW only works if YOU placed
the call, which would be deadly in my situation because I often
RECEIVE modem calls after midnight.

I told the rep that I wished they'd just give you a list of available
features and let you pick the ones you want, and charge you by number
of features picked.  I said that in this case, I would not want call
waiting but I might well consider that package if Touch Tone were
substituted for call waiting (they get $2.00 per month for Touch Tone
in GTE land!).

The rep seemed sympathetic and said that many people had expressed to
her that they did NOT want call waiting on their lines, but that she
could only offer the package as it was tariffed.

So you see the problem ... if you think you want distinctive ringing,
it seems kind of silly not to pay the additional 95 cents a month that
gives you call forwarding and three-way calling, yet if you do that,
you are stuck will call waiting whether you want it or not.

If I thought it would do any good, I'd write to GTE and ask that they
consider NOT bundling call waiting with any other feature package,
unless it can be omitted. I don't know if they do this in any other
states, but I was rather surprised to find that they do it here in
Michigan.

The only good thing that can be said about GTE North is that the last
I heard, their rates for basic service were a bit lower than Michigan
Bell's (I hope that is still true!).  And in Michigan, their service
is really not all that bad in many areas (except that they do still
try to use crappy "subscriber carrier" to provide service in some
areas instead of installing more lines, but I think maybe they are
learning that this is NOT the way to go in this day of fax machines
and modems!).

I really do wish that telephone companies would offer optional extra
features the way some pizza places offer toppings ... you can get,
say, four extra toppings (features) for a special price, but YOU get
to pick the features.  The current method (having a different price
for every feature) is illogical and confusing.  I will grant that
perhaps there are some features that are so costly to provide that
they warrant special pricing, but those should be the exception,
rather than the rule.

Because I can't get the package that I really want without paying
individual prices for everything, I'll probably wind up just going
with Plain Old Telephone Service and GTE won't get ANY extra money
from me.  While this saddens me not in the least, it would seem that
if the phone companies want to maximize their profits they would
consider giving customers what they want, or at very least an option
package that does NOT include call waiting.  Good grief, I know a lot
of folks who DON'T have modems or fax machines and who STILL would not
have call waiting on their line because they hate having their calls
interrupted (I even had a Michigan Bell executive confide to me once
that he wouldn't have it on HIS residence line, because he felt that
it was "rude").

And, for crying out loud, ANY decent option package ought to include
Touch Tone (in those areas where they still charge extra for it)!
After all, you know that if call waiting is available on a switch,
that switch has got to support Touch Tone as well!


Jack Decker  [e-mail]   FidoNet 1:154/8

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

From: Toby Nixon <[e-mail]>
Subject: Hayes Press Release: Prices Reduced on ISDN Products
Date: 28 Oct 92 16:20:17 EDT
Organization: Hayes Microcomputer Products, Norcross, GA


Notice: The following Hayes press release is provided for news and
information purposes only and is not intended to be construed as a
commercial advertisement or solicitation.


                                              FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
                                                             H-2692


HAYES LOWERS PRICES ON ISDN PRODUCTS

        Atlanta, GA, 28 October 1992 -- Hayes Microcomputer Products,
Inc. today announced a 25 per cent price reduction for both Hayes ISDN
System Adapter and Hayes ISDN PC Adapter to US$1199 and CDN$1499.

        Hayes ISDN System Adapter is an external multimedia adapter
with superior voice and data capabilities that supports both AT&T and
Northern Telecom ISDN switches and fully implements Hayes Standard AT
Command Set for ISDN and Hayes AutoStream.  This product comes
packaged with both a Macintosh and DOS configuration program, as well
as Hayes ISDN Tool, a connection tool for use with Macintosh
Communications Toolbox, and provides Caller ID for data
communications.

        Hayes ISDN PC Adapter is an internal terminal adapter which
provides the installed base of IBM PCs, ISA/EISA and compatible
computers with ISDN functionality.  The ISDN PC Adapter has
high-performance data capabilities and is well designed to support
both asynchronous and network applications. Included with this product
is Hayes SoftPhone, a voice call management application for MS-DOS
systems that provides multiple phone books, call logging, interactive
call screening and sound cues, allowing your PC workstation to become
an enhanced feature phone.

        Hayes also announced that support for National ISDN-1 (NI-1)
will be provided as an upgrade to both the ISDN System Adapter and
ISDN PC Adapter. The NI-1 upgrade for Hayes ISDN System Adapter can be
ordered through Hayes Customer Service in March 1993, and for the ISDN
PC Adapter in May 1993, for a cost of US$75 and CDN$95 each.

        There are over 30 applications now available for use with
these ISDN terminal adapters.  With a large number of vendors
supporting Hayes Standard AT Command Set, many existing data
applications can be transferred to this new digital platform.  Many
LAN applications can also take advantage of ISDN via Hayes ISDNBIOS
and a third party application which provides a NETBIOS interface on
the ISDN PC Adapter. Some of the applications currently available
include remote LAN access, image desktop conferencing, remote database
access using Caller ID, and leased line replacement.

        A third ISDN product, Hayes ISDN Extender, a telecommunications
network interface module for NeXT computers which supports both ISDN
and analog data communications, has an estimated retail price of
US$349 and CDN$400.  The ISDN Extender and peripherals are currently
available through Value-added Resellers and Dealers who sell NeXT
computers.

        Best known as the leader in microcomputer modems, Hayes
develops, supplies and supports computer communications equipment and
software for personal computers and computer communications networks.
The company distributes its products in over 60 countries through a
global network of authorized distributors, dealers, mass merchants,
VARs, systems integrators and original equipment manufacturers.

       ###

For further editorial information, please contact:

Beth McElveen/Peggy Ballard
Hayes Microcomputer Products, Inc.
Direct Dial:  BMcElveen - 404/840-6816, PBallard - 404/840-6812
Fax:  [phone]     MCI Mail:  PBallard

For additional product information and upgrades, or for the names of
participating resellers and dealers, customers should contact Hayes
Customer Service:

Telephone               Online with Hayes BBS
404/441-1617 (U.S.)     800/US HAYES (U.S. and Canada)
519/746-5000 (Canada)   404/HI MODEM (U.S. and Canada)
081-848-1858 (U.K.)     404/729-6525 (U.S. - Atlanta ISDN Users)
852-887-1037 (H.K.)     081-569-1774 (U.K.)
                        852-887-7590 (H.K.)


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] (Gerald Ruderman)
Subject: Test Recording RA 2 Channel 4
Organization: Rational Systems, Inc.
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1992 10:30:08 GMT


Last Sunday evening I was in a hotel room in New York City. This hotel
uses AT&T as their default carrier. I dialed 8+0+ my home phone as
part of a calling card call. Instead of the bond it rang and I heard
"This is a test recording on RA 2 channel 4." This happened two more
times before a call went through.

Anyone know what this was about?


Gerald Ruderman   [e-mail]

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

Date: Thu, 29 Oct 92 06:39 GMT
From: David Bonney <[e-mail]>
Subject: Pet Peeve - Intercept Messages
Reply-to: [e-mail]


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

> ... 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" ...

Which leads me to one of my pet peeves: Why oh why don't they ever
tell us >what number< to call for customer service??

For the telecom literate, it's merely annoying to have to look up the
number for the (hopefully correct) customer service center.  But that
assumes that 1) we haven't been slammed, and/or 2) we 'recognize' the
recording and can thus take appropriate action.

But not everyone reads (or understands?) TELECOM Digest.   :-)

My prayers go out to those not in-the-know when they get a recording
telling them to call 'customer service' for assistance.


    [ A Telecommunications Professional Now Unemployed In Westford MA ]
 dab    [    No Employer, No Disclaimer.    Just My Own Thoughts.      ]
    [ Inquiries To <[e-mail]> Or Telephone [phone] ]

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

From: [e-mail] (Eliot Moore)
Subject: CLASS Features vs. FX Lines
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1992 08:20:43 GMT


Pacific Bell has informed me I cannot order "Priority Ringing" service
(wherein the phone rings differently for "priority" designated
callers) on foreign exchange lines.  The lines in question are all
Pacific Bell and all SS7-enabled on ESS #1A CO's.

Is there a technical limitation to support their position?

If not, is there any way to pursue installation of features conveniently
"not tariffed for foreign exchange service"?


Regards,

Eliot Moore - [e-mail], POB 1431 Santa Monica CA 90406

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #810
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa21112;
          30 Oct 92 2:04 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA21266
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 29 Oct 1992 23:51:16 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA30787
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 29 Oct 1992 23:50:57 -0600
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1992 23:50:57 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #811

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 29 Oct 92 23:51:00 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 811

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Telecom and Cellular Report From India (Shrikumar)
    Computerized Sales Call "Locked" my Line (Martin Soques)
    FBI Finds No Basis For Prosecution in Case of Transmitting Device (N Allen)
    Presidential Info Available via Sprint FONCard (Joseph Bergstein)
    Presidential Straw Poll (Phydeaux)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Thu, 29 Oct 92 01:02:07 -0500
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Telecom and Cellular Report From India
Organization: UMass, Amherst, MA 01002 + Temporal Sys & Comp Net, Bombay, India


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

>> 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?

GSM was developed as Euro-standard to allow people to cruise acroos
Europe using the same Cell-phone. I believe there is also an effort in
Europe for automated/comuterised or aural information channels which
broadcast reports on road conditions. At least I think there is a
german system, and maybe there are some efforts towards an
Euro-standard. I'd like to know more about this.

> 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.

And now soon in India too, GSM will be spoken ...

(I append at the end of the article, a summary of some telecom
scenario developments in India, which I promised to PAT several months
ago ...)

> 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,

   Technically, how different in principle, besides detail, is USDC
 from GSM? Would it be difficult to have a all nation cell phone unit?

   I believe some digital encryption is available on some GSM
providers in Europe, and it is only link level encryption for the
radio hop, and not end-to-end (thats difficult anyway).  I have been
told that "to learn details of the crypto-system would not be easy".
My guess is it must be fixed key crypto-system essentially a
substitution/permutation cypher, most likely not with any chaining, no
feedback. , and the key being tied to the equivalent to the ESN in
ROM. These are guesses but I'd like to know whats really there.

[After I had written the above para, a message from PhilKarn indicates
that this is indeed the case for the US Cellular Digital with
encryption.  Someone know is it similar in Europe on GSM?]

   I don't think there are, at least I not aware of, any Bellcore
CCITT standards for encryption on telephones that use two key schemes,
even weak ones. Time there was one, IMHO ! Esp. end-to-end encryption.

Ok ... now for news on India ...

[While we are comparing emergency numbers, let me mention that 100 is
police, 101 fire and 102 ambulance, in all places in India, This is
pretty close to Israel. Also, besides Israel, I have not seen a number
for Ambulance separately.]

 Under IMF pressure or otherwise, the Indian Telecom structure has
also started worshipping "privatisation" in "value-added services".
But deregulation is not what this going to be for sure ... since all
services are tightly licensed and regulated ... so they'd behave more
like the LECs and not like the more competitive IXCs.

 Sometime back, there was a proposal to split up long distance telecom
into regional corporations, the word meaning they would be govt
undertakings but functionally independant, at least to the extent that
political ministers would not have as much a free say in the day to
day working.  This would not have brought in any competition worth the
name (no self serving bureaucrazy would ever wrought that on itself)
but it was said by some that this was modelled after the Divestiture.
(IMHO, I fail to see the analogy). But this would have surely brought
in a greater responsiveness to the user community, greater efficiency
and cost conciousness, less frauds/corruption and better services.
But this proposal is now in the cold freezer.

The devolution of the phone service in the four major metropolis, (now
run by MTNL, Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Limited, Metro Telephone Corp
Ltd) and the similar formation of a corporation out of the erstwhile
Overseas Communication Service, OCS, into VSNL, Videsh Sanchar Nigam
Ltd, Overseas Communcation Corp Ltd, which handles all International
traffic did bring in these improvement along with pay hikes for the
staff. Even a government corporation is better than a government
department directly run by a ministry.

{The are, due to history, several parallels between the structure, the
bureaucrazy, problems, (except currently I gather BT is pretty good)
between the British system and that in India. In fact when I read the
pithy words of Bernard Levin in his column in {London Times} I was
wondering if he not was talking about India :-) }

   Ok ... now about cellular coming to India ...

   The DoT, The Department of Telecommunications, floated tenders
asking for bidders for running cellular and radio-paging services in
cities in India. Most bidders were consortia or tie-ups between major
internation big-names and Indian companies, and some industrial
houses.

   For cellular, GSM was mandated as the standard.  (There was little
debate, the decision was handed down.)

   Some 30 significant bids were under consideration, in which many of
the International bidders were participants in more than one
consortium, at least one with and one without a government agency
itself being one of the partners. Finally the decisions have been made.

    In Bombay, one of the operators is going to be a consortium of
Millicom Inc's Mauritian operator, Emtel, with Bharat Telecom Ltd.,
and Compagnie Generale des Eaux of France. Apparently, a major
criterion was the amount of foreign exchange the company could conjure
up with the best terms.

   I believe the price of a subscription is going to be enormous,
close to Rs 100K surely more, (which is close to $4000 !) plus
proportionally steep air time charges. Customers are expected only to
be large corporate accounts. These operations are funded entirely by
private capital, and no cross subsidy is expected to happen into the
normal phone service.

Meantime I caught a release from Philips (the dutch company, with an
Indian arm) that they were investing significantly in GSM in India.
Philips has been a late entrant into the main line telecom field in
India, having slept for a long while when others like Motorola were
scrambling for paging and cellular, but has lately been very active
and is talking about manufacturing pagers and such.

Radio Paging has seen very similar developments ... Motorola was one
of the major players, bidding for all cities up with more than one
partner. They were quite eager to educate, help and even do most of
the homework for anybody and his dog with money to bid for the Paging
Service tender. In all some 19 companies have been shortlisted, with
criterea similar to that for cellular.

Other services such as E-mail, and Voice Mail are also likely to be
talked about soon, with an exercise of a similar nature in "licensing"
being undertaken by the DoT now. However, for these services, the
format is not the form of a tender or license but what is being
referred to as a "franchise" ...  but the meaning of the word
franchise of a govt run monopoly is not very clear to me, mildly
amusing would be a better statement of my emotions. It is very likely
that some E-mail services under this scheme would come up in India
"sometime" during the coming year. (There already are several who
claim to have started, but I havnot begun counting them yet.)

Meantime, I must mention that MTNL, the govt corp that runs the phones
in the metros has been running a pilot paging service in Bombay
already (which is priced just too high) and VSNL, the govt corp
responsible for all international traffic, and probably the most
progressive, has been running a small but (I gather) good Email
service based on X.400 reaching Delhi, Bombay and Madras. But their
current charter lets them carry traffic between India and
International Destinations only. So I can send X.400 E-mail from
Bombay or Delhi to the US, but not yet from Bombay to Delhi.

An X.25 public network, now christened I-NET, has finally, after a
wait of some 6 years, brought PSDNs to reach 8 cities in India.
Current capacity is very small ... only 160 X.25 ports, some 500 X.28
leased, and some 700 X.28 dial up subscribers, most of whom are not
generating any significant traffic yet. BUt major capacity expansion
and hopefully much needed improvement of quality is expected soon.

Besides these, there is also expected to be some very serious
companies, who would also be entering this field providing telecom,
database, information and E-mail services outside the gambit of the
regulated services, ie. regardless of the legal/ political structure I
outlined above. These may be outside the letter of the law, but it is
quite likely that one of them might turn out to be more successful and
keen a competitor and would survive too. Also the record of the govt
to actually implement its laws in this context has lately not been
very good. But they are all likely to be "high profit" value-added
services, and would not contribute significantly to basic telecom
infrastructure.

Interesting to note that as Cable TV spreads in urban India, there is
a clutter of co-ax cables, most of them happily radiating into the
ether too over most streets, reminiscent of pictures of America before
FDM in the Lenkurt Demodulator (No I am not that old, I love browsing
thru old books in the library ;) the Min in charge of TV sees its as
DoTs problem for enforcing the law about monopoly on wires across the
street ... while the DoT could not care less, since this was TV,
right ... not telephones !! ;-) So almost the entire cable TV
operations out there are technically illegal ... but work just as
finely.

There could be fairly interesting changes in the choices in telecom
services in India, very possibly. However, how much of a net
improvement that will result in remains to be seen. In particular, as
long as the phones system has its problems, tho in the major cities it
is indeed very workable and nice, the last mile for most services will
be insurmountable. And unless the reach of these services is wide, to
carry them beyond the metros into the deep industrial areas, the real
problems may not be solved.

Wait and watch!

In a different context, Our Moderator notes ....

[ ... newspapers in Spain have ads for a Tarot practitioner. The
services directed to Americans are located in the Netherland Antilles
and one is in Georgetown, Guyana.  [This was contested by someone -- shri]
Those guys make a profit on their free services by getting kickbacks
from the international long distance carriers and the [PTTs] .... ]

   In the last several months, each Sunday edition of the {Times of
India} has carried an ad for a tarot reading service out of London. I
had guessed correctly that this was how they worked, assuming there
was nothing dubious about them (like the 800 number not credit card
chat lines ;)

   So, if BT is encouraging tarot readings to be read on the line from
London to India, then often are the international trunks to India very
idle?

   If so, then I get back to the question I asked before ... would not
BT like to let me use the Fallow bandwidth?


shrikumar ( [e-mail], [e-mail] )
"Of course, these are my *OPINIONS* !!"

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

Date: Thu, 29 Oct 92 08:44:44 CST
From: [e-mail] (Martin Soques)
Subject: Computerized Sales Call "Locked" My Line


Greetings!  Last night, I received a computerized sales/sleeze call
which essentially "locked" my line and prevented me from getting a
dial tone no matter what I did with my switch hook.  I found this
disturbing since I could not hang up on this unsolicited call.  Is
this legal?  The pitch was somewhat long but did not reveal the
identity of the calling party (the call had pauses/beeps to leave my
name, address, and phone number).

Insights, opinions and similar experiences from the comp.dcom.telecom
community would be appreciated.  Thanks!


snail: Martin P. Soques   Opinions are my own ...
       P. O. Box 17341    E-mail: [e-mail]
       Austin, TX 78760   phone: [phone]


[Moderator's Note: You did not hang up *long enough*. Had you stayed
off the line for maybe 20-30 seconds the sales robot would have gotten
cut off. But each time you disconnected for a few seconds then went
back off hook again, you reset the connection in the switch and forced
it to start timing out again. That is the important thing to remember
about getting any unwanted caller off your line: Hang up and remain on
hook for at least long enough for the CO to get around to pulling the
plug on the caller, as it were.  Sometimes it will happen sooner than
20-30 seconds, but don't be hasty! If you are too hasty, you lose, and
get to start all over! :)   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: FBI Finds No Basis For Prosecution in Case of Transmitting Device
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 92 21:15:05 EST


Here is a press release from the U.S. Department of Justice.

FBI Finds No Basis For Prosecution in Case of Transmitting Device
Found in Va. Capitol Building

Contact: Elizabeth Smith of the U.S. Department of Justice,
         202-514-2007

   RICHMOND, Oct. 29 -- Richard Cullen, United States Attorney for the
Eastern District of Virginia, announced today that the Federal Bureau
of Investigation has concluded its investigation into events
surrounding the transmitting device found in the office of the
governor's chief of staff.

   Cullen has concluded that there is no basis for federal
prosecution.

   The device was discovered in the afternoon of Aug. 20 and was
reported to the FBI on the following day.

   Robert Satkowski, special agent in charge of the Richmond field
office of the FBI, stated that upon examination by the FBI, the
transmitting device had no battery, was turned off, and the antenna
was broken.  Further, the device was of a type manufactured without
any serial number or other identifying markings and was distributed to
a large number of sales outlets across the nation.  Accordingly, it is
not traceable to a particular buyer.

   The device cost between $300 and $600.

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

From: [e-mail] (Joseph Bergstein)
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1992 17:11:47 -0500
Subject: Presidential Info Available via Sprint FONCard


Per the following press release from Sprint, Campaign updates can
now be obtained by using a Sprint FONCARD:


                                         For Immediate Release

            LATEST PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN INFORMATION
             AVAILABLE THROUGH SPRINT'S FONCARD(sm)

     KANSAS CITY, Mo., Oct. 15, 1992 -- People who can't wait for the
newspaper for the latest presidential campaign information -- or who
don't have access to radio or television -- can use their Sprint
FONCARDs(sm) to access the new Sprint Presidential Campaign Coverage
hotline.

     Sprint's political hotline offers the latest information from
such sources as CNN, Associated Press, United Press International and
the television networks.  Other available information comes from
political polls -- often conducted by the news services immediately
after the presidential debates.

     The political hotline is part of Sprint's Special Events Hotline,
which recently provided similar news for the Winter Olympics.  Sprint
plans similar hotlines for upcoming events.  Sprint's Information
Line, also part of Sprint's FONCARD service, includes the latest
information on such other subjects as world news, weather, sports,
finance and soap operas.

     FONCARD Information Line is updated daily and Sprint's Special
Events Hotline is updated within about an hour of special events.  For
example, Thursday's presidential debate will end at 10:30 Eastern
time; FONCARD customers can have a thorough roundup of news by about
11:30.

     The Presidential Campaign Coverage hotline can be accessed
by:
     *  dialing Sprint's FONCARD 800 number, 800-877-8000
     *  dialing "#36" at the first tone
     *  dialing a 14-digit FONCARD number
     *  dialing a choice, such as"4" for Sprint's Presidential
        Campaign Coverage hotline.

     Calls to the Information Line are 75 cents per minute of use.
     "People are more tuned into this campaign than any other in
recent years," said Tom Weigman, Sprint's Chief Marketing Officer.
"Sprint's FONCARD Information Line provides immediate access to
campaign news from any phone, anytime, anywhere."

     Other features of the FONCARD include Sprint QuickConference(R)
for three-way calling without operator assistance, Message Delivery,
and FONCARDs based on customers' home phone numbers.

     Sprint is a diversified international telecommunications company
with $9 billion in annual revenues and the United States' only
nationwide all-digital, fiber-optic network.  Its divisions provide
global long distance voice, data and video products and services, and
local telephone services to more than four million subscriber lines in
17 states.

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

Date: Wed, 28 Oct 92 23:19:59 PST
From: [e-mail] (Phydeaux)
Subject: Presidential Straw Poll


[Moderator's Note: To close this issue of the Digest, a little bit of
fun in a diversion very appropriate during the five days ahead of us.
Please be my guest: participate in the voting!     PAT]

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

Announcing a Usenet-wide United States Presidential straw poll!
Anyone who reads this message is eligible to cast his vote for
President of the United States in this poll.  You do *not* need to be
a citizen of the U.S.  to participate!

To cast your ballot, send mail to [e-mail] with the word 'vote'
and the name of the candidate you wish to vote for in the subject
line.  Do *not* include any other text in your message.

Here is an example of what your ballot  might look like:

         To: [e-mail]
         Subject: Vote Jerry Garcia

The poll will be open from now through 12:00 midnight Pacific Daylight
Time on October 30, 1992.

Rules:
- Only  one ballot per  person will be  counted. (The last to arrive).
- Ballots  without the word 'vote' in the subject  line  will  NOT  be
  counted.
- Your ballot  *must* have the name of the candidate you wish to  vote
  for somewhere in the *subject* line.

As a reminder, the following are the major candidates who are running.
Pick one of them, or one of your own!

        Party         Candidate
        -----------  ---------
        Republican:  Bush
        Democrat:    Clinton
        Libertarian: Marrou
        Independent: Perot
                Other:       <your choice>

Please note that the results will be disclosed ONLY as a final tally,
and will not be displayed by voter.

Remember, voting will end on October 30, 1992.  The results will be
posted shortly thereafter.


Happy voting,

reb


[Moderator's Note: All readers have 24 hours to get their votes in.  PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #811
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa21884;
          30 Oct 92 2:22 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA02073
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 30 Oct 1992 00:16:59 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA01235
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 30 Oct 1992 00:16:42 -0600
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1992 00:16:42 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Autovon: The DoD Phone Company


Here is a submission received recently which was too large for
inclusion in a regular issue of the Digest. It is being filed in the
Telecom Archives for further reference also.

PAT


Date: Thu, 29 Oct 92 18:24:43 EDT
From: Tom Coradeschi <[e-mail]>
Subject: Autovon: The DoD Phone Company
Organization: Electric Armts Div, US Army ARDEC, Picatinny Arsenal, NJ


  From: [e-mail] (NARDAC NORFOLK)
  Newsgroups: dod.general
  Subject: CHIPS ON-LINE OCT 92
  Date: 19 Oct 92 15:00:00 GMT

Autovon: The DoD Phone Company
By Peter B. Mersky

Editor's Note: An article on the DoD phone company in Chips? I'm sure
some computer purists are scratching their heads and wondering if I've
lost mine.  However, when Alexander Graham Bell said, "Come here,
Watson. I need you."  What he meant was, "Hook up your modem and dial
my BBS." Obviously, hoping Watson could get a clear circuit. Corny?
You're right -- now that I have your attention ...

Anyone who has served in the military or who has worked in a DoD
office since the early 1960s has had experiences with the military's
long-distance phone system, universally called Autovon. Usually, these
encounters involve frustration, long connection waits, frequent
cutoffs (referred to as being preempted) and occasionally poor
reception. The only saving grace of the Autovon system was that it was
free. Right? Well, not really.

Autovon's notoriety grew as its coverage expanded. But, just where did
Autovon come from? I wasn't surprised that nobody has ever researched
Autovon's history. It's like writing about the Q-tip. We take such a
mundane, everyday tool for granted and never think about its heritage
or development. There's very little specific recorded history on
Autovon's birth. The story is part of a corporate memory, currently
residing with members of the Defense Information Systems Agency
(DISA), formerly the Defense Communications Agency. DISA manages DoD's
primary communications worldwide.

Autovon had its beginnings with the Army's Switch Communications
Automatic Network (SCAN), a three-switch system developed for their
own use. (A switch is a basic unit of an overall network and is
usually an individual telephone system.) At this time, each service
strung up its own private networks according to requirements.
Logistics bases would work circuits between themselves. Quartermaster
sections had circuits to their counterparts throughout the country.
Sometimes, one service would let another service use a few of its
circuits to call a base, if the sister service had an ongoing need.

At the height of the Cold War, DoD began looking for a common-user,
long- distance telephone system that would survive enemy attack and
still give command and control capabilities to appropriate levels of
the government and the military. DoD selected the Army's SCAN as the
basis for a worldwide communications link, eventually listing SCAN as
a DoD resource in 1963 and renaming it the Automatic Voice Network
(Autovon). By the mid 1970s, Autovon had been deployed in the European
and Pacific theaters.

Jim Sage, Chief of DISA's Voice Network Operations Directorate,
likened Autovon's structure to the public phone system. In your system
at home, you dial 1, then a ten-digit number. You actually dial into a
local system which then switches you into a long-distance network,
passing your call along until it reaches its destination.

"We did essentially the same thing with Autovon. Post-camp stations
had a small system that served all the users on the installation. If
you want to call downtown, dial 9, then the number. If you want to
call long distance, your local phone system can be connected to the
DoD long-distance system, Autovon, by various methods. This is the
Autovon long-distance network; it doesn't give you local service. It
can be compared roughly to AT&T, MCI or SPRINT long-distance telephone
networks."

Autovon had some features that public service telephones lacked. Above
all, it was a military communications network. The Joint Chiefs wanted
their command and control capability in a crisis or war. They wanted
their phone system to be able to survive enemy attack -- even if its
human users didn't -- so they buried some of the Autovon switches
underground.

To further ensure survivability, the system was so interconnected that
the loss of a few switches wouldn't affect the overall network.
Robustness was the watchword. Another feature of Autovon was
multi-level precedence preemption (MLPP). There are various degrees of
importance regarding military phone calls: flash override, flash,
immediate, priority and routine. People who might be calling from one
finance center to another to check on a serviceman's pay record would
be classified as routine users. However, someone directing troop
movements or high-level security matters where decisions must get
through, has flash override capability. When Autovon is saturated with
calls, if the supporting trunklines are tied up, selected users with
higher precedence will get their calls through by using MLPP.

As the far-ranging Autovon network grew, it became obvious that its
ancient analog technology was out of date. Digital technology had made
tremendous strides, and DoD wanted to incorporate these advances into
its long-distance phone system. By the mid-1970s, planning was
underway to replace Autovon. The new system was called the Defense
Switched Network (DSN). The replacement cost was high, and the move to
DSN couldn't occur overnight. There were many switches involved in
building and deploying DSN, while phasing Autovon out and maintaining
operational standards. DSN deployment continued through the early
1980s, mainly in the European and Pacific theaters. However, the
archaic Autovon was growing old and more difficult to maintain in
CONUS.

The solution was what Jim Sage called "a technological shot in the
arm." The Defense Commercial Telecommunications Network (DCTN)
included some of DSN's advances as well as the new capability of
video-teleconferencing. DCTN interconnected with Autovon via a variety
of circuit arrangements, including one- and two-way links. DISA
expanded DCTN throughout the late 1980s. AT&T, the prime contractor
for DCTN, as well as the original Autovon system, agreed to take out
many of the old analog switches and replace them with new No. 5
Electronic Switching Systems at no cost to the government. DISA could
also take out more switches and further reduce the communication
system's cost. From 1988 to 1991, DISA claims to have saved $49
million in modernizing the Autovon-DSN-DCTN system.

A common misconception is that DSN service allows free long-distance
calls. In fact, DoD's overall annual budget for long-distance
communication is $289 million worldwide. This amount doesn't reflect
the fact that much of the hardware is already bought and paid for.
Much of the money goes toward financing the cost for individual
post/camp/station access and backbone trunking.

When a user in Norfolk calls another office, say in California, the
cost of that call is part of the overall budget and expense of
communications.  Household phone consumers pay two rates for their
services: a flat rate for local service and a call-by-call rate for
long distance service. The military setup is basically the same, with
a little variation. DoD offices pay a flat rate for the local lines --
the numbers you call by first dialing 9 -- and a user fee for DSN
lines. However, the Navy, and the rest of the military, tailors its
individual phone service to the local budget and requirements of the
particular military base. Using a shopping list supplied by DISA, a
particular base may select two or three overseas lines, ten
transcontinental hookups and a similar number of local lines. Each of
the hookups is charged at a particular rate and makes up that office's
annual communications budget.  Thus, each military installation has a
specific number of DSN lines based on the available funds in its
budget.

DISA uses a "P" (for percentage) factor to describe the success or
failure rate of connections on DSN. Usually, the desired rate is P-10.
That is, for every 100 calls within a geographic area (referred to as
a theater), 10 are blocked. Considering how many DSN calls are being
made at any one time, it's easy to see why we have so many failures,
one of the most frustrating and time-consuming aspects of DSN. P-10 is
included in the linkage between the originator and destination. For
instance you want to call California from your office in Virginia,
there may be only 10 DSN lines available from your base, which block
three out of every 100 calls. After getting onto one of those 10 local
DSN lines, you must now get across the backbone network, which will
block four out of every 100 calls, to the funnel of, perhaps, another
10 lines, at your destination, which, in turn, will block three out of
every 100 calls. At any stage along the road, your call could fail to
complete. Adding up the numbers of blocked calls (3+4+3), you arrive
at the P-10 factor.

To further confuse things, some areas may enjoy a P-0! In November
1991, Norfolk had an overall P-47 rating for DSN access. However,
during the same timeframe, NAS Alameda was rated at P-0, no trouble
getting onto the DSN. In some cases, a rating of P-60 is not uncommon.

The current top five high-blocking DCTN (Navy) Access Areas are NAS
Moffett Field, NAVSTA San Diego, NAS Lemoore, MCAS El Toro and NAS
Oceana. The P- factors for these areas range from 48 to 65. Funding
will probably not allow the necessary increase in circuits to relieve
the congestion.

OK, so that may explain some of the difficulty in using DSN, but what
about the cost? Again, the military pays a flat rate for DSN service.
Thus, the more you use DSN, the cheaper each call is. If your base
pays $1,000 a month for a DSN line, and you make only two calls, then
each call is $500! Hardly economical. But, if you make 1,000 calls on
the same circuit each month, the individual cost is only $1.

What about using commercial service when the DSN is uncooperative?
While it might not seem at first that substituting commercial calls
for DSN is wasteful, particularly on routine matters, it is. Consider
the office worker in Norfolk who decides to check on his buddy in
California, just a short five-minute DSN call to see how he's doing.

It's not uncommon for every one of the DSN circuits of a particular
base to be busy. But, perhaps one is open at the time the yeoman
places his call to his friend. At the same moment, another worker in
another office has official business to negotiate. He picks up the
phone, but the vacant line is now carrying the yeoman's personal call.
The second worker can't get through. He dials repeatedly, his
frustration and sense of urgency rising with each rapid busy signal.
Finally, he gets permission from his boss to use commercial service.
Now, that $10 commercial call, probably made at the top mid-day rate,
becomes an added expense that might have been saved. Of course, the
usual reaction is that commercial calls are figured into the operating
budget, right along with DSN service. True, but in these times of
drastic budget cuts, it is well to consider how commercial calls can
eat so far into the budget that there may come a time where the base
commander tells his office heads, "Hey! I don't have any money for
outside long-distance calls. Tell your folks to use DSN."

Even with purely official calls, the DSN system is periodically
saturated.  Each November, AT&T notes a huge increase in the number of
calls coming into the Arlington area. All over the world, sailors know
that this is the time when the advancement test scores are released.
Detailers and counselors are deluged with frantic inquiries about the
caller's success or failure in making E-5 or E-6. (For the Air Force,
this busy time is in August, and the place is Texas.) In some
respects, the military, beset with budgetary crunches and operational
concerns, isn't worried about easing the plight of the harried DSN
consumer. Remember, the system was always intended as a command and
control network for high level government and DoD officials. Its use
as a daily communications service for office workers was secondary.

Jim Sage talked about discussions between DISA and DoD. "We try to
lean on the military users. We tell them, 'Look, your circuits are
overloaded, and your people are angry.' We argue with them a lot. But
the real story is simple: DoD is saying that they only have so much
money. 'DISA,' they say, 'you may be 100 percent right, but not only
do we not have the money, but the money we thought we had has been cut
again.' "

"When the Navy in Norfolk says it can't afford the same services any
more, we ask, 'Well, what can you afford?' We try to tailor the
service, but usually end up taking out some of the circuits or
services. And it's going to get worse. In DoD's defense, they're
getting the best bang for their buck. When the DSN lines are saturated
during a busy day, they're getting their money's worth. And if a
crisis arises, those authorized precedence will be able to get through
by pre-empting calls of lesser importance."

Will the service get better? What are the problems now? As in other
areas of current military concern, economics play a large part in
defining DSN in the 1990s and beyond. DISA monitors traffic along its
existing lines, much like those people on the side of a busy
thoroughfare who count cars during the rush hour. An internal program
monitors DSN switches, samples call flow and tells system engineers
what's happening. If the number of calls rises dramatically in a
particular area, DISA adds more trunk lines, although not immediately.

Outside the metropolitan Washington area, near Leesburg, Virginia, in
the small town called Dranesville, AT&T maintains a modern network
control center dedicated to monitoring CONUS DSN operations. One of
the minor phenomena of Autovon and DSN is the so called high and dry
connections. This abortive call occurs when, after getting on the DSN,
and dialing your destination, the connection is completed but all you
hear is ... nothing, dead air.

People usually hang up and try again. Eventually, they manage to
complete their connection. What they don't realize is that the bad
connection -- in reality, the bad circuit, much like a floppy disk's
bad sector -- is still there. Someone else will encounter it; maybe
even the original caller if the system is busy enough. DISA strongly
recommends that consumers call the Dranesville control center and
report a bad connection. The DSN number to Dranesville is 550-1611.

While DISA and DoD have realized substantial savings in the last 15
years -- $94 million, in fact -- that money doesn't go back into the
DoD phone system. A JCS recent study revealed that with an extra
annual $10 million, DISA could offer every CONUS military base a
P-capability. But DoD has other places to spend that money.

As we head toward the turn of the century, DSN will continue evolving
into the planned integrated network its designers envisioned. Voice
and data services will combine into one network for local and
long-haul transmissions, called the Integrated Services Digital
Network (ISDN).

Acknowledgements: I would like to thank Mr. Jim Sage; LTC Stephen
Kubiak, USA; LT Carlene Wilson, USN; and Ms. Beverly Sampson of DISA;
and CDR John Howard and Mr. Ron Olson of NCTC's Network Validation
Department for their help.

About the Author: Mersky is the assistant editor of Approach, the
Naval Aviation Safety Review. He has written or coauthored several
books on Navy and Marine Corps aviation. Mersky is a commander in the
Naval Reserve. He can be reached at Commercial [phone] or DSN
564-7758.

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

This article may be reproduced and redistributed as long as the content
remains the same as the original.











Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa24216;
          30 Oct 92 3:25 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA05621
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 30 Oct 1992 01:13:24 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA03444
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 30 Oct 1992 01:13:07 -0600
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1992 01:13:07 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #812

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 30 Oct 92 01:13:00 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 812

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Bell Canada and Private Information (Alayne McGregor)
    Help With LC Loss Detection on Telenova 1 (Andy Rubin)
    Data Communications Interface (James Bruce Christian)
    Need PT&T Contact in Fiji (Pushpendra Mohta)
    SRI Seeks "Phreaks" for New Study (J. Philip Miller)
    Datapac Customer Service ([e-mail])
    Private Lines, Bandwidth, and Signal Level (Keith Lofstrom)
    MAYA 9600 Baud Modem: Manual Wanted (Mark Schuldenfrei)
    Phone Directory on CD (Ken Jongsma)
    MFS Datanet Announces City-to-City LAN Speed Net (Shrikumar)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1992 18:24:18 -0400
From: [e-mail] (Alayne McGregor)
Subject: Bell Canada and Private Information


The Canadian Radio Television and Telecommunications Commission (the
government agency that regulates telecommunications in Canada) is
currently investigating changes in the tariffs regarding Automatic
Dialing and Answering Devices (i.e. computer-generated junk calls).

To do this, it has asked Bell Canada for some background information
on the number of users of restricted ADADs that it currently serves.
Bell Canada has been rather loath to disclose this information,
perhaps because of the CRTC's recently-announced long-distance
competition decision.

Bell Canada finally responded October 21. I quote:

"At the end of September 1992, the Company's billing records showed
that there were 20 Restricted ADAD users registered with the Company
using a total of # central-office lines.

#  Provided in confidence to the Commission.

Pursuant to Section 350 and 358 of the _Railway Act_ the Company
provides this response in confidence. Disclosure of the service
specific data would assist the Company's existing and potential
competitors in developing more effective business strategies thereby
causing the Company specific direct harm."

I shall leave it to Nigel Allen to explain the history that leads to
the Railway Act governing telecommunications in Canada.

I confess myself somewhat baffled how Unitel would get any competitive
advantage knowing how many lines Bell has sold to ADAD owners.


Alayne McGregor    [e-mail]    [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: It might be that Bell has heard that Unitel would
like to set up a service especially for ADAD owners, with special and
very competitive pricing. Perhaps Bell is also thinking about some
service changes/additions/rate changes involving ADAD owners and they
do not want to tip their hand, thinking Unitel will pull it off first.
I know on a few occassions someone has asked Illinois Bell how many
subscribers they have to one service or another; or how many lines go
 from point A to point B; or even a seemingly innocuous question such
as how many people (a) call the business office each day; (b) use
calling cards at payphones, etc. IBT's answer is its none of your
business. Competitors would love to know how to properly staff their
AOS operations; the most profitable places for pay phones, etc. IBT
says competitors can find out the hard way ... this might be the same
stance Bell Canada is taking with Unitel: let them figure *everything*
out for themselves and hopefully screw up in the process.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Android Rubin)
Subject: Help With LC Loss Detection on Telenova 1
Date: 29 Oct 92 23:33:42 GMT
Organization: Apple Computer Inc., Cupertino, CA


I have an old Telenova 1 PBX.  This system was also sold by Wang.
Telenova is out of business and Wang doesn't support the product
anymore.

I'm hoping someone who reads comp.dcom.telecom either has experience
with this switch, or knows someone who might know someone who might ...

Anyway, my specific problem is that I'm having trouble setting up a
PIU to detect loss of loop current from a CO line.  It seems to be a
software configuration issue, as the activity LED on the COIU flashes
when the telco drops loop after the remote caller hangs up.

I'm also interested in any information about the DTMF signalling that
takes place when using the VMESG voicemail option.  I'm interested in
using my dialogics D41/D card as a voicemail system with this PBX.

About six months ago I tracked down a nice fellow who used to work for
Telenova in Los Gatos, CA.  His new company had purchased the rights
to use the design of the switch, and was re-writing the firmware to
have the switch act as a cellular phone forwarder.  I've since lost
contact with him (Tom Smith), so if you're out there, Tom, please drop
me a line.

Any help will be greatly appreciated.  I'm willing to hire a
consultant to do the necessary work, if I can find one with experience
on this particular switch.


Andy    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (James Bruce Christian)
Subject: Data Communications Interface
Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1992 00:44:49 GMT


Greetings!

    Recently, I ran across three brand new Norstar Meridian Data
Communications interfaces model DC1D.  As far as I can conclude from
the manuals they are 2400 Baud modems designed to be used with the
Norstar system.

    Can anyone tell me what they are worth?  Possibly any other useful
information?


Thanks!

Jim Christian    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Pushpendra Mohta)
Subject: Need PT&T Contact in Fiji
Date: 30 Oct 92 01:20:13 GMT
Organization: CERFnet


CERFnet is trying to provide Internet access next March to an eight
week US research project in Fiji using a 56Kbps leased line. Two of
the big three US IEC's don't provide service to Fiji, and the one that
can is unable to find the PT&T contact in Fiji to provide pricing for
Fiji half of the link!

(Our researcher contact down in Fiji is currently unreachable.)

Can someone point us in the right direction?  Seems to me that this
should all be published and public knowledge.  Email replies will be
appreciated.


Regards,

Pushpendra Mohta              [e-mail]        [phone]
Director of Engineering       [e-mail]     [phone]
CERFNet

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

From: [e-mail] (J. Philip Miller)
Subject: SRI Seeks "Phreaks" for New Study
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 92 11:11:30 CST


[Moderator's Note: Mr. Miller passed this along from a recent issue of
our companion publication, {Computer Undergroud Digest} with a suggestion
that perhaps not all TELECOM Digest readers had seen it.   PAT]

 Forwarded message:
 Date: 20 Oct 1992 18:00:41 -0800
 From: "Stuart Hauser" <[e-mail]>
 Subject: SRI Seeks "Phreaks" for New Study

A team working with Donn Parker at the SRI is gathering information
about the perceived vulnerabilities (and related topics) of the
software and control systems of the public switched telephone and data
networks from the perspective of the hacker community and other
knowledgeable sources.  It is an extension of prior research that Donn
has been carrying on over the past 20 years into the vulnerabilities
of end-user computer systems, also from the perspective of hackers.
Like the other projects, this is a pure research study.

Our objective is to gather our information through face-to-face,
telephone and keyboard interviews of members of the hacker community
and its observers in the next two to four weeks. We are not attempting
to identify and collect information on criminal activities, but rather
on what folks know or hear about the weaknesses and vulnerabilities of
the PSTN/PDNs.  Below is a more complete brief on our interests.

Stuart Hauser

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

Information Sheet for Participants in SRI's Study of the Public
Switched Telephone Network

October 1992

SRI International is conducting a study of the security aspects of
voice and data communications networks, referred to as "Cyberspace" by
some.  Specifically, we are looking at the security of the public
switched telephone networks and public data networks (PSTN/PDN) from
the perspective of the vulnerability of the network management and
control software residing in the switching systems and the computers
that manage them.  This study is part of SRI's ongoing research into
information and communications systems worldwide and how they are
viewed by the international "hacker" community.  We are seeking the
views of many experts-including what we have called "good hackers" for
many years-on a number of issues relating to the security and
vulnerability of the PSTN/PDNs, and on the international "malicious
cracker" community.

We know that the security of the software that controls the PSTN/PDNs
is as important to most hackers as it is to everyone else who is
interested in exploring Cyberspace.  Consequently, we believe that the
good hackers are as interested as we are in helping us and other
PSTN/PDN stakeholders understand what the really malicious crackers
might see as the weaknesses and vulnerabilities of these networks,
what new technologies -- including the use of human engineering
techniques -- they might be planning to use to gain access, and what
they might be planning to do next.

This study is being led and conducted by Donn B. Parker, who has been
conducting this type of research for SRI International and its clients
for the past 20 years, and is well known throughout both the good
hacker and malicious cracker communities.  As in the case of the prior
field research of this kind, Mr. Parker and his associates will be
gathering information through face-to-face interviews of the members
of the hacker community in the United States, Canada, Europe, and
several other countries.

SRI International is a research and consulting organization that is
not owned by any business or government agency; we are not in the law
enforcement or criminal investigation business.  This is a pure
research project to determine the vulnerability and security of the
software that manages and controls the PSTN/PDNs.  Our interests are
very much the same as were those for earlier projects in which our
interests were focused on the vulnerability and security of the now
widely used computer information systems.  We do not work with law
enforcement agencies to collect information on any individual or group
and we will not reveal the names of our information sources unless the
sources ask us to do so.  A summary of our findings will be sent to
you on request after the study has been completed.

By working together in this way, SRI and cooperating information
professionals can help protect the major highways of Cyberspace for
our respective uses and interests.


Donn B. Parker    [e-mail]   [phone]

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

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]
Subject: Datapac Customer Service
Organization: Laurentian University
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1992 16:42:53 GMT


I would like to open an account with Datapac but unfortunately their
customer service number is not listed in the 705 area. I tried directory
assistance and the operator was so misinformed that she told me to call
the 300 bps and ask them. I wonder if somebody could give me the number
reachable from here.


Thanks.


[Moderator's Note: Boy, is that operator behind the times! Anyone
should know these days you would want to call the 2400 bps instead!  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Keith Lofstrom)
Subject: Private Lines, Bandwidth, and Signal Level
Organization: KLIC
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1992 17:44:53 GMT


Around here, a two-ended private line (no switching) costs $6 per
month, and is hard copper wires (direct ohmic connection) from end to
end.  I have been contemplating getting such a line over to a friend's
house to experiment with.

It appears that I can get a pretty high bit rate through such a line
if I drive enough signal at the transmit end and am willing to take a
60dB gain loss through the system -- however, I'm not sure how much
signal I am allowed on a private line.

According to the book "Subscriber Loop Signaling and Transmission
Handbook" by Reeve (IEEE Press, 1992), Part 68 of the FCC rules limits
the metallic voltage level to -15dBV / 8KHz in the 300KHz and above
region, for terminal equipment connected to the the telephone network,
which consists of the "Public Switched Telephone Network and certain
private lines".

On the other hand, an acquaintance who is a data services sales type
for a nearby telephone company assures me that you can shove anything
you want through a hard copper line, up to 50 volts or so -- "after
all, you can put ring voltage through it".  But then, he's a sales
type, and for the wrong company at that.

I suspect the "certain private lines" that are limited by part 68 are
lines that are signal-processed in some way, or otherwise couple to
services that could be affected by the high frequencies/signal levels.
Hard copper lines may not have these restrictions.

Of course, what I can REALLY get away with is what my local telco lets
me get away with, but I thought I would find out what other people
have managed to do in their areas.

Any wire wizards out there who can shed some light?


Keith Lofstrom         [e-mail]       Voice (503)-520-1993

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

From: [e-mail] (Mark Schuldenfrei)
Subject: MAYA 9600 Baud Modem: Manual Wanted
Organization: Progress Software Corp.
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1992 16:51:37 GMT


A friend of mine (with no news access) has a MAYA 9600 Baud modem
(v.32/v.42) which he bought used.  He is having handshaking problems
with the unit, which came without a manual.  Sadly, MAYA has gone out
of business, so there is no way to order one.

Would any of you be able to supply him with a copy, or some help with
resolving his comm. problems?  The name is Mike Bergman, and he can be
reached at a shared account: [e-mail]

Any replies sent to me will be forwarded, but it's best to contact him
directly.  Thanks.


Mark Schuldenfrei ([e-mail])
[I'm just showin' you my opinions: this ain't a gift]

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

Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1992 11:14:48 EST
From: Ken Jongsma <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Phone Directory on CD


In the current {PC Week} there was a small blurb for the following:

Phone Disc: This $149 product includes telephone listings of 70
million U.S. residents plus more than seven million U.S. businesses.
DAK Industries, Inc., of Canoga Park, Calif., can be contacted at
[phone].

I was a bit surprised to see DAK selling this. One usually associates
DAK with closeout merchandise. Perhaps the listings are a bit out of
date?


Kenneth R Jongsma            [e-mail]
Smiths Industries        73115,[e-mail]
Grand Rapids, Michigan             [phone]

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

Date: Fri, 30 Oct 92 00:55:55 -0500
From: [e-mail]
Subject: MFS Datanet Announces City-to-City LAN Speed Net
Organization: UMass, Amherst MA + Temporal Sys & Computer Networks Bombay India


Hi,

Excerpted from comp.newprod ... -- shri

MFS DATANET ANNOUNCES FIRST NATIONAL SERVICE FOR HIGH-SPEED
INTERCONNECTION OF LANS AND CUSTOM NETWORKS

OAKBROOK TERRACE, IL, October 5, 1992 -- MFS Datanet, Inc., ..
announced the first .. network designed to interconnect ...  Local
Area Networks (LANs) at native LAN speeds.

MFS Datanet said that its new national High-speed LAN Interconnect
(HLI) service supports Ethernet, Token Ring, FDDI, ....  [in] December
1992.  ...  Addition to metro LAN interconnection services introduced
in August 1991.

Accessing MFS Datanet's HLI services can be a simple as plugging into
a LAN wall jack connected to MFSCC's fully secured point of presence
in the customer's building. ... [End all CSU/DSU & T1 variations? --
shri]

In addition to native LAN rates of 4, 10, 16, and 100 Mbs, MFS Datanet
also offers fractional data rates ... [What about burst data ...  also
I strained to find words like ATM, but found nothing specific -- shri]

"Coupled with the September 17, 1992 decision by the FCC mandating
interconnection between local exchange carrier and competitive access
provider networks, it means that customers on or off our network, big
or small, can take advantage of our services.

MFSCC subsidiaries include MFS, Inc., the nation's largest
Competitive Access Provider; MFS Network Technologies, Inc., a major
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ?? -- shri
communications systems integrator and facility manager; and MFS
Datanet, Inc., which develops and markets advanced data communications
services.

[Could someone drop a line on what this FCC mandate is ... ? -- shri]


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

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #812
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa07600;
          30 Oct 92 10:18 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA21318
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 30 Oct 1992 07:47:24 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA23770
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 30 Oct 1992 07:47:07 -0600
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1992 07:47:07 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #813

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 30 Oct 92 07:47:00 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 813

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: T-1 For Datacomm (David G. Lewis)
    Re: T-1 For Datacomm (Hans-Gabriel Ridder)
    Re: A Small Tutorial on Networking Stuff (Terry Kennedy)
    Re: A Small Tutorial on Networking Stuff (Lars Poulsen)
    Re: Swiss Phone (Tritel Ronco) - Can it Work? (David Hyams)
    Re: Swiss Phone (Tritel Ronco) - Can it Work? (Thomas Schreiber)
    Re: What is Van Eck Phreaking? (Andrew Emmerson)
    Re: What is Van Eck Phreaking? (Jon Luckey)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (david.g.lewis)
Subject: Re: T-1 For Datacomm
Organization: AT&T
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1992 13:38:48 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> kentrox![e-mail]
(Myron Hattig) writes:

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

>> 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.

Terminology clarification/correction.  All a DSU does is take a data
stream in some (usually user-settable) format and convert it to a
telco-compatible format, such as DDS.  The function that Myron is
describing is actually a combined DSU and DS1 multiplexer.  The DSU
portion turns the data streams (e.g. V.35 or RS-232) into DS0 signals,
and the DS1 mux portion muxes those 24 DS0s into a DS1.

> (64kbs of data x 24) + (8kbps framing/signaling/fdl bits) = 1.544 Mbps.

Or, 24 DS0s x 8 data bits per frame per DS0 = 192 data bits/frame, + 1
framing bit per frame = 193 bits/frame, x 8000 frames/second = 1.544
Mb/s.

> The maximum port rate on a Data Port is (64kbs x 24) = 1.536 Mbps.

Alternately, 192 data bits/frame x 8000 frames/second = 1.536 Mb/s.

> 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.

Again, this is the DS1 mux function.

> 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.

Well ... it depends on how fast and loose you want to play with
terminology.  If by T1 you mean a digital signal comprised of 24
distinct constituent 64kb/s signals, you're correct.  But if by T1 you
mean DS1, you're not correct because a DS1 is *by definition* a
digital signal at the rate of 1.544 Mb/s.  The fact that a lot of
applications happen to form that digital signal by multiplexing and
framing 24 individual DS0s is happy coincidence.

That's one reason I personally try to avoid the term T1.  A DS1 is a
digital signal (meeting certain standards on level, pulse shape, and
so on) at 1.544 Mb/s.  A channelized DS1 is a DS1 with 24 explicit
DS0s, and some sort of framing, either D4/SF or ESF.  An unframed DS1
is a DS1 with no explicit framing, and a full 1.544 Mb/s available for
user data.

> No device can connect to a T1 service without these overhead bits.

If the T1 is what I would call a channelized DS1, you're correct.
However, not all T1 service is channelized.  Some carriers offer
unframed DS1 service.  If your DS1 is to be used for 24 DS0s, it's in
your best interest to have a channelized DS1, because performance
monitoring is enhanced (particularly with ESF framing). But if you
just need a fat pipe, an unframed DS1 is what you want.

> By the way, a Channel Service Unit (CSU) just retransmits the data
> portion of a T1 signal after striping the received framing bits.

Well, not quite.  A CSU is, in its raw form, a DS1 repeater in a
customer premises box.  Of course, these days it's a lot more complex,
and has nifty performance-monitoring features and ESF Facilities Data
Link communications functions and other good stuff.  It doesn't strip
any framing bits, though (aside from manipulating, for example, the
ESF FDL and Cyclic Redundancy Check bits).

> 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.

Again, not quite.  Telcos require a CSU at the termination of a
metallic DS1 so that the transmitted signal can reach the first
repeater, as well as providing the neat functions above.  The CSU *is*
CPE, though.  The actual demarcation (Network Interface) is usually an
RJ48 jack or a DSX panel.

Companies that provide DS1 over fiber optic systems may require a CSU for
loopback, ESF PM, and other functions, but it's not technically required if
the customer equipment is sufficiently close to the FOT.  When I worked at
Teleport, we never required a CSU; we handed off service on a RJ48X smart
jack or a DSX-1.  (Not requiring a CSU was one selling point, although it
didn't endear us to companies like, well, ADC Kentrox ...)

> 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.

Also not quite; unframed DS1s can go over a public network, and if
they do, may need a CSU.  However, it would have to be a CSU that
supports unframed DS1s, and I don't know who makes these.

> A Digital something? Cross Connect something? (DACS)

Digital Access and Crossconnect System.

> 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.


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

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

From: Hans Ridder <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: T-1 For Datacomm
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation - DECwest Engineering
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1992 18:07:20 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> kentrox![e-mail]
(Myron Hattig) writes:

> By the way, a Channel Service Unit (CSU) just retransmits the data
> portion of a T1 signal after striping the received framing bits.

Er, I hate to take on a guy from Kentrox, but I don't think this is
correct.  How could the DSU/MUX/PBX pick out the channels without the
framing bit?  The only thing I'm aware of that a CSU does is terminate
the spanned power (if used,) and "enforce" the ones-density
requirement.  (And possibly transmit keep-alives if the DSU dies, I
forget, it's been awhile.)

> 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.

In my experience this is correct.  If you have a T1 span which does
not go through a DACS, you can use the whole 1.544Mbps for data.  If
there's a DACS, the best you can get is 1.534Mbps.  Also in my
experience, most of the telco folks will *not* be able to tell you if
you need framing (or even who is supposed to provide clocking!)  I
just tried it and used it if it worked.


Hans-Gabriel Ridder <[e-mail]>
DECwest Engineering   Bellevue, Washington, USA

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

From: Terry Kennedy <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: A Small Tutorial on Networking Stuff
Organization: St. Peter's College, US
Date: 30 Oct 92 04:45:14 EST
Organization: St. Peter's College, US


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Randal L.
Schwartz) 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.

  I beg to differ. The Internet hostmaster at NIC.DDN.MIL is
responsible for all registration services for MILNET hosts, and for
some services for US non-MILNET hosts. The hostmaster is not
responsible for non-US non- MILNET hosts, nor for certain registration
functions for US non-MILNET hosts, such as the user directory (see
recent postings here regarding the Internet White Pages for exactly
what functions the NIC performs). Thus, there needs to be a
registration authority for the non-us domains.

> 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.)

  Please look at the US-DOMAIN.TXT file, available from NIC.DDN.MIL
and some other servers. It says (in part):

 ... [Jan 1992] ... Because many computers in the United States are
already registered in the COM, EDU, and other top level domains,
relatively few computers are currently registered in the US domain.
However the US Domain is beginning to grow. It is expected than many
more computers of all types and belonging to all sizes of
organizations will be registered in the US Domain. Large organizations
or companies are also encouraged to register in the US Domain.

> Sigh.  So much bickering.

So much misinformation. Sorry, no smiley.

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

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

Date: Fri, 30 Oct 92 03:39:43 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Lars Poulsen)
Subject: Re: A Small Tutorial on Networking Stuff
Organization: CMC Network Systems (Rockwell DCD), Santa Barbara, CA, USA


Thanks for your "clarifying notes" on X.400.

Others have already commented on your minor misunderstandings of
Internet mail transfer agents, so I won't belabor those; they weren't
important from a user perspective.

But your posting illustrates quite well the dark side of X.400, and
confirms my point about the user-unfriendlyness of X.400:

- X.400 was developed by a committee with total disregard for the
  practical useability of the system by the end user.

- X.400 will not be practical until there is a global X.500 directory
  seamlessly interconnected. At that time a whole new generation of
  user agents will have to be written to take advantage of the directory
  facilities.

- If and when the global directory actually becomes workable (and it is
  still not clear that it will scale well) such enhanced user agents can
  equally well be written for RFC821/RFC822 mailers.

The Internet Domain Name System is in fact a first demonstration of a
distributed directory. It works fairly well, but only because it was
designed to be strictly hierarchically structured. The replication
agents required to synchronize the more ambitious X.500 direstory
systems will require a lot of traffic to maintain.

X.500 directory protocols are of a complexity level similar to SQL. I
have heard knowledgeable people suggest that it is in fact harder to
implement an X.500 engine capable of performing the searches described
in your examples than to build an SQL engine. And then it has to be
able to synchronize retrievals from multiple servers that may have
different record formats.

Throughout the Internet Protocol Suite there is an emphasis on making
the protocols simple enough to implement reliably. It is no accident
that the Internet is growing by 15% per month in every measure:

 - number of hosts
 - number of users
 - traffic volume
 - number of networks reachable from the national backbone.

As the business world discovers the Internet (and they are learning
fast; almost every month there are tutorial articles in {Datamation},
{MacWeek}, etc) this growth will acellerate. Senator Albert Gore from
Tennesee has repeatedly sponsored legislation that will eventually
turn the major research networks sponsored by the U.S. government into
a "National Data Highway System". I expect that this will be a
cornerstone in a Clinton/Gore industrial policy program. Once the
"acceptable use policy" restrictions are lifted from the NREN
backbone, RFC822 mail will truly be the lingua franca of public and
private electronic mail systems from FIDOnet to UUCP mail.


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] (David Hyams)
Subject: Re: Swiss Phone (Tritel Ronco) - Can it Work?
Organization: Ascom Autelca AG, Guemligen, Switzerland
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1992 08:16:38 GMT


[e-mail] (A virtually vegetal non-entity) writes:

> Any advice?

I've asked around and it seems that it will probably work, but you'll
have to do something about the cabling first. The problem is that the
connection cable has four wires in it, only two of which are used for
carrying the phone signals. Needless to say, the Swiss and Americans
can't agree which of these wires are used to carry the signals. If I
remember correctly, the US uses the inner two, while the Swiss use the
outer two (although I'm not 100% sure ...) You'll have to remove the
plug and have a play with the wiring until the phone starts working.

> Aside from the usual ten number push buttons (arranged in two rows),
> it also has an asterisk, octothorpe (#), "H", "D", large dot, and
> double up-arrow buttons.

The 'H' button is for 'HOLD', 'D' is for 'DATA', 'large dot' is a
recall button (I think), while the double up-arrow is last number
redial.  BTW, do american phones have these buttons, and if so, how
are they marked? Are there any international standards for these
things?

> On the back is a simple switch with "IMP" (presumably pulse dial)
> and "FO" (touch tone?) positions.

Correct.

> Can any of our Swiss readers assist?

Well, I'm not Swiss but I do live here -- is that ok?


David Hyams   Bern, Switzerland

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

From: [e-mail] (Thomas Schreiber)
Subject: Re: Swiss Phone (Tritel Ronco) - Can it Work?
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Ascom Autelca AG, Switzerland
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1992 10:37:59 GMT


In article [e-mail], [e-mail] (A virtually vegetal
non-entity) writes:

> Now: can I use it?  Unclear.  It has an RJ-11 on its back, and the
> handset uses the standard "small" RJ (does this one have a number)
> that I'm used to on all my other phones.  However, when I plug it in,
> I get dead silence.

The problem is, that the Swiss wiring of a RJ-11 is not the same as in
the US (as elsewhere in the world I think). I'm not a specialist in
wiring phones at all, but as I know, the two wires with the colours
blue and white are the phone line. I think in the US they are supposed
to be in the middle of the four pins of a RJ-11.

> Any advice?  The phone has "Tritel Ronco" written on the handset.
> Aside from the usual ten number push buttons (arranged in two rows),
> it also has an asterisk, octothorpe (#), "H", "D", large dot, and
> double up-arrow buttons.  On the back is a simple switch with "IMP"
> (presumably pulse dial) and "FO" (touch tone?) positions.  Can any of
> our Swiss readers assist?

IMP means pulse dialing, FO is touch tone.  I'm not quite shure about
the special buttons for the Tritel Ronco. But I have a phone out of
the same product family. The features for those buttons are there: "H"
means Hold. This holds the line for 20 seconds. It can be used if you
want to move to another phone in another room, or so. You just can
push this button and put the handset back. After 20 seconds the line
will be disconnected.  "D" means Data Mode. This is used to transmit
the identification code to a mailbox or so (touch tone).  Just try it;
I hope it works and you enjoy this nice little Swiss phone.


Thomas Schreiber AV-FES4.5 / Ascom Autelca AG / CH-3073 Guemligen / Switzerland
Email : [e-mail]    Voice: [phone]
                    FAX:   [phone]
X:400: G=Thomas / S=Schreiber / OU=Autelca / O=Ascom / P=EUnet / A=Arcom / C=ch

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

Date: Fri, 30 Oct 92 08:12 GMT
From: Andrew Emmerson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: What is Van Eck Phreaking?
Reply-To: [e-mail]


It is the act of reading the screen of a computer VDU screen from a
distance, e.g. from outside someone else's premises. It involves
tuning into higher-rate harmonics of the VDU's line frequency with a
TV tuner, then re-inserting syncs to stabilise the image. So called
because a Dutchman named van Eck wrote a paper on the subject in the
course of his duties in the Dutch PTT Laboratories. It is not
phreaking as we know it; ELINT or electronic eavesdropping would be a
better description.


Andy Emmerson G8PTH/G9BUP [phone] voice, [phone] fax

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

From: [e-mail] (Jon Luckey)
Subject: Re: What is Van Eck Phreaking?
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1992 00:26:38 GMT


[e-mail] writes:

> Just a quick query.  Can someone explain to me what is Van Eck
> phreaking?

Well, I wouldn't have put the term 'phreaking' in there, but Van Eck
is a method of reading what's on a CRT (monitor) screen remotely by
tuning in on the RF noise caused by CRT drive circuitry.

Basically it duplicates what appears on the CRT by listening to radio
noise of the electronics.  There is a goverment specification called
Tempest, which deals with making computer systems that are resistant
to being spied on in this manner.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #813
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa29902;
          2 Nov 92 2:01 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA11991
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 1 Nov 1992 21:26:11 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA11007
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 1 Nov 1992 21:25:57 -0600
Date: Sun, 1 Nov 1992 21:25:57 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #816

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 1 Nov 92 21:26:00 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 816

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Computerized Sales Call "Locked" My Line (Todd Lawrence)
    Re: Private Lines, Bandwidth, and Signal Level (Macy Hallock)
    Re: Stolen Cell Phone (Paul Houle)
    Re: Use of Kerberos for Cellular Phone Protection? (Craig R. Watkins)
    Re: Very Weird Telephone Problem (Barton F. Bruce)
    Re: Guyana Phone System (was Area Code 610) (Gerald Ruderman)
    Re: Radio Modems (Steve Schear)
    Re: Autovon: The Dod Phone Company (David Leibold)
    Re: Non-Critical, Real-Real-Cheap International Bandwidth (H. Hallikainen)
    Re: Phone Directory on CD (Steve Rothman)
    Re: Need PT&T Contact in Fiji (Carl Moore)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Computerized Sales Call "Locked" My Line
From: [e-mail] (Todd Lawrence)
Date: Sun, 01 Nov 92 20:54:12 CST
Organization: (What? Organized??) - Mythical Computer Systems


[e-mail] (Martin Soques) writes:

> Greetings!  Last night, I received a computerized sales/sleeze call
> which essentially "locked" my line and prevented me from getting a
> dial tone no matter what I did with my switch hook.  I found this
> disturbing since I could not hang up on this unsolicited call.  Is

> [Moderator's Note: You did not hang up *long enough*. Had you stayed
> off the line for maybe 20-30 seconds the sales robot would have gotten
> cut off. But each time you disconnected for a few seconds then went

Just a quick note, (and judging from the poster's address of Austin,
this really wouldn't apply to him).  Keeping the switchook closed for
an extended period of time will disconnect you regardless of the
callers switchook condition in an ESS or Crossbar environment, however
in a Step by Step system, if the calling party is served by the same
CO (same prefix), the calling party will be unable to disconnect no
matter how long you leave the switchook closed ... (there are a few
SxS still out there!)


Todd Lawrence
Internet:  [e-mail]     uucp:  uunet!valinor!todd

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

Date: Sun, 01 Nov 92 18:17 EST
From: fmsys![e-mail] (Macy Hallock)
Subject: Re: Private Lines, Bandwidth, and Signal Level
Organization: The Matrix


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

> Around here, a two-ended private line (no switching) costs $6 per
> month, and is hard copper wires (direct ohmic connection) from end to
> end.  I have been contemplating getting such a line over to a friend's
> house to experiment with.

That's an extraordinarily cheap rate in today's telco tariff climate.
Most "special service" circuits have seen substantial rate hikes in
the last few years.  Around here, a similar circuit has gone from
$7.50/mo in 1984 to $60.00/mo.  I have noted that the rate took its
most substantial increase about the same time the telco's started
aggressively marketing Centrex.  I wonder if the intent was to protect
Centrex against off-premise stations off PBX systems ...?

> It appears that I can get a pretty high bit rate through such a line
> if I drive enough signal at the transmit end and am willing to take a
> 60dB gain loss through the system -- however, I'm not sure how much
> signal I am allowed on a private line.

You are correct. Depending on several variables, you can do this
several ways.

The cheapest way: if the pairs are not loaded (likely if you are less
than 5000 cable feet from the C.O.) you can use a two wire line driver
by RAD, Patton Electronics or Black Box.  This will get you up to
38,400 bps async, depending on the distance.  Be sure you get the two
wire model.  Consider adding additional lightning protection, while
you are at it.  Cost: about $145 each end.

There are better quality two wire high speed line drivers, but the are
"oddballs" to most datacom houses.  You might be able to pick up a
pair of ARK or Gandalf "LDM" limited distance modems to do this from a
surplus house.  Be sure you get two wire units.  Cost: Whatever you
can bargain.

Next cheapest: use a pair of inexpensive V.32bis modems with a leased
line option in the software.  This will get you 14,400bps, more if you
can use compression.  The interface rate for RS-232 will most likely
be 19,200 or 38,400.  This will work with both loaded and unloaded
cable pairs, BTW.  Cost: about $300 each end.

Another way: again for unloaded cable ... get a pair of UDS or other
56kbps CSU/DSU's.  These will run at 64kbps or 56kbps at sync or async
on a four wire metallic circuit.  Cost: about $700 each end.  V.35 or
RS232 interface available.

These are all solutions that can be done yourself (I have).


Macy Hallock  +1.216.723.3000  Fax [phone]  [e-mail]
F M Systems, Inc.  150 Highland Drive  Medina, OH USA     [e-mail]

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

Date: Sun, 01 Nov 92 23:18:48 MST
From: [e-mail] (Paul Houle)
Subject: Re: Stolen Cell Phone
Organization: New Mexico Tech


> [Moderator's Note: I wish you would elaborate a little further on this
> and how you think Kerberos could be implemented in cellular phones. I
> suspect it would be (almost) totally foolproof. How would you do it?
> How would the legitimate user get his 'ticket' each time?    PAT]

    The fundamental problem with cell phone security is that all
call information is sent "in the clear".  Presumably with a properly
configured scanner and computer, a person could intercept the ESN and
other information that is sent out every time a person uses his
cellular phone and eventually accumulate a rather long list of valid
numbers to use at will.  If the phreaker uses every number only once,
it would be difficult to catch him, although if the cellphone people
were about as ruthless as Bell was with the blue boxers, it might be
able to catch some of them (using traffic analysis or tapping lines
and having radiolocation cars ready to scramble).

    With a serious modification in the design of the phones,
public key cryptography technology could be applied here.  A private
key that is stored in a ROM on the cellular phone could be used to
sign random test messages sent by the cellular base.  The base could
verify the signature with a copy of the public key.  The public key
could then be sent in the clear, and it would do little good to
would-be cellular hackers.  The same technology could even be used to
encrypt the voice if it is sent digitally, which would provide real
security (at last!) to radio communications.  The only way that this
system could be beat would be (a) combinational attack (which could be
made arbitrarily difficult by using long keys), (b) copying the
private key from somebody's phone (which presumably would require the
phreaker to actually take physical possession of the phone and to
tamper with it), or (c) acquisition of codes at the site where the
phones are made.

    (b) looks like it could be a real problem.  I go buy a phone
with false I.D. and sell copies of the private key to hundreds of
people, then disappear when the bill comes.

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

From: Craig R. Watkins <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Use of Kerberos for Cellular Phone Protection?
Date: 01 Nov 92 15:21:26 EST
Organization: HRB Systems, Inc.


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

> To TELECOM Digest, I ask Pat, what is Kerberos and what is a 'ticket'?

Kerberos is an authentication system used to authenticate entities to
each other on a network.  To even go into its design goals might take
more space than we should bother with here and you don't want to hear
it from me, anyway.  You might want to start out with the paper
/pub/kerberos/doc/usenix.txt (or usenix.PS) on aeneas.mit.edu.  Also
see techplan.txt and other documents in that directory for more
information.

A ticket is a credential which you hand to another entity to prove to
them that you are who you say you are.  Very basically this is done by
encrypting information with a key that is shared by the two interested
parties or by the parties and a third trusted party (so that this
trust can be conveyed to others).  (See?  I'm almost ready to write a
few more pages (poorly) explaining this -- see the papers I referenced
above instead.)

>> How would / could you implement Kerberos for use on cellular phones?

One might argue that something as sophisticated as Kerberos does not
need to be implemented for authentication for cellular phones.  All
one would need to do is to "share a secret" with your cellular
provider.  You would program an encryption key into your phone (eg a
64-bit number) which you would also tell your cellular provider.  Your
cellular provider might send you a "challenge" which you would encrypt
with your key and send back to the provider.  The provider would do
the same and be able to verify that you are who you say you are.  This
is "private key encryption."  When done correctly, it is computationally
unreasonable to deduce your private key from monitoring this exchange.

One might also argue that Kerberos' extension of trust methods might
be able to expand to be used between cellular providers to authenticate
roamers.

Another option would be to use "public key encryption" where each
party has one public key (which is published to the world) and one
private key (which is known only to its owner).  An advantage here is
that only the cellular phone needs to know the private key; the phone
could compute both the private and public key and then only display
the public key for the user to provide to the cellular company.  The
rest would be similar to a private key method.

Basically, there are fairly well understood technologies for
implementing more reliable authentication than we have now.


Craig R. Watkins    [e-mail]
HRB Systems, Inc.   [phone]

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

From: Barton F. Bruce <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Very Weird Telephone Problem
Organization: Cambridge Computer Associates, Inc.
Date: 01 Nov 92 14:49:55 EDT


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (David
Fiedler) writes:

> The phone rang a third time. This time it *was* my sister on the
> line, but it was a very bad connection, as if she was in Argentina or
> something. I asked her if she had called me the previous two times,
> and she said, "No, I just got home. And anyway, you just called *me*".
> We determined that we had *each* heard the phone ring, and picked it
> up, and found ourselves connected to each other!

Any relatives that might play cute games conferencing both you
together and at the same time hoping to hear something of interest as
they listened in?

> This was so weird that the MCI customer service lady actually
> suggested exorcism. I wasn't about to admit to her that my wife and I
> had already looked in the mirror to make sure we weren't already dead,

If this is the case, although it could be some other 'being' causing
the connection to be setup, it could be also be just one of you at
either end not being fully aware of 'other' abilities, and exorcism
would then hardly be appropriate. This is the wrong news group for
that sort of thing, though.

I would be very curious to see what does or does not show up on phone
bills.

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

From: [e-mail] (Gerald Ruderman)
Subject: Re: Guyana Phone System (was Area Code 610)
Organization: Rational Systems, Inc.
Date: Sun, 1 Nov 1992 00:09:56 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> David Lesher <wb8foz@SCL.
CWRU.Edu> writes:

>> [Moderator's Note: There are a bunch of internationally based phone
>> services in New Jersey advertised to people all over the world.

>> The services directed to Americans are located in the Netherland
>> Antilles and one is in Georgetown, Guyana.

> I spent 30+ days in Georgetown two years ago, and have returned since.
> The phone service there is as bad as Havana, and far worse than, say,
> Poland was. I regularly got local calls abandoned, likely due to the
> lack of interoffice trunkage. If you called back several times,

I'm making this up as I go along. IOW I don't know what I am talking
about.  If I wanted to set up a scam I could do the following:

    Find a country with very bad telephone service.

    Make a deal with them to get a good percentage from incoming
international calls to a certain range of numbers.

    Go to the neighboring country that provides the connection to the
outside world for phone service.

    Make a deal with the PTT there to have calls to these numbers fed
not to the country they are directed to, but to my operation.

    Advertise, etc and count the money.

    So a customer calls the number, it gets to someplace with
great phone service. The call does not get forwarded to the
destination country.  My "operators" do whatever. The customer gets a
bill for internation calls and someone else does the collection for
me. Passes it along to the PTT in the target etc.

    The beauty is complaints. The customers have to direct them to
a country with (or is it without) phone service from hell. "Its not my
fault you can't all the Kamchatka PTT."

Warning: I do not advocate doing this, but if you do please tell me
how it goes.


Gerald Ruderman    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Schear)
Subject: Re: Radio Modems
Organization: Cylink Corp.
Date: Sun, 01 Nov 92 22:35:54 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> patrick%8461.span@Fedex.
Msfc.Nasa.Gov (Patrick E. Meyer) writes:

> Can anyone please suggest companies that I can contact about radio
> modems.

Cylink manufacturers a family of Direct Sequence Spread Spectrum radio
modems.  Operating in the 902-928 MHZ ISM band they provide
full-duplex, point-to-point unlicensed links of up to ten miles
(line-of-sight) at data rate of 64-256 kbps.  If you'd like more info,
drop me a line.


Steve Schear    N7ZEZ
Cylink, Inc.
310 N. Mary Ave.
Sunnyvale CA 94086
[phone]; FAX -6645
e-mail: [e-mail]

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

Date: Sun, 01 Nov 92 21:43:25 EST
From: David Leibold <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Autovon: The Dod Phone Company


Besides the noteworthy history of Autovon recently posted as a Digest
special issue, the archives also contain an excerpt from an Autovon
phone book under the file name "autovon.instructions". This is
supplemental to the information in the recent posting and also
contains details on what the various "flash" priorities do and who can
use them.


[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Harold Hallikainen)
Subject: Re: Non-Critical, Real-Real-Cheap International Bandwidth Wanted
Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo
Date: Sun, 01 Nov 1992 07:10:45 GMT


    It seems that for this application, a voice circuit is
overkill.  Do international carriers offer packet data transmission on
a "space available" basis?  It seems that if there is room for "one
more phone call" on a circuit, there's room for 64 kbps of data that
could be divided among various users on a space available basis.  Each
packet sent by a user could include a "priority" code that would
determine who gets to go and who gets to wait.  Higher priority codes
would cost more per bit.

    In such a system, the highest priority would probably go to
voice calls.  If the circuit is not fully loaded with voice, then the
various data users could put their data on the circuit, on a space
available, priority code basis.  Those of us that just need to get the
data there sometime (not right now) would get lower rates since our
use could be preempted by a higher priority code.

    This is how I envision internet working (though I don't really
know anything about how it does work).  It would seem that highest
priority is given to interactive data use (telnet), then, perhaps,
ftp, then mail, then news.  It's cost effective to keep the circuits
loaded, yet does not slow down high priority traffic.

    Just some thoughts ...


Harold

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

Date: Sun, 01 Nov 92 09:43:53 EST
From: [e-mail] (Steve Rothman)
Subject: Re: Phone Directory on CD


> Phone Disc: This $149 product includes telephone listings of 70
> million U.S. residents plus more than seven million U.S. businesses.

Do these new telephone listing CD-ROMs contain addresses, as well as
names and phone numbers? Can they be searched by phone number (and
address, if contained), or just by name?


Steve Rothman

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

Date: Sun, 01 Nov 92 11:49:53 EST
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Need PT&T Contact in Fiji


This may end up coming across as a joke, but:

Wasn't it AT&T that had the ad about someone being connected
erroneously to Fiji?  Apparently, that (fictional) connection was not
via the carrier running the ad.  Does that advertiser consider
real-life connections to Fiji?

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #816
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa29939;
          2 Nov 92 2:02 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA05930
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 1 Nov 1992 19:32:48 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA07737
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 1 Nov 1992 19:32:35 -0600
Date: Sun, 1 Nov 1992 19:32:35 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #814

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 1 Nov 92 19:32:38 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 814

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    ISDN and Stuff ([e-mail])
    Recommendations on ISDN System For Office (Thomas B. Clark III)
    Re: ISDN in Irving, Texas (Bob Blackshaw)
    Digital Spread Spectrum Cordless Phone (Howard Gayle)
    Popfone Applies For Portable Phone Net in Canada (David Leibold)
    Bell Atlantic to Cut 4,000 Jobs (Washington Post via Paul Robinson)
    V2.2bis Line Monitor? (J. R. Pendleton)
    When Were Round Plugs and Jacks Invented? (Jim Haynes)
    Latest from Japan: Cordless Home PBXs (Jim Gottlieb)
    Calling Card Fraud (Steve Kass)
    Straw Poll Results! Guess Who Won the Election! (Phydeaux)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sun, 01 Nov 92 14:42:45 -0500
From: Doctor Math <[e-mail]>
Subject: ISDN and Stuff


The rumors are true: the University where I work is getting a new
phone system.  I actually got to talk to a local RBOC representative
about it, so I found out the following:

We're getting a nice shiny new DMS-100 and new Northern Telecom
phones.  This DMS-100 will presumably have a fiber connection to the
#5ESS which is "downtown".  The phones are hybrid: analog voice path,
digital signalling between the phone and the switch; analog devices
(read: FAX machine) require a special line card which provides a POTS
connection.

The DMS-100 will have ISDN capability, and the switch that serves the
town around the University will be made ISDN capable. Thus, with
enough CPE, it will be possible to make ISDN calls from my house to
the University.  Great, I'm so excited ... now the hard part.

Let't suppose that I want to set up a low-bandwidth Internet connection
between here and my house. My options are:

1. Get a fast modem (under $300) and set up a SLIP connection on an
   UNmeasured residential line. Since the call isn't measured, I can
   just leave the connection up all the time.

2. Get an ISDN line ($???) and an ISDN adaptor ($1200 from Hayes).
   Since ISDN service IS measured,  try to use it as little as possible.

Obviously, the ISDN route will cost lots more.  According to the rep,
ISDN service is supposed to be attractively priced to people who wish
to use it to replace some sort of four-wire leased-line service.

Question: Why are things this way? When current modem technology
approaches the speed of one ISDN B-channel over an unmeasured dial-up
line for one-fourth the CPE cost and less than half the base monthly
charge, why would I want ISDN? Why is it that current analog lines are
either "unmeasured" (residential) or "measured" (business), yet most
ISDN is measured regardless of who's using it (and charged at a higher
rate if it's for data)?  Finally, a request: does anyone maintain some
sort of ISDN availability information? Not RBOC hype ("We plan to have
ISDN in 94% of our state by the year 1997."), but real price and
availability information? I am curious to see how much the various
RBOCs are charging for ISDN and how available it is becoming in
various places around the country. I'll even maintain a price chart
for the TELECOM Digest if people are interested.

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

From: [e-mail] (Thomas B. Clark III)
Subject: Recommendations on ISDN System For Office
Organization: UNC-CH School of Medicine
Date: Sun, 01 Nov 1992 17:49:50 GMT


My department at University of North Carolina is looking toward buying
a new office telephone system.  The university now has a digital
switch and can provide us with ISDN service.

We will need about 40 extensions and 15 or so trunk lines, 10 of which
will be dedicated to individuals.

We would like to interface with the university's voice mail system,
and to have it turn on message lights on the telephones.  We would
also like to interface with a dictation system.  We need toll call
accounting and restriction.

The university's telecom department keeps proposing outdated analog
systems that we have no interest in.  Does anybody have suggestions
for systems that we might look at?  E-mail to me, and if there is a
significant number of responses I will forward a summary to the
Moderator.  Thanks.

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

From: [e-mail] (Bob Blackshaw)
Subject: Re: ISDN in Irving, Texas
Organization: Corporation for Open Systems
Date: Sun, 01 Nov 1992 14:23:34 GMT


In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (R. Steven
Rainwater) writes:

> Our company is planning on developing some software that will take
> advantage of ISDN BRI services.  To this end we asked GTE to install
> two ISDN BRI lines at our office.  We were pleasantly suprised at the
> rates: $17 per line vs.  about $40 per line for our standard analog

[ some deletions]

> Can anyone direct me to information on how we can get from the two
> wires on our wiring block to an RJ45 jack and perhaps offer an
> explanation of what this power supply is that we "might" need?
> Hopefully, the terminal adapter can provided whatever power might be
> needed to the line.

What you need in addition to your terminal adapters is a network
interface device (NT1 in ISDN parlance). The two wire line from GTE is
the U interface, an echo-cancelling 80 kbaud line using the 2B1Q line
encoding. Your adapter devices have an S/T interface, which is four
wire 192 kbits full duplex 2B+D interface.

This is why you need the NT1 device which converts between the two
different protocols on the U and S/T interfaces. As to power, the NT1
will most likely have some instructions. Under ISDN, the telco no
longer is required to provide the 48 volts as in analog service.  This
is to prepare for the days when we go fibre (damned hard to push DC
down a piece of glass :-) )

> Also, one additional problem has come up with GTE.  The manual for the
> terminal adapter indicates that the device needs to be programmed with
> two numbers; a Terminal Endpoint Identifier (TEI), and a Service
> Profile Identifier (SPID).  We are told to get these numbers from the
> phone company but, once again, GTE claims they have no knowledge of
> these things.  I've gotten numbers for several higher up GTE people
> and will keep plugging away at this one, but, in the meantime, does
> anyone know of a way to determine these two numbers from my end?  We
> are on an AT&T 5ESS switch, if that makes any difference.

No, you get the TEI and SPID from the switch at initialization time.
You need to get hold of Bellcore Publication SR-NWT-001953 which
covers all of the CPE requirements for National ISDN-1, the ISDN
service that is going in all over the U.S. The AT&T 5ESS should not
make any difference since that is what National ISDN-1 is all about.
The three major switch manufacturers have agreed to implement the same
interface.


Bob

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

Date: Sun, 01 Nov 92 08:15:56 PST
From: [e-mail] (Howard Gayle)
Subject: Digital Spread Spectrum Cordless Phone
Reply-To: [e-mail]


A short article in "The Consumer Electronics Edge" (Nov. 1992, p. 5)
describes the Escort 9000 cordless phone from Cincinnati Microwave.
It's said to use "digital spread spectrum technology" in the 902-928
MHz band to give greater range and more privacy.  The price is given
as "about $350" and the availability as "early next year."  The
address of Cincinnati Microwave is 5200 Fields-Ertel Rd., Cincinnati,
OH 45249, USA.  Phone [phone].

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

Date: Sun, 01 Nov 92 19:06:15 EST
From: David Leibold <[e-mail]>
Subject: Popfone Applies For Portable Phone Net in Canada


There are plans by the Canadian Department of Communications to award
licenses for portable cordless phone networks. {The Toronto Star}
reports that the Popfone consortium will apply for a license. Popfone
consists of Call-Net (long distance company), Maclean Hunter (cable,
pager operator), Charles Sirois (who at least a few months ago was
Teleglobe Canada chief) and others.

Popfone hopes to franchise out base stations to such businesses as
corner stores and major attractions. Unlike a cellular network, there
won't be end-to-end ownership of facilities with Popfone.

This is presumably the CT2 cordless phone standard, described as being
somewhere between a pager and a cell phone. There are hopes that four
million such phones could be in operation within five years, compared
to the present one million cellular subscribers. Such phones are
intended for operation within 100 metres of a base station, as opposed
to the wide coverage on a cellular system.


[e-mail]

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

Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
Date: Sun, 01 Nov 1992  17:32:31 EST
Subject: Bell Atlantic to Cut 4,000 Jobs


Business Digest, October 30, 1992, {Washington Post}, Page F2

Bell Atlantic Chairman Raymond W. Smith told securities analysts in
New York that the company would cut 4,000 jobs by the end of this
year, in addition to the 3,200 that were eliminated last year.  Smith
said Bell Atlantic will cut costs by $225 million in the next few
years.

       ---

AT&T will invest $402 million in TPC-5, the first transpacific
fiber-optic system using optical amplifiers.  The $1.12 billion TPC-5
network will be a 15,500 mile loop that links the mainland United
States with Hawaii, Guam and Japan.

       ---

The Audio Home Recording Act of 1992, which supporters say will open
the way for mass marketing of digital recording equipment for home
stereo systems, was signed into law by President Bush.

       ---

Legislation that regulates the use of 900-number calling services and
makes it harder to intercept calls made on cellular telephones with
special scanning equipment was signed by President Bush.

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

From: [e-mail] (J. R. Pendleton)
Subject: V2.2bis Line Monitor Help Needed
Date: 01 Nov 92 19:17:57 GMT
Organization: Employer not involved in this.


I have a problem where I have a number of phone lines coming into what
could be called a concentrator (eight in, one out).

The incoming lines are 2400 bps standard modems.  I would like the
capability to monitor traffic both directions.  I need to monitor the
telephone line rather than the RS-232 out of the modems.

I envision a inductive pickup, that I could clamp onto the telco
lines, some sort of modem that will demodulate both sides and some
sort of data capture scope.

Does such a critter exist?  If so, could one of the kind readers give
me a pointer to such a device, or am I out of luck and have to build
one?

Many thanks.


Jerry Pendleton

J. R. Pendleton, who does not speak for Key Computer Labs or Amdahl Inc.
 uucp: [e-mail]  Voice : [phone]  Amateur : KC6RTO

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

From: [e-mail] (Jim Haynes)
Subject: When Were Round Plugs and Jacks Invented?
Date: 1 Nov 1992 08:31:08 GMT
Organization: University of California; Santa Cruz


I was just looking at an old telegraphy book dated 1903 -- of course
it may be older and just reprinted or revised at that date.  I was
surprised to see no round plugs and jacks in there.  I thought they
were in use by that date.  By "round" I mean the familiar 1/4-inch
diameter "phone" plug that is still in use today.

What were shown in the book included:

The old kind of switchboard where a tapered plug with an insulated
handle is stuck into a hole between two pieces of metal to connect
them together.

A two-conductor plug and cord which looked like it could be inserted
in place of the solid tapered plug in the above kind of switchboard.

Flat plugs with cords, to be put into a clip jack.  The plug has two
flat blades of metal with an insulator between them, forming a
sandwich.  The jack has a fixed contact and an arched spring contact.
More than one plug can be put into the jack at a time, resulting in
the plug circuits being connected in series.


[e-mail]    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Jim Gottlieb)
Subject: Latest from Japan: Cordless Home PBXs
Organization: Info Connections, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo, Japan
Date: Sun, 1 Nov 1992 10:07:35 GMT


Cordless telephones have long been popular in Japan.  The small size
and poor construction of Japanese residences leads to few transmission
problems.  Most are rated at only ten meters, but this is usually
sufficient.

The limited space also leads to many functions being crammed into one
small unit.  Cordless Telephone/Answering Machines are quite common.
The main unit is a telephone, an answering machine, and the base unit
for the cordless handset.  All in a box that is smaller than a 2500
set.

Manufacturers here have lately been adding a new twist.  In addition
to the one cordless handset that it comes with, many new models can be
equipped with three or four cordless telephones.  The base ('parent
phone' in Japanese) can call to any of the 'child phones', and any of
the child phones can call either the base or another of the 'child'
handsets.  Each handset has its own charger base.

This basically creates a wireless PBX for the home and I have been
seeing them in an increasing number of residences.  Japanese children
don't normally have their own phone lines, so the single-line nature
of this product suits it perfectly to the Japanese family.

The price for the PBX / base unit / telephone / answering machine and
first cordless unit is about USD$400-500.  Each additional cordless
unit is USD$120-160.


Jim Gottlieb         InfoConnections, Tokyo, Japan
<[e-mail]>     <[e-mail]>
In Japan:  Fax: [phone]   Voice Mail: [phone]

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

Date: Sun, 01 Nov 1992 23:04 EST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Calling Card Fraud


  Well, after years of using my AT&T calling card in high-risk areas,
I became a victim of calling card fraud.  AT&T cancelled my card (but
didn't call me to say so) because of suspected fraud after seeing
calls to Bangladesh and the UK.  I haven't seen the bill yet; maybe
there were many.  I had never called those places.

  What I think happened is that when I was trying vainly to call voice
mail from a phone that NYTel had rigged to disable the keypad, the
several tries, together with my having to read my number aloud to AT&T
operators to retry and to get credit, let someone get ahold of my
number.  I'm going to let AT&T know that NYTel policy -- and AT&T's of
having me read the number aloud - probably contributed to the number
getting stolen.  I'm very careful about punching it in fast with the
keypad covered, in general.

  Within this story, yet one more example of AT&T's left hand not
knowing what the right hand is doing.  The operator at 00 said the
card was denied and that I would have to call the business office
tomorrow.  A call to 1-800-222-0300, however, answered my question on
the spot this evening.  AT&T was actually very helpful, and says they
will annul the fraudulent charges once I get my bill.  I'm glad they
acted so quickly to cancel the card, though a call to me would have
been in order [the terms and conditions of the card do say they can
cancel without notice].  Another card had already been issued and
mailed, which I should have within days.  I hope it spells something
easy to remember, too.


Steve Kass/ Dept of Math and CS/ Drew U/ Madison NJ 07940
[e-mail]  201-514-1187

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

Date: Sun, 01 Nov 92 11:50:30 PST
From: [e-mail] (Phydeaux)
Subject: Straw Poll Results!  Guess Who Won the Election!


Well, the Usenet Straw Poll is over and the results are below.  Only a
few people attempted to vote multiple times and their votes were
disqualified.  There were over 2000 votes cast. I believe I got enough
of a cross-section of the Usenet community by announcing this on a
number of different groups.  I doubt, however, that the results below
are representative of the voting population of the United States.
Beyond this, I think the results speak for themselves.

A hearty "Thank you!" to those who participated, and to those in the
US, don't forget to vote on Tuesday!


reb

Vote tally for candidates receiving more than one vote:

858 BILL CLINTON        470 ANDRE MARROU        401 H.ROSS PEROT
226 GEORGE BUSH         58 JAMES "KIBO" PARRY   26 LASZLO NEMETH
17 CTHULHU              16 NOBODY/NONE OF THE ABOVE
15 JIM HENDERSON        13 FRANK ZAPPA          12 HOWARD STERN
11 TED FABER            7 BO GRITZ              5 JERRY BROWN
5 JERRY GARCIA          4 RON DANIELS           3 DAVE BARRY
3 RALPH NADER           3 REN & STIMPY          2 HUNTER S THOMPSON
2 CHARLES MANSON        2 TIM CLINKENPEEL       2 TSONGAS

The following each received one vote:

ADAM JANIN                AL GORE
ANDROMEDA GALAXY            ANN RICHARDS
BILL 'N OPUS                BILL MOYERS
BOBBY HEENAN                CALVIN (OF CALVIN AND HOBBES)
CHAD ANDREW HANKIN FOR PRESIDENT    COKIE ROBERTS (NPR)
DANIELS                 DAVID LETTERMAN
EDDIE LAWSON                ELIZABETH DOLE
ELVIRA FOR PRESIDENT            ELVIS PRESLEY
ERNEST BORGNINE/ERIC ESTRADA        FBI SPECIAL AGENT DALE COOPER
GEORGE WILL/P.J. O'ROURKE        J.R. "BOB" DOBBS
KERMIT                    THE MAYOR OF ROCHESTER
GARY STOLLMAN                GEORGE CLINTON
GORE VIDAL                HEMP
HILLARY                    HOWARD PHILLIPS
IDI AMIN                JACK HERER
JESSE JACKSON                JIM MORRISON
LARRY AGRAN                LEADER KIBO
LENORA FULANI                LEVON HELM
LONNIE SMITH                MICKEY MOUSE!
MIKHAIL GORBACHEV            MISS TREE PARKER
MR. BEAN                NOAM CHOMSKY
PAT PAULSEN                             PHIL LESH
PETER GARRETT (AUTRALIAN ENVIRONMENTALIST)
PICKARD / RIKER                PRES-JAMES STOCKDALE, VP-QUAYLE
REAGAN/NIXON                RICHARD STALLMAN
ROBERT "BALD EAGLE" ANGELINO        STANLEY OWSLEY
THAT HEAD EWOK IN RETURN OF THE JEDI    THOMAS JEFFERSON
TOD JOHNSON                TOM PETERS
UPDATES                    WILLIAM GATES
ZIPPY THE PINHEAD

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #814
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa29955;
          2 Nov 92 2:02 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA20412
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 1 Nov 1992 20:52:39 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA11702
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 1 Nov 1992 20:52:18 -0600
Date: Sun, 1 Nov 1992 20:52:18 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #815

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 1 Nov 92 19:32:38 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 814

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    ISDN and Stuff ([e-mail])
    Recommendations on ISDN System For Office (Thomas B. Clark III)
    Re: ISDN in Irving, Texas (Bob Blackshaw)
    Digital Spread Spectrum Cordless Phone (Howard Gayle)
    Popfone Applies For Portable Phone Net in Canada (David Leibold)
    Bell Atlantic to Cut 4,000 Jobs (Washington Post via Paul Robinson)
    V2.2bis Line Monitor? (J. R. Pendleton)
    When Were Round Plugs and Jacks Invented? (Jim Haynes)
    Latest from Japan: Cordless Home PBXs (Jim Gottlieb)
    Calling Card Fraud (Steve Kass)
    Straw Poll Results! Guess Who Won the Election! (Phydeaux)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sun, 01 Nov 92 14:42:45 -0500
From: Doctor Math <[e-mail]>
Subject: ISDN and Stuff


The rumors are true: the University where I work is getting a new
phone system.  I actually got to talk to a local RBOC representative
about it, so I found out the following:

We're getting a nice shiny new DMS-100 and new Northern Telecom
phones.  This DMS-100 will presumably have a fiber connection to the
#5ESS which is "downtown".  The phones are hybrid: analog voice path,
digital signalling between the phone and the switch; analog devices
(read: FAX machine) require a special line card which provides a POTS
connection.

The DMS-100 will have ISDN capability, and the switch that serves the
town around the University will be made ISDN capable. Thus, with
enough CPE, it will be possible to make ISDN calls from my house to
the University.  Great, I'm so excited ... now the hard part.

Let't suppose that I want to set up a low-bandwidth Internet connection
between here and my house. My options are:

1. Get a fast modem (under $300) and set up a SLIP connection on an
   UNmeasured residential line. Since the call isn't measured, I can
   just leave the connection up all the time.

2. Get an ISDN line ($???) and an ISDN adaptor ($1200 from Hayes).
   Since ISDN service IS measured,  try to use it as little as possible.

Obviously, the ISDN route will cost lots more.  According to the rep,
ISDN service is supposed to be attractively priced to people who wish
to use it to replace some sort of four-wire leased-line service.

Question: Why are things this way? When current modem technology
approaches the speed of one ISDN B-channel over an unmeasured dial-up
line for one-fourth the CPE cost and less than half the base monthly
charge, why would I want ISDN? Why is it that current analog lines are
either "unmeasured" (residential) or "measured" (business), yet most
ISDN is measured regardless of who's using it (and charged at a higher
rate if it's for data)?  Finally, a request: does anyone maintain some
sort of ISDN availability information? Not RBOC hype ("We plan to have
ISDN in 94% of our state by the year 1997."), but real price and
availability information? I am curious to see how much the various
RBOCs are charging for ISDN and how available it is becoming in
various places around the country. I'll even maintain a price chart
for the TELECOM Digest if people are interested.

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

From: [e-mail] (Thomas B. Clark III)
Subject: Recommendations on ISDN System For Office
Organization: UNC-CH School of Medicine
Date: Sun, 01 Nov 1992 17:49:50 GMT


My department at University of North Carolina is looking toward buying
a new office telephone system.  The university now has a digital
switch and can provide us with ISDN service.

We will need about 40 extensions and 15 or so trunk lines, 10 of which
will be dedicated to individuals.

We would like to interface with the university's voice mail system,
and to have it turn on message lights on the telephones.  We would
also like to interface with a dictation system.  We need toll call
accounting and restriction.

The university's telecom department keeps proposing outdated analog
systems that we have no interest in.  Does anybody have suggestions
for systems that we might look at?  E-mail to me, and if there is a
significant number of responses I will forward a summary to the
Moderator.  Thanks.

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

From: [e-mail] (Bob Blackshaw)
Subject: Re: ISDN in Irving, Texas
Organization: Corporation for Open Systems
Date: Sun, 01 Nov 1992 14:23:34 GMT


In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (R. Steven
Rainwater) writes:

> Our company is planning on developing some software that will take
> advantage of ISDN BRI services.  To this end we asked GTE to install
> two ISDN BRI lines at our office.  We were pleasantly suprised at the
> rates: $17 per line vs.  about $40 per line for our standard analog

[ some deletions]

> Can anyone direct me to information on how we can get from the two
> wires on our wiring block to an RJ45 jack and perhaps offer an
> explanation of what this power supply is that we "might" need?
> Hopefully, the terminal adapter can provided whatever power might be
> needed to the line.

What you need in addition to your terminal adapters is a network
interface device (NT1 in ISDN parlance). The two wire line from GTE is
the U interface, an echo-cancelling 80 kbaud line using the 2B1Q line
encoding. Your adapter devices have an S/T interface, which is four
wire 192 kbits full duplex 2B+D interface.

This is why you need the NT1 device which converts between the two
different protocols on the U and S/T interfaces. As to power, the NT1
will most likely have some instructions. Under ISDN, the telco no
longer is required to provide the 48 volts as in analog service.  This
is to prepare for the days when we go fibre (damned hard to push DC
down a piece of glass :-) )

> Also, one additional problem has come up with GTE.  The manual for the
> terminal adapter indicates that the device needs to be programmed with
> two numbers; a Terminal Endpoint Identifier (TEI), and a Service
> Profile Identifier (SPID).  We are told to get these numbers from the
> phone company but, once again, GTE claims they have no knowledge of
> these things.  I've gotten numbers for several higher up GTE people
> and will keep plugging away at this one, but, in the meantime, does
> anyone know of a way to determine these two numbers from my end?  We
> are on an AT&T 5ESS switch, if that makes any difference.

No, you get the TEI and SPID from the switch at initialization time.
You need to get hold of Bellcore Publication SR-NWT-001953 which
covers all of the CPE requirements for National ISDN-1, the ISDN
service that is going in all over the U.S. The AT&T 5ESS should not
make any difference since that is what National ISDN-1 is all about.
The three major switch manufacturers have agreed to implement the same
interface.


Bob

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

Date: Sun, 01 Nov 92 08:15:56 PST
From: [e-mail] (Howard Gayle)
Subject: Digital Spread Spectrum Cordless Phone
Reply-To: [e-mail]


A short article in "The Consumer Electronics Edge" (Nov. 1992, p. 5)
describes the Escort 9000 cordless phone from Cincinnati Microwave.
It's said to use "digital spread spectrum technology" in the 902-928
MHz band to give greater range and more privacy.  The price is given
as "about $350" and the availability as "early next year."  The
address of Cincinnati Microwave is 5200 Fields-Ertel Rd., Cincinnati,
OH 45249, USA.  Phone [phone].

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

Date: Sun, 01 Nov 92 19:06:15 EST
From: David Leibold <[e-mail]>
Subject: Popfone Applies For Portable Phone Net in Canada


There are plans by the Canadian Department of Communications to award
licenses for portable cordless phone networks. {The Toronto Star}
reports that the Popfone consortium will apply for a license. Popfone
consists of Call-Net (long distance company), Maclean Hunter (cable,
pager operator), Charles Sirois (who at least a few months ago was
Teleglobe Canada chief) and others.

Popfone hopes to franchise out base stations to such businesses as
corner stores and major attractions. Unlike a cellular network, there
won't be end-to-end ownership of facilities with Popfone.

This is presumably the CT2 cordless phone standard, described as being
somewhere between a pager and a cell phone. There are hopes that four
million such phones could be in operation within five years, compared
to the present one million cellular subscribers. Such phones are
intended for operation within 100 metres of a base station, as opposed
to the wide coverage on a cellular system.


[e-mail]

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

Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
Date: Sun, 01 Nov 1992  17:32:31 EST
Subject: Bell Atlantic to Cut 4,000 Jobs


Business Digest, October 30, 1992, {Washington Post}, Page F2

Bell Atlantic Chairman Raymond W. Smith told securities analysts in
New York that the company would cut 4,000 jobs by the end of this
year, in addition to the 3,200 that were eliminated last year.  Smith
said Bell Atlantic will cut costs by $225 million in the next few
years.

       ---

AT&T will invest $402 million in TPC-5, the first transpacific
fiber-optic system using optical amplifiers.  The $1.12 billion TPC-5
network will be a 15,500 mile loop that links the mainland United
States with Hawaii, Guam and Japan.

       ---

The Audio Home Recording Act of 1992, which supporters say will open
the way for mass marketing of digital recording equipment for home
stereo systems, was signed into law by President Bush.

       ---

Legislation that regulates the use of 900-number calling services and
makes it harder to intercept calls made on cellular telephones with
special scanning equipment was signed by President Bush.

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

From: [e-mail] (J. R. Pendleton)
Subject: V2.2bis Line Monitor Help Needed
Date: 01 Nov 92 19:17:57 GMT
Organization: Employer not involved in this.


I have a problem where I have a number of phone lines coming into what
could be called a concentrator (eight in, one out).

The incoming lines are 2400 bps standard modems.  I would like the
capability to monitor traffic both directions.  I need to monitor the
telephone line rather than the RS-232 out of the modems.

I envision a inductive pickup, that I could clamp onto the telco
lines, some sort of modem that will demodulate both sides and some
sort of data capture scope.

Does such a critter exist?  If so, could one of the kind readers give
me a pointer to such a device, or am I out of luck and have to build
one?

Many thanks.


Jerry Pendleton

J. R. Pendleton, who does not speak for Key Computer Labs or Amdahl Inc.
 uucp: [e-mail]  Voice : [phone]  Amateur : KC6RTO

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

From: [e-mail] (Jim Haynes)
Subject: When Were Round Plugs and Jacks Invented?
Date: 1 Nov 1992 08:31:08 GMT
Organization: University of California; Santa Cruz


I was just looking at an old telegraphy book dated 1903 -- of course
it may be older and just reprinted or revised at that date.  I was
surprised to see no round plugs and jacks in there.  I thought they
were in use by that date.  By "round" I mean the familiar 1/4-inch
diameter "phone" plug that is still in use today.

What were shown in the book included:

The old kind of switchboard where a tapered plug with an insulated
handle is stuck into a hole between two pieces of metal to connect
them together.

A two-conductor plug and cord which looked like it could be inserted
in place of the solid tapered plug in the above kind of switchboard.

Flat plugs with cords, to be put into a clip jack.  The plug has two
flat blades of metal with an insulator between them, forming a
sandwich.  The jack has a fixed contact and an arched spring contact.
More than one plug can be put into the jack at a time, resulting in
the plug circuits being connected in series.


[e-mail]    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Jim Gottlieb)
Subject: Latest from Japan: Cordless Home PBXs
Organization: Info Connections, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo, Japan
Date: Sun, 1 Nov 1992 10:07:35 GMT


Cordless telephones have long been popular in Japan.  The small size
and poor construction of Japanese residences leads to few transmission
problems.  Most are rated at only ten meters, but this is usually
sufficient.

The limited space also leads to many functions being crammed into one
small unit.  Cordless Telephone/Answering Machines are quite common.
The main unit is a telephone, an answering machine, and the base unit
for the cordless handset.  All in a box that is smaller than a 2500
set.

Manufacturers here have lately been adding a new twist.  In addition
to the one cordless handset that it comes with, many new models can be
equipped with three or four cordless telephones.  The base ('parent
phone' in Japanese) can call to any of the 'child phones', and any of
the child phones can call either the base or another of the 'child'
handsets.  Each handset has its own charger base.

This basically creates a wireless PBX for the home and I have been
seeing them in an increasing number of residences.  Japanese children
don't normally have their own phone lines, so the single-line nature
of this product suits it perfectly to the Japanese family.

The price for the PBX / base unit / telephone / answering machine and
first cordless unit is about USD$400-500.  Each additional cordless
unit is USD$120-160.


Jim Gottlieb         InfoConnections, Tokyo, Japan
<[e-mail]>     <[e-mail]>
In Japan:  Fax: [phone]   Voice Mail: [phone]

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

Date: Sun, 01 Nov 1992 23:04 EST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Calling Card Fraud


  Well, after years of using my AT&T calling card in high-risk areas,
I became a victim of calling card fraud.  AT&T cancelled my card (but
didn't call me to say so) because of suspected fraud after seeing
calls to Bangladesh and the UK.  I haven't seen the bill yet; maybe
there were many.  I had never called those places.

  What I think happened is that when I was trying vainly to call voice
mail from a phone that NYTel had rigged to disable the keypad, the
several tries, together with my having to read my number aloud to AT&T
operators to retry and to get credit, let someone get ahold of my
number.  I'm going to let AT&T know that NYTel policy -- and AT&T's of
having me read the number aloud - probably contributed to the number
getting stolen.  I'm very careful about punching it in fast with the
keypad covered, in general.

  Within this story, yet one more example of AT&T's left hand not
knowing what the right hand is doing.  The operator at 00 said the
card was denied and that I would have to call the business office
tomorrow.  A call to 1-800-222-0300, however, answered my question on
the spot this evening.  AT&T was actually very helpful, and says they
will annul the fraudulent charges once I get my bill.  I'm glad they
acted so quickly to cancel the card, though a call to me would have
been in order [the terms and conditions of the card do say they can
cancel without notice].  Another card had already been issued and
mailed, which I should have within days.  I hope it spells something
easy to remember, too.


Steve Kass/ Dept of Math and CS/ Drew U/ Madison NJ 07940
[e-mail]  201-514-1187

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

Date: Sun, 01 Nov 92 11:50:30 PST
From: [e-mail] (Phydeaux)
Subject: Straw Poll Results!  Guess Who Won the Election!


Well, the Usenet Straw Poll is over and the results are below.  Only a
few people attempted to vote multiple times and their votes were
disqualified.  There were over 2000 votes cast. I believe I got enough
of a cross-section of the Usenet community by announcing this on a
number of different groups.  I doubt, however, that the results below
are representative of the voting population of the United States.
Beyond this, I think the results speak for themselves.

A hearty "Thank you!" to those who participated, and to those in the
US, don't forget to vote on Tuesday!


reb

Vote tally for candidates receiving more than one vote:

858 BILL CLINTON        470 ANDRE MARROU        401 H.ROSS PEROT
226 GEORGE BUSH         58 JAMES "KIBO" PARRY   26 LASZLO NEMETH
17 CTHULHU              16 NOBODY/NONE OF THE ABOVE
15 JIM HENDERSON        13 FRANK ZAPPA          12 HOWARD STERN
11 TED FABER            7 BO GRITZ              5 JERRY BROWN
5 JERRY GARCIA          4 RON DANIELS           3 DAVE BARRY
3 RALPH NADER           3 REN & STIMPY          2 HUNTER S THOMPSON
2 CHARLES MANSON        2 TIM CLINKENPEEL       2 TSONGAS

The following each received one vote:

ADAM JANIN                AL GORE
ANDROMEDA GALAXY            ANN RICHARDS
BILL 'N OPUS                BILL MOYERS
BOBBY HEENAN                CALVIN (OF CALVIN AND HOBBES)
CHAD ANDREW HANKIN FOR PRESIDENT    COKIE ROBERTS (NPR)
DANIELS                 DAVID LETTERMAN
EDDIE LAWSON                ELIZABETH DOLE
ELVIRA FOR PRESIDENT            ELVIS PRESLEY
ERNEST BORGNINE/ERIC ESTRADA        FBI SPECIAL AGENT DALE COOPER
GEORGE WILL/P.J. O'ROURKE        J.R. "BOB" DOBBS
KERMIT                    THE MAYOR OF ROCHESTER
GARY STOLLMAN                GEORGE CLINTON
GORE VIDAL                HEMP
HILLARY                    HOWARD PHILLIPS
IDI AMIN                JACK HERER
JESSE JACKSON                JIM MORRISON
LARRY AGRAN                LEADER KIBO
LENORA FULANI                LEVON HELM
LONNIE SMITH                MICKEY MOUSE!
MIKHAIL GORBACHEV            MISS TREE PARKER
MR. BEAN                NOAM CHOMSKY
PAT PAULSEN                             PHIL LESH
PETER GARRETT (AUTRALIAN ENVIRONMENTALIST)
PICKARD / RIKER                PRES-JAMES STOCKDALE, VP-QUAYLE
REAGAN/NIXON                RICHARD STALLMAN
ROBERT "BALD EAGLE" ANGELINO        STANLEY OWSLEY
THAT HEAD EWOK IN RETURN OF THE JEDI    THOMAS JEFFERSON
TOD JOHNSON                TOM PETERS
UPDATES                    WILLIAM GATES
ZIPPY THE PINHEAD

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #814
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa29973;
          2 Nov 92 2:03 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA08298
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 1 Nov 1992 20:49:29 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA21053
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 1 Nov 1992 20:49:14 -0600
Date: Sun, 1 Nov 1992 20:49:14 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #815

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 1 Nov 92 20:49:20 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 815

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: T-1 For Datacomm (Hans-Gabriel Ridder)
    Re: T-1 For Datacomm (Kenneth A. Becker)
    Re: Private Lines, Bandwidth, and Signal Level (Carl P. Zwanzig)
    Re: Private Lines, Bandwidth, and Signal Level (Hans-Gabriel Ridder)
    Re: Private Lines, Bandwidth, and Signal Level (Scott Dorsey)
    Re: Caller ID Approved In Arizona (Joachim Koenig)
    Re: CLASS Features vs. FX Lines (John Higdon)
    Re: Integretel Sticks Me With Charges (Paul S. Sawyer)
    Re: Last GTE Cord Board Removed (John R. Levine)
    Re: Computerized Sales Call "Locked" My Line (Brian J. Catlin)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Hans)
Subject: Re: T-1 For Datacomm
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation - DECwest Engineering
Date: Sun, 01 Nov 1992 19:22:46 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(david.g.lewis) writes:

> A channelized DS1 is a DS1 with 24 explicit DS0s, and some sort of
> framing, either D4/SF or ESF.

OK.

> However, not all T1 service is channelized.  Some carriers offer
> unframed DS1 service.  If your DS1 is to be used for 24 DS0s, it's in
> your best interest to have a channelized DS1, because performance
> monitoring is enhanced (particularly with ESF framing).

You seem to be saying here that if I want 24 DS0's, I don't
*necessarily* need framing (or "channelized DS1," in your words,) only
that it's in my "best interest."  If this is so, I can't see how any
equipment could pick out the 24 channels without framing ... (In
other words, I think this is wrong.)


Hans-Gabriel Ridder <[e-mail]>
DECwest Engineering, Bellevue, Washington, USA
Any opinions expressed are not those of my employer, honest.

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

Date: Sun, 01 Nov 92 22:08:43 EST
From: [e-mail] (Kenneth A Becker)
Subject: Re: T-1 For Datacomm
Organization: AT&T


In article <[e-mail]>, Hans Ridder <ridder@zso.
dec.com> writes:

> In article <[e-mail]> kentrox![e-mail]
> (Myron Hattig) writes:

> In my experience this is correct.  If you have a T1 span which does
> not go through a DACS, you can use the whole 1.544Mbps for data.  If
> there's a DACS, the best you can get is 1.534Mbps.  Also in my
> experience, most of the telco folks will *not* be able to tell you if
> you need framing (or even who is supposed to provide clocking!)  I
> just tried it and used it if it worked.

Umm ... speaking as a real, live DACS II hardware design junkie, I
have to state that the product from AT&T does handle clear DS1.  It's
one of our selling points!  What you put in is what you get out, so
long as your bit rate doesn't get out of kilter.  As a previous poster
pointed out, you don't get the error detection and such like when you
don't run ESF, D4, or CEPT DS1.  However, you pays your money and you
take your chances.  One point, though: DS1 has this requirement on the
maximum number of zeroes present being 15 or less so it doesn't lose
bit synchronization.  If you can assure yourself that your data
streams meet that requirement, then you're off and running.  If you
can't, then maybe you should go back to thinking about D4 or ESF with
B8ZS line coding so you can at least get 64 kb/s on the individual
channels.


Ken Becker [e-mail]

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

Date: Sun, 01 Nov 92 09:53:40 -0500
From: Carl P. Zwanzig <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Private Lines, Bandwidth, and Signal Level
Organization: The Midnite Group


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

> Around here, a two-ended private line (no switching) costs $6 per
> month, and is hard copper wires (direct ohmic connection) from end to
> end.  I have been contemplating getting such a line over to a friend's
> house to experiment with.

> It appears that I can get a pretty high bit rate through such a line
> if I drive enough signal at the transmit end and am willing to take a
> 60dB gain loss through the system -- however, I'm not sure how much
> signal I am allowed on a private line.

> I suspect the "certain private lines" that are limited by part 68 are
> lines that are signal-processed in some way, or otherwise couple to
> services that could be affected by the high frequencies/signal levels.
> Hard copper lines may not have these restrictions.

In C&P land, there used to be a circuit type referred to as a "BA"
line.  This was solid copper, and was intended for the old bipolar DC
burgler alarms.  If I remember correctly, they were tarriffed for up
to 30bps switched DC only, although we had a couple hundred running
300bps FSK modems.  They were good for the modems up to about ten
miles, after that we had to go to a "real" line (type "FD" (Foreign
Data?)).  There was no restriction on voltage levels under normal
ringing voltages, but remember what they're tarriffed for.

These codes are from the circuit numbers, so ordering them may require
other codes.

As usual, Your Mileage May Vary (!tm)


Carl Zwanzig    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Hans)
Subject: Re: Private Lines, Bandwidth, and Signal Level
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation - DECwest Engineering
Date: Sun, 01 Nov 1992 19:04:55 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Keith
Lofstrom) writes:

> It appears that I can get a pretty high bit rate through such a line
> if I drive enough signal at the transmit end and am willing to take a
> 60dB gain loss through the system -- however, I'm not sure how much
> signal I am allowed on a private line.

> According to the book "Subscriber Loop Signaling and Transmission
> Handbook" by Reeve (IEEE Press, 1992), Part 68 of the FCC rules limits
> the metallic voltage level to -15dBV / 8KHz in the 300KHz and above
> region, for terminal equipment connected to the the telephone network,
> which consists of the "Public Switched Telephone Network and certain
> private lines".

The DDS spec. (AT&T PUB 62310 {Digital Data System Channel Interface
Specification}) mentions 0dBm (into a 135 ohm termination) for the
9.6K speed, and 6dBm for the other speeds.  There are also a couple of
pages of pulse shaping requirements.  It says the lower level for the
9.6K speed "is necessary to ensure crosstalk compatibility with other
existing loop transmission systems."  So apparently, there are limits
which depend on frequency and risetime.

> On the other hand, an acquaintance who is a data services sales type
> for a nearby telephone company assures me that you can shove anything
> you want through a hard copper line, up to 50 volts or so -- "after
> all, you can put ring voltage through it".  But then, he's a sales
> type, and for the wrong company at that.

Yes, but the ring voltage is a low-frequency sinusoidal waveform --
the least likely to cause crosstalk.  If you could shove anything you
wanted down the wire, we'd all have 10Mbps Ethernet coming down the
wire to our house, right?  Modems would be alot cheaper too.
Obviously there must be *some* limits.

> I suspect the "certain private lines" that are limited by part 68 are
> lines that are signal-processed in some way, or otherwise couple to
> services that could be affected by the high frequencies/signal levels.
> Hard copper lines may not have these restrictions.

 From my understanding, what they're concerned about is crosstalk with
*any* other lines.  Fast risetimes (like square waves) are a primary
contributor to crosstalk.  DDS and T1 equipment apparently have
restrictions on the pulse shape and amplitude to prevent just such a
problem.  Unfortunatly, the specs. for those services only tell you
what the limits are, and that those limits are selected to prevent
interference with "other services."  Great, huh?

> Of course, what I can REALLY get away with is what my local telco lets
> me get away with, but I thought I would find out what other people
> have managed to do in their areas.

It's likely you could do all sorts of rude things, and it might take
them quite a while to track the complaints down to you.  But then
again, they might get to your door in couple of days.  :-0

> Any wire wizards out there who can shed some light?

Not me!  Sorry I don't have a hard reference.  Let us know if you find
one.


Hans-Gabriel Ridder <[e-mail]>
DECwest Engineering, Bellevue, Washington, USA
Any opinions expressed are not those of my employer, honest.

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

From: [e-mail] (Scott Dorsey)
Subject: Re: Private Lines, Bandwidth, and Signal Level
Date: 01 Nov 1992 15:07:11 GMT
Organization: NASA Langley Research Center and Reptile Farm


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Keith
Lofstrom) writes:

> Around here, a two-ended private line (no switching) costs $6 per
> month, and is hard copper wires (direct ohmic connection) from end to
> end.  I have been contemplating getting such a line over to a friend's
> house to experiment with.

Well, on a 48F circuit, it depends a lot on where your line is routed.
First of all, you can expect response out to 20KC without too much
trouble, but if you go much higher than that, you'll run into
problems.  I've managed to run an STL circuit for an FM station over a
48F line, just running the channels seperately.  If I run the
composite signal (with 38 Kc bandwidth) through the thing, the reponse
drops off badly around 30 Kc, and what's worse the group delay is
terrible.  If you can stand the group delay, you can probably
re-equalize the thing to get higher frequencies.

The higher the frequency, the more crosstalk you'll induce into other
lines.  So if you want to crank 100V at 25C through the line, you
should be okay.  But if you are going to 10KC you want to read the
specs carefully, and don't go over the 0 dB mark.  Above 10 KC it
doesn't matter much; if the stuff leaks into adjacent pairs nobody
will care much (unless it's a T-1 line or it's another one of your
pairs).

You can do some amazing stuff over some 48F circuits.  On other ones,
you can hardly get a voice through.  You aren't paying much, but what
you save in money you lose in line-line consistancy.  It's a great
thing for experimentors, though!


scott

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

Organization: Universitaet des Saarlandes
From: [e-mail] (& Koenig)
Subject: Re: Caller ID Approved In Arizona
Date: 01 Nov 92 12:49:38 GMT

[e-mail] (Bill Everts) writes:

> 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?

Harry calls his wife in the evening:

"Darling, I'm still in the office and have a lot of work to do. I'll
come home late today".

His wife:

"Oh, Harry, you're not, you are with Mrs ....."

Hopefully, the number of divorces will in- or decrease.


Joachim
email: [e-mail]   University of Saarland, Germany, Europe
phone: [phone]    fax: 2678   <Ende der Fahnenstange>

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

Subject: Re: CLASS Features vs. FX Lines
Date: 01 Nov 92 17:49:33 PST (Sun)
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)


[e-mail] (Eliot Moore) writes:

> If not, is there any way to pursue installation of features conveniently
> "not tariffed for foreign exchange service"?

The whole matter of FX, if not a dead horse already, will be put out
to pasture soon. Telcos have long been working to eliminate FX, so you
will not find much sympathy about having your particular wish list
considered WRT special features on FX. For instance, there is
certainly no technical matter involved, but you CANNOT order FX with
any unmeasured service any longer in Pac*Bell territory.

To accomplish this dream of an "FX-free" world, telcos now have at
their collective disposals the matter of "virtual service". VS is
available in areas that have SS7 connectivity. It enables a telco to
literally assign any number desired to any pair by typing in a few
commands. In the past, if you wanted a 408/976 number, you had to have
your installation within the local serving area of the Space Park CO,
located in Santa Clara since that is where the serving 1AESS switch
happened to be. This is no longer the case and you can now have your
976 equipment located anywhere in the toll district.

Telcos will now attempt to make FX more and more unattractive.
Remember, your telco would like to be paid for each and every
connection that is put up. FX circuits work counter to this principle.


John Higdon <[e-mail]> (hiding out in the desert)

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

From: [e-mail] (Paul S. Sawyer)
Subject: Re: Integretel Sticks Me With Charges
Organization: UNH Telecommunications and Network Services, Durham, NH
Date: Sun, 01 Nov 1992 19:03:41 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Doug
Sewell) writes:

> [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.

> $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.

Is there a list of these 800-collect scams?  The only ones we have
seen so far claim to be "Collect from ENTERTAIN, KS, 913 338 1574" and
they do not seem to be actual collect calls, just a bill record for a
call someone here may have made.  Since we do not accept collect calls
(at least on the PBX lines tagged on the bill), since many of the
calls ocurred when there would have been NO PBX OPERATOR on duty to
even answer such a collect call (if it were really incoming), and
since there does not seem to be such a place as Entertain, Kansas,
(unless Overland Park recently changed its name), we have always got
credit from the LEC.  Even so, if someone has a list of the 800-
numbers which translate to "collect" calls, it would be useful.  We
might even block these numbers, since they are at least operating
questionably, if not fraudulently.

Thanks.


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


[Moderator's Note: I don't know of any such list. Anyway, the numbers
change constantly and such a list would never be up to date. Vigilence
is the keyword here: telecom managers should always be alert to the
various and sundry ways those schlock outfits have of pushing through
charges. In the early days of 900/976, I guess it never occurred to
the sex-by-phone purveyors that sooner or later a large segment of
their customer base would have phones blocked from calling them. But
as the technology for keeping ahead of the schlock firms improves, so
do the techniques they use to get their calls through.

Here is another one for you to think about: Try 702-333-8444. This
number is blocked by MCI/Sprint/others. *They* won't complete the
call, and advise callers to dial in via 10288-1-702-etc ... AT&T and
the local telco in Nevada both willingly handle the incoming calls. I
wonder why Sprint/MCI/etc are wary of it?  For an example of this, try
calling the above via 10222-plus or 10333-plus. Supposedly the calls
are (as the recorded announcement says) 'free of all 900 charges; you
only pay for the toll ...' if that's so, then howcome MCI/Sprint won't
connect to the number?   PAT]

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

Subject: Re: Last GTE Cord Board Removed
Organization: I.E.C.C.
Date: 01 Nov 92 01:04:23 EST (Sun)
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.

The first cord board was in Bridgeport.  New Haven had the distinction
of the first telephone directory.  In the late 1970s, the local
Connecticut phone books had fancy covers commemorating the centennials
of these two events.  I believe that SNET, the current local telco for
most of Connecticut is a corporate descendant of the original
Bridgeport and New Haven phone companies.  Pre-breakup, SNET was
minority owned by AT&T and was considered an AT&T affiliate.  Now
they're considered to be an independent, though they have a lot more
AT&T equipment than other independents.

GTE headquarters are in Stamford, and as far as I can tell have never
had anything to do with telephony in Connecticut, other than perhaps
selling them some light bulbs.  Probably just as well.


Regards,

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

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

From: [e-mail] (Brian J. Catlin)
Subject: Re: Computerized Sales Call "Locked" My Line
Date: Sun, 01 Nov 1992 06:11:55 GMT


In message <[e-mail]> Mr. Soques writes:

> Greetings!  Last night, I received a computerized sales/sleeze call
> which essentially "locked" my line and prevented me from getting a
> dial tone no matter what I did with my switch hook.  I found this
> disturbing since I could not hang up on this unsolicited call.  Is
> this legal?  The pitch was somewhat long but did not reveal the
> identity of the calling party (the call had pauses/beeps to leave my
> name, address, and phone number).

One problem that pops up in my mind is, what if you have an emergency
and have to call ambulance/police/fire?  20-30 seconds can be the
difference between life and death.

If they say that this amount of time won't hurt, then why are
answering machines and modems not allowed on party lines?  My modem
hangs up immediately when anyone else on the line picks up their
phone.  Older answering machines typically hang up after about a
minute and newer ones can sense when the other person hangs up and
then they quickly release the line.

I would hate for this 20-30 seconds to mean someone's life.  But it
looks like this may have to happen before something changes.

Please feel free to e-mail flames, random bursts of laughter, etc.


B. J. Catlin


[Moderator's Note: Well you are right of course that 20-30 seconds
can mean life or death under some conditions. But the current telco
technology is such that if the man wants his phone line back (more or
less) immediatly, he will need to disconnect and wait about that
period of time for the CO to get rid of the other party who is hanging
on the line.  PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #815
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa00919;
          2 Nov 92 2:52 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA16929
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 1 Nov 1992 22:20:14 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA17420
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 1 Nov 1992 22:19:57 -0600
Date: Sun, 1 Nov 1992 22:19:57 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #817

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 1 Nov 92 22:20:00 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 817

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Cellular Reception Equipment Banned by Congress (RISKS, via Monty Solomon)
    Cheap Voice Mail (Luigi Semenzato)
    Voice-Operated Phone? (John R. Gersh)
    "Call Home" Special Case For Calling Cards? (Kris Harris)
    Virtual Reality (Lori A. Tracewell)
    Information on Telecommuting Requested (Gerry Santoro)
    Tone to Pulse Convertor (Jack Decker)
    Need Basic Book(s) on Telecom Hardware (James D. Murray)
    Telephone Phreaks (Daniel Drucker)
    Seeking Modem Information (Thomas K. Hinders)
    Phone Records: Public or Private? (Steven A. Rubin)
    The Worst Phone Lines in the US? (Pat Turner)
    Quick Questions (Rich Padula)
    Spain Tax Counters (Georg Holderied)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sun, 01 Nov 1992 02:03:58 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <[e-mail]>
Subject: Cellular Reception Equipment Banned by Congress


Excerpt from RISKS DIGEST 13.88

 Date: Tue, 27 Oct 92 17:56:46 GMT
 From: [e-mail] (Robert Allen)
 Subject: Cellular Reception Equipment Banned by Congress

For some time, since the Electronics Communications Privacy Act was
passed, it is been a Federal crime in the U.S. to listen to
communications carried out over cellular telephone.  Only a handful of
people have been prosecuted, mostly cases where someone has taped a
politician talking about things (sometimes illegal things) over a
cellphone and passed the tape on to the media.

More recently, manufacture and import of devices capable of receiving
cellular transmissions have been banned by the FCC.  Naturally this
has resulted in a run on radios which are 800MHz capable, or which can
be easily modified to to be so capable.

The reason the ban on both listening and making equipment capable of
listening is that the cellular phone lobby wants to be able to assure
their potential customers of privacy.

Comments about facist government aside, the risks should be obvious:
if people assume that a medium is secure, when in fact it is not only
NOT secure, but is rather heavily monitored, they are likely to say
things they don't mean, or which shouldn't be (literally) broadcast.
Currently the police use cellphones extensively, as do drug dealers.
Court cases have stated that cordless phones (the type which talk to
the base-set in your house) are *not* protected under the ECPA, and
may be legally monitored, although there is reportedly a law in CA
which makes it illegal to do so.  In at least one case police have
monitored communications on a cordless phone, with a readily available
scanner, and have used evidence so gathered to prosecute an individual
for drug related crimes.

Another interesting note is that the law specifically prohibits
"scanning receivers" which are, or may be made, cellular capable.  How
this affects test equipment, non scanning receivers, other cellphones,
etc., remains to be interpreted by a court.

Here is the partial text of the law.


Robert Allen, [e-mail]

  Article 2202 of alt.radio.scanner:
  From: [e-mail] (Mark Walsh)
  Newsgroups: alt.radio.scanner
  Subject: Section 408, was "Scanner Bill"
  Date: 21 Oct 92 17:24:33 GMT

SEC. 408. INTERCEPTION OF CELLULAR COMMUNICATIONS.

   (a) AMENDMENT -- Section 302 of the Communications Act of 1934 (47
USC 302) is amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:

   "(d)(1) Within 180 days after the date of enactment of this
subsection, the Commission shall prescribe and make effective
regulations denying equipment authorization (under part 15 if title
47, Code of Federal Regulations, or any other part of that title) any
scanning receiver that is capable of --

   "(A) receiving transmissions in the frequencies allocated to the
domestic cellular radio telecommunications service,

   "(B) being readily altered by the user to receive transmissions in
such frequencies, or

   "(C) being equipped with decoders that convert digital cellular
transmissions to analog voice audio.

   "(2) Beginning one year after the effective date of the regulations
adopted pursuant to paragraph (1), no receiver having the capabilities
described in subparagraph (A), (B), or (C) of paragraph (1), as such
capabilities are defined in such regulations, shall be manufactured in
the United States or imported for use in the United States."


Mark Walsh (walsh@optilink) -- UUCP: uunet!optilink!walsh

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

From: [e-mail] (Luigi Semenzato)
Subject: Cheap Voice Mail
Date: 01 Nov 1992 19:38:22 GMT
Organization: University of California, Berkeley


We have a few Sparc IPC workstations, made by Sun Microsystems, in our
office, with disk space to spare.  They have audio in-out hardware.
The A/D and D/A conversions are both 8 bit @ 8 KHz, I believe.  The
quality is certainly sufficient for voice mail purposes, and it would
be fun to have such a system, but only if it can be done cheaply.

I am trying to find out how to attach these machines to the telephone
line.  The audio in/out interface to the machine is very simple: two
jacks, one for a microphone, the other for an earphone or small
speaker.  Someone recently posted a simple circuit to handle the
speaker part (audio out), consisting of an impedance-matching
transformer and capacitors to cut off the DC component from the line.
What about the microphone (audio in)?

The harder part is detecting the ring, and doing the equivalent of
lifting the receiver and hanging up (including detecting that the
other party has hung up).  I believe the only non-audio signals I can
easily get in and out of the workstation are two lines on the RS-232
connector, one is the Carrier Detect, I think, the other Data Terminal
Ready, and I can set one and read the status of the other in software.
The DTR line could drive a small relay.

Everything else can be done in software, including producing tones and
interpreting them.  Any suggestions?  Is there some product on the
market that could be used for this?  If so, I would hope it to be
cheaper than an answering machine, since it implements only a small
subset of its capabilities (but it's a much smaller market, I know, I
know).


Thanks,

Luigi

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

From: [e-mail] (John R. Gersh)
Subject: Voice-Operated Phone
Organization: Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Lab
Date: Sun, 01 Nov 92 19:52:27 GMT


Is there such a thing as a voice-operated telephone dialer for home
use?

I'm trying to help my father, whose vision has deteriorated to the
point where he cannot easily use a phone. Dialing is not the problem;
he can "touch-type" on the keypad well enough. The problem is in
looking up numbers. As somone with impaired vision, he's got free use
of directory assistance, but that's not always convenient. He'd also
typically have to remember the number long enough to dial it. (Is
dial-it-for-you-too DA, where available, also free to the vision
impaired?)  A speed dialer feature helps, of course, but if it stored
enough different numbers to be helpful, it would be too hard to
remember the code for each one.

What would be ideal is a voice-operated dialer like top-of-the-line
auto cellular installations advertise. Can one get this feature in an
ordinary phone? Any recommendations?


John Gersh                       [e-mail]
The Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory
Johns Hopkins Rd., Laurel, MD 20723      [phone]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: "Call Home" Special Case For Calling Cards?
Organization: Drake University, Des Moines, Iowa, USA
Date: Sun, 01 Nov 1992 02:38:37 GMT


With regards to calling home on a calling card without a PIN, it
sounds like you need a personal 800 number to me.  Any major IXC will
offer one.

I have a personal 800 number from a company called INS (Iowa
Networking Services) It was free to activate, and there is no monthly
charge.  The rates are comprable to standard long-distance rates.  A
call to the business office will get your routing number changes for
no charge (although Cable & Wilerless still has the best system.  With
INS, you must call during business hours, as the system is not
automatic)

The only catch is the routing number must terminate in Iowa.

If anyone is interested, INS can be reached at [phone].


Kris Harris - PO BOX 2410 - Des Moines, Iowa  50311-0410 - [phone]
Standard disclaimers apply.  I am not in any way connected to INS.

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

From: [e-mail] (Lori A Tracewell)
Subject: Virtual Reality
Organization: The Ohio State University
Date: Sun, 01 Nov 1992 19:46:52 GMT


I am working on research in virtual reality. I am looking for theories
and recent research.


Thanks,

Rex Robbins

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

Organization: Penn State University
Date: Sun, 01 Nov 1992 16:08:36 EDT
From: Gerry Santoro - CAC/PSU <[e-mail]>
Subject: Information on Telecommuting Requested


I am working with a colleague to develop a conference presentation on
'telecommuting and the workplace.'  Our hope is to describe
telecommuting and the ways in which it influences, or is influenced
by, such factors as office/workspace design, workplace ergonomics,
work group strategies, and so on.

I am interested in any references to journal/periodical articles or
book chapters dealing with any of the above subjects.  Please email
them to me rather than posting them.  If anyone is interested please
let me know and I will mail the completed list to those who wish.


gerry santoro   academic computing/speech communication
penn state university

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

Date: Sun, 01 Nov 92 16:44:19 CST
From: Jack Decker <[e-mail]>
Subject: Tone to Pulse Convertor


First, I want to thank everyone who sent me info abot the 1ESS switch.
The conclusion was that the 1ESS cannot handle distinctive ringing,
though the 1AESS can.  Unfortunately, Sault Ste. Marie is stuck with
the 1ESS until the third quarter of '94.

Now, I have a situation that mabe someone can help me with.  I need to
get hold of one tone-to-pulse convertor ... that is, something that
you can plug a telephone device that dials using tone dialing into,
and have it come out the other end as dial pulses.  I know that these
things used to be plentiful back before "Equal Access" (it was often a
feature of the type of dialer that would dial a carrier's local access
number using pulse dialing, then switch to tone to outpulse the
account number and number called) but you can't seem to find them now,
at least not at any decent price (actually, I haven't seen one lately
at ANY price).  What I'm really hoping to find is perhaps something
like a memory dialer that has this function, but where the memory is
shot or something.  If you have a device that will do the tone to
pulse properly, I don't care if any of the other features work.  In
other words, I'm looking for something inexpensive or, as the birds
say, cheap!  :-)

If you have something like this lying around in your junk box, and
would like to get rid of it, or if you know a place where such a
device can be purchased inexpensively, please let me know.


Thanks,

Jack Decker    [e-mail]    FidoNet 1:154/8

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

Date: Sun, 01 Nov 1992 08:03:18 GMT
From: [e-mail] (James D. Murray)
Subject: Need Basic Book(s) on Telecom Hardware
Organization: San Diego State University, College of Sciences


I am looking for a standard book or reference work on telephone
equipment and associated hardware.  Topics would include telephone
handsets, wiring, punch blocks, connectors (RJ11, Centronics, etc.),
line signals and voltage levels, etc.  There doen't seem to be a FAQ
associated with this newsgroup which would have information on such a
reference.

I've been doing quite a bit of wiring lately for people's phone
systems and although I have no training as such, everything I've done
so far seems to be working.  I'd now like to find out all the
terminology and how all the hardware works from my handset to the
phone company computer.

Please drop me a line via email on the titles of such reference works.
Also, if there are any good online docs about this subject that are
accurate I'd like them emailed to me or at least their BBS/FTP
location mentioned.


Thanks very much.

James D. Murray    [e-mail]

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

Subject: Telephone Phreaks
From: mertwig![e-mail] (Daniel Drucker)
Date: Sun, 01 Nov 92 20:34:54 EST
Organization: Mertwig


Does anyone know if a person's physical cable pair can be discovered by
a hacker illicitly logged into COSMOS or MIZAR?

Also, would someone tell me what the STD-III Information Center is?
(Dial 950-1288 anywhere in the USA, 2400,8N1.)


Daniel Max P. Drucker    HAM CALLSIGN PENDING
[e-mail] (or try mertwig![e-mail])

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

Date: 01 Nov 92 10:49:39-0800
From: /PN=Thomas.K.Hinders/OU=CCMAIL/O=CHAN.IS/PRMD=MMC/ADMD=TELEMAIL/C=US/@sprint.com
Subject: Seeking Modem Information


I have inherited two modems with no docs etc.

They are 8 bit PC card type; the boxes were labeled Fast Link 9600
baud.

On the modems is Telebit and the date 1985, they have S/N of 015330064
and 65.

Does anyone have any information on this type modem?

Thanks in advance,


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Steven A Rubin)
Subject: Phone Records: Public or Private?
Organization: HAC - Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore
Date: Sun, 01 Nov 1992 09:00:48 -0500


I am trying to find out if the customer records the RBOCs keep on what
exchanges customers call is public record.  Also, are long distance
records public?


[Moderator's Note: No sir, they are not! They are proprietary records
of the telco, released only to the customer or by subpoena to law
enforcement agencies, etc.  Local telcos are required to exchange data
for billing purposes with the long distance carriers, and this applies
even if your phone number is non-published. But other than for billing
and/or investigative purposes *no one* is to get records of your
calls.   PAT]

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

Date: Sun, 01 Nov 92 13:28 EST
From: rsiatl![e-mail]
Subject: The Worst Phone Lines in the US?
Reply-To: [e-mail]


   I recently received a newsletter from Telos.  Telos, as some may
know, is a prominent manufacturer of DSP hybrids for the broadcast
industry.  Anyway, in the newsletter, Telos writes:

   "As far as we can tell, the worst phone line conditions in the US
exist in the Dallas/Fort Worth and Miami/Fort Lauderdale areas.  The
'Dallas' software [firmware actually -- PMT] is optimized for these
difficult line conditions."

   I seem to recall that GTE is the LEC in Miami.  Is this correct?
Who tied them in Dallas?

It should be noted that Telos equipiment is unlikely to be deployed in
rural areas due to it's high cost. Personaly I think one of the worst
systems I have encountered is in Hickory, NC (Centel).


Pat Turner KB4GRZ   [e-mail]

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

Date: Sun, 01 Nov 1992 19:39:03 -0500
From: [e-mail] (Rich Padula)
Subject: Quick Questions


Fellow TELECOM Digesters:

I have three quick questions.

1) I want Caller-ID into my PC off the serial port. I'm a DIY kinda
guy, and I recall someone doing this, but I can't find the info. I got
a sample of Motorola's Caller-ID chip, but I would like to siphon
power from the serial port to run it. Any ideas where I can find these
posts or who authored them?

2) Which carrier can you recommend for commercial 800 service? I would
also like to get real-time ANI or DNIS(?) if possible. Is this difficult?

3) On an unrelated note, a friend of mine wants to program and design
a message forwarding system (kind of like AT&T's Voice Mark maybe?) to
record and deliver voice messages. I told him I didn't think it would
be too useful (and especially not money-making) because of answering
machines, beepers, etc. He was unconvinced. So, I ask everybody for
opinions, facts, stories, and experiences about such systems.

Please respond in e-mail to: [e-mail].

I will gladly summarize for the mutual benefit of myself and others.

Thanks in advance.

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

From: [e-mail] (Georg Holderied)
Subject: Spain Tax Counters
Date: 01 Nov 92 16:14:34 GMT
Organization: Schweizer Radio und Fernsehen (SRG)


Can anybody tell me, how taxing information is transmitted to phone
sets in Spain? (i.e. in Switzerland there are 12 KHz-Tones that
advance the tax-displays.) Is the tax information always present on
subscriber lines, or does it have to be ordered separately?

Thanks for any information on this subject.


George

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #817
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa22042;
          3 Nov 92 2:09 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA10248
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 2 Nov 1992 23:35:20 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA18612
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 2 Nov 1992 23:35:04 -0600
Date: Mon, 2 Nov 1992 23:35:04 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #818

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 2 Nov 92 23:35:00 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 818

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    WindowPhone Personal Call Manager (Caller-ID) (Kathy Sharp)
    Cell Phones to Cut DWI Requested by State Police (Dave Niebuhr)
    Encrypted Email (Mike Riddle)
    HELP Needed on JPEG Standard! (Euee S. Jang)
    Armored Phone (Andrew M. Boardman)
    Airfone -- Phooey (Jim Rees)
    Some Questions on Public Data Networks ([e-mail])
    Today's LECs Would Prefer Metering (was ISDN and Stuff) (Shrikumar)
    Clear-Tel? (Gabe M. Wiener)
    Phone Woes Resolved (Dan Lanciani)
    410 Full Cutover (Carl Moore)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: gtephx![e-mail]
Date: Mon, 2 Nov 92 16:35:07 MST
From: [e-mail] (Kathy Sharp)
Subject: WindowPhone Personal Call Manager (Caller-ID)
Organization: AG Communication Systems, Phoenix, Arizona
Date: Mon, 2 Nov 1992 23:34:35 GMT


     Contact:  1-800-424-8559

SUMMARY: WindowPhone (TM) Group of AG Communication Systems introduces
version 1.2 of its personal call management system for PCs.

PHOENIX, Arizona -- AG Communication Systems Corporation has announced
availability of WindowPhone (TM) Version 1.2, an innovative personal
call management system that further enhances user productivity with
phone book import and export capabilities, a button for quick access
to other software programs, a last number redial function and
left/right mouse button support.

The new version is available for immediate delivery through
MicroWarehouse, Inc., Power Up Software Corporation and The
Programmer's Shop.  Current owners of WindowPhone will receive 1.2 at
no charge.

WindowPhone 1.2 allows data in other programs to be imported into any
of its three phone books.  The new version also allows database
information in WindowPhone to be exported into other software
applications.

A new function called "Launcher" has been added, giving users
quick access to other Windows and DOS applications with just one
click.

Version 1.2 also includes a redial function which provides automatic
recall of the last number dialed.

After selecting an entry in the call log, phone book or unanswered
calls window, users can immediately access the caller's database,
delete the entry or initiate automatic dialing to the caller without
having to move around the screen.

"We designed WindowPhone 1.2 with the enhancements our customers have
been asking for, offering users greater flexibility and increased
productivity.  With these upgrades available at the same list price,
WindowPhone is an inexpensive, sophisticated call management tool for
home or office applications," says Roger Heldt, WindowPhone general
manager.

WindowPhone links the PC and telephone using advanced teleconnection
features and provides many unique benefits with or without the
availability of Caller ID service.  It maintains a complete log of all
incoming and outgoing call activity--by time, date and duration--when
the PC is on or off.  With Caller ID service, WindowPhone identifies a
caller by name in a pop-up window on the PC screen, providing instant
access to detailed caller information.

Even without Caller ID, WindowPhone automatically logs all outgoing
calls from any extension on the line; maintains thousands of phone
book entries complete with caller notes, photos, and auto-dial phone
number listings; blocks outgoing calls to selected prefixes or
numbers; and much more.

WindowPhone is both a software (requires Microsoft (R) Windows 3.0 or
higher) and hardware (8-bit Industry Standard Architecture card)
product, which allows it to provide a unique arsenal of call
management features without requiring additional peripherals, such as
a modem, or occupying system serial port addresses.

WindowPhone, which lists for $295, is available for immediate delivery
by contacting any of these distributors: MicroWarehouse at
1-800-367-7080, Power Up Software at 1-800-851-2917 and The
Programmer's Shop at 1-800-421-8006.

A joint venture of AT&T and GTE, AG Communication Systems provides a
wide range of products and services, including hardware and software
design, systems engineering and systems integration.  The
Phoenix-based company has earned more than 3,000 patents and is a
leading developer and manufacturer of advanced telecommunication
products.

WindowPhone is a trademark of AG Communication Systems Corporation.
Windows is a trademark of Microsoft Corporation.  All other trademarks
referenced here are the proprietary service marks, trademarks or
registered trademarks of their respective manufacturers.


Kathy Sharp        Voice:  [phone]    FAX:  [phone]
AG Communication Systems, PO Box 52179, Phoenix AZ 85072-2179
UUCP:  ...!{ncar!noao!enuucp | att}!gtephx!sharpk
Internet:  gtephx![e-mail]     (AG = AT&T + GTE)

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

Date: Mon, 2 Nov 92 15:35:36 EST
From: [e-mail] (Dave Niebuhr)
Subject: Cell Phones to Cut DWI Requested by State Police


A letter to the editor in today's {Newsday} (11/02/92) by a New York
State Police Captain requested the use of cell and land-line phones
for reporting drunk and/or dangerous drivers.

The article reads:

"Regarding the letter by Dorothy Enright ["Put Car Phone to Good Use,"
Oct. 19]: "The Division of State Police has invited the public to
assist the police in DWI enforcement by establishing the *DWI
(numerically, it's *394).  By dialing that number the public may
report persons who aer suspected of operating vehicles under the
influence of alcohol or drugs.  If the area of the reported violation
is customarily patrolled by a local police agency, the agency having
the enarest available patrol will be notified and asked to respond and
investigate.

"This effort is backed up by a toll-free telephone land-line,
1-800-CURB-DWI (1-800-287-2394).  Although the system is intended
primarily for reporting suspected intoxicated drivers, the reckless
and erratic operators described by Enright constitute a hazard that
the state police wish to be informed of."


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

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

Date: Mon, 02 Nov 92 06:50:02 CST
From: [e-mail] (Mike Riddle)
Subject: Encrypted Email
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Inns of Court, Papillion, NE


Greetings:

With the release of PGP2.0 "Pretty Good Privacy," there has been an
increase in discussion about usefulness and legality of encrypted
email, in a number of newsgroups.  Some of these have referred to
"PEM," which I believe stands for "Privacy Enhanced Mail."

I don't have a full newsfeed, but can arrange to get additional
groups.  Can someone point me to the right newsgroups and/or RFCs so I
can research PEM a bit better?

Thanks for your help. Email replies cheerfully accepted.


Mike
     <<<< 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   (1:285/27.0)

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

From: [e-mail] (Euee S. Jang)
Subject: HELP Needed on JPEG Standard!
Organization: UB
Date: Tue, 3 Nov 1992 02:13:53 GMT


Hi. I am a graduate student at Suny at Buffalo. I am about to start
the experimentation on JPEG. But I have no program or tool for JPEG.
Because it is an important part of my research, it would be helpful if
you send some information how I can reach it.

Thank you for reading.


Erik     e-mail: [e-mail]
Dept. of Electrical and Computer Engineering
State University of New York at Buffalo

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

Date: Mon, 2 Nov 92 17:21:17 EST
From: andrew m. boardman <[e-mail]>
Subject: Armored Phone


I need a wall-mountable telephone for indoors use that's fairly theft-
and vandalism-proof.  Who sells this kind of stuff?


andrew   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Jim Rees)
Subject: Airfone -- Phooey
Date: 2 Nov 1992 22:58:57 GMT
Organization: University of Michigan CITI
Reply-To: [e-mail]


Last night I was actually on a plane that had Airfones and I needed to
make a call.  The stupid thing just sat there emiting DTMF tones and
never gave me a dial tone.  And why is there no RJ-11 jack on it?
Where am I supposed to plug in my modem?  I'm not impressed.

On the other hand, I am impressed with the new AT&T Public Phone 2000.
(PAT -- there are some in the lobby of the Palmer House).  Makes the
old green-screen Public Phone Plus look archaic.  Sure would be nice
if they would put an X server and slip/ppp driver in them.  VT-100s
went out with bell-bottoms (or was it platform shoes).

It also would be nice if AT&T would install some of these in train
stations.  I don't spend that much time at airports, but given
Amtrak's on-time record, I do spend a lot of time in train stations.

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

Organization: Purdue University
Date: Mon, 02 Nov 1992 22:47:00 EST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Some Questions on Public Data Networks


I have some questions on Public data networks. Any response would be
greatly appreciated.

* Value added networks of common carriers (like AT&T) never cross
paths with their voice networks. ie traffic on one never uses the
other network.  Am I right?

* Public data networks (common carrier VANs, Tymnet, Telnet etc) are
not as extensive as plain old telephone networks. ie if someone in
some remote place in say Oklahama wants a data connection, most
probably he will not get it. Is this right?

* Internet, Bitnet 'et. al.' do not use any public data network - they
have their own infrastructure which is not shared with anyone. Is this
right?

* Common carrier offerings like Frame Relay, SMDS do not use their
plain old voice infrastructure. I'm wrong. Right?

If you think this is too trivial reply by mail. I will summarize.


Thanks.

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

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

Date: Mon, 2 Nov 92 00:51:26 -0500
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Today's LECs Would Prefer Metering (was ISDN and Stuff)
Organization: UMass, Amherst MA + Temporal Sys & Computer Networks Bombay India


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

> Question:  Why is it that current analog lines are either "unmeasured"
> (residential) or "measured" (business), yet most ISDN is measured regardless
> of who's using it (and charged at a higher rate if it's for data)?  Finally,

 Guess its got to do with history, back before Mr. Strowger started
getting ripped off, and back when the Sheriff's wife had to ask Louise
to call up the Bates Motel ... it would have been a real chore for
Louise to meter calls. Also, the equipment was all installed and
business was not sure.  So it was simpler to charge flat rate and
amortise the cost of operations over the user base. Besides they'd
have wanted to encourage more usage, phones being new. So the phone
company then got stuck with it. They'd like to but I don't think they
can change now!

 But now, no one needs to be enouraged to use the phone any more, and
since more money in revenue would be welcome, its logical that they
would try to move to measured service -- always gets more money for
the effort.  So any new service today will try to ignore exact
analogous parallels in other services, when it comes to billing. So
business is always metered, ISDN will be so.  My guess and < $0.02
worth.

Incidentally, in India the MTNL (Government undertaking, LEC) has
recently began a very unpopular policy of charging local calls on a
five minute basis, each five minutes amounts to a new call. They could
not have implemented it before they got these fancy stored program
exchanges, so that's one nice thing about strowgers and crossbars :-)
They are hated for this, but they are a monopoly ... so it will stick,
at least for a while maybe a long while. BTW, local calls have always
been sort-of metered in India, you are allowed some 200 calls free per
month. The phone service is quite congested so I think this is fair.
But what is terrible about this new rule is the simple fact that in
any office a phone is shared between a bunch of guys, and it always
takes a while to get transfered from the switchboard/PBX to the
correct phone and then to ask for the right person ... and this eats
into the five minutes. Funny, MTNL does not apply this rule for calls
from a public phone.

I heard that some PTTs in Europe have always had metered local calls,
or at least that it was so planned ... is that true?


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Gabe M Wiener)
Subject: Clear-Tel?
Organization: Columbia University
Date: Mon, 2 Nov 1992 04:38:53 GMT


I went to a reunion at my high school the other day, and at one point
I went to make a call from the same old NY Tel payphone that was there
when I was a student there.  Anyway, I banged in my credit card #, and
got a message saying, "I'm sorry, but AT&T does not allow other
carriers on their cards."

Puzzled, I tried again, using my New York Tel calling card, and got
"Thank you for using Clear-Tel."

Now WAIT A SEC!  I've heard of AOS's on COCOT's, but these were plain
vanilla NY Tel payphones.  Why would a local call be processed by
anyone *other* than New York Tel?


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

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

Date: Mon, 2 Nov 92 02:09:15 EST
From: [e-mail] (Dan Lanciani)
Subject: Phone Woes Resolved


    A while back I described an odd problem with one-way audio
dropouts on calls after about midnight.  After nine months, the
problem was finally fixed.  The details are slightly amusing: the
repair supervisor (or whatever she really was) eventually told me that
she couldn't do anything more (because they had "locked horns" with
the transmission technicians), that there was nobody else I could talk
to about the problem, and that it would take a long time (much longer
than the eight weeks we had been communicating) before there could
possibly be progress (because NET's staff is very small and their
systems complicated).

    I took this (especially the part about not talking to anybody
else) to be a good cue to move on to the DPU.  Intending merely to get
a good target name for a written explanation, I spoke to a helpful
person there.  He was interested enough to take down some of the
specifics and initiate a trouble report.  I wasn't really expecting
much, but _that very night_, in addition to the dropouts, there were
many loud clicks and pops (starting as soon as the ringing was heard).
The next night, the dropout problem (and, of course, the clicks and
pops) was gone and it has not come back.

    A few days later, a NET representative called to say that a
technician was checking my line because it wasn't 100% up to
standards.  (And the polarity of my line was reversed in the process
...)  I told him I was happy to be rid of the dropouts but he didn't
know exactly what had been done about that.  Later, the helpful person
from the DPU checked back with me.  I thanked him for the almost
unbelievable response time.  He mentioned that he wasn't entirely
happy with the explanation he received from NET ("a switching
problem") but as long as it worked ...

    So there you have my testimonial to the effectiveness of the
DPU.  I don't think I would have believed it without first hand
experience.  I still don't believe that it was worth NET's effort to
put me off for so long over a problem that could be fixed so quickly.


Dan Lanciani    ddl@harvard.*

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

Date: Mon, 2 Nov 92 17:13:34 EST
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject: 410 Full Cutover


410 should now be fully cut over.  In Delaware yesterday, I tried a 0+
call via AT&T to my office (278-xxxx) using area 301, and it got a
recording telling me to use 410.  This was between 9 and 9:30 AM
Eastern Standard Time.

On Saturday, I heard an announcement of this on WTOP (1500-AM) radio
(Washington, DC) and the announcer flubbed; he said 310 where 301 was
intended.


[Moderator's Note: I dialed an out of service number in 301 Monday
morning and the intercept message which came back said the number
dialed,  *410* - etc, was not in service.  So apparently calls to 410
dialed as 301 are still going through from some places.   PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #818
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa24433;
          3 Nov 92 3:07 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA12414
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 3 Nov 1992 01:10:08 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA02553
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 3 Nov 1992 01:09:55 -0600
Date: Tue, 3 Nov 1992 01:09:55 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #819

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 3 Nov 92 01:09:00 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 819

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Phone Records: Public or Private? (Jeff Wasilko)
    Re: Phone Records: Public or Private? (Joe Konstan)
    Re: Integretel Sticks Me With Charges (Maxime Taksar)
    Re: Integretel Sticks Me With Charges (John Higdon)
    Re: Computerized Sales Call "Locked" My Line (Steve Forrette)
    Re: Computerized Sales Call "Locked" My Line (Phillip J. Birmingham)
    Re: Computerized Sales Call "Locked" My Line (Shrikumar)
    Re: Phone Directory on CD (Bryan Lockwood)
    Re: Phone Directory on CD (Ken Jongsma)
    Re: Cheap Voice Mail (Tony Harminc)
    Re: Radio Modems (John Gilbert)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Jeff Wasilko)
Subject: Re: Phone Records: Public or Private?
Date: Mon, 2 Nov 92 22:21:13 EST
Organization: Univ of Fnord; Roslyn's Cafe Div.
Reply-To: [e-mail]


Steven A Rubin <[e-mail]> wrote:

> I am trying to find out if the customer records the RBOCs keep on what
> exchanges customers call is public record.  Also, are long distance
> records public?

> [Moderator's Note: No sir, they are not! They are proprietary records
> of the telco, released only to the customer or by subpoena to law
> enforcement agencies, etc.  Local telcos are required to exchange data
> for billing purposes with the long distance carriers, and this applies
> even if your phone number is non-published. But other than for billing
> and/or investigative purposes *no one* is to get records of your
> calls.   PAT]

Well, not exactly. I had a bad experience with an agent of the local
operating company (SNET). I've been meaning to write it up, but never
had the time. Here goes:

A woman called our Publisher claiming to be a VP for SNET (the LOC).
She said that she spoke with me on Friday and that besides being
out-and out rude, I told her we were running a kiddie-porn ring when
she asked what business we were in!!!!

So, she threatened to have all of our lines cut off, and make us 'go
thru hell' to get things turned back on. She also kept calling and
harrasing our office manager and our receptionist. The harrasment went
on for three days before I was able to talk to the woman ...

We found out that she's some kind of telemarketer in a different
division of a SNET agent company (i.e., she didn't work for SNET). The
president of this company said she had no reason to talk to me, but
the outbound call log showed numerous calls to our number. She also
pulled our line records (she knew how many and what kind of trunks we
had), wven though she shouldn't have had access to them. She also knew
our calling patterns, including our totals for our SNET and AT&T/MCI
bills.

As it turns out, I was at happy hour with the publisher at the time
she said I talked to her, so I had an alibi ...

No one has any idea why she decided to torment me. The president of
the company promised me an explanation (and a written apology) the day
after I spoke with him. SNET also was supposed to look into it.

I never got an explanation. The president of the telemarketing firm
never called me and won't return my calls. SNET brushed it off, even
when I protested about the woman getting unathorized access to our
call records. SNET says their agents need to 'better serve customers'.
I asked if there was any way to block agents' access, but they said
no. They didn't seem concerned about the woman impersonating a VP of
SNET.

I wish I had the time to pursue this -- she caused be an awful lot of
grief over this. I ended up just chalking it up to a slightly deranged
woman.

Telemarketers are scum.

Jeff    Jeff's Oasis at Home.   Jeff can also be reached at work at:
                                                 [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: I love it when presidents of companies won't take
my phone calls; I treat it like a challenge, and often times I wind up
calling them *at home* in the evening. If corporate records show their
wife as an officer of the corporation, then I just make my demands on
the wife.  Don't you think that doesn't get them on the phone after
the wife rips hubby apart for trying to hide from me. One night I
called a guy's home and he just happened to answer the phone himself.
I told him what I wanted and his reply was to call him at the office
during the day. "But sir," I told him, "you don't accept business
calls during the day at your office. You have your secretary give me
the brush off. *If* I call tomorrow -- I may just place you with an
attorney instead -- I'll expect you to talk to me, understand?"  If
you really want that telemarketer's skin, start getting *real pushy*
with the president until he at least takes your call and deals with it
in a satisfactory way. If necessary, pull his corporate records, get
the name of his attorney from that and talk to his attorney. That'll
put him on notice that you mean business. It works for me!   PAT]

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

From: Joe Konstan <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 2 Nov 92 10:33:31 CST
Subject: Re: Phone Records: Public or Private?


Steven A. Rubin asked:

> I am trying to find out if the customer records the RBOCs keep on what
> exchanges customers call is public record.  Also, are long distance
> records public?

And our Esteemed Moderator (tm) replied:

> [Moderator's Note: No sir, they are not! They are proprietary records
> of the telco, released only to the customer or by subpoena to law
> enforcement agencies, etc.  Local telcos are required to exchange data
> for billing purposes with the long distance carriers, and this applies
> even if your phone number is non-published. But other than for billing
> and/or investigative purposes *no one* is to get records of your
> calls.   PAT]

Didn't we have a discussion about this some six months ago.  I thought
that the upshot was that LONG DISTANCE call records had to be
disclosed by your long distance company to any other long distance
companies to "help them effectively compete" for your business.

At the time, this was in relation to mailings from Sprint or MCI about
how an individual could save money (given their known calling
patterns) by switching.  Today, though, in the era of 800- calls that
become collect at dollars per minute, I'd be surprised if these same
long distance companies weren't getting this information and selling
it or mailing lists based on it.


Joe Konstan    [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: I do not think other LD companies can get your call
records, name, address or phone number for any reason other than
billing purposes, at least not legally. Telemarketing contractors
could be considered agents in a limited sense when telco hires them to
solicit your business; they get the records they need but the
assumption is they do not abuse them.   Note key word: assumption.   PAT]

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

Date: Mon, 2 Nov 92 10:58:13 -0800
From: [e-mail] (Maxime Taksar KC6ZPS)
Subject: Re: Integretel Sticks Me With Charges


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

> Here is another one for you to think about: Try 702-333-8444. This
> number is blocked by MCI/Sprint/others. *They* won't complete the
> call, and advise callers to dial in via 10288-1-702-etc ... AT&T and
> the local telco in Nevada both willingly handle the incoming calls. I
> wonder why Sprint/MCI/etc are wary of it?  For an example of this, try
> calling the above via 10222-plus or 10333-plus. Supposedly the calls
> are (as the recorded announcement says) 'free of all 900 charges; you
> only pay for the toll ...' if that's so, then howcome MCI/Sprint won't
> connect to the number?   PAT]

Sprint and MCI *do* complete the call!  Pay close attention here: the
recording you reach from *both* Sprint and MCI is identical.  I
suspect that trying this with any carrier other than AT&T will give
you the same result (as will calling through the LEC).  It's just that
AT&T completes the call differently.  (And you really will only have
to pay the LD charges).

Why is this?  Because the actual, local number merely reaches the
recording (which probably doesn't supervise).  However, if you call
through AT&T, then AT&T doesn't route the call to the actual local
number, but rather to the service you're trying to reach.

Why would AT&T do this?  Because it's in the interest of both them and
the service provider (who, BTW, is not necessarily sleazy).  AT&T runs
dedicated lines from the target area to the provider's POP.  The
provider gets a kick-back for (either all or just the ones going over
the dedicated trunks ... I don't remember) the calls made to the
service in question.

As I understand it, it's very difficult to convince AT&T to install
this class of service.  (Someone correct me if I'm wrong).  Also, the
name of the service slips my mind.  Anyone from AT&T have the official
name?


Maxime Taksar    KC6ZPS    [e-mail]

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

Subject: Re: Integretel Sticks Me With Charges
Date: 2 Nov 92 22:16:30 PST (Mon)
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)


They (MCI/Sprint) ARE connecting to the number. The number has some
answering machines on it that tell you to redial the call with '10288'
so that the call will be routed via AT&T. It is AT&T that is NOT
carrying the call (at least not to the number you dialed). By
pre-arrangement with the IP, AT&T intercepts that seven-digit number
in area 702 and routes it over a special span connected to the Lo-Ad
communications center in Reno.

Then AT&T splits the proceeds with the IP. In other words, for
consideration of the "attractive nuisance" in Nevada that encourages
calls, AT&T gives a piece of the action to the machine's keeper. This
scheme depends on a heavy volume of traffic, and of course, having the
calls carried via AT&T. While normal LD rates apply, the volume of
calls makes it worthwhile for AT&T to cut the IP in.

The "intercept" that you thought was coming from MCI or Sprint was
actually a barker message provided by the IP so that the caller would
reroute his call over AT&T.


John Higdon <[e-mail]> (hiding out in the desert)

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: Computerized Sales Call "Locked" My Line
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA
Date: Mon, 2 Nov 1992 03:35:19 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail].
colostate.edu (Brian J. Catlin) writes:

> If they say that this amount of time won't hurt, then why are
> answering machines and modems not allowed on party lines?

The reason that answering machines and modems aren't allowed on party
lines is that the phones that telco provides for party line use have
special ringers that will ring only when the proper polarity/ground
combination is present.  Regular modems and answering machines will
answer calls for any party on the party line instead of ones for a
specific party.


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Computerized Sales Call "Locked" My Line
Date: 2 Nov 92 14:58:03 -0600
Organization: Fermi National Accelerator Lab


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

> [e-mail] (Martin Soques) writes:

>> Greetings!  Last night, I received a computerized sales/sleeze call
>> which essentially "locked" my line and prevented me from getting a
>> dial tone no matter what I did with my switch hook.  I found this
>> disturbing since I could not hang up on this unsolicited call.  Is

>> [Moderator's Note: You did not hang up *long enough*. Had you stayed
>> off the line for maybe 20-30 seconds the sales robot would have gotten
>> cut off. But each time you disconnected for a few seconds then went

    I should point out that several years ago (when I lived in
Nashville) I received a computerized call that would *call back* when
I hung up on it. I finally managed to convince them they were wasting
their time by leaving interesting noises (screams, toilet flushes) in
the place where they wanted you to state your address. I also seem to
remember suggesting that I would find the number of the company
president and disrupt *his* dinner to tell him what I thought of his
machine.

    BTW, it is hilarious to come home and find out that your answering
machine has picked up in one of these calls.


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


[Moderator's Note: Do it! Start calling the president of the company
at home during his dinner. If he has the nerve to object, then tell
him you are going to sue him if his machine(s) ever call you again for
any reason. Don't forget to dial *67 before calling him. It is none of
Mister Hotshot's business what your home phone number is.  PAT]

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

Date: Mon, 2 Nov 92 01:13:44 -0500
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Computerized Sales Call "Locked" My Line
Organization: UMass, Amherst MA + Temporal Sys & Computer Networks Bombay India


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

> Just a quick note, (and judging from the poster's address of Austin, this
> really wouldn't apply to him).  Keeping the switchook closed for an extended
> period of time will disconnect you regardless of the callers switchook
> condition in an ESS or Crossbar environment, however in a Step by Step
> system, if the calling party is served by the same CO (same prefix), the
> calling party will be unable to disconnect no matter how long you leave the
> switchook closed ... (there are a few SxS still out there!)

Wasn't it the other way ... if my memory is not flakey, it was the
crossbar that could be disconnected only by the caller. Something to
do with the holding current being related to the callers loop current
flowing thru the holding relay contacts.

Or maybe I am all muddled up.... my crumbling-page-books are in India,
so I cannot hop up to them and verify.


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


[Moderator's Note: I had crossbar service for years. It seems to me it
would also drop the caller eventually, but a minute or more was about
the time it took.  I know with crossbar the called party had a lot
longer time to hang up one phone (like in the john) and go to another
(like in the bedroom with a stop for a glass of water in the kitchen)
without getting cut off; but eventually you would lose it.   PAT]

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

Subject: Re: Phone Directory on CD
From: [e-mail] (Bryan Lockwood)
Date: Mon, 02 Nov 92 16:23:08 AST
Organization: The Generation Gap


Ken Jongsma <[e-mail]> writes:

> In the current {PC Week} there was a small blurb for the following:

> Phone Disc: This $149 product includes telephone listings of 70
> million U.S. residents plus more than seven million U.S. businesses.
> DAK Industries, Inc., of Canoga Park, Calif., can be contacted at
> [phone].

> I was a bit surprised to see DAK selling this. One usually associates
> DAK with closeout merchandise. Perhaps the listings are a bit out of
> date?

Au contraire. DAK has been working very hard to sell these things. I
get a flyer about every other month. DAK seems to be working quite
hard to bring CD-ROM prices down into the realm of affordability for
the common man.


Bryan Lockwood    [e-mail]   1@501 (WWIVnet)

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

From: [e-mail] (Ken Jongsma)
Subject: Re: Phone Directory on CD
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Smiths Industries
Date: Mon, 2 Nov 1992 15:29:20 GMT


In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Ken Jongsma)
writes:

> In the current {PC Week} there was a small blurb for the following:

> Phone Disc: This $149 product includes telephone listings of 70
> million U.S. residents plus more than seven million U.S. businesses.
> DAK Industries, Inc., of Canoga Park, Calif., can be contacted at
> [phone].

Since I submitted this, I have seen a copy of the DAK catalog that
features this CD-ROM directory. Deciphering Drew Kaplan's flowery
prose is not easy, but I have a few additional details:

 - Three disks are shipped: Eastern US Residential, Western US Residential
   and Entire US Business.

 - All three disks include names, addreses, zip codes and phone numbers.

 - Only *listed* numbers are included.

 - Residential searches allowed by name, limited by city or state.

 - Business searches by category, addresses, street names, states, zip
   codes, area codes or phone numbers.

 - "Hits" on either disk can be saved to disk in groups of 25 or less.

 - The price is $129 + $6 shipping, but the note indicates a CD-ROM drive
   purchase is required.

One of the product photographs shows the producer of the disk set is
Digital Directory Assistance, Inc. at [phone].


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

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

Date: Mon, 02 Nov 92 00:01:19 EST
From: Tony Harminc <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Cheap Voice Mail


[e-mail] (Luigi Semenzato) wrote:

> We have a few Sparc IPC workstations, made by Sun Microsystems, in our
> office, with disk space to spare.  They have audio in-out hardware.
> The A/D and D/A conversions are both 8 bit @ 8 KHz, I believe.  The
> quality is certainly sufficient for voice mail purposes, and it would
> be fun to have such a system, but only if it can be done cheaply.

If you send me one of those underused Sparcstations, I will send you a
working answering machine by return mail.  This would appear to
satisfy your need for cheap voicemail, and my need for a cheap
workstation, with minimal fuss and maximum fun.


Tony Harminc

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

From: [e-mail] (John Gilbert)
Subject: Re: Radio Modems
Organization: Motorola, Land Mobile Products Sector
Date: Mon, 2 Nov 1992 23:09:08 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> patrick%8461.span@Fedex.
Msfc.Nasa.Gov (Patrick E. Meyer) writes:

> Can anyone please suggest companies that I can contact about radio
> modems.

Motorola also offers a variety of radio modems. We offer low power/low
cost UHF radio modem links for private systems, mobile data terminals,
mobile radio PCs, RF modem (rx only) on an industry standard RAM card,
portable terminals and modems with nationwide service on the ARDIS
network, "Altair" wireless ethernet and cellular data modems.

Motorola Team Sales can be reached at 1-800-367-2346.  Ask to speak to
Cindy at X4213 or Gay at X4215.


John Gilbert    [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #819
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa13310;
          4 Nov 92 1:03 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA07852
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 3 Nov 1992 23:00:27 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA12460
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 3 Nov 1992 23:00:12 -0600
Date: Tue, 3 Nov 1992 23:00:12 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #820

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 3 Nov 92 23:00:15 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 820

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Private Lines, Bandwidth, and Signal Level (Harold Hallikainen)
    Re: Private Lines, Bandwidth, and Signal Level (John Schmidt)
    Re: Telephone Phreaks (Tim Tyler)
    Re: Airfone -- Phooey (Henry Mensch)
    Re: 700 Numbers From Overseas (Ron Jarrell)
    Re: The Worst Phone Lines in the US? (David Lesher)
    Re: ISDN and Stuff (Maxime Taksar)
    Want to Know the Address of Pactel (Cellular Mobile Co.) (Hanwook Jung)
    Low Noise Cordless Phone Info Wanted (Steven L. Johnson)
    Career Opportunities in Digital Wireless Comm. Tech at ITRI (Nirwan Ansari)
    Disconnection and Steppers (Stephen H. Lichter)
    Non-Intuitive (Monty Solomon)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Harold Hallikainen)
Subject: Re: Private Lines, Bandwidth, and Signal Level
Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo
Date: Tue, 03 Nov 1992 21:54:03 GMT


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

> It's likely you could do all sorts of rude things, and it might take
> them quite a while to track the complaints down to you.  But then
> again, they might get to your door in couple of days.  :-0

    Year ago, I drove a dry pair with some program audio at the
radio station I worked for.  The level was not bad (maybe +8 dBm
peak), but, I accidentally drove the pair unbalanced.  Since I was
sending identifiable audio, the phones lit up as everyone in the
neigborhood now heard our station on their phone.  We had someone from
the CO break in on one of the calls (since the lines were now all
busy) to ask what we were doing.  Apparently they got a lot of calls
too.  So, it's important to keep those lines balanced!

    Back on the subject (private lines), I have an old Bell
Systems Technical Reference Publication 41004 from October 1973.  It
discusses voiceband circuits under Tariff FCC 260.  The circuits are
identified as 2001, 3001 and 3002 circuits.  We have generally used
3002 circuits.  Some of the specs it outlines for all these circuits
are: 600 ohm termination, maximum data signal power of 0 dBm over 3
second average, +13 dBm peak, receive level of -16 dBm at 1004 Hz.
Above voiceband, 3995 to 4005 Hz was to be at least 18 dB below
maximum allowed in band signal (possibly to protect carrier of analog
mux systems?), 10 to 25 KHz was to be less than -16 dBm, 10KHz to 25
KHz was to be less than -24 dBm, 25 KHz to 40 KHz was to be less than
 -36 dBm, and above 40 KHz, -50 dBm.  In local areas, these circuits
would often just be dry pairs.  They could, however, be multiplexed,
bringing in the frequency limitations.

    I've also got some Pacific Bell private line rates from 1988.
They vary from $15.22 per month for a 1001 half duplex circuit to
$33.49 for a 2001 full duplex circuit.

    Finally, all this stuff is pretty out of date.  Is Bellcore
where we'd now go to find out all these specs?


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

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

Date: Tue, 03 Nov 1992 01:49:05 EST
From: JOHN SCHMIDT <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Private Lines, Bandwidth and Signal Level


Telco tariffs and technical standards have specific limits on signal
levels and baud rates, to prevent crosstalk into other services.  If
you rented a "dry pair" from them which was simply a piece of JK wire
from point to point, with no connection to their multi-pair cables,
they really didn't care what you put in it.  (but then, why didn't you
run your own wire?) (probably because I recall the installation charge
was something like $10, and the monthly rental $.50, cheaper to pay
them than anyone else, and they would fix it free when someone set the
file cabinet on it and squashed it.)

Anyway, we once wanted to run some 50ma current loop teletype circuits
on telco pair at 300 baud, and were told that those circuits were
limited to 75? baud.  The 125VDC or so in an unbalanced loop would
cause too much crosstalk at 300 baud.  20ma I think was OK up to 300
baud. (Maybe some old-timer who set up teletype circuits, which are,
of course, some of the first data communications circuits, can
remember the exact limits.) Anyway, if you ever landed across one of
those circuits, you never complained about ringing voltage anymore!
very painful!

"Program" circuits are limited to +8 dbm, as measured on a "VU" meter
(+18dbm peak), although I have run much hotter levels in unamplified
loops without "detection" (read 'complaint').  In fact, for some years
in the late '60s, we connected a program circuit here to the 70volt 20
watt output of a PA amplifier, and had a 12" speaker with only a line
to voicecoil transformer running off the other end, two buildings
away, loud enough to be uncomfortable when the amplifier was turned
up, without any noticable crosstalk.  And to this day I have an
intercom circuit between our studios on the third floor and the rear
door to the building running on a pair in the (now owned by Adelphi,
used to be Telco's) riser cable here, "microphone" level when
listening, 70volt audio when talking.  It's been here about 20 years,
and no one has ever complained.  The trick to this is to keep
everything well balanced.  A little bit of unbalance, and you'll get
crosstalk up the gazoo ...

DISCLAIMER: DON'T BLAME ME IF YOU TRY THIS ON YOUR OWN AND THE PAIR
MELTS, OR THE REPAIRPERSON GETS ZAPPED AND WANTS TO SUE... ;-( .


John H. Schmidt, P.E.         Internet: [e-mail]
Technical Director, WBAU      Phone--Days     [phone]
Adelphi University                   Evenings [phone]
Garden City, New York 11530   Fax-------------[phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Tim Tyler)
Subject: Re: Telephone Phreaks
Organization: UMCC
Date: Tue, 3 Nov 1992 02:50:54 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> mertwig![e-mail]
(Daniel Drucker) writes:

> Also, would someone tell me what the STD-III Information Center is?
> (Dial 950-1288 anywhere in the USA, 2400,8N1.)

Secure Telephone Unit III


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Henry Mensch)
Date: Tue, 3 Nov 92 22:06:42 -0800
Subject: Re: Airfone -- Phooey
Reply-To: [e-mail]


[e-mail] (Jim Rees) wrote:

> Last night I was actually on a plane that had Airfones and I needed
> to make a call.  The stupid thing just sat there emiting DTMF tones
> and never gave me a dial tone.  And why is there no RJ-11 jack on it?
> Where am I supposed to plug in my modem?  I'm not impressed.

Is anyone happy with these things?  I've never gotten one to work to
my satisfaction ...


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Ron Jarrell)
Subject: Re: 700 Numbers From Overseas
Date: 3 Nov 92 06:48:03 GMT
Organization: Virginia Tech (VPI & SU)


Actually, according to the account rep I spoke with when getting my
Easy Reach 700 number, sometime next year they intend to have things
in place so that you will be able to reach the Easy Reach numbers from
international locations, and forward to them as well. Plus other
miscellaneous stuff like information services; weather, stocks, sports
scores, etc.


Ron Jarrell    Virginia Tech Computing Center   [e-mail]

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

From: David Lesher <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: The Worst Phone Lines in the US?
Date: Tue, 3 Nov 92 19:53:27 EDT
Reply-To: [e-mail]  (David Lesher)
Organization: NRK Clinic for habitual NetNews abusers - Beltway Annex


> I seem to recall that GTE is the LEC in Miami.  Is this correct?

NOPE!

Miami is Bell South Territory. aka BS.

I fought for 2.5 years trying to get a pair quiet enough so that my
Microcom MNP modem would not give up and just hang up. Even wrote to
the PSC. I'd call BS Repair on the FUBAR pair, they could not hear me,
and they'd STILL claim it was fixed within 30 minutes.

BS is still under investigation for a multi-million fraud case re:
repair. Seems that if a problem exists longer than 24 hours, the PSC
must be notified in the yearly report, and the sub gets a refund.
Guess what. Virtually EVERY ticket got 'kicked' before 23.9 hours.

At long last, a fired supervisor spilled the beans to the PSC and the
press. When I last talked to my contact in state goverment, they were
still turning over rocks on the case ...

Oh, I also visited the guy who bought my house. Turns out he's a VAX
sysmjr [poor .astard ;-] and yep, he had the same line noise! But
relief is at hand ... Andrew shredded that piece of trunkage into
multi-color spaghetti :-}

In short - the only thing I miss about BS and Miami is my great old
'255-RTFM' assignment :_}


[e-mail]

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

Date: Tue, 3 Nov 92 10:15:53 -0800
From: [e-mail] (Maxime Taksar KC6ZPS)
Subject: Re: ISDN and Stuff


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Doctor Math) writes:

[example of ISDN costing quite a bit more than a high-speed modem over
POTS for an internet link deleted]

> Question: Why are things this way? When current modem technology
> approaches the speed of one ISDN B-channel over an unmeasured dial-up
> line for one-fourth the CPE cost and less than half the base monthly
> charge, why would I want ISDN?

[Further questions that I'm not really qualified to answer deleted.]

Modem technology will never get near the speed of an ISDN B channel.
I think that the theortical limit for a modem over a POTS line is
somewhere in the 25-30Kbps range (someone please remind me how fast a
Shannon modem is).  This isn't even half of what an ISDN B channel is.

Why would you want ISDN?  Because, theoretically, many people and
businesses will eventually have it.  I'll venture to suggest the Fax
machine analogy.  A Fax is to SnailMail as ISDN is to POTS.  If ISDN
does become as popular as it's supposed to, ISDN CPE will cost *much*
less, just as most technologies go down in cost as market and
competition for it increase.


Maxime Taksar   KC6ZPS   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Hanwook Jung)
Subject: Re: Want to Know the Address of Pactel (Cellular Mobile Co.)
Organization: UB
Date: Tue, 03 Oct 1992 19:34:15 GMT


Does anybody know the address of Pactel Co. (cellular mobile
communication company)?

Please send email the address directly to me.  Thanks in advance.


H. Jung     email address : [e-mail]

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

Date: Tue, 3 Nov 1992 22:23:31 -0500
From: Steven L. Johnson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Low Noise Cordless Phone Info Wanted


I'm looking to replace an older low end cordless phone with something
that has less hum and noise.  Slightly more range would be nice also.

I am wondering how the newer 902/928 MHz phones (digital or analog)
compare with the more popular 46/49 MHz ones.  I'm interested in
comparisons or recommendations on the different noise reduction
methods that the phones use.

Specifically the Panasonic KX-T9000 looks interesting, but is it
really noticably better than the best of the 46/49 MHz flavor?

Pointers to previous discussions (telecom-archives, etc) gratefully
accepted.


Steve    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Nirwan Ansari)
Subject: Career Opportunities in Digital Wireless Comm. Tech at ITRI
Organization: New Jersey Institute of Technology, Newark, N.J.
Date: Tue, 3 Nov 1992 16:05:09 GMT


This is a posting for Dr. C. H. Lu. Please REPLY and forward ALL
INQUIRIES to:

                Dr. Chung H. Lu
                Communications Technology Division
                CCL/ITRI, M00B, Bldg. 14
                195 Sec. 4,  Chung-Hsing Rd.
                Chutung, Hsinchu 310
                Taiwan

                Fax: [phone]
                Phone: [phone]
                e-mail: [e-mail]


                 Career Opportunities
                         in
     Digital Wireless Communications Technology

Computer and Communications Research Laboratories of the Industrial
Technology Research Institute (CCL/ITRI) has ongoing projects in the
areas of wireless communications, including personal communications
and wireless data communications. Current emphases are TDMA wireless
digital telephone, CDMA technology, and spread spectrum technology
(SST) RF Modem.

CCL is the leading industrial research organization in computer and
communications in Taiwan.  We are strategically located next to the
Hsinchu Science Based Industrial Park.  Chiao Tung University and
Ching Hwa University are only minutes away.  If you would like to be a
major contributor to the emerging wireless communications technology
and burgeoning wireless communications industry in Taiwan, CCL has a
position for you.

Openings for senior engineers/researchers and managerial positions in
the following areas of expertise are available:

High level design definition and development, system and software
design for wireless communications systems, protocol analysis and
implementation, RF system analysis and design, RF circuit design,
channel coding and communications signal processing.

Advanced degree and extensive relevant experiences in digital
communications are required.  Demonstrable project leadership is a
plus.  Interested professional please send a full resume and relevant
supporting materials to:


Dr. Chung H. Lu
Communications Technology Division
CCL/ITRI, M00B, Bldg. 14
195 Sec. 4,  Chung-Hsing Rd.
Chutung, Hsinchu 310   Taiwan

Fax: [phone]
Phone: [phone]
e-mail: [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: 3 Nov 92 02:38:00 UT
Subject: Disconnection and Steppers


Sometime before we replaced our step switches to electrnic we had work
orders that had us convert the connector's to a timed disconnect.
That means when a called party hanges up after a set time the ground
on the C lead is removed and the called party is free and has dial
tone again. It has been years so I really don't remember the amount of
time, but it was not very long. These were done in GTE California, but
I'm sure our other companies as well as many others had done the
convert.  It was standard practice to do this on a equipment as it was
added.


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: Monty Solomon <[e-mail]>
Subject: Non-Intuitive
Date: Tue, 3 Nov 92 4:30:03 EST


[Moderator's Note: Monty passed along this next message from where it
originally appeared in the rec.humor.funny newsgroup.   PAT]

 From: [e-mail] (Greg Rose)
 Subject: Non-Intuitive
 Keywords: smirk

All I wanted to do was find out the temperature predicted for
tomorrow. But I'd missed the television weather report. So I looked up
the telephone directory. The index mentioned "recorded information
services". Great, turn to page whatever.

"Recorded information service numbers all start with 0055 [this is
Australia we're talking about]. The services themselves are listed
under 'D' for 'double-oh-double-five'".

Great. Turn to the 'D' section, and look towards the end of the 0055
list for 'Weather', but it isn't there. So I started at the beginning.
Fortuitous, that. The weather service is listed under 'A', for "Ask
the Weather".

You really do have to ask it, and nicely, too! It reads out a list of
places, and when you hear the one you want, you must say "yes please",
for it to go into the detail.

I love intuitive ways to use things. Now I know why.

 Greg Rose
 [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #820
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa17692;
          4 Nov 92 3:16 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA07031
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 4 Nov 1992 01:15:49 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA19961
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 4 Nov 1992 01:15:27 -0600
Date: Wed, 4 Nov 1992 01:15:27 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #821

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 4 Nov 92 01:15:30 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 821

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Today's LECs Would Prefer Metering (was ISDN and Stuff) (P. Knoppers)
    Re: Today's LECs Would Prefer Metering (was ISDN and Stuff) (Richard Cox)
    Re: 700 Numbers From Overseas (Holger Reusch)
    Re: Computerized Sales Call "Locked" My Line (Richard Cox)
    Re: HELP Needed on JPEG Standard! (Jack Adams)
    Re: HELP Needed on JPEG Standard! (John R. Levine)
    Re: PP 2000 -- Phooey (John R. Levine)
    Re: Phone Directory on CD (Paul Robinson)
    Re: Phone Directory on CD (Philip Gladstone)
    Bandwidth on Demand Specification Wanted (Jim Edwards)
    Re: Tone Converters (Steven H. Lichter)
    Migrating the Internet: Internet Course (via Internet) (Peter Roosen-Runge)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Peter Knoppers)
Subject: Re: Today's LECs Would Prefer Metering (was ISDN and Stuff)
Organization: Delft University of Technology, Dept. of Electrical Engineering
Date: Tue, 03 Nov 1992 14:08:08 GMT


[e-mail] writes:

> I heard that some PTTs in Europe have always had metered local calls,
> or at least that it was so planned ... is that true?

I'll add one data-point to this discussion ...

In the Netherlands local phone calls have been metered since as long
as I can remember (over 25 years). Local calls of any duration used
to cost one unit.

With the proliferation of modems this simple tariff became too
expensive for the phone company. Local calls during office-hours now
cost one unit per five minutes (or a part thereof). At other times you
get ten minutes per unit.

Each unit adds DFL 0.15 (about US $ 0.08) to the phone bill and this
rate has not been changed in a looooooong time.


Peter Knoppers - [e-mail]

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

Date: Tue, 3 Nov 92 12:02 GMT
From: Richard Cox <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Today's LECs Would Prefer Metering (was ISDN and Stuff)
Reply-To: [e-mail]


[e-mail] said:

>> each five minutes amounts to a new call. They could not have implemented
>> it before they got these fancy stored program exchanges, so that's one
>> nice thing about strowgers and crossbars :-)

and asks:

>> I heard that some PTTs in Europe have always had metered local calls,
>> or at least that it was so planned ... is that true?

In the UK all calls are metered by time, local or not: with the
exception of one city (Kingston upon Hull -- Hull for short) where
local calls are untimed.

The arrangement here (apart from in Hull) is that a "new call" is
registered every "time unit" -- which varies from *57.5 seconds* in the
morning to three minutes forty seconds in the evening and (also at
weekends.)

We are somewhat envious of the tariffs enjoyed in the USA !


Richard Cox

Mandarin Technology, Cardiff Business Park, Llanishen, CARDIFF, Wales CF4 5WF
Voice: [phone]      Fax: [phone]      VoiceMail: [phone]
E-mail: [e-mail]     Not diallable on 511 in mainland USA


[Moderator's Note: Why is Hull the exception?   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Holger Reusch (Dipl. Gerhard + Joe))
Subject: Re: 700 Numbers From Overseas
Organization: Technical University Vienna, Dept. for Realtime Systems, AUSTRIA
Date: Tue, 3 Nov 1992 16:23:13 GMT

In an article by Juergen Ziegler <[e-mail]>, our beloved
Moderator writes:

> [Moderator's Note: You are missing the point, Juergen. 700 numbers are
> intended as internal arrangements in the USA. This is much the same
> thing with 800 numbers, although not exclusively. 700/800 are for use
> inside the USA by callers within the USA.

> I don't complain because some company in Germany receives toll free
> calls on the (German) equivilent of 800 -- something we here in the
> USA cannot dial internationally. I assume if they want USA callers
> they will put in an 800 number here as we know it and can use it.
> Every country has certain telephone codes for its own internal use;
> the USA has 700, 800 and 900.  Why do you think it is 'stupid'?  If
> you wish to bypass network arrangements and use a service like 'USA
> Direct' to get into the USA and then call outbound to a 700/800
> number, suit yourself. Of course it will cost more.  PAT]

Unfortunately, for many items like software, books, etc., ordering
from US companies is the only possible (or affordable) way to get
them.  Certain companies only publish their 1-800 number.  What is a
European supposed to do if the only phone number known to him is a
toll-free number in the US?  Being told that this is an "internal
arrangement" which he is not supposed to use is rather frustrating.

If companies would publish their regular numbers in addition to
toll-free numbers everything would be fine.  But, not aware of the
700/800 problem, they don't do it.  Cynics here call it bloody
Americo-centrism, but IMHO that's exaggerated.

We Europeans don't complain because we want to phone toll-free, we
complain because we *need* internationally accessible numbers in the
US and current arrangements don't offer that.  The concept of getting
everything you need from a national supplier just doesn't work for
smaller countries.

I don't mind paying for 700/800 numbers, all I want is to be able to
call them at all.


Holger Reusch
Technical University of Vienna, Austria <-+--- No kangaroos here,
Dept. for Real-Time Systems               |    sorry!
[e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: Cynics in Europe can call it whatever they like; I
read some papers from the UK and other places in Europe which carry
advertisements for companies in Europe. *They* do the same thing; I
have seen their ads with only '0800' numbers and the like. Shall I
now devote several issues of this Digest to complain about 'European
centrism' because I can't call them on their nickle?  Your complaint
should be directed to companies which advertise in media read around
the world while failing to include telephone numbers which can be
dialed internationally. Maybe a lot of those companies simply are not
soliciting business from other countries for reasons of their own,
possibly involving customs taxes, copyright problems, etc.  Or maybe
their advertising copy writers are simply stupid. In either case, why
blame telco for omissions by merchants in their advertising?   PAT]

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

Date: Tue, 3 Nov 92 12:02 GMT
From: Richard Cox <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Computerized Sales Call "Locked" My Line
Reply-To: [e-mail]


Commenting on a message from [e-mail], PAT said:

>>  [Moderator's Note: Do it! Start calling the president of the company at
>>  home during his dinner. If he has the nerve to object, then tell him you
>>  are going to sue him if his machines ever call you again for any reason.
>>  Don't forget to dial *67 before calling him.
>>  It is none of Mister Hotshot's business what your home phone number is.

Logic error here, I'm afraid.  If he doesn't know what your home phone
number is, just how is he to make sure that his machines never call it?


Richard Cox

Mandarin Technology, Cardiff Business Park, Llanishen, CARDIFF, Wales CF4 5WF
Voice: [phone]      Fax: [phone]      VoiceMail: [phone]
E-mail: [e-mail]     Not diallable on 511 in mainland USA


[Moderator's Note: Good point.  PAT]

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

From: vixen![e-mail] (22475-adams)
Subject: Re: HELP Needed on JPEG Standard!
Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ
Date: Tue, 3 Nov 92 13:17:06 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Euee
S. Jang) writes:

> Hi. I am a graduate student at Suny at Buffalo. I am about to start
> the experimentation on JPEG. But I have no program or tool for JPEG.
                         ^^^^----(SOFT?)

In case you didn't know, SOFT is an acronym for Spell Out First Time!
For those like me who have some problems with unexpanded acronyms,
could we all make a point of employing SOFT wherever possible?  I'd
like to help Euee, but for the life of me, my context sensitive parser
is having a hell of a time with JPEG!  Oh well, with the big Five Zero
approaching, the loss of a few synapses is inevitable!


Jack (John) Adams         Bellcore NVC 2Z-220
[phone] {Voice}         [phone] {Facsimile}
[e-mail]     [e-mail]

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

Subject: Re: HELP Needed on JPEG Standard!
Organization: I.E.C.C.
Date: 3 Nov 92 22:05:04 EST (Tue)
From: [e-mail] (John R. Levine)


JPEG has very little to do with telecom.  It's a scheme for
compressing digitized photographs.  There is an informal group that
has written a high-quality free JPEG compressor and decompressor in
very portable C.  See their periodic posting in the usenet group
comp.compilers for details.


Regards,

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


[Moderator's Note: Thanks for clarifying that, John. I honestly did
not know what it was either.  :(   PAT]

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

Subject: Re: PP 2000 -- Phooey
Organization: I.E.C.C.
Date: 3 Nov 92 22:40:52 EST (Tue)
From: [e-mail] (John R. Levine)


> On the other hand, I am impressed with the new AT&T Public Phone 2000.

I'm not.  I was at JFK airport last week and having a few minutes to
kill, I tried to call my computer at home and check my mail using a
PP2000.  After tediously working through their "user friendly" menu,
I set it to 2400 bps, called in, modems shook hands, then nothing, no
characters, no nothing.  Didn't work at 1200 bps, either.  Nobody else
has any trouble calling in here.  What gives?


Regards,

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

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

Date: Tue, 3 Nov 92 10:18 GMT
From: Tansin A. Darcos & Company <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Phone Directory on CD


In TELECOM Digest 12-819, Ken Jongsma <[e-mail]>
writes:

> In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Ken Jongsma)
> writes:

>> In the current {PC Week} there was a small blurb for the following:

>> Phone Disc: This $149 product includes telephone listings of 70
>> million U.S. residents plus more than seven million U.S. businesses.
>> DAK Industries, Inc., of Canoga Park, Calif., can be contacted at
>> [phone].

> Since I submitted this, I have seen a copy of the DAK catalog that
> features this CD-ROM directory. Deciphering Drew Kaplan's flowery
> prose is not easy, but I have a few additional details:

>  - Three disks are shipped: Eastern US Residential, Western US Residential
>    and Entire US Business.

>  - All three disks include names, addreses, zip codes and phone numbers.

>  - Only *listed* numbers are included.

I think I know why they are selling a telephone directory disk.

About two years ago the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that plain
alphabetical listings, i.e. telephone white pages, because the work
can all be done automatically, lack the "minimum spark of creativity"
which is necessary for copyright protection.

This means that telephone white pages are no longer copyrightable
material.

This decision effectively overturns the 1920s case of _Pacific
Telephone v. Leon_ which was one of the landmark cases in copyright
law: that even if the telephone company wasn't making a directory, you
couldn't use their data without their permission.

This may be why the CD Rom is being sold this way; because the
original data is not subject to copyright, once they either get the
tape of directory information or scan phone books or city directories,
they can use the information any way they want to (subject to any
contract requirements, of course.)


Paul Robinson -- [e-mail]

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

Date: Tue, 3 Nov 1992 09:26:38 -0500
From: [e-mail] (Philip Gladstone)
Subject: Re: Phone Directory on CD
Organization: Citibank


[e-mail] (Ken Jongsma) writes:

> One of the product photographs shows the producer of the disk set is
> Digital Directory Assistance, Inc. at [phone].

This disk sounds very like the one produced by ProCD INC. Their phone
number is [phone] (note similarity to one given above). They
list the disk for $349, with qty 300 at $70. They call the three disk
set the 'ProPhone National Edition'.

It appears that (some of) the data is gained by scanning in phone
books.  The data can be up to 18 months old.


Philip

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

From: [e-mail] (Jim Edwards)
Subject: Bandwidth on Demand Specification Wanted
Date: 3 Nov 92 18:08:11 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Jime Edwards)
Organization: Tektronix, Inc., Beaverton,  OR.


Does anybody know where I can get a copy of the Bandwidth On Demand
(BOND) specification?  Thanks.


Jim Edwards    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: 3 Nov 92 02:46:00 UT
Subject: Re: Tone Converters


Jack Decker <[e-mail]> wrote:

> Now, I have a situation that maybe someone can help me with.  I need
> to get hold of one tone-to-pulse convertor ... that is, something that
> you can plug a telephone device that dials using tone dialing into,
> and have it come out the other end as dial pulses.

We have some converters laying around from the old days of step. They
require 48 volts to run. If you have that you are more then welcome to
them for the cost of the postage.

Teltone also made some for line voltage so maybe someone has some of
those.


Steven H. Lichter   GTE Calif COEI

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

Date: Tue, 3 Nov 1992 14:25:00 EDT
Reply-To: Peter Roosen-Runge <[e-mail]>
From: Peter Roosen-Runge <[e-mail]>
Subject: Migrating the Internet: Internet Course (via Internet)


Here's a workshop you can attend without leaving your office (or home)
 - it may be of interest to those on this list who haven't yet had a
chance to explore Internet services and resources.

                ........... Peter Roosen-Runge

Navigating the Internet:
An Interactive Workshop
November 16, 1992 through December 11, 1992

"Navigating the Internet: An Interactive Workshop" is intended for new
or infrequent users of the network of networks called the Internet.
it is designed to give an overview of several operating systems used
on the Internet and to give examples of the resources available over
the Internet.

The only requirement is that the user have access to the Internet and
can read basic e-mail.  UNIX, VMS, and VM will be the primary
operating systems covered in the workshop.

Participants will be sent instructions by e-mail.

A BITNET listserv provided by the University at Buffalo will be used
for interactive answering of questions and solving problems with
additional help by e-mail.

Instructor Richard J. Smith.
Assistant Director of Technical Services
University of Southwestern Louisiana

VMS & VM adaption by Jim Gerland
Systems Consultant
University at Buffalo

Guest lecturer Dr. Chris Tomer
University of Pittsburgh

Contributions by Peter Scott, Charles W. Bailey Jr. and other will
be included.

Week 1

Internet Mail -- Instructions on how to use basic e-mail

UNIX, VMS, VM basics -- how to create, read, edit, copy, and move
      files in UNIX, VMS, VM.

User information -- How to find addresses with WHOIS, how to finger
     users, finding files with Archie, and printing basics.


--------------------
Thanksgiving Break (USA) November 25-29, 1992
--------------------

Week 2

Ftp -- File transfer Protocol will be explained with instruction on
       how to ftp a document.

Ftp -- Explanation and instructions on how to ftp pertinent
       Requests for Comments (RFC). Reading a file in ftp.

Ftp -- Instructions on how and where to get Internet reference
       guides, an electronic book, a Supreme Court decision, and
       several PC games.

Instructions on how to subscribe to electronic journals.
       Instructions on ftping a directory of electronic journals.
       Reading news.


Week 3

Telnet -- Telnet will be explained with instructions on how to get
    to several OPACs. Capturing a file.

Telnet -- Explanation and instructions on getting to and exploring
    CARL.

Telnet -- Explanation and instructions on getting to and exploring
    Freenet.

Telnet -- Using the ERIC database.

Evaluation


Registration Fee: free


AUTOMATED REGISTRATION (Preferred)

To register for "Navigating the Internet: an Interactive
Workshop" send the following e-mail message (NO SUBJECT HEADING) to:

[e-mail]

In the body of the e-mail message send:

sub navigate yourfirstname yourlastname

(If the above instructions are unfamiliar to you, ask for
assistance from your computer center.)

E-MAIL REGISTRATION

Send e-mail requesting registration to:

[e-mail]


U.S. POST REGISTRATION

Richard J. Smith
Dupre Library
302 St. Mary Blvd.
University of Southwestern Louisiana
Lafayette, LA 70503

Include your name and e-mail address


PHONE REGISTRATION

Richard J. Smith
[phone]

Posted on PACS-L and NETTRAIN


Richard J. Smith   Assistant Director for Technical Service
University of Southwestern Louisiana   Lafayette, LA 70503
[phone]   [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #821
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa01033;
          4 Nov 92 7:46 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA01616
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 4 Nov 1992 05:43:00 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA25863
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 4 Nov 1992 05:42:42 -0600
Date: Wed, 4 Nov 1992 05:42:42 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #822

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 4 Nov 92 05:42:40 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 822

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Risks Of Cellular Speech (Dave King, RISKS Digest via Monty Solomon)
    Cellular Snooping and Privacy Issues (PGN, RISKS Digest via Monty Solomon)
    AT&T Takes Away my Call Manager (Craig R. Watkins)
    Northern Telecom Voicemail (Meridian Mail) (Aninda V. Dasgupta)
    Northern Telecom Email Address Wanted (Scott Matthews)
    Silent Caller From Different Numbers (Mike Honeycutt)
    Re: Caller ID Approved In Arizona (Alan Boritz)
    Splits This Month (Carl Moore)
    Fax Back From DTMF Selection? (SHAPIN
    Telco Handling of Cable Cut (Dan Mongrain)
    Help Needed With DTMF Tones (Alistair Grant)
    Do Tell! (Rich Greenberg)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Tue, 3 Nov 1992 19:30:21 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <[e-mail]>
Subject: Risks Of Cellular Speech


Excerpt from RISKS DIGEST 13.89

 Date: 02 Nov 92 12:00:22 EST
 From: Dave King <[e-mail]>
 Subject: Risks Of Cellular Speech

[The following was distributed here at work by our security folks. I
was surprised at the degree to which cellular traffic has apparently
become public speech.  But then, perhaps my surprise is just a
reflection of my naivete.  I'm not sure how Canada's laws compare to
ours, but given how difficult it must be to catch someone at this, I
can't imagine things are much different here in the 'States.  (But
then if it's so difficult, how'd they do the study???)  Dave]

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

Two Bell Canada security managers shared some startling data with us
recently.  In a three-month study of the Metro Toronto area earlier
this summer, Bell found that 80 percent of all cellular telephone
traffic is monitored by third parties.  Even more eye-opening is the
fact that 60 percent of monitored calls are taped for closer scrutiny
and culling of marketable information.  The chance of being monitored
and taped is even higher in rural areas, where air traffic is lighter.
Scanners cost as little as $200, and are sold in virtually every
shopping mall in Toronto.

Marketable information includes the obvious -- mergers, take-overs,
market and product plans, but the listeners are also looking for
voice/phonemail access codes and passwords.

The digitized tones are translated into numbers quite easily. "Phone
phreaks", the telecommunications equivalent of computer hackers, use
these numbers to break into voicemail systems. One misuse which is
growing in frequency is the setting up of "pirate" voicemail boxes,
often by organized crime.  Pirated boxes give them the ability to
disseminate information on drug deals, as one example, with little or
no risk of detection.

We ask you to be extremely cautious when using your personal or
business cellular phone.  Do not discuss confidential business
matters, and avoid calling in for phonemail messages via your cellular
phone.


David L. King, IBM SE Region Information & Telecomm Systems Services Department
CAY, Mail Drop D072, 10401 Fernwood Road, Bethesda MD 20817 301 571-4349


[TELECOM Modertor's Note: None of this comes as any surprise to
readers here, though. We might disagree on the exact percentage of
cellular calls which are intercepted, but the percentage is high.   PAT]

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

Date: Tue, 3 Nov 1992 19:33:04 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <[e-mail]>
Subject: Cellular Snooping and Privacy Issues


Excerpt from RISKS DIGEST 13.89

 Date: Mon, 2 Nov 92 9:49:24 PST
 From: "Peter G. Neumann" <[e-mail]>
 Subject: Cellular Snooping and Privacy Issues

An article by John Flinn on the front page of the {San Francisco
Examiner}, Sunday, 1 November 1992, listed several cases of
inadvertent or advertent eavesdropping, in the midst of a fine story
on the problems in general.

* A supposedly private conference call among SF Mayor Jordan,
real-estate magnate Walter Shorenstein, and several others discussing
the then not public withdrawal of George Shinn from the effort to save
the SF Giants was BROADCAST on a TV frequency.

* A 23-minute conversation allegedly between Princess Diana and a man
who called her ``my darling Squidge'' was taped by a retired bank
manager in Oxford, and transcribed in The Sun.  (The woman allegedly
referred to the Royal Family as ``this ****ing family''.)

After discussing privacy laws, legalities, and realities, Flinn notes
that at Scanners Unlimited in San Carlos, CA, "about a quarter of the
customers are interested in telephone eavesdropping."


[TELECOM Moderator's Note: Part of the above article got obliterated
somehow in getting here. One of PGN's examples above had to be omitted
in this copying. Someone ought to tell the local politicians here in
Chicago about how easy it is to hear them and their mistresses using
city-owned cars and city-owned cellular phones in their free time at
night around the city.  PAT]

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

From: Craig R. Watkins <[e-mail]>
Subject: AT&T Takes Away My Call Manager
Date: 3 Nov 92 09:20:57 EST
Organization: HRB Systems, Inc.


Call Manager is a (free) service of AT&T that allows you to touch tone
in an account code (of the form 15xx where you make up xx) where you
would normally dial a calling card number when you place a 0+ call.
Your bill then gets itemized and totaled by account code.

I've been using it at home for years.  This weekend I noticed that it
was only enabled on my primary line; other lines got a message about
it not being available when I entered the account code.  It took a few
days and a bunch of phone calls to get to the right people and get it
turned back on, but that's just a war story and I won't bore you with
the details.

My conclusion is that while AT&T used to have Call Manager enabled on
ALL lines, they recently have started disabling it from lines that
haven't "signed up" for this free service.  I'm guessing that I never
signed up my other lines.  Even though they are all under the same
billing number and I have been using Call Manager on them for years,
and I have been provided with consolodated billing for the lines
together, AT&T saw need to disable them.

Within the last month or two I received a mailing from AT&T that told
me that I had subscribed to Call Manager and if I wanted to
discontinue this free service I should return the enclosed card,
otherwise do nothing.  I wonder if they are thinking about starting to
charge for this service or they have something else up their sleave?

If you think you have Call Manager, you should check.  If you have
problems with Call Manager on your residential lines, call AT&T
Residential Customer Service at 800-222-0300.  It's OK if they
transfer you to a supervisor or to THEIR Special Services Desk, but
don't let them transfer you to the special Call Manager Center
(800-972-1152) because that is for business lines only (on the other
hand, if you are calling about business lines, call THAT number).


Craig R. Watkins   [e-mail]
HRB Systems, Inc.  [phone]

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

Date: Tue, 3 Nov 92 09:14:54 EST
From: [e-mail]  (Aninda V. Dasgupta)
Subject: Northern Telecom Voicemail (Meridian Mail)


I have written some code that "talks" to a Meridian Mail Voicemail
system and tries to determine if a user has phone messages.  If so,
the program sends e-mail (electronic mail) to the subscriber,
notifying him/her of messages.

Our campus has an SL-1, with a Meridian Mail (MM) module.  The
bare-bones options on our SL-1 line-cards require us to lift up our
handsets to determine if new voicemail messages exist.  Although I
have a "Call Indicator" box (made by AG Communications, Pheonix, AZ -
a neat and handy little box) to notify me of calls that I didn't
answer, most of my colleagues are less fortunate. Therefore I wrote
these programs.

The programs exist on two platforms, PC and Sun workstations.  The PC
uses a COM (asynchronous serial) port to connect to the MM. It also
sits on our campus Ethernet so that it can send email.  The program
pretends to be a dumb VT320 terminal and periodically logs into the MM
module and sends appropriate "Function Keys" to make it display "Find
Users" screens under the "User Administration" menu.  The program then
saves all screens displayed in a file and logs out of the MM module.
It then processes the saved file to determine which user might have
new messages and sends email to the user.

The version on the Sun uses TCP/IP and Telnet.  The MM module is
connected to a Terminal Server box via Serial lines. The Terminal
server sits on our campus Ethernet and the Sun box "talks" to the
Terminal server on the Telnet port.  The rest of the program is
similar to the one described above for the PC.

If anyone is interested in more details of these programs, please send
me email (do not use the telswitch-nt mailing list, I am not a
subscriber.) Although I won't be able to give you complete source
code, I can give you sufficient details to go build your own programs
(quite simple actually.)

My main gripe against Meridian Mail is that it gives me no way to get
to the digitized-voice files that store phone messages. All I need to
do is read the size of each file for a user and determine if the file
is a new one or an old one that has been played before.  The SL-1 can
easily determine how many old and how many new messages a user has,
but, using the terminal interface on the Mail module, I can't do the
same.  That really is a shame. Additionally I wish I could download
the message files and play them on my Sparcstation.  Presumably, the
files are eight-bit PCM encoded, no?

Also, is there a back-door, a magic sequence of key-presses, that
exits out of the program that gives all those menus (starting with the
"main menu" ) and gives me some sort of a prompt or command line?  I
guess even if there was one, NT wouldn't tell me, right?

Does anyone on these mailing lists know anybody within Northern
Telecom who can give me some technical information?  I find going
through the local telco (that resells NT equipment) representative
very time consuming and half the time they don't know what I am
talking about. I have tried calling NT directly, but they won't talk
to me; keep saying that I should go to NYNEX. I am surprised that NT
does not have better technical support.

By the way, I am no "phreak", I am doing all this with full knowledge
of our campus phone admin :-)

Any information, hint, idea, comment, question, etc. is most welcome.
Remember, contact me directly or through the comp.dcom.telecom
newsgroup.  I do not subscribe to the telswitch-nt mailing list.


Cheerios,

Aninda DasGupta ([e-mail]) Ph:[phone] Fax:[phone]
Philips Labs\n 345 Scarborough Rd\n  Briarcliff Manor\n NY 10510

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

From: [e-mail] (Scott Matthews)
Subject: Northern Telecomm
Organization: The Software Engineering Institute
Date: Tue, 3 Nov 1992 20:56:04 GMT


Does anybody have any internet hosts (email addresses) for Northern
Telecom?


Thanks,

scott

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

From: Mike Honeycutt <ecsvax![e-mail]>
Subject: Silent Caller From Different Numbers
Organization: UNC Educational Computing Service
Date: Wed, 4 Nov 1992 00:45:59 GMT


We are having a (minor) problem.

A student complained about receiving frequent phone calls where the
person does not say anything.  The call can last up to a minute then
the caller hangs-up.  This pattern is repeated several times a week
(weekdays only) and occurs between 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m.  We have
received no other complaints (the phone numbers in our dorms are
basically sequential) so I've ruled-out a "deamon dialer".

Now the twist:

Southern Bell monitored the calls and reported they were coming from
*various* state agencies within 100 miles of Asheville!  Although this
raised my eyebrows, Southern Bell seemed even less interested in the
problem and has put it on a back burner.

Before my imagination gets the best of me and I start writing the
sequel to "The Cuckoo's Egg", can anyone offer a logical explanation
for these events.

I will summarize (unless you request anonymity).


Thanks,

Mike Honeycutt  UNC Asheville Computer Ctr.  [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: Ask the student if they have a (former) friend/lover
working for the state in a position where their work would take them
around to various state offices; i.e. an auditor, a telecommunications
or computer technician employed by the state, etc.  Have they had any
sort of personal problems with a person like this?   PAT]

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

Date: 03 Nov 92 21:25:21 EST
From: Alan Boritz <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Caller ID Approved In Arizona


[e-mail] (& Koenig) writes:

> Harry calls his wife in the evening:

> "Darling, I'm still in the office and have a lot of work to do. I'll
> come home late today".

> His wife:

> "Oh, Harry, you're not, you are with Mrs ....."

> Hopefully, the number of divorces will in- or decrease.

IN-crease in this case.  But don't worry, she's better off without
him.  An adulterer stupid enough to call his wife from his
girlfriend's Caller-ID equipped phone can't possibly make a good
husband or father. ;)


Alan Boritz          [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: It is not his 'girlfriends Caller-ID equipped
phone', it is *his* phone at home equipped that way that ratted on
him. His only option would be to press *67, and I'm afraid that would
make the wife suspicious also.   PAT]

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

Date: Tue, 3 Nov 92 9:44:08 EST
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject: Splits This Month


The history.of.area.splits file has 512/210 taking place last Sunday
(Nov. 1) and 714/909 as coming on Nov. 14.  Both of these are the
beginning of the permissive dialing.

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

From: [e-mail] (Ted Shapin)
Subject: Fax Back From DTMF Selection?
Date: 3 Nov 92 22:24:32 PDT
Organization: Beckman Instruments, Fullerton, CA


I am looking for recommendations for a fax back system which will use
audio response and DTMF tones to select a stored fax document that
will then be transmitted to the caller's fax machine.

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

From: [e-mail] (Dan Mongrain)
Subject: Telco Handling of Cable Cut
Organization: Gandalf Data Ltd.
Date: Tue, 3 Nov 1992 14:31:05 GMT


A recent Bell Canada TV commercial shows a raccoom chewing through a
cable.  A voice-over indicates that even if a line goes down in their
network, calls will be rerouted so that they are not lost or even
noticed by the parties at each end.  Is this true?

I always thought that voice switches used circuit switching, which
means that is a call is interrupted, it has to be re-established
manually.  I agree there are redundant trunks to by-pass the cut cable
but always thought that there were no automatic rerouting.

Please enlighten me.


Dan Mongrain   [e-mail]

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

Date: 03 Nov 92 23:42:09 EST
From: Alistair Grant <[e-mail]>
Subject: Help Needed With DTMF Tones


Hello,

     I would like your help please. I am trying to make a automatic
phone dialer, I have the tones:

       |    1209    1336    1477
        ----------------------------
   697 |     1      2       3
   770 |         4      5       6
   852 |         7      8       9
   941 |         *      0       #

I have a program that creates the average of these tones for the
corresponding number but when I put it to the phone nothing happens.
Can you tell me what is going wrong? I have the tones last for 0.5 of
a second and seperated by 0.1 of a second. If you can shed any light
on the subject that would be cool.


Thanks - Alistair GRANT

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

Date: Tue, 3 Nov 92 19:30:25 PST
From: [e-mail] (Rich Greenberg)
Subject: Do Tell!


Todays {Los Angeles Times} (10/3/1992) had an ad a few pages into the
first section that I thought would give a few chuckles to the other
readers of the TELECOM Digest.  (Especially a certain gentleman who
likes cows ((-: )

Its a big ad, about the size of a piece of legal paper (13" x 8.5").
Mostly black with large white type:

                   Does Your
                  Phone System
                    Go Out
                   More Than
                    You Do?

The text block at the bottom is a pitch for CentraNet(r) service from
our old friends from GTE.


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

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #822
******************************











Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa18982;
          6 Nov 92 2:01 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA30231
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 5 Nov 1992 23:54:16 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA19733
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 5 Nov 1992 23:54:03 -0600
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 23:54:03 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #823

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 5 Nov 92 23:54:00 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 823

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    AT&T to Buy McCaw Cellular for $3.8 Billion (USA Today via Paul Robinson)
    Two Articles on MCI (Washington Post via Paul Robinson)
    Australian Phone Numbers to Become Eight Digits (David E. A. Wilson)
    $20,000 Settlement in Telemarketing Scam (Nigel Allen)
    A Question on Gbps Services (Lim Chin Keng)
    Music On Call? (Jerry Leichter)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
Date: Thu, 05 Nov 1992  18:34:41 EST
Subject: AT&T to Buy McCaw Cellular For $3.8 Billion


Two views of the same story: Nov 5, 1992

[Page 1, USA Today]

AT&T has $4 billion cellular phone deal on the line
By John Schneidawind, USA TODAY

AT&T and the USA's No. 1 cellular phone company are joining hands to
form a nationwide wireless phone network.

AT&T said Wednesday it wants to spend almost $4 billion to acquire a
33% stake in McCaw Communications.

The deal could hasten the day when we use pocket-sized cellular phones
anywhere in the world.

On the way to consumers:

 - Better cellular service.  Now, you usually have to change cellular
numbers in each city you visit.  In the future, you could take along
your phone -- and number.

"Think of the possibility of having one phone number and the phone
that travels with you," says Craig McCaw, chief executive if NcCaw,
which has 2.1 million customers in more than 100 cities.

 - Cheaper service.  Cellular rates have been falling, but still
average $69 monthly.

McCaw would use AT&T's money to pay down McCaw's $5 billion debt.  "We
have to drive our expenses down so we can afford to operate at prices
the average consumer can consider," he says.

Says Robert Morris, an analyst at Goldman Sachs: "AT&T would get back
into the local phone business with the technology of tomorrow."

For now, the McCaw family keeps voting control, but AT&T has an option
to gain control over seven years.

"We're dating now -- we're not getting married yet," says AT&T's CEO
Robert Allen.

The deal, first reported by USA TODAY's Dan Dorfman, is the largest
that has been announced this year.


[ Page B12, {The Washington Post} ]

AT&T Seeks Stake in McCaw Cellular
Deal May Spur National Mobile Phone System
By Cindy Skrzycki, Washington Post Staff Writer

   AT&T, the nation's largest long-distance company, yesterday
announced that it is negotiating a $3.8 billion strategic alliance
with McCaw Cellular Communications Inc., the nation's largest cellular
telephone company.

   The proposed alliance gives AT&T immediate access to one of the
fastest-growing markets in the telecommunications industry -- wireless
phone technology.  McCaw, considered an innovative leader in the
cellular industry with 2.1 million cellular subscribers, would be able
to tap into AT&T's formidable national marketing, distribution and
research capabilities to advance its goal of establishing a nationwide
cellular network.

   "Over the last 20 years I have entered into dozens of strategic
alliances," said Craig McCaw, chairman and chief executive of McCaw.
"None have ever made more sense to me."

   "McCaw, who currently controls the $1.3 billion company, called
McCaw and AT&T "natural allies" with a "common vision."

   He added that one possible benefit of the alliance could be cheaper
cellular service.

   The two companies said they envision bringing to market more
quickly new advances such as a single nationwide telephone number for
each wireless telephone user and a portable handset that works
everywhere and is programmable.

   Prior to yesterday's announcement, McCaw had been moving in this
direction with alliances with other companies, such as Oracle Corp.
and International Business Machines Corp.

   The proposed deal gives AT&T a 33 percent interest in McCaw and an
option to eventually acquire voting control of the company.  AT&T paid
$100 million for the option and would pay another $600 million if it
exercised it.

   The proposed deal would return to American hands the 22 percent
stake that British Telecommunications PLC has held in McCaw since
1989.  AT&T will pay the British firm $1.8 billion, or $49 a share.
Similarly, AT&T will pay McCaw $2 billion for new McCaw shares valued
at $42 each.

   British Telecom yesterday cited "the regulatory constraints of
foreign ownership" as one reason it was selling its stake for a
profit.  The average price paid by AT&T for its stock would be $45 a
share.

   AT&T, already a supplier of cellular equipment and handsets, enters
the cellular market at a time of great ferment over what the next
generation of wireless telephony will be.

   Currently, three companies, none of which are in the cellular
industry, have experimental licenses from the Federal Communications
Commission to develop and test new "personal communications" products.

   Before the breakup of the Bell System monopoly in 1984, AT&T was a
fledgling player in cellular service but got out of the business at
the time of the breakup.  Bell Laboratories developed the concept of
cellular phone service in 1947, and its scientists came up with the
first experimental system in 1962.

   AT&T also made cellular handsets but left that business in the
1980s only to reenter it last year.

   Robert Allen, chairman and chief executive of AT&T, said the
alliance announced yesterday supports growth of its long-distance
business and its desire to expand wireless services.  It also puts
AT&T in direct competition with some of the seven regional "Baby Bell"
companies that it used to own.

   AT&T made major strides in expanding wireless services with its
$7.48 billion acquisition of NCR Corp in the fall of 1991.

   The deal involving McCaw, if approved by regulatory agencies and
the boards of the companies, comes as another long-distance carrier,
Sprint, is attempting a merger with Centel Corp., another major
cellular company.

   "I think it's awesome," said Michael Elling, a telecommunications
analyst with the brokerage Oppenheimer & Co. in New York.

   In addition to giving McCaw nationwide marketing muscle, he noted,
AT&T has the technology to help crack down on the widespread problem
of tampering with cellular equipment to get free calls.

   Elling said McCaw will have more incentives to persuade customers
to stay loyal, rather than switch to other cellular carriers, by
offering discounts and other calling services of AT&T.

   Trading in the shares of both companies was halted before the
announcement, and didn't resume before the stock market closed
yesterday.  Before the halt, McCaw's shares were down $2.12 1/2 to
$26.75, wile AT&T was down 62 1/2 cents at $42.75.

   Analyst Alfred J. Humphries with Hanifen Imhoff Inc. said there was
some concern over the $5.3 billion debt that McCaw is carrying from
its purchase of LIN Broadcasting Corp., another cellular carrier.
Proceeds from the deal would be used to pay down that debt.

   AT&T's Allen, expressing confidence in McCaw, noted that the
proposed alliance does not pose "any risks we are particularly
concerned about."

   However, Herschel Shosteck, a telecommunications consultant in
Silver Spring, suggested that AT&T paid too much for the privelege of
entering the cellular market with McCaw, particularly since the
promise of the personal communications market is unclear.

                    --------

Staff writer Mark Potts contributed to this article.

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

Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 05 Nov 1992  20:03:18 EST
Subject: Two Articles on MCI


Two articles on MCI from the November 5, 1992, {Washington Post}


[Article 1, Digest, Page B13]

MCI and 46 global telecommunications firms signed a construction and
maintenance agreement for TPC-5, a 15,525 mile, $1.3 billion
fiber-optic network intended to link Japan, Guam and the United States
by late 1995.


[Article 2, Page B12]

[Photo: a face, lower left profile; next to it a black diamond in
        white the words "The MCI 100 Day Report"]
[Photo Caption: A scene from an MCI television commercial above, and
                the logo from its newspaper ad campaign]

MCI's Ads to Drive You Mad
New Campaign another of the 'What Is It?' Variety

By Paul Farhi and Cindy Skrzycki, Washington Post Staff Writers

   Sinister sounding music swells on the sound track.  Grainy, shadowy
black-and-white images flicker on the screen.  "This can't go on,"
intones an anxious male voice.  Then up comes the Kennedy-style
slogan, "If not us, who?  If not now, when?"

   All of which may have left viewers who saw this jagged imagery on
TV Tuesday night with a question of their own: Huh?

   Shot in a style that even Fellini might have deemed obtuse, the
bizarre 30-second drama is part of a new $10 million ad campaign from
MCI Communications Corp., the Washington-based long-distance phone
company.

   The commercials are MCI's way of telling small and medium-sized
businesses that they will soon be able to switch their 800 number from
their existing provider to MCI.

   If that message didn't quite come across loud and clear in the
commercials that began airing Tuesday, MCI and its ad agency say
that's intentional.

   Just as Infiniti tantalized car buyers with commercials featuring
trees and rocks but no cars, MCI ads are "teasers" -- in effect,
commercials for a forthcoming series of commercials.

   In MCI's case, none of this weeks commercials actually describes
the benefits of switching to its 800 service.  Instead, the ads
attempt to play off the themes of the presidential campaign, with
vague references to MCI's "agenda for change" and its plan "for the
first 100 days."

   In one especially strange spot that aired during the election
returns on the networks, two business executives are seen guffawing,
snorting and generally carrying on about ... well, it's not entirely
clear what's so funny.

   "This is a campaign that will evolve," promised Ron Berger, the
creative director at MCI's ad agency, Messner Vetere Berger McNamee
Schmetter of New York, which conceived of and shot the ads in one
month.  "We're trying to get people to sit up on Election Night and
look at things and be provoked by them."

   Berger, whose agency also produces ads for Volvo and Coppertone,
said MCI's commercials have to be provocative and challenging to
compete with giant rival AT&T.

   In the fierce and seemingly never-ending ad wars among
long-distance companies, AT&T spends about $2.5 billion on its
marketing -- roughly twice MCI's outlay.

   Unless you need an 800 number, the ads don't necessarily have to
make sense.  The campaign, after all, takes a mass-market approach to
reaching a narrow group of consumers: business customers -- or at least
those people who are the "influencers" within a company about
telecommunications decisions, said Timothy Price, president of MCI's
newly formed business services division.

   The company estimates that small and medium-sized businesses spend
some $18 billion a year for all kinds of telecommunications services.

   But are extreme close-ups of somber-faced business executives any
way to capture a market?  To MCI's credit, few people seemed to have
missed its new ads; on the other hand, not everyone loved them.

   That the ads generated word of mouth around the office water cooler
is proof that MCI "broke through" on some level, said Jay Chiat,
chairman of ad agency Chiat/Day/Mojo Inc.

   Chiat, whose agency created the equally dark "Lemmings" spot for
Apple Computer Inc. in 1986, said the first reaction among a group he
was watching TV with was: " 'What's going on?'  People forget that
advertising is a redundant thing.  If you are intrigued, you will keep
looking at it, trying to figure out what the message is.

   "You don't have to like advertising but you do have to be provoked
by it."

   But Bob Garfield, who reviews ads for Advertising Age magazine,
found MCI's spots "so grossly melodramatic for the situation at hand
as to be laughable ... You'd think the guys in the spot were
discussing the pros and cons of ethnic cleansing, not how cheaply you
can dial Memphis."

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

From: David E A Wilson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Australian Phone Numbers to Become Eight Digits
Organization: Dept of Computer Science, Wollongong University, Australia
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 03:01:16 GMT


[Seen on last night's television news and in today's {Sydney Morning
Herald}.]

Austel (Australia's Telecommunications regulatory body) has announced
its plans to renumber all of Australia's 15 million telephone numbers.

The current plan with 54 area codes containing five to seven digit
numbers will be replaced with four area codes with eight digit
numbers.  Tasmania and Victoria will share 03 (currently allocated to
Melbourne), New South Wales will use 02 (currently Sydney), Queensland
will use 07 (Brisbane) and the Northern Territory, Western Australia
and South Australia will use 08 (Adelaide).

Capital city numbers will add the digit 9 to the front while regional
numbers will add the current area code (without the leading zero). For
instance:

    [phone]    ->    [phone]
    (042) 21 3802    ->    [phone]

The changes will start in Sydney, most rural areas of NSW and parts of
SE Queensland in 1994. Melbourne will follow in 1995, NT, Adelaide and
the rest of Queensland and NSW will follow in 1996, Perth and Tasmania
in 1997 and Canberra in 1998.

Austel's chairman Mr Robin Davey said the changes were necessary
because the country was fast running out of numbers (especially in
Sydney and Queensland Gold Coast). Only 13% of the 96 million numbers
the current scheme allows are currently in use but it was not feasible
to use numbers from less-populous areas in the cities because it would
destroy the geographic mapping that people like in telephone numbers.

In addition, the international access code will change from 0011 to
006 and in a move to free up the 00 prefix for international access
the 008 code will change to 180 and 0055 will become 190.


David Wilson              [phone] voice, [phone] fax
Dept Comp Sci, Uni of Wollongong  [e-mail]

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

From: Nigel Allen <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 19:00:00 -0500
Subject: $20,000 Settlement in Telemarketing Scam Case
Organization: NDA


Here is a press release from the Attorney General of Virginia.

Terry Applauds Ruling in Case of Deceptive Funds Solicitation
Contact: David A. Parsons of the Office of the Attorney General of
          Virginia, 804-786-3518

   RICHMOND, Va., Nov. 4 -- Attorney General Mary Sue Terry today
applauded a Henrico County Circuit Court's ruling that a Florida
company used deceptive tactics when it solicited money in Virginia for
children to visit a traveling "museum" to learn about the dangers of
drugs.

   In his ruling, Circuit Judge L.A. Harris ordered the company --
Community Benefit Services Inc. (CBS) -- to pay $20,000 to Virginia
for distribution to legitimate charities.

   The attorney general filed suit against CBS and its owners on May
8, 1991.  CBS is a for-profit corporation that owned a tractor-trailer
that housed an exhibit to discourage drug abuse.  The trailer traveled
around the country and made half-day stops in parking lots where the
public could walk through the exhibit.  It visited about a half-dozen
locations across the state, including Henrico, in 1990.  A two-day
trial was held in September, 1992.

  "Obviously, the public is very interested in programs that educate
children about drugs," Terry said.  "These people took advantage of
that in order to try and make a fast buck."

   The attorney general's suit alleged that CBS telephoned Virginians
from its Florida office and led them to believe that it was a local
Virginia charity.  It also used local, Virginia return addresses that
it rented from private mail box services.  CBS asked donors to send
money so it could invite deserving local children to tour the trailer,
which it called the Children's Traveling Museum.

   The suit alleged that many Virginians assumed that CBS was a
not-for-profit organization and that their payments were tax
deductible.  CBS did not disclose during much of its operation in
Virginia that it was, in fact, a for-profit corporation and that
donations to it were not tax deductible.

   The suit also alleged that CBS did not effectively distribute
tickets to local children.  In the Richmond area, only one school
received any tickets, and its tickets arrived after the school year
ended.  Other tickets were sent to a Roanoke for-profit company, which
left them on its retail customer counter to be ignored or taken by
anyone, regardless of age or need.

   In its ruling, the court held that: "Defendants did employ in the
solicitation or collection of contributions devices, schemes, or
artifices which allowed them to obtain monetary contributions through
material misrepresentations and misleading information."

   The court ruled that CBS and its owners should pay back $20,000,
which is the majority of the company's take from Virginia.  When
collected, the state will distribute the money to legitimate charities
under the supervision of the court.

   The court also ruled that, in any future solicitations, CBS must
first register with the Virginia Division of Consumer Affairs,
disclose its location and that of its telephone solicitors, and
disclose that it is a for-profit business.

   The case was investigated by the Virginia Division of Consumer
Affairs.

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

Canada Remote Systems  - Toronto, Ontario
World's Largest PCBOARD System - 416-629-7000/629-7044

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

From: [e-mail] (Lim Chin Keng)
Subject: A Question on Gbps Services
Organization: National University of Singapore
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 11:32:14 GMT


Can anyone help me with information on Giga bps services in North
America and Europe. In particular I need to know whether there is such
a service and what is it used for.

Any information on this would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks.


Lim Chin Keng - Singapore Telecom   Internet : [e-mail]

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

Date: Thu,  5 Nov 92 09:16:54 EDT
From: Jerry Leichter <[e-mail]>
Subject: Music On Call?


I came home recently to find a strange message on my answering
machine: Several minutes of music.  There was no voiceover anywhere in
the message, or before or after it -- just music.  The sound was of
surprisingly good quality; I'm quite sure we're talking about a direct
electrical connection, not pickup by a handset of music playing in the
background.

The music was symphonic; I didn't place the piece, but would guess
Debussy as the composer.  (Definitely NOT the schlock you typically
get for music-on-hold.)

Nothing like this has happened before or since.

Any guesses?


Jerry


[Moderator's Note: My guess is someone was playing games. They called
your machine and let it rack up a long 'message' by simply playing
music for however long it lasted before the machine clicked off.  PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #823
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa25890;
          6 Nov 92 3:41 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA05895
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 6 Nov 1992 01:32:16 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA20249
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 6 Nov 1992 01:32:03 -0600
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 01:32:03 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #825

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 6 Nov 92 01:32:00 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 825

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Alleged Phone Harasser Arrested While Paying $18,000 Bill (R. Gellens)
    Phone Service in the Great White North (John J. Butz)
    Who Are the Major Players in CT2 Phones and Equipment? (H. Shrikumar)
    AT&T to Play Big on the Airwaves (H. Shrikumar)
    Firm Unveils First 'Personal Communicator' (Paul Robinson)
    Michigan Bell Charges for Phone Number (Ken Jongsma)
    NET Using Junk Calls to Sell Answering Service (Bob Clements)
    PAM: Pulse Amplitude Modulation Questions (M. Iqbal)
    DS1 For Multiple Dial in Data Lines? (Harold Hallikainen)
    Sync. Serial I/O Driver-z8530/vxworks (Murad Mirza)
    Need Widget to Connect Two Faxes or Modems Together (Randolph J. Herber)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: MPA15AB![e-mail]
Date: 06 NOV 92 01:57
Subject: Alleged Phone Harasser Arrested While Paying $18,000 Bill


The {L.A. Times} reported in its Saturday, October 24, 1992 Orange
County Edition (I'm a little behind -- I'll probably find out who won
the Presidency someday next week) that a man wanted in Denver for
allegedly making several thousand harassing calls was arrested after
trying to pay his $18,000 bill at an Irvine, California cellular
telephone office.

Among his alleged victims are a city councilwoman, a police detecive,
and a gay and lesbian suicide prevention hot line, which was forced to
shut down for a while because of his flood of calls.

The Times reported that he is alleged to have been making these calls
for at least ten years, and was arrested seven times before.  It said
he had a lot of money available to him, and made harassing phone calls
to anyone he didn't like.

The man, David George Neuman, was said to live in a motor home with
nine dogs and twelve cellular phones which he used to allegedly make
the calls.

He was arrested in Denver, but set free by accident, and has eluded
police up to now.

He was arrested because police allerted cellular phone companies
nationwide, and the Irvine company (no name given) called police and
said he was coming in to pay his bill.  Other cellular companies have
been asked not to give him service.

The story did not say why he used cellular phones to make his calls.


Randy Gellens                [e-mail]
A Series System Software                 if mail bounces,  forward to
Unisys Mission Viejo, CA                         [e-mail]
Opinions are personal;   facts are suspect;   I speak only for myself

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

Date: Thu, 5 Nov 92 10:36:58 EST
From: [e-mail] (John J Butz [phone])
Subject: Phone Service in the Great White North


I hear that Canadian phone service underwent/is going through a
divestiture, similar to the one AT&T experienced.

Could anyone write to me and explain the current situation, the major
players, the regulators, recent deals, etc.  Perhaps there are good
articles in newspapers or trade journals that explain the current
Canadian telephony environment?

If I get sufficient replies, I will post them here for your reading pleasure.


J "Hoser" Butz        ER700 Sys Eng
[e-mail]    AT&T - BL

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

Date: Thu, 5 Nov 92 07:48:04 -0500
From: [e-mail] (H.Shrikumar)
Subject: Who Are the Major Players in CT2 Phones and Equipment?


Hello world,

    Who are the major players in CT2 equipments and in CT2 phones?  I
believe CT2 was either born in UK or was at least first implemented/
pilot tested there. So are some UK manufactures the big names?

European Manufacturers?
Americans? Japanese? and even any Taiwanese/Korean (probably not yet)?

Are the major Cellular manufacturers also into CT2? What's their
policy/strategy on CT2?

How is the Illinois/Ameritech CT2 trials ... how are they going? How
is response? Whose equipment do they use? What about user's phones?

Is CT2 faring well on the other side of the big pond?

If I assert that the only CT2 trials in the world have been in London
and Illinois will someone here contradict me ? :-) Japan seems to be a
potential user, perhaps more than US cities, given geographical size
and population densities. Any CT2 in Japan?

Any other part of the world?

Also, whose standard is CT2? What is CCITTs position on it (or is it
them all along ?)

Inquiring minds want to know,

I will also be grateful for any pointers to magazine/journal/trade rag
reports on these questions. If there is interest, I could summarise
them for the telecom archives.


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

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

Date: Thu, 5 Nov 92 07:48:04 -0500
From: [e-mail] (H.Shrikumar)
Subject: ATT to Play Big on the Airwaves


  Just heard on NPR this morning ...

  ATT bought a 30% state in McCaw, the Cellular King, for $3.8 bn.
ATT aims big in being a major player in Nationwide Cellular and phone
services.

 The morning edition said this brings ATT in direct competition with
the RBOCs, many of which have themselves entered Cellular market and
are competitors of McCaw. (Given that the RBOCs now bill for Sprint
and MCI, so are we seeing a gradual breakup of the close symbiosis
between Ma and baby bells ? -- shri).

 There were indications of new services on a nationwide cellular
network ... with buzz words like palmtop, one number anywhere, even on
the road etc. thrown in. McCaw himself chimed in to say that this
opens up possibilities of one number referring to a person anywhere --
in his home in CA or driving down the road in NYC. (not direct quote).

 A mention was made that now ATT had bought NCR last year, and with
McCaw's cellular and the Bell Labs research, the above aims are in
hand. (Although buying NCR is not the same as buying HP when it comes
to palmtops ... are we going to have pocket Towers and 88K unix
machines ?? :-) :-)

I think I should go and grab a nice mnemonic 700 number from ATT :-)


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

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

Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
Date: Thu, 05 Nov 1992  20:02:22 EST
Subject: Firm Unveils 1st 'Personal Communicator'


Firm Unveils 1st 'Personal Communicator'
{Device Combines Fax, Phone and Computer}

{Washington Post} November 4, 1992, Page F1

Photo: Man cradling a thin phone handset in on his left shoulder,
coiled cord runs down to a device that looks like an Etch-a-Sketch
with an antenna for a portable cellular phone.  He is holding the
device with his left hand, in his right is what looks like an ordinary
19c stick ball-point pen, but could be a stylus.

Caption for photo:  EO's communicator can send and receive
                    text-based messages and documents.

By Bart Ziegler
Associated Press

   NEW YORK, Nov. 3 - A small California startup company backed by
AT&T unveiled the first "personal communicator" Monday, a handheld
device that combines the capabilities of a pager, phone, fax, computer
and electronic organizer.

   Users of the device from EO Inc. can send and receive text-based
messages and documents, send and receive faxes and organize
information such as their appointments.  With other software, the
machine could provide functions normally performed on portable
computers.

   The device, scheduled to be available in the second quarter of next
year, will be priced from $1,999 to $3,299, depending on options.

   With a $799 attachment, users can send and recieve cellular phone
calls as well as documents while on the road.  Without this
attachment, the machine must be hooked up to a standard phone line to
communicate, though it cannot provide voice calls this way.

   While other companies have discussed their interest in making such
devices, and Apple Computer Inc. has shown a prototype called Newton,
EO is the first to announce firm plans and pricing.

   The EO device weighs from 2.2 pounds to 4 pounds, depending on the
model, making them smaller and lighter than most portable computers
sold today.  The base model is about 11 inches long, 7 inches wide and
less than one inch high, while the more expensive version is a bit
bigger.

   EO machines do not have keyboards.  Instead, users write on large
screens with a special pen.  The machines contain special software
from another startup company, GO Corp. of Foster City, Calif., that
can "recognize" neatly printed handwriting and perform commands.

   For example, users can tap on a certain part of the screen with the
pen and call up a phone list.  The machine also can store handwritten
notes or letters, and can even turn the handwriting into typed text
for storage.  These notes or letters later could be sent as a fax to a
computer user or to a conventional fax machine.

   Through the cellular connection, users can send and receive
electronic mail messages and documents while on the road.  The E-Mail
capability is provided through AT&T's Easylink service.  To exchange
information, the device also can be attached to a standard
International Business Machines Corp.-compatible personal computer.

   The EO device contains a microphone and speaker, so that users can
attach voice memos to computerized documents.

   The EO machine uses a special microprocessor developed by AT&T.
This computer chip, which acts as EO's "brain," doesn't use as much
power as the microprocessors found in desktop PCs.  The EO can run for
as long as four hours before its batteries must be recharged.

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

From: [e-mail] (Ken Jongsma)
Subject: Michigan Bell Charges for Phone Number
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 19:12:16 -0500 (EST)


 From the "What can we do to squeeze some more revenue from the
peasants?"  department:

In the monthly Michigan Bell billing insert, there is a large article
that gushes about how Michigan Bell will allow you to pick a
"personalized" telephone number. The cost is only $38!! They conclude
by stating that your customer service rep will be more than willing to
help you.

The article is written to imply that this is some great new feature,
cleverly failing to mention that Michigan Bell had been offering this
new "service" for free up until Oct 5th of this year.

Also in the same newletter is an article about the "Scan Phone" that
someone had mentioned in a previous Digest.

In the Detroit area, you can rent a phone with a built-in credit card
reader and barcode reader. Michigan Bell provides a large book of
barcodes associated with Kroger groceries, a bill paying service and
15 other vendors of various products.

For $11.95 per month, you can use the phone to "shop" from the catalog
or pay bills. Outside 313, you have to pay the long distance charges.

The phone doubles as a caller ID display.

Another example of a supposedly local phone company getting involved
in something they know very little about, instead of concentrating on
provided higher capacity, lower cost local service.


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

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

Subject: NET Using Junk Calls to Sell Answering Service
Date: Thu, 05 Nov 92 09:22:22 -0500
From: [e-mail]


Here's a slightly amusing junk call story.

I have repeatedly sent in the cards to New England Tel that put you on
the list of people who do not want automated junk calls.  Of course,
they don't care about that, or the fact that lines are unlisted.

I got a (non-automated) junk call from New England Tel the other
evening, on an unlisted number.  When I heard that they were trying to
sell their new phone answering service, I decided to actually tell
them what I thought of it.  Rough transcript:

<Sleaze-Droid>:
    Have you heard about our wonderful new phone answering service?
<Me>:
    Yes.  Would you answer a couple questions about it?
<SD>:
    Sure.
<Me>:
    How do I use it to screen out junk calls?
<SD>:
    You mean like this one? [Yes, she said that.]  I don't know.
<Me>:
    Where's the blinking light so I can see if there are any calls
    when I walk in.
<SD>:
    There isn't one.
<Me>:
    Sounds pretty useless. <Click>


Bob Clements, K1BC, [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (M.Iqbal)
Subject: PAM: Pulse Amplitude Modulation Questions
Organization: University of Florida
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 92 22:30:35 GMT


Hi,

I have been thinking on the pulse amplitude modulation lately a lot.
I made up following two diagrams that I have not seen in any
communication book. I appreciate if somebody can comment on it.

1) The following is natural sampling PAM diagram that I made with a
LPF and an impulse train. What I have seen in almost every
communication book is a pulse train at the mixer. However, I modeled
pulse train with an impulse train and a LPF. The LPF acts as a
short-time integrator.  I think that in doing so one can understand
flat-topped PAM better which is shown in the figure of #2.

                            Switch

 Analog(message) ----------(X)-----------> PAM with natural sampling
  Signal input              |
                            |----------
                            |         |
                            |         >
                            |         <  <--- resistor
                         -------      <
                         | LPF |      |
                         -------      |
                            |        ---
                            |        GND
       Impluse train--------|

The time constant of the LPF is small enough so that LPF capacitor
discharges before next impulse arrives. During the time capacitor is
charged, the output follows input as the switch in on.

2) All I did here is moved the LPF in the output branch from the input
branch. Since LPF transfer function is similar to an integrator, any
product of the impulse and the analog-message siganal will be held.
Thus we will have sample and hold circuitry in the output branch.

                                   -------
Analog(message) ----------(X)------| LPF |----> Flat-topped PAM
 Signal input              |       -------
                           |
                           |
                           |
                           |
      Impluse train--------|


Any comment will be appreciated. I have skipped math as it is very hard to
put in ASCII the summation signs and other symbols.

Please email your reply.


Thanks,

[e-mail]   University of Florida

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

From: [e-mail] (Harold Hallikainen)
Subject: DS1 for Multiple Dial in Data Lines?
Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo
Date: Fri, 06 Nov 1992 02:04:51 GMT


    In a discussion today, the idea came up of using a single DS1
or T1 line to handle incoming calls to a BBS type system instead of 24
individual phone lines and 24 modems driving 24 serial ports.  It
seems that we should be able to have a single DS1 line driving a
single interface board in the computer that would sort out all the
data (figure out which user is on which line and is in which time
slot, etc.).  This would compare favorably to all that extra hardware.
To the outside world, though, it would look just like 24 dial in
modems, except, perhaps, people whoe have ISDN or switched 56 lines
could dial in at that rate instead of some rate limited by a modem.
Anyone doing this?


Harold

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


From: [e-mail] (Murad Mirza)
Subject: Sync. Serial I/O Driver-z8530/vxworks
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Communication Research Centre
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 92 15:47:05 GMT


Hi,

We are looking for source code, or pointers to help us implement a
byte synchronous serial I/O driver for the z8530 on vxworks.

BUT ... we will more than happy to receive ANY code for Unix driver
that does byte synchronous I/O on ANY USART that we could use as a
template.

I am asking for Unix sources, as vxworks seems/claims to be very
Unix-ish.

Please reply by email as I don't read all these groups on a regular
basis.

Thanks in advance.


Murad Mirza    Communication Research Center/DOC

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

From: [e-mail] (Root)
Subject: Need Widget to Connect Two Faxes or Modems Together
Date: 6 Nov 92 03:10:59 GMT
Organization: Leptons, Quarks and Bosons, Winfield, IL 60190-1412


A friend wants to connect two fax machines together via their telco
connections so that the machines could be used as copiers.  Also, she
wants to connect a fax modem equipped PC to a fax machine so that the
fax machine could be used both as a scanner and as a printer.

She would like a small and inexpensive piece of euipment with two
modular telephone jacks with just enough "smarts" to supply a dial
tone and appropriate ringing signals.  The smarts could be a person
listening on a speaker and using buttons to generate the signals at
the proper time.

Can some one tell me where such equipment can be obtained from and
give me company names, addresses and telephone numbers.  Estimates of
price would also be useful.

I used to be a frequent reader of this news group and needed to drop
it because of the volume of messages.  I will monitor the group for a
few messages in case the answer is posted here.  E-mail answers would
be prefered.


Randolph J. Herber,
(Trademarks belong to their respective owners.)
@ home:    {att|eponym|mcdchg|obdient|uunet!tellab5|wheaton}!yclept!rjh
    [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #825
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa29199;
          6 Nov 92 4:46 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA15746
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 6 Nov 1992 00:42:42 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA03705
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 6 Nov 1992 00:42:28 -0600
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 00:42:28 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #824

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 6 Nov 92 00:42:30 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 824

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    AT&T and McCaw: Press Release via AT&T TODAY (Ed Hopper)
    Cellular Advice Sought (Jerry Leichter)
    Cellular Phones Free? (Joseph Bergstein)
    Cellular Scam (Randy Gellens)
    Define the A and B Carriers (Randy Gellens)
    Telephones in Hull (was Today's LECs Would Prefer Metering) (Nigel Allen)
    UK: Hull, Local Charges (John Walsh)
    AT&T to Eliminate Holiday Rates (Paul Robinson)
    The MCI 100 Day Report #1 (Paul Robinson)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Date: 5 Nov 92 21:36:20 GMT
Subject: AT&T and McCaw: Press Release via AT&T TODAY (11-4-92)


Wednesday, November 4, 1992 -- 4:00 p.m. EST

        AT&T NEGOTIATING STRATEGIC ALLIANCE WITH MCCAW TO EXPAND
                WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS IN NORTH AMERICA

     AT&T and McCaw Cellular Communications, Inc., today announced
they are negotiating a strategic alliance that will involve broad
marketing and technological cooperation in wireless communications.

     Under the proposed agreement, AT&T will make a $2 billion
investment in new McCaw shares for 19% ownership of the cellular
services company.  AT&T also will purchase British Telecom's shares in
McCaw and purchase an option from McCaw that would eventually allow
AT&T to acquire voting control of the company.  The entire investment
is valued at about $3.8 billion.

     "I am excited about the prospect of this alliance," said AT&T
Chairman Bob Allen.  "It would stimulate more growth in our long-
distance business and propel us into the fastest-growing segment of
our industry.  We respect the value of an entrepreneurial company like
McCaw and its importance in pioneering new ideas and bringing them to
fruition.  We intend to take full advantage of that entrepreneurial
spirit as we work with them to speed the day when people can
communicate anytime from anywhere.

     "We are committed," Allen said, "to working with the whole
industry to accelerate growth, add new services and serve customers
even better."

     Wireless communications is the fastest-growing segment of the
telecommunications industry, expanding at a rate of 30% to 40% a year.
It includes cellular telephones, paging and mobile data services.

     AT&T has always maintained leadership positions in wireless
communications, starting with its pioneering of mobile radio research
in the '20s and '30s.  Today, AT&T Network Systems is the largest
domestic provider of wireless network equipment; AT&T Consumer
Products is establishing a growing presence in cellular telephones and
wireless products for consumers; NCR, an AT&T subsidiary, is a
competitive force in wireless LANs and other data products; and AT&T
EasyLink's global messaging services can be delivered via wireless.

     In the agreement being negotiated, AT&T would grant McCaw a
long-term license to use the AT&T brand name in marketing wireless
services in North America.  McCaw would also gain access to AT&T's
marketing, sales, customer service and distribution channels, as well
as the research and development capabilities of AT&T Bell
Laboratories.

     "American companies are frequently criticized for being too
short-term focused and concerned only with the next quarterly earnings
report," said Vic Pelson, president of AT&T's Communications Services
Group.  "This alliance with McCaw reflects a commitment to the
long-term health of AT&T.  We strongly believe that it's necessary for
AT&T to have a major position in wireless markets and technologies in
the future if we are to remain the world's leading communications
company."

     McCaw Cellular is the largest cellular service provider in the
U.S. and is developing and marketing a range of wireless
communications services, including a cellular network that spans the
continent and is capable of transmitting voice and data
communications.

     McCaw Cellular owns a 52% interest in LIN BROADCASTING Co., which
is engaged in cellular telephone operations, television broadcasting
and specialty publishing.  It also has a 32% stake in American Mobile
Satellite Corporation, which is developing a satellite-based
communications network to provide personal communications services to
remote areas of North America now out of reach of terrestrial
communications systems, and a 51% stake in Claircom, Inc., a joint
venture with Hughes Network System, which is licensed to provide
telephone service to commercial and private aircraft.  McCaw Cellular
is the nation's fifth-largest paging service provider.

     The alliance with McCaw will help speed the development of the
first seamless wireless communications network to operate nationwide.
A conservative prediction is that 15% to 20% of Americans will use
wireless services by the year 2000.  The telecommunications provider
who can serve their needs with complete satisfaction has much to gain.
That's true not only on the consumer side, but in business, where
competition in wireless is heating up.

     "Our potential alliance would provide McCaw Cellular with added
resources to take advantage of the wealth of emerging business
opportunities in wireless communications, enabling us to accomplish
more for our employees, shareholders and customers," said McCaw
Cellular's CEO Craig McCaw.  "The alliance would bring U.S. businesses
and an increasingly broad base of consumers a whole new level of
products and services, increasing productivity across a range of
industries and helping America compete in the global marketplace."

     As part of the alliance, AT&T would purchase 47 million newly
issued shares of McCaw's common stock at $42 per share.  British
Telecom, which owns 35.8 million shares of McCaw's Class A and Class B
stock, would sell its interest to AT&T for $49 per share.  The sale is
subject to approval by BT's Board of Directors.  BT currently is
represented on McCaw Cellular's Board of Directors and has other
shareowner rights.

     AT&T's purchase of BT's shares would bring the average price per
share paid by AT&T for new McCaw and existing BT shares to $45, giving
AT&T about 33% ownership of McCaw Cellular.  AT&T would receive the
right to designate three members of McCaw's Board of Directors, with
McCaw's management team staying in place and remaining independent.

     The proposed transaction also would enable AT&T to purchase an
option from the controlling shareholders of McCaw Cellular to acquire
voting control.  AT&T would pay $100 million for the option, and an
additional $600 million, if the option is exercised.  This option
would give AT&T a majority of seats on the board.

     "The importance of this alliance to AT&T lies in its contribution
to our overall vision as a corporation," said Allen.  "That vision is
to be the world's best at bringing people together and giving them
easy access to the information and services they want -- anytime,
anywhere.  And it certainly means being a leader in cellular
services."

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

Date: Thu, 5 Nov 92 09:09:29 EDT
From: Jerry Leichter <[e-mail]>
Subject: Cellular Advice Sought


My sister is a surgery resident in San Francisco (and with the kind of
work she does -- heart surgery, trauma unit, etc. -- I sincerely hope
none of you meet her on the job).  These days, she's essentially on
beeper call 24 hours a day, seven days a week -- the beeper is forever
at her side, and at all hours of the night and day she has to be able
to reach a phone quickly.  So ... a cellular phone seems like the
answer.

Overall picture of usage:

- A couple of outgoing calls a day, mainly fairly short, but some
might be long.

- Few if any incoming calls.  (She'll keep the beeper -- the doctors
have developed a simple code they pass in the beeper message to
indicate just how urgent a particular call is.)

- Excellent coverage all over the Bay Area a must.

- She jogs, so wants something she can carry with her, the smaller and
lighter the better.

I'm seeking recommendations (and warnings) about the best choice of
carrier, phones, and the best place to find a recommended phone at a
decent price.  (She's been wondering why the newspaper ads in the New
York Times list phones at prices that are hundreds of dollars better
than what's being offered in her area.  I explained the California
policy on service contract tie-ins.)

Question: She can't be the only one who wants to keep her beeper along
with her cellphone.  Does anyone make a combined beeper/cellphone?
Seems like an obvious product ...


Jerry

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

From: [e-mail] (Joseph Bergstein)
Date: Thu, 05 Nov 1992 18:47:41 -0500
Subject: Cellular Phones Free?


They're really giving them away!

 From an ad in a recent sports section of {The Washington Post}

A Cellular Phone Free To The First 4,000 At Rosecroft Raceway (horse
racing near Washington D.C.).

"The first 4,000 people through Rosecroft's doors tonight get a
certificate good for a free cellular telephone, redeemable at Lite
Cellular Sales and Service.  Requires one time $35 activation fee, and
one year minimum service agreement.  Installation extra.

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

From: MPA15AB![e-mail]
Date: 06 NOV 92 01:58
Subject: Cellular Scam


The {L.A. Times} reported that a "hacker" probably sold the serial and
phone number combination for a freeway call box to a ring which used
it to make 11,733 calls charged to the one phone.  The calls totalled
25,875 minuted and cost about $1600.  Officials from L.A. Cellular,
which provides the airtime, and GTE Cellular, which maintains the
phones, investigated.

(The rate was so low because the county gets a special rate on airtime
for call boxes.)

The article has some interesting quotes.  "That's not legally
allowable, and it's not an easy thing to do," said Dana McClure, who
analyzes phone calls for the county.  "Most people don't know how to
do it, but there are some."

The article states that 'Everyone involved with the call box system is
confident that the problem has been solved, but officials are mum as
to how they have blocked potential cellular banditry.'

"I don't think we can tell you what we did to fix it because we don't
want it to happen again," a county sokesman said with a laugh.


Randy Gellens                [e-mail]
A Series System Software                 if mail bounces,  forward to
Unisys Mission Viejo, CA                         [e-mail]
Opinions are personal;   facts are suspect;   I speak only for myself

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

From: MPA15AB![e-mail]
Date: 06 NOV 92 01:58
Subject: Define the A and B Carriers


Each cellular area has two carriers, the A and the B carrier. Is the
A carrier always the LEC?  When people refer to the "landline carrier,"
is this the same as the LEC?


Randy Gellens                [e-mail]
A Series System Software                 if mail bounces,  forward to
Unisys Mission Viejo, CA                         [e-mail]
Opinions are personal;   facts are suspect;   I speak only for myself


[Moderator's Note: The A carrier is the NON-landline carrier in the
area; the B carrier is the landline or wireline carrier; it is the
local telco, or usually some subsidiary of the same parent as the
local telco, as is the case with Ameritech Mobile here. The A carrier
is often known as 'Cellular One', which is a name used by a variety of
carriers on the A side; the carriers buy the right to the name much
like fast food places buy the right to use the name 'McDonalds'. The
carriers jump sides continually. For example, Southwestern Bell is the
B carrier (and local telco) in St. Louis. There they use the name
'Southwestern Bell Mobility' (I think) for their cellular service. In
Chicago, which is outside their telco marketing area, the same company
shows up on the A side as Cellular One of Chicago.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Telephones in Hull (was Today's LECs Would Prefer Metering)
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 92 4:39:20 EST


In Volume 12, Issue 821, [e-mail] (Richard Cox) writes:

> In the UK all calls are metered by time, local or not: with the
> exception of one city (Kingston upon Hull -- Hull for short) where
> local calls are untimed.

And our Moderator asks:

> [Moderator's Note: Why is Hull the exception?   PAT]

Different ownership is the answer. The telephone system in
Kingston-upon-Hull is run by Kingston Communications, a company which
is owned by the City of Kingston-upon-Hull. (The telephone service
there used to be operated by the city directly, but I think the
decision to run it as a separate company came in response to various
controls imposed on municipal governments by the central British
government.) In the rest of the U.K., the franchised local carrier is
British Telecommunications PLC, which used to be known as British
Telecom and now likes to be known simply as BT.

Around the turn of the century, a number of British city governments
ran their own telephone companies. Most of these were eventually
purchased by the National Telephone Company or by the post office
(which eventually acquired the National Telephone Company). Even
before these acquisitions, the post office was involved in
telecommunications through its telegraph network. I am not sure why
Kingston-upon-Hull stayed in the phone business whle other cities sold
their telephone departments.

Hull has slightly different dialing than the rest of Britain. In Hull,
you dial two-digit numbers beginning with 9 for the operator, or for
the business office or for repair service ("faults reporting"). From a
BT phone in the rest of Britain, you dial three-digit numbers beginning
with 1 for the operator or for repair service.

Hull has done some other innovative things that I can't think of right
now.  If your local library has British phone books (probably on
microfiche), check the introductory section of the Hull directory for
more information about the city and its telephone service.

The most obvious difference between Hull and the rest of the United
Kingdom is in the older-style phone booths. Recently-installed phone
booths are metal and plastic, but in the days when the post office ran
the phone suystem in the UK, the standard phone booth (or "call box")
was made of cast iron and was painted red, to match the post office's
street letter boxes ("pillar boxes"). But in Hull, because the phones
there weren't run by the post office, the cast-iron phone booths were
painted white.

A proper discussion of British pay phones would deal with Button A and
Button B, but I will leave that to someone else. In practice, an
increasing number of British pay phones work with stored-value cards
or credit cards rather than coins.


Nigel Allen   [e-mail]

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

Date: Thu, 5 Nov 92 09:09:24 EST
From: [e-mail] (John Walsh)
Subject: UK: Hull, Local Charges


Hi,

I remember a couple of years ago while I was staying near Hull being
told that BT (British Telecom) does not have a monopoly over ALL of
the UK.  Apparently the area around Hull has (since the advent of
telephony) had it's own local telco, and the locals pride themselves
on having a much better service than the rest of the country.  Local
calls incur a fixed charge as far as I remember...

Sorry, no hard facts!


John Walsh    <standard disclaimer>

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

Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
Date: Thu, 05 Nov 1992  17:35:21 EST
Subject: AT&T to Eliminate Holiday Rates


I found the following advertisement, "buried" on page A9 on today's
(November 4) {Washington Post}.  I suspect what it means is that AT&T
wants to eliminate holiday discounts.  Has anyone else heard about the
following?


Paul Robinson -- [e-mail]
Any opinions are mine alone and no one else is responsible for them.

                             ---

NOTICE TO AT&T LONG DISTANCE CUSTOMERS

On November 2, 1992, AT&T filed tariff revisions with the Federal
Communications Commission to reduce the number of Special Rate
Occasions (occasions when special lower rates apply to Evening and
Night/Weekend Dial Station calls) from ten (10) Evenings and nine (9)
Night/Weekends to zero (0), and to reduce the number of Floating
Holidays (those holidays over and above the regular ten (10) federal
holidays) from four (4) to zero (0).

These changes are scheduled to become effective on November 16, 1992,
and will apply to both general and commercial long distance schedules.

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

Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
Date: Thu, 05 Nov 1992  18:20:06 EST
Subject: The MCI 100 Day Report #1


MCI is running an ad; it appears on page A-16 of the Nov. 4
{Washington Post}.  It mentions the 800 number portability option,
"For the first time you, not AT&T, will own your 800 number."  (Funny
how it neglects to mention that MCI {also} will no longer own the 800
numbers.)

This advertisment has a marker on it, "The MCI 100 Day Report, #1", so
I assume there will be 99 more ads, one every day I guess.

It also seems to make a veiled reference to the Clinton Election
(opportunity or disaster depending on your point of view) by saying
"Meanwhile, whether you see today as riding out the bad times, or
tuning up for the good times ..."

It also mentions when 800 number portability takes effect: early 1993.


[Moderator's Note: The same ad appeared in the Chicago papers on
Thursday, November 5.   PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #824
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa29359;
          6 Nov 92 4:54 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA22508
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 6 Nov 1992 02:39:40 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA31670
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 6 Nov 1992 02:39:27 -0600
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 02:39:27 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #826

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 6 Nov 92 02:39:30 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 826

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Help Needed With DTMF Tones (Jack Adams)
    Re: Help Needed With DTMF Tones (Bill Sohl)
    Re: Help Needed With DTMF Tones ([e-mail])
    Re: Help Needed With DTMF Tones (Terry Houser)
    Re: Help Needed With DTMF Tones (Arthur Rubin)
    Re: Today's LECs Would Prefer Metering (was ISDN and Stuff) (J. Macassey)
    Re: Today's LECs Would Prefer Metering (was ISDN and Stuff) (John Levine)
    Re: Today's LECs Would Prefer Metering (was ISDN and Stuff) (Martin Baines)
    Re: The Worst Phone Lines in the US? (John Rice)
    Re: The Worst Phone Lines in the US? (John Higdon)
    Re: The Worst Phone Lines in the US? (David Cornutt)
    Re: Airfone -- Phooey (Brian G. Gordon)
    Re: Airfone -- Phooey (Kenneth Crudup)
    Re: Caller-ID Approved in Arizona (Alan Boritz)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: vixen![e-mail] (22475-adams)
Subject: Re: Help Needed With DTMF Tones
Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 92 14:14:02 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, Alistair Grant <100032.525@
CompuServe.COM> writes:

>      I would like your help please. I am trying to make a automatic
> phone dialer, I have the tones:

>        |    1209    1336    1477
>         ----------------------------
>    697 |       1      2       3
>    770 |         4      5       6
>    852 |         7      8       9
>    941 |         *      0       #

> I have a program that creates the average of these tones for the
>                                   ^^^^^^^-Herein lies your problem.
> Can you tell me what is going wrong?

If you're serious about this, you need to check out ALL the
requirements as published by ANSI, EIA, TIA, and Bellcore.  I'd start
with SR-TSV-002275, "BOC Notes on the LEC networks -1990."  Also, the
FCCs part 68 registration would be a nice idea ;^)!  BTW, with Dual
Tone Multi Frequency (DTMF),the tones are both present, they're not
averaged!


Jack (John) Adams       Bellcore NVC 2Z-220
[phone] {Voice}       [phone] {Facsimile}
[e-mail]  [e-mail]

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

From: dancer![e-mail] (22501-sohl)
Subject: Re: Help Needed With DTMF Tones
Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 92 14:16:13 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> Alistair Grant <100032.525@
CompuServe.COM> writes:

> I have a program that creates the average of these tones for the
> corresponding number but when I put it to the phone nothing happens.
> Can you tell me what is going wrong? I have the tones last for 0.5 of
> a second and seperated by 0.1 of a second. If you can shed any light
> on the subject that would be cool.

The DTMF detection equipment looks for BOTH tones, not an average of
the two.  There are audio filters that detect the individual tones and
I'd guess the "average" of the tones being created by your program
does not actually consist of the individual tones themselves.

The duration of your tone also seems a bit longer than necessary.  If
you ever listen to the outpulsing of any auto dial phone you'll here
an entire ten digit number outpulsed in about two seconds.  You could
probaby shorten the 0.5 second tone length to about 0.2 or 0.15 seconds.


Standard Disclaimer- Any opinions, etc. are mine and NOT my employer's.
Note - If email replying to me with an automatic addressing process
bounces, manually address the resend using one of the addresses below.

Bill Sohl (K2UNK) BELLCORE (Bell Communications Research, Inc.)
Morristown, NJ             email via UUCP      bcr!dancer!whs70
201-829-2879 Weekdays      email via Internet  [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Help Needed With DTMF Tones
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 92 15:48:23 CST


> I have a program that creates the average of these tones for the
> corresponding number but when I put it to the phone nothing happens.
> Can you tell me what is going wrong? I have the tones last for 0.5 of
> a second and seperated by 0.1 of a second. If you can shed any light
> on the subject that would be cool.

Sorry.  It doesn't work like that.  Sending a tone at Freq A and a
tone at Freb B is NOT the same as sending a single tone at a frequency
equal to the average of A and B.  The only real way to prove that is
to mathematically represent the signals, or to look at them on an
oscilloscope, but the following example may illustrate the point.  The
3 tone is 1477 and 697 Hz.  The average would be 1072Hz.  The * Tone
is 1209 and 941 Hz.  The average would be 1075 Hz.  There is only a
3Hz difference between 1072 and 1075, which would make distinguishing
the 0 and 3 almost impossible (allowing for tolerances).  However,
since sending two tones is not the same as sending the average of the
two tones, there is no problem.  If you want to reproduce the DTMF
tones, you'll have to generate both tones and add the signals.


Brett   ([e-mail])

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

Date: Thu, 5 Nov 92 14:58:34 PST
From: Brad Houser/SC9-43/765-0494 <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Help Needed With DTMF Tones


The touch tones use what is called DTMF which I think stands for Dual
Tone Modulated Frequencies.  The key word is Dual.  Averaging two
frequencies does just that, sends a single frequency tone half way in
between.  You need a way to send each of the two tones.


Brad Houser    [e-mail]   [phone]

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

Subject: Re: Help Needed With DTMF Tones
From: a_rubin%dsg4.dse.beckman.com (Arthur Rubin)
Date: 5 Nov 92 16:25:23 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Arthur Rubin)


I assume you looked up the frequencies -- I haven't checked them ...
but what do you mean by "average" of the tones.  Both tones have to be
broadcast simultaneously.  The spacing SHOULD be adequate, but I think
you might need to shorten the tone. My modem will send 10 tones/second
and the phone system will handle it correctly, but I don't know the
on/off ratio.


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] (Julian Macassey)
Subject: Re: Today's LECs Would Prefer Metering (was ISDN and Stuff)
Date: 6 Nov 92 04:49:11 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Julian Macassey)
Organization: The Hole in the Wall  Hollywood California U.S.A.


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

> In the UK all calls are metered by time, local or not: with the
> exception of one city (Kingston upon Hull -- Hull for short) where
> local calls are untimed.

> [Moderator's Note: Why is Hull the exception?   PAT]

    Hull has and has allways had a private phone company.
Subscribers in Hull never had the displeasure of being treated with
contempt by the General Post Office and then being badgered by British
Telecom.

    Hull subscribers usually get good service and good equipment.
By the way, Hull had itemised billing before British Telecom offered
it. Yes, free enterprise telcos do work and have survived in some
corners of Europe.

    Of course, governments have recently "discovered"
privatisation and customers in Europe are beginning to enjoy the kind
of service that the U.S. had in the sixties.


Julian Macassey, [e-mail]  N6ARE@WA6FWI.#SOCAL.CA.USA.NA
742 1/2 North Hayworth Avenue Hollywood CA 90046-7142 voice [phone]

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

Subject: Re: Today's LECs Would Prefer Metering (was ISDN and Stuff)
Organization: I.E.C.C.
Date: 5 Nov 92 12:43:29 EST (Thu)
From: [e-mail] (John R. Levine)


> [Moderator's Note: Why is Hull the exception?   PAT]

Because for some historical reason it has its own phone company
independent of British Telecom.  Maybe some reader in the UK can
explain the history of it.


Regards,

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


[Moderator's Note: And in fact in an issue of the Digest earlier today
we did have such a history lesson.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Martin Baines)
Subject: Re: Today's LECs Would Prefer Metering (was ISDN and Stuff)
Date: 5 Nov 1992 15:50:25 GMT
Organization: Sun Microsystems Ltd
Reply-To: [e-mail]


> [Moderator's Note: Why is Hull the exception?   PAT]

Due to historic accident Hull has always had a separate Telephone
Company from the rest of the UK: basically in the early days of
telephony the original legistation allowed local councils to
authorise/run local phone services as well as the Post Office.  Hull
was the only place that did this, that didn't hand the phone
operations over to the Post Office.

Hence Hull now has a different telephone company (Kingston
Communications) from the rest of the UK providing local loop
connection. They offer complete equal access to BT and Mercury for
long distance and a choice of different local tarrifs, one of which is
"free" local calling. There is still the option of metered local calls
as well.


Martin Baines, Sales Support Manager,
Sun Microsystems Ltd, 306 Science Park, Cambridge, CB4 4WG, UK
Phone: [phone]                 Fax: [phone]
JANET:     [e-mail]    Other UK:  [e-mail]
Internet:  [e-mail]
X.400:     g=martin s=baines prmd=sunir admd=mci c=us

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: The Worst Phone Lines in the US?
Organization: Teradyne Inc., Telecommunications Division
Date: Fri, 06 Nov 92 04:22:11 GMT


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

> I recently received a newsletter from Telos.  Telos, as some may
> know, is a prominent manufacturer of DSP hybrids for the broadcast
> industry.  Anyway, in the newsletter, Telos writes:

> "As far as we can tell, the worst phone line conditions in the US
> exist in the Dallas/Fort Worth and Miami/Fort Lauderdale areas.  The
> 'Dallas' software [firmware actually -- PMT] is optimized for these
> difficult line conditions."

> I seem to recall that GTE is the LEC in Miami.  Is this correct?
> Who tied them in Dallas?

Actually, you have it backwards. GTE is the LEC in Dallas (but not Ft.
Worth). Bell South is the LEC in Miami.

Don't know about Miami, but I make fairly regular calls into the DFW
area and haven't noticed any significant noise problems (voice or
data).


John Rice    K9IJ    [e-mail]

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

Subject: Re: The Worst Phone Lines in the US?
Date: 6 Nov 92 00:44:42 PST (Fri)
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)


David Lesher <[e-mail]> writes:

> BS is still under investigation for a multi-million fraud case re:
> repair. Seems that if a problem exists longer than 24 hours, the PSC
> must be notified in the yearly report, and the sub gets a refund.
> Guess what. Virtually EVERY ticket got 'kicked' before 23.9 hours.

This is exactly what GTE California has done to EVERY SINGLE trouble
report that I have ever submitted. Spot checking with friends and
associates reveals similar experience. You report trouble to repair
and when there has been nothing done, you call back. You are told that
the problem has been corrected. When you complain that it certainly
has not, another ticket is opened. Using this sleazy trick, GTE
manages to maintain better looking repair resolution records with the
PUC.

> At long last, a fired supervisor spilled the beans to the PSC and the
> press. When I last talked to my contact in state goverment, they were
> still turning over rocks on the case ...

GTE employees are usually too busy toting the company line, blaming
customers for all the company's deficiencies. Look how much flack I
have taken on this forum from GTE-types for merely relating
experiences and observations. Rather than fix the problems, it is
easier to just attempt to discredit me.

 From the "GTE Definitions Handbook" by Yours Truly:

Smart Park-- n. A place where GTE has actually installed enough
facilities to provide real telephone service. No real service is
generally provided, however.


John Higdon <[e-mail]> (hiding out in the desert)

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

From: [e-mail] (David Cornutt)
Subject: Re: The Worst Phone Lines in the US?
Organization: NASA/MSFC
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 16:22:16 GMT


rsiatl![e-mail] writes:

> "As far as we can tell, the worst phone line conditions in the US
> exist in the Dallas/Fort Worth and Miami/Fort Lauderdale areas.  The
> 'Dallas' software [firmware actually -- PMT] is optimized for these
> difficult line conditions."

I don't know about Dallas, but I lived in Ft. Lauderdale from 1983-88,
and never had any major hassles with the phone service.  (Power is
another matter ... :-(.  At the time I lived there, I believe that
they had a mix of Xbar and 1AESS equipment.  Trunkage seemed to be
sufficient for day-to-day use; blockage was uncommon.

> I seem to recall that GTE is the LEC in Miami.  Is this correct?

BellSouth (under the name Southern Bell) is the LEC in South FL.  As
far as I know, there is no GTE anywhere in Florida.


David Cornutt, New Technology Inc., Huntsville, AL  [phone]
([e-mail]; some insane route applies)
"The opinions expressed herein are not necessarily those of my employer,
not necessarily mine, and probably not necessary."


[Moderator's Note: Oh my goodness yes, there is plenty of GTE in the
stateof Florida. We've had many articles submitted here in the past
about the company there.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Brian Gordon)
Subject: Re: Airfone -- Phooey
Date: 5 Nov 92 17:09:31 GMT
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Mt. View, Ca.


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 820, Message 4 of 12

> [e-mail] (Jim Rees) wrote:

>> Last night I was actually on a plane that had Airfones and I needed
>> to make a call.  The stupid thing just sat there emiting DTMF tones
>> and never gave me a dial tone.  And why is there no RJ-11 jack on it?
>> Where am I supposed to plug in my modem?  I'm not impressed.

> Is anyone happy with these things?  I've never gotten one to work to
> my satisfaction ...

It must be the luck of the draw.  I'm two for two with them.  In both
cases I just needed to call home and report that I was coming in on a
different flight, so the calls were short and not particularly
"quality demanding", but they were fine for their purpose.  At their
price, I certainly wouldn't contemplate a _long_ call.


Brian G. Gordon        [e-mail]     [e-mail]
B.GORDON2 on GENie  70243,3012 on CompuServe    BGordon on AOL

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

From: [e-mail] (Kenneth Crudup)
Subject: Re: Airfone -- Phooey
Organization: Open Software Foundation
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 19:09:54 GMT


[e-mail] (Jim Rees) wrote:

> Last night I was actually on a plane that had Airfones and I needed
> to make a call.  The stupid thing just sat there emiting DTMF tones
> and never gave me a dial tone.  And why is there no RJ-11 jack on it?
> Where am I supposed to plug in my modem?  I'm not impressed.

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

> Is anyone happy with these things?  I've never gotten one to work to
> my satisfaction ...

You guys are joking, (esp. Rees), right?

"No dial tone"? Didja read the instructions? You get no call
completion 'till the phone knows whom to charge. (Cell phones don't
have dial tone either).

"No RJ11 jack (for modem)" - the bandwith ain't good enough to let you
use one, from the specs I've read here. Besides, I used one to arrange
a way from the airport a couple of months ago. You *don't* want to get
chatty unless you are say, Bill Gates plotting the destruction of a
competitor (or having someone else pay for it). 10 minutes = $2 setup
charge + 10 * $2/min = $22 ... imagine reading mail for a half hour or
so.

I've got no connection with Airphone, just that I found the service
workable, if expensive, and actally better than expected.


Kenny Crudup, Contractor, OSF DCE QA
OSF, 11 Cambridge Center, Cambridge, MA 02142    [phone]
[e-mail]    OSF has nothing to do with this post.

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

Date: 05 Nov 92 19:48:07 EST
From: Alan Boritz <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Caller ID Approved In Arizona


[e-mail] (Alan Boritz) writes:

>> His wife:

>> "Oh, Harry, you're not, you are with Mrs ....."

> [Moderator's Note: It is not his 'girlfriends Caller-ID equipped
> phone', it is *his* phone at home equipped that way that ratted on
> him. His only option would be to press *67, and I'm afraid that would
> make the wife suspicious also.   PAT]

That option is not available here in North Jersey.  However, I don't
think it would make the wife suspicious if it were.  She's probably
used to his fooling around and already assumed he was lying. ;)


Alan Boritz    [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: I am reminded of how children forty years ago liked
to listen to the VHF radio and spy on the mobile phones of that era. I
think the service was called AMPS. There were only a few channels or
frequencies in use, and a tiny bit of knob twisting on the old tube
style VHF tunable recievers would hear them all. Making a call
involved passing the number verbally to an operator; naughty children
would write the number down 'for later reference'. Man driving on
expressway calls his wife, "sorry honey, I'll be working late at the
office".  Then he immediatly makes another call and the children note
that number as well. Man says, "Hi baby! I ditched the old Battle-Ax;
I am on the road now and will be at your place in 20 minutes."

Naughty children think about the wonderful fun to be had by causing
some hate and discontent in the world: first, a check with name and
address service on the destination phone number, then a call to the
wife on the first phone number: "Lady, we heard your husband on the
car phone; he isn't working late at the office, he is meeting his girl
friend at xxxxx Street." (Silence ... ) The wife finally speaks up and
says she will go there to confront her philandering husband at his new
"office" ... Hysterical gales of laughter as the naughty children
disconnect the call and fantasize about Battle-Ax confronting hubby and
his mistress, contemplating if she will crack him on the head with a
frying pan as he wonders how she found out about the mistress, let
alone where to find them in their hideaway.  Other times, the children
would hear the number passed to the operator and hastily dial it
themselves, causing the mobile AMPS operator and her customer to get
busied out. 'With luck', a guy might never be able to get through to
whoever he was calling; the line would be busy each time he tried.  PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #826
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa14348;
          8 Nov 92 23:51 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA18537
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 8 Nov 1992 21:35:24 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA03902
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 8 Nov 1992 21:35:03 -0600
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 21:35:03 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #827

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 8 Nov 92 21:35:00 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 827

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    ITU Goes Electronic Again ([e-mail])
    Some Questions on Public Data Networks (Sashidhar Kondared via L. Poulsen)
    Question Regarding Telephone Party Lines (John V. Jaskolski)
    Is the AT&T International Rate Schedule Online? (Carl Karcher)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: ITU Goes Electronic Again
Organization: Nokia Telecommunications.
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 15:19:57 GMT


**** WELCOME TO THE TELEDOC AUTO-ANSWERING MAILBOX (TAM) ****

TELEDOC is an electronic document distribution service of the
International Telecommunication Union in Geneva, Switzerland.

For help on TELEDOC Auto-Answering Mailbox (TAM) commands, send a
message with the line HELP in the message body.

NEWS FLASH: Summaries of CCITT Recommendations are being added to the
ITU Document Store.  Send the command LIST CCITT/REC to see the
Recommendation Series groups now available.  A new TAM help file is
also available (send the command HELP).

REPLY TO COMMAND => HELP

TAM replied on October 29, 1992 at 11:19 AM local time in Geneva.

TAM Help is attached in the next message body part.

 ********************* END COVER MESSAGE *********************


Start of body part 2

TELEDOC AUTO-ANSWERING MAILBOX (TAM) HELP
LAST REVISION: October 8, 1992

** INTRODUCTION **

TELEDOC is an electronic document distribution service of the
International Telecommunication Union (ITU).  The ITU is a United
Nations agency based in Geneva, Switzerland.  It consists
organizationally of five permanent organs: 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).

ITU documents are stored 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)

This document describes the electronic mail access, the Teledoc
Auto-Answering Mailbox (TAM).


** TELEDOC AUTO-ANSWERING MAILBOX (TAM) **

The Teledoc Auto-Answering Mailbox (TAM) is an X.400 "robot"
electronic mailbox at ITU headquarters.  The electronic mail address
of the TAM is:

(X.400)

S=teledoc; P=itu; A=arcom; C=ch

or --

(Internet)

[e-mail]

Electronic mail sent to the TAM should only contain simple commands
described below.  When the TAM receives a message, it scans it for
these commands which it interprets and processes.  It then constructs
and mails back a reply.

For example, you can ask the TAM to send help (HELP), a list of groups
and/or documents in the ITU Document Store (LIST) or an actual
document (GET).  Here is a sample message to the TAM:

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

 To: S=teledoc;P=itu;A=arcom;C=ch (X.400)
    or
    [e-mail] (Internet)
 FROM: (NAME)
 SUBJECT: (IGNORED)

HELP
LIST
LIST CCITT
LIST CCITT/REC
LIST CCIR
LIST IFRB
LIST BDT
LIST TIES
GET 1449

The above message to the TAM asks to:

1. Send a help file;
2. Send a list of groups and/or documents at the root
level of the ITU Document Store;
3. Send a list of groups and/or documents in the CCITT
Group (CCITT);
4. Send a list of groups and/or documents in the CCITT
Recommendations group (CCITT/REC);
5. Send a list of groups and/or documents in the CCIR
Group (CCIR);
6. Send a list of groups and/or documents in the IFRB
Group (IFRB);
7. Send a list of groups and/or documents in the BDT
Group (BDT);
8. Send a list of groups and/or documents in the
Telecom Information Exchange Services Group (TIES);
9. Send the document that has the Unique Permanent
Identifier (UPI) of 1449.


** GETTING STARTED **

1. Find out how the electronic mail system you use in your
organization or company can access the TAM via either the X.400 or
Internet mail address listed above.  Alternatively, you can access the
TAM via various major email service providers (see below).

2. Send a test message (TEST or HELP) to the TAM.  If you receive a
reply then you have established that your message has reached the TAM
and that it can also reach you.

3. Decide which group of documents in the ITU Document Store you are
interested in.  Send a mail message requesting a list (LIST) of groups
and/or documents in that group.

4. After you receive a list of available documents and groups, send a
mail message to list (LIST) other sub-groups or get (GET) the document
you want.  The TAM will send to you the list or document requested.


** TELEDOC AUTO-ANSWERING MAILBOX COMMANDS **

TAM commands consist of a command word followed, in some cases, by an
argument.  Commands and arguments can be specified in upper, lower or
mixed case.  Every line of your mail message to the TAM should contain
a valid command.  Only commands contained in the mail message are
interpreted.  All other lines and the mail subject field are ignored
(you can use the subject field to document your request for your own
needs).  Up to 50 lines per message will be processed by the TAM.
Each valid command currently generates a separate mail reply.

START
     This optional command tells the TAM to begin
     processing commands after this line.  If this
     command is present, any text in the mail
     message before this command is ignored.

TEST
     This command is used to test that the TAM can
     receive mail from your electronic mail system
     and can also respond back to your mail system.
     The TAM will acknowledge your message and send
     a help file.   Typically, if you have not
     received a reply within 48 hours, there is a
     connectivity problem between your electronic
     mail system and the TAM.

HELP
     This command sends the latest help file listing
     and explaining the commands understood by the
     TAM.

LIST <PATH>
     This command returns a list of groups and/or
     documents in the specified group.  The path to
     a group is defined by its location relative
     from the top of the ITU Document Store.  For
     example:

     LIST
     LIST CCITT
     LIST CCITT/REC
     LIST CCITT/REC/F
     LIST CCIR
     LIST IFRB
     LIST BDT
     LIST TIES

     The first example of the LIST command above
     returns a list of groups and/or documents at
     the root level of the ITU Document Store.

GET <UPI>
     When the TAM sends a list of documents and/or
     groups, it provides a Unique Permanent
     Identifier (UPI) code for every document in
     each available format.  The UPI is the code
     used to retrieve the document that you want.
     For example:

     GET 1449
     GET 1453

     You should only retrieve documents in formats
     that can be handled by your electronic mail
     system (see ENCODE below).

ENCODE
     Most mail systems can handle ASCII documents
     attached to mail messages but may have
     difficulties with non-ASCII (i.e., "binary")
     formats such as word processing and graphics
     files.  With the ENCODE command, you can
     request the TAM to encode non-ASCII files into
     the UUENCODE format which is ASCII.  To decode
     the UUENCODED file back into its original
     binary format, you need a utility program
     called UUDECODE.  This program is widely
     available in different computing environments.
     Enter this command in your mail message before
     any GET commands retrieving binary formats if
     your mail system can only support ASCII
     formats.  For example:

     ENCODE
     GET 2314
     GET 2315

     Internet (SMTP) mail does not typically
     support binary attachments to mail messages.
     Therefore, if the TAM is replying to Internet
     mail, the ENCODE command is automatically
     applied.

HUMAN
     Since the TAM is a "robot", it may not
     understand exactly what you are trying to say
     to it.  If you type the command HUMAN followed
     by any message, the TAM will STOP processing
     commands and automatically forward your
     incoming mail message to a human operator at
     the ITU.  For example:

     HUMAN
     I am having a problem locating a document
     concerning XXXX.  Could you please tell me
     where it is available?
          Thank you,
          Bill

END
     This optional command tells the TAM to ignore
     the rest of the mail message.  This command is
     only required if your mail message contains
     text after your commands you want the TAM to
     ignore (e.g., your signature).


** IF YOU HAVE PROBLEMS **

There are problems sometimes with international mail connections just
as there are problems sometimes with long distance telephone calls.
The electronic mail circuits between the TAM and your mail system can
fail or be temporarily unavailable.  In this case, email can be
delayed or not delivered.  So, the first advice if you have a problem
is to try again.

The TAM will only reply to valid commands.  If the argument to a LIST
command or GET command cannot be interpreted then you should receive
an error message explaining why.  If the TAM cannot process any
commands in your mail message, it will return a message saying so and
send back the help file.  If you have no problems retrieving ASCII
documents but difficulties with non-ASCII formats, your mail system or
the mail gateways to your system may not support binary messages.  In
this case, try using the ENCODE command.

If you have problems that you can't resolve, you can use the HUMAN
command and then enter your written description of the problem in the
mail message.  The TAM forwards messages containing the HUMAN command
to an ITU help desk.  If you wish to make a suggestion on how the
service can be improved, please contact:

Mr. Robert Shaw
TELEDOC Project Coordinator
Information Services Department
International Telecommunication Union
Place des Nations
1211 Geneva 20, Switzerland

TEL: [phone]
FAX: [phone]
X.400: G=robert; S=shaw; A=arcom; P=itu; C=ch
Internet: [e-mail]


** ACCESS TO TAM FROM EMAIL SERVICE PROVIDERS **

If you do not have direct access to either X.400 or Internet mail,
many major email service providers (e.g., MCI, Compuserve) provide
gateway facilities and can access the TAM.

ACCESS FROM MCI:

MCI users can access the TAM through MCI's facilities for access to
other mail systems (EMS).  TAM can be accessed through either MCI's
X.400 or Internet gateways.  X.400 responses appear faster and more
reliable.

ACCESS FROM MCI MAIL VIA X.400:

1. At COMMAND, type CREATE

2. At TO, type TELEDOC followed by EMS in
parentheses.  For
example,

      TO: TELEDOC (EMS)

3. At the prompt EMS: type ARCOM.  For example,

   EMS: ARCOM

4. At MBX: type PR=ITU.  For example,

   MBX: PR=ITU

5. At the next MBX: type return to end addressing

6. Complete as usual

ACCESS FROM MCI MAIL VIA INTERNET:

1. At COMMAND, type CREATE
2. At TO, type TELEDOC followed by EMS in
parentheses.  For
example,

   TO: TELEDOC (EMS)

3. At the prompt EMS: type INTERNET.  For example,

   EMS: INTERNET

4. At MBX: type [e-mail].  For example,

   MBX: [e-mail]

5. At the next MBX: type return to end addressing

6. Complete as usual


ACCESS FROM COMPUSERVE

Compuserve mail users can access the TAM through Compuserve's Internet
mail gateway facility.

ACCESS FROM COMPUSERVE MAIL VIA INTERNET:

1. Choose COMPOSE a new message, edit the message with TAM commands,
then choose SEND

2. At SEND TO (NAME OR USER ID), type
INTERNET:[e-mail]  For example,

   Send to (Name or User ID):
INTERNET:[e-mail]

3. At SUBJECT, type any text (TAM ignores subject
fields)

4. Complete as usual

** END HELP FILE **

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

Date: Sun, 8 Nov 92 16:15:57 PST
From: [e-mail] (Lars Poulsen)
Subject: Some Questions on Public Data Networks
Organization: CMC Network Systems (Rockwell DCD), Santa Barbara, CA, USA


[Moderator's Note: The original of this message was in issue 818 of
TELECOM Digest on Monday, November 2. It then circulated in comp.dcom.
telecom over the November 2-4 period. Apparently Sahsidhar is so busy
cross posting to various newsgroups that he does not bother reading
his articles later.  PAT]

In article <[e-mail]>

   (appearing in comp.dcom.isdn) Sashidhar Kondared (?) writes:

> I have some questions on Public data networks for which comp.dcom.telecom
> may be more approriate, but its moderator doesn't seem to think so. I think
> someone on this group can easily clarify my doubts with out any reference to
> secondary info sources. Any response would be greatly appreciated.

I am surprised that PAT would discourage this; I am cc'ing TELECOM on
this response, in the hope that he may reconsider.

> *  Value added networks of common carriers (like AT&T) never cross paths
> with their voice networks. ie traffic on one never use the other network.
> Am I right?

I think you are wrong. SprintNet, ACCUNET and their cousins are using
cicuits provisioned in the same way that customers' leased lines would
be provisioned. This means that these circuits typically will be
sharing multiplexed trunks with interoffice trunks from the voice
network.

I.e. a handful of 56 kbps data circuits may be multiplexed together to
form a T1 circuit. (That same T1 may also be carrying some 56kbps
lines from the SS7 network supporting the voice network.) Likewise, a
number of voice trunks from your local toll access switch to the next
toll switch down the road may be multiplexed together on a T1. These
two T1's may be multiplexed together on a T3 fiber, along with some
T1's that were sold that way.

> *  Public data networks (common carrier VANs, Tymnet, Telnet etc) are not
> as extensive as plain old telephone networks. ie if someone in some
> remote place in say oklahama wants a data connection , most probably he
> will not get it. Is this right?

Yes, and no. Plain old telephone service is available just about
everywhere, because it is the government's policy that it should be.
On the other hand, no carrier is required to offer data service unless
they think they can make money on it.

But some form of data service is available just about anywhere.
Certainly, if you can get telephone service, you can dial up a modem
connection. If you can get a leased voice-grade line (and I think you
can get that almost anywhere, although you may have to pay for laying
the wire, if there isn't a wire already) you can set up a leased
dataline with modems. The value added carrier will typically offer you
service at their point of presence, and if you can get your data
there, you can use the service. Mostly, in metropolitan areas, I think
they prefer to sell the service at your premise, and THEY lease the
access line; this lets them earn a profit on the access line, and in
principle cuts down on the fingerpointing.

> *  Internet, Bitnet 'et. al.' do not use any public data network -
> they have their own infrastructure which is not shared with anyone.
> Is this right?

"There is no network called Internet". The Internet is a loose
connection of networks that use the same protocol stack. Each of the
"member" networks is separately provisioned. Most links are leased
digital data service lines, from 56kbps all the way up ... NSFnet's
backbone consists of 45Mbps (T3) links provisioned by MCI. Some links
out near the edges are dial-up links using asynch V.32bis modems (see
footnote).

So these networks "have their own infrastructure" in the sense that
they see some private lines, but the actual "wire" between cities is
likely to be part of a phone company fiber.

> *  Common carrier offerings like Frame Relay, SMDS do not use their plain
> old voice infrastructure. I'am wrong. Right?

Frame relay networks are generally built in a similar fashion as the
above mentioned X.25 networks.

SMDS is intended to be a more streamlined pipe for data into the
higher levels of the ISDN hierachy. SMDS uses phone numbers as data
link addresses.


Lars Poulsen, SMTS Software Engineer    Internet E-mail: [e-mail]
CNC Network Products / Rockwell Int'l    Telephone: [phone]
Santa Barbara, CA 93117-3083        TeleFAX:   [phone]

Footnote: My company just announced the NetHopper; a low-cost dial-up IP
router, which will connect your local ethernet to the Internet by
automatically dialing up a modem connection when there is traffic.


[Moderator's Mote: You are correct Lars. I did use his message
although it was around for a couple days in the queue with a few
hundred other submissions waiting for attention.  I wish people would
take the time to *read* each issue -- or at least scan it -- before
writing to me saying their article was not used. This gentleman has
since posted a summary of responses received. I will run it in the
next issue of the Digest.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (John V. Jaskolski)
Subject: Question Regarding Telephone PARTY LINES
Date: 8 Nov 92 15:39:55 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Boston University Dept. of Cognitive and Neural Systems


I am interested in building or acquiring telephone bridges for party
lines.  This would be a device that allows multiple callers to call in
and be "bridged" together so as to be able to all talk together at the
same time.  Ideally, the system would have several numbers with any
number of lines able to be dynamically allocated to a given party line
number.  For example, five people might call in on line one (and be
talking together), seven people might be talking on line two, etc.  At
another time 50 people might be on line one with the teleconferencing
system dynamically allocating the lines to each number as needed.
What I am looking for is ANY INFORMATION WHATSOEVER: chips that might
be used, schematics, textbooks, vendors, whatever.  These systems are
also called Group Bridging Service (GBS) systems and if purchased
comercially they are expensive.  Information regarding vendors will
also be greatly appreciated.


Thank you very much,

John V. Jaskolski, IMC                            Internet: [e-mail]
International Marketing Corp.                Bitnet: jasko%kenmore AT BUACCA
IMC of America                     UUCP: {harvard,uunet}!bu.edu!bucasb!jasko

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Is the AT&T International Rate Schedule Online?
Organization: Waisman Center, University of Wisconsin-Madison
Date: 8 NOV 92 10:58:36 CDT


Does anyone know if the current AT&T international rate schedule is
available online somewhere? I have it in hardcopy format but it
doesn't scan very well.  Please reply via email as I don't read this
group regularly. Thanks.


Carl Karcher                          Internet: [e-mail]
Waisman Center                        Bitnet:   KARCHER@WISCMACC
University of Wisconsin-Madison       PSTnet:   [phone]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #827
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa16014;
          9 Nov 92 0:51 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA24950
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 8 Nov 1992 22:50:33 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA00429
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 8 Nov 1992 22:50:15 -0600
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 22:50:15 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #828

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 8 Nov 92 22:50:20 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 828

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Public Data Neworks: Replies 'Summary' ([e-mail])
    Compuserve/MCI Email (Alfredo E. Cotroneo)
    Alcatel Kirk Delta Phone Help Needed (Jack Adams)
    NT Meridian Key System For Sale ([e-mail])
    Sprint/United Telephone Wants Your Old Equipment (TELECOM Moderator)
    New 900 Number Scam - Credit Collection/Telecompute/West Penn (John Nagle)
    Odd Survey (Rob Knauerhase)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Organization: Purdue University
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 15:54:46 EST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Public Data Neworks: Replies 'Summary'


Here is the most comprehensive reply to my earlier posting regarding
public data networks. I got several replies saying that the same
infrastructure is used for several services (voice, Data and all the
new services) and that is the key to new service offerings like Frame
Relay, SMDS etc. Got two replies which specifically answered all the
questions, but Lars' reply is most comprehensive, and covers all the
points in the other replies.


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


[Moderator's Note: It turns out that all Sashi sent for a 'summary'
was the one message from Lars Poulsen which I ran in the last issue of
the Digest. (I had not read this 'summary' before announcing in the
last issue I would run it in the next issue.) So I have truncated his
message at this point rather than reprint the message from Lars all
over again. Please, when sending articles to telecom, allow time for
them to arrive and be used. In my haste to accomodate Sashi earlier
this evening -- until going back through my own archives and finding
the original message *was* used, I printed Lars' reply first.  PAT]

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

Date: 08 Nov 92 06:19:24 EST
From: Alfredo E. Cotroneo <[e-mail]>
Subject: Compuserve/MCI Email


Our Association has subscribed to CompuServe (CSI) in order (mainly)
to have Internet access. Another use of the CSI account is to forward
mail to US addresses. Mail is edited in Milano, Italy, and uploaded
via modem to Compuserve via an Infonet node in Milano. CSI assures
almost next day US mail delivery in the US at a very competitive cost
(more or less the cost of an Airmail stamp from Italy, that's one or
two days delivery versus ten or more days from Milano).

Another use we make of the CSI account is to forward mail to MCI
users. CSI does charge quite a lot for mail gated to MCI (ca.  US$ 1,
per message). Access to MCI from CSI's Internet gateway
(INTERNET: [e-mail]) is blocked by CSI, so we have to use the CSI
to MCI direct gateway at a higher price.  Although expensive, sometime
we also use CSI to MCI mail for urgent and important messages. At an
extra cost and for any kind of destination, CSI also notify us of
delivery/receipt of messages. This is an option that sometimes we also
use.

Recently we suspected that all mail previously sent to at least one
MCI's address was not delivered by CSI, and we were NOT been advised
(no message returned as undeliverable). Since we were indeed charged
for all CSI to MCI mail delivery, we assumed that all of these
messages were indeed delivered on time to MCI, but apparently they
were not. About a month ago we filed a request to CSI customer
Service, but no reply has been received so far, except a series of "we
are sorry for the delay in answering you, we are investigating the
matter" like messages.

The content of some of these messages consisted of a "Notice of usage
of HF frequencies" by our SW Station. These notifications usually try
to avoid interferences between broadcasters when a seasonal HF
frequency changes is due. A few weeks ago one station who was the
receipient of one of such notifications started interfering heavily
with our station. After a few notes of complain from us (sent via
fax!), they stated that they have not received our notifications sent
via CSI->MCI.

If it really proves that messages were not delivered by CSI, what
would be the responsability of CompuServe or MCI? Would it be possible
to obtain any compensation for what the losss of this mail caused, and
is still causing? Again, probably if the messages would have been
carried thru Internet, there would be no guarantee they would be
delivered/received (?), but since this is a direct CSI->MCI gateway
(and service charged) I must assume that delivery must be guaranteed
by both CSI and MCI.

I know the US has a tradition in service and satisfaction -- something
we are still missing overhere in Europe, I am afraid.  But still it
seems that we are at a standstill with CSI.  Any help/hint/suggestion
in this matter from the US readers will be greatly appreciated. Is
there any federal body I should also contact at this regard?

Do not forget that we are based in Milano, Italy, and are not a US
company. Please email directly to: [e-mail], and I
will summarize if there is interest. Thank you.


Alfredo E. Cotroneo   President
NEXUS-International Broadcasting Association
PO BOX 10980, I-20110 Milano, Italy
NEXUS-IBA is a non profit-Association chartered according to the
Italian law and operates IRRS-Shortwave on Shortwave to Europe.


[Moderator's Note: Actually, the fault may very well be with MCI Mail.
They routinely dump huge amounts of mail from the Internet undelivered.
The sender may or may not get notice of non-delivery, depending on the
way things occured.  Consider this Digest for example: I have several
dozen subscribers who receive their copies via MCI Mail -- or at least
they are supposed to. About once every two weeks, I get back notice
that they did NOT deliver one or more issues. As often as not, I find
out when several subscribers from MCI Mail write me at the same time
and say one or more issues never arrived. Their complaint is that a
single address in the envelope is bad; someone quit subscribing to MCI
Mail but never told me to remove their name. The mail gets there, MCI
sees one bad address and dumps it all. Maybe the Reston gateway sends
it back to me, maybe not. I suspect MCI does not always give it back
to Reston, otherwise I'd get a mailer daemon from there. MCI Mail has
never seen any need apparently to follow Internet mail standards which
provide for handling multiple addressees with one bad address in the
midst of it. Naturally, I have to then remail the missing issues. It
is quite a nuisance that MCI Mail seems unwilling to correct.   PAT]

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

From: vixen![e-mail] (22475-adams)
Subject: Alcatel Kirk Delta Phone Help Needed
Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 92 15:34:05 GMT


Hi,

My cousin in Denmark sent me a very lovely Alcatel Kirk Delta
telephone with repertory and a number of other features.
Unfortunately, the explanation of some of the settings of the feature
switches is in Danish and I'm too embaressed (not knowing Danish all
that well) to call them and ask for an interpretation.  Among the
things I would like to know about the settings of the switches is: How
do I set it for DTMF dialing?  What ringer tone patterns are
available?  Etc.  The glossy user guide is in Danish, but contains
very meaningful information (i.e., it tells how to make and answer
calls, use the repetory features, etc.)  I would like some kind soul
who might have an English version to mail me a copy or I could e-mail
the relevant Danish phrases for translation.  In case all this fails,
I can always just fool around with the switches and hope for the best.


Jack (John) Adams         Bellcore NVC 2Z-220
[phone] {Voice}         [phone] {Facsimile}
[e-mail]     [e-mail]

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

From: Ron <[e-mail]>
Subject: NT Meridian Key System For Sale
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 92 12:04:11 CST


I've got a Northern Telecom "meridian" Key Telephone System for sale.

It's a box about 15" x 24" x 3.5".

It's got a software cartridge that allows a capacity of 6x16 lines.  6
in, and 16 out.

The warranty expired in Jan of 1991.  As far as I know it's functional.

This is just the Key System Unit.  No stations or other software is
available.  The unit is also missing documentation.

I'm unsure of the unit's worth, so I'll accept the best offer over what I
paid for it that I receive via e-mail by Nov. 20th, and work out the
details from there.


Ron                      | Lightning Systems, INC.
[e-mail]  | [phone]  62megs
                         | 14.4k HST/V.32bis

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

From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Subject: Sprint/United Telephone Wants Your Old Equipment
Date: November 8, 1992 (Sun) 18:25:00 CST


Here is a place Ron could sell his old system, and you might have
stuff for them also.  I received this Fax message over the weekend:

 United Telephone - Northwest
  (A Sprint Company)

CASH FOR USED TELEPHONE or COMPUTER EQUIPMENT!
==============================================

United Telephone (a Sprint Company) is interested in purchasing your
USED TELEPHONE or COMPUTER equipment.

   -- ALL models and manufacturers wanted!
   -- Parts or complete systems -- Large or Small!
   -- Offers quoted within three days!
   -- WE PAY SHIPPING!

             PHONE:  [phone]    FAX: [phone]
                  QUESTIONS?    PLEASE CALL OR FAX

So anyone with old equipment they don't want might consider this as
one way of getting rid of it -- and help Sprint upgrade their service
at the same time, yuk, yuk!


PAT

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

From: [e-mail] (John Nagle)
Subject: New 900 Number Scam - Credit Collection/Telecompute/West Penn
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 21:51:49 GMT


I've uncovered what appears to be a new 900-number scam.

I received a collection letter which reads as follows:

"Credit Collection Center
 P.O. Box 610894
 Miami, FL. 33261-0894
 305-945-8441            Creditor: West Penn Audio
                Number: 900-420-4747
                Amount: $5.00
   ...

    "The amount(s) listed in the above statement are charges
incurred as a result of your use of (900) telecommunications services
offered by the above creditor(s).  These services were originally
billed to you by your local phone company on behalf of the creditor(s)
and appeared on the (900) section of your phone bill.  At your
request, your local phone company removed the charge(s). The telephone
company has referred these disputed charges back to the "900
Information Provider".  Do not contact your local phone company since
they can no longer be of assistance.  The amounts listed above have
been placed for immediate collection and we intend to collect" [This
last in boldface.]

"PROTECT YOUR CREDIT. PLEASE REMIT PAYMENT WITHIN 10 (number partially
crossed out with crosshatching) DAYS RECEIPT OF NOTICE TO AVOID FURTHER
ACTION".

"If your telephone service has been activated with the last four months
call this office."

            Credit Collection Center

            1-305-945-8441

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

This seemed a bit strange, for while I have some 900 charges, I've
never asked the local telco (Pac Bell) to cancel any of them.  So I
called the "Credit Collection Center" and reached a "Mr. Grant", who
refused to discuss any adjustment, refused to tell me who "West Penn
Audio" was, told me that if I didn't pay, something would be placed on
my credit report, and hung up.  A second call reached a different
person, who said she was unable to give me the date of the call or
tell me who West Penn Audio was, but did tell me that the date of the
supposed chargeback transaction was March 9, 1992.

So I decided to check this out.

     Pac Bell's local billing office was quite cooperative, proiding
me with copies of the bills for the period of interest (no sign of any
call to the indicated 900 number) and a letter stating I had never
requested such an adjustment.  AT&T billing was similarly cooperative,
providing copies of bills from their end, and the information that the
900 number was now defunct, but had been in use from 12/1/91 to
3/31/92 under the name "Info on Region A", by Telecompute Corp, 1275 K
Street NW.  STE ,G-9, Washington, DC 20005.  Calling Telecompute
(202-789-1111) reached a Mr. Paul Besic, who told me that Telecompute
was a service provider for other 900 services; they didn't provide
content, just the technical end.  He said "they didn't use collection
agencies" and didn't remember West Penn Audio, but said he would check
and get back to me by the end of the day.  He didn't.

       Following up the West Penn Audio thread led, via the
Pensylvania Secretary of State's office, to West Penn Audio Inc, 747
South Avenue, Pittsburgh PA 15221.  This is a Pittsburgh-area dating
service.  I reached a Mr. Richard Caldwell at 412-366-4848, who
confirmed that they used Credit Collection Center of Miami FL and
Telecompute Corp. of Washington DC.  He identified the 900 number
indicated as a "Numerology Hotline" (I vaguely remember calling
something like this once, and I do have proper bills for 900 charges
to some wierd numbers.  But not for this one.)  He was polite, and
told me they no longer used Telecompute because of problems in the
past.  Caldwell said they send Credit Collection a tape, and Credit
Collection does the rest.  But he didn't seem clear on where the data
comes from.  I didn't ask for an adjustment; by now I was reasonably
convinced I'd found a scam.

       Further checking produced the expected: Credit Collection
Center of Miami FL isn't a member of the Better Business Bureau or the
Chamber of Commerce, but they are at least a valid Florida corporation
located at 13499 Biscayne Blvd, Suite #208, Miami FL 33181.  West Penn
Audio isn't a member of the Pittsburgh Better Business Bureau, but
they are a valid Pensylvania corporation.  Telecompute just seems to
be in the middle.  (Any relation to Telesphere, the bankrupt
900-service provider and Alternate Operator Service for high-priced
payphones and motels?  Don't know yet.  Anyone have info?)

      I posted a previous message to TELECOM Digest, asking simply if
anyone else had received a similar letter.  Two people have thus far
responded reporting similar letters, with one referencing the same
phone number and dollar amount.  Very suspicious.  I wonder how many
they sent out.

      Generating large numbers of phony bills for small amounts is an
old scam, and this seems to be a new variation.  What is going on, I
suspect, is that this Credit Collection outfit is buying lists of
people who at some time called some 900 numbers, and then sending them
bills for small amounts for some arbitrary 900 number, figuring few
people will check their bills.

      I'm filing a complaint with the Dade County (FL) office of
consumer protection. (305-375-4222 or 305-375-4178).  If you have
received a similar letter, please BOTH call them and E-mail or post
that information.  These guys can probably be shut down with a little
work.


John Nagle


[Moderator's Note: While it is possible the outfit in Miami might be
very sleazy, I doubt there is anything sinister about this. There are
collection agencies which handle unpaid charges to 900/976 services
after they were returned uncollectible by telco.  I suspect someone
(maybe the middleman mentioned above) got some billing tapes mixed up
somehow. Either he did not want to 'fess up when you called, or maybe
the numerology consultants were the ones to bungle their work. I don't
think the collection agency is involved in it; they just agreed to try
and collect a bunch of five dollar charges for the numerology people.
If enough people like yourself have raised stinks with the collection
agency, by now the agency may well have packed up the whole load of
accounts and sent them back to their client saying they were not
interested in handling so many disputed claims, etc.  I know the
attornies I work with *used to* represent a certain nameless telco in
the pager business. Telco's records were so bad, and the disputes by
customers so plentiful we dumped them as a client. The Miami agency
may have done the same with the numerology people by now.  And yes,
900 services can bill you direct and place you in collection if they
wish, although not many bother with it.  PAT]

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

From: Rob Knauerhase <[e-mail]>
Subject: Odd Survey
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 92 16:33:11 CST


This afternoon, I got a call from an overly-friendly man named John
something, who worked for Chilton Research.  He asked if I'd take part
in a survey of long-distance for the household.  I asked what it was
for, and he said "marketing research."

He mispronounced my name, and if this phone was associated with me as
listed in the phone book.  I said yes.  He then asked if I still had
MCI as my primary LD carrier, to which I replied yes.

At this point, I asked if his company was engaged by MCI, and he said
no.

He then interrupted (trying to get back on the script, I imagine) and
said that they were checking to make sure people's long-distance
carriers has not been changed without their knowledge; there is a
number to call to make sure who is your LD company.  I said "You mean
700-555-4141" (like a good telecom geek) and he said (in a surprised
tone) "Yes.  Can you call that toll-free number, double-check that it
says MCI, then I will call you back and make sure?"

I said that I was sure I had MCI as of my last bill, and that I highly
doubted I'd been slammed since then (a week ago).  He said "You'd be
surprised -- we've found many people who were changed without perm-
ission in the past couple days."

So I agreed to call, and did, and got the MCI message.

He called back, and I told him that yes, it was still MCI.  He asked
how long I had had MCI, and I said "around two years"; he then
launched into a short "thank you" script and that was the end of the
call.

Afterwards, though, I began to wonder:

 - if Chilton isn't hired by MCI, why do they care that I haven't been
slammed?  Or did MCI commission the survey and instruct the people not
to portray themselves as MCI employees?

 - was he perhaps going to try to sell me some other company if things
had gone differently?

 - my name and number are listed in the phone book, but how did he
know that I had MCI?  I assume that IBT wouldn't release that info
unless perhaps they commissioned the survey, and he said that MCI
wasn't the originator.

Has anyone heard of this company, or heard of this type of survey?  I
don't suspect anything fishy; however, the purposes of such a survey
aren't clear to me and the man who called didn't seem to know anything
beyond the prepared spiel he had.


Rob Knauerhase           University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
[e-mail]       Dept. of Computer Science, Gigabit Study Group

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #828
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa17534;
          9 Nov 92 1:45 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA22716
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 8 Nov 1992 23:31:15 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA26064
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 8 Nov 1992 23:30:59 -0600
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 23:30:59 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #829

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 8 Nov 92 23:31:00 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 829

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Wanted: Advice on 56kbps Line/Products (William Petrisko)
    CallerID in Area Code 516 (Dave Niebuhr)
    Advice Needed on Telephone Security Systems (Kamran Husain)
    Phone Harassment (a New Solution?) (Luigi Semenzato)
    ISDN From Intel PC Computers (Steve Davidson)
    Computer Dialed Calls (Ray Normandeau)
    BC Tel Pay Numbers (RISKS Digest via Leonard Erickson)
    Leased Line Modems (Jonathan Roy)
    OSC Goes Multilingual (Nigel Allen)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Wanted: Advice on 56kbps Line/Products
From: [e-mail] (William Petrisko)
Date: 8 Nov 92 03:07:02 MST
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: University of Arizona, College of Engineering and Mines, Tucson


I was recently given the opportunity to supervise the move of a small
alarm company with offices in two different cities.  Currently, the
computers on both ends are connected with a leased 9600 baud line and
a set of async stat muxes.

Since they have to order a new line because of the move, they felt
this would be a good time to upgrade a lot of equipment.  I need
advice on setting up the new system.  They will be ordering a 56kbps
leased line for the new locations.  Questions:

What type of termination is at both ends of the 56kbps leased line?
(Is it similar to the 2-pair 9600 data leased line?)

The capability of running voice (off premise extensions, essentially)
must be included in the equipment that is purchased.  Two lines
minimum, four to six lines would be great.  It should be capable of
emulating a standard phone line (ie: not additional equipment needed
on the pbx side ... SLT extension in one end, phone in the other.
Please let me know if I am hoping for too much here.)

Suggestions on equipment to purchase/vendors to call?  Cost?

I have seen LAN bridges that will link an ethernet across a 56kbps
channel, but none that will link arcnet.  The OS they are using (QNX
2.15) can only use their own propriatary arcnet cards.  Does a LAN
bridge exist that can handle arcnet?  Convert it to a more widely-used
standard?

If link via arcnet isn't possible (or too expensive), it will have to
be done using serial lines.

In case it isn't obvious, the same piece of equipment will need to
handle both the voice and data.

Apologies for the hastiness in preparing my questions.  FYI, this
project has a deadline for completion for Feb 1, 1993.  Please send
your suggestions/experiences via e-mail.  I will summarize if
necessary.


Thanks.

bill petrisko                 [e-mail]
aka n7lwo    ..!uunet!4gen!warlok!gargle!omnisec!thumper!bill

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

Date: Sun, 8 Nov 92 07:51:35 EST
From: [e-mail] (Dave Niebuhr)
Subject: CallerID in Area Code 516


NYTel subscribers in the 516 area code (Nassau and Suffolk Counties on
Long Island) are now able to subscribe to CallerID effective Nov. 1.
The actuation of this service will be effective on November 16,
however.

When I called NYTel on Monday (11/1), the sales rep didn't metion the
blocking options (per-call or per-line) and I'm assuming that she and
the others figured that a recent bill insert explained it all and
therefore they didn't have to mention it at the time of the order (I
wonder how many people read these things).

The monthly cost is $6.50 (US) if no other PhoneSmart(tm) options are
used.  I have Call Return and that with CID will be $8.50 (US) per
month with per call blocking (free) and Call Trace ($1.50 (US) per
use).

The signup fee after the first six months of availability will be
$16.00 (US) if a subscription is done then.  Two free switchings of
blocking will be allowed and there is a fee after that although I
can't recall what it costs.

A few questions now come to mind that I hope the readers of the Digest
who have CID can answer:

  1. Is the monthly cost reasonable both for the CID alone and also
     with one option?

  2. Which is really the better blocking - per-call or per-line?

  3. My oldest daughter and her husband have a cell phone on the A
     side; will their number be displayed on the ID box?

  4. I played with the call block feature (*67 for me) and tried to dial
     through the stutter tone which left me with a dead line (absolutely
     nothing but silence.  Waiting until after the stutter had completed,
     I was able to complete the call.  Is this normal?  Could this have
     been because I was calling a known non-working number (my former
     second line which had to be given up due to a massive cut in pay)?


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Kamran Husain)
Subject: Advice Needed on Telephone Security Systems
Date: 8 Nov 92 19:55:26 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail]


This applies to comunications, so bear with me please.

Lately there's been a rash of robberies in our area where the mode of
operation has rendered most home security systems useless.  (I don't
have the exact number of houses hit so far, and the cops here are
understandably close mouthed about it.)

Most houses hit have the breakers outside the security zone. Crooks
snip the phone lines and cut the power off. If someone's home, the
owner goes out to turn the power on and the alarm off. (S)he then
walks back in with the crooks. If they are not home for (say for the
weekend) crooks come back after 24 hour when the battery back up is
drained for the siren. The alarm monitoring company is NOT notified
since the phones are dead and that's the only lifeline back.

My house was hit day before yesterday but we stayed indoors and used a
mobile phone (luckily!! inside the house!) to call the sheriff.  No
theft, but scared us witless when the both our regular POTS phones
were dead. Also, we found on later examination that our cable TV coax
was cut. (Why cable???)

This brings me to the questions:

a) Is there a secondary way of notifying a monitoring station that AC
power is out AND that the phones are no longer functoning? Is it done
on cable TV? or is there a wireless (radio/CB/cellular) transmitter
for those people who do not have mobile phones?

b) Any recommendations on such devices out there?

c) Why were cable connections cut? Do some monitoring stations use
cable coax for communications back to the head node for purposes other
than cable TV channel $$$ monitoring?

d) How can I hide the phone connections at my house or make the
snipping a less than trivial process?

I would appreciate any advice.


Thanks,

Kamran Husain   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Luigi Semenzato)
Subject: Phone Harassment (a New Solution?)
Date: 8 Nov 1992 01:43:44 GMT
Organization: University of California, Berkeley


This must have come up so many times that I am almost ashamed to ask
(but, as you see, I am doing it anyhow).

My friend George has been receiving a very large number of harassing
telephone calls.  The caller never says anything, but if George speaks
to him, he (let's assume it's a he) will not hang up -- so it is not
likely to be some piece of machinery with a glitch.

He gets several calls a day, in the evening, mostly at times that seem
to coincide with TV commercials (on the hour and the 1/2 hour).  The
calls typically start at eight and stop around midnight, but sometimes
they go on longer.

He has called Pacific Bell, who has offered to change his number for
free -- but that's a nuisance.  He has also called the local police.
They will handle the matter at one condition: George must log all
calls (day and time) for a week.  With this information, the police
will contact PacBell and find the calling number.  In the end, George
does not get to know who is calling, but presumably the police will
warn the offender.

This area (Oakland, CA) does not offer call ID, but there is another
service that comes in handy: selective call forwarding.  It costs 3.50
a months, and the subscriber can request that certain numbers be
forwarded to any number of the subscriber's choice.  It also works
this way: the subscriber may call the operator and say: `I'd like to
forward all calls from the person who just called to xxx-xxxx', where
xxx-xxxx is some disconnected number.  The subscriber does not get to
know who called -- that's confidential (even though in this
circumstance he would have the full right to know) -- but nonetheless,
the harasser is now virtually neutralized.

To George, having the police warn this person, or cutting him off with
the selective forwarding, is all the same; neither as satisfactory as
knowing who the person is -- not for revenge, but out of a compelling
curiosity, as he suspects it may be someone he knows.

Can anybody suggest other options?


Thanks,

Luigi


[Moderator's Note: Illinois Bell will put a trap on a line to catch
the person involved, but only on one condition: you must first give
them a written okay to turn their evidence over to the police and
agree to prosecute the offender ... no exceptions. IBT won't get in
the middle of it; it could be a total stranger, some sick person or
perhaps someone you know -- a relative or a 'friend'.  IBT won't do a
trap and play detective for you just to satisfy your curiosity.
Niether is it possible to 'tell the operator to forward the last call
you received to a non-working number ...' or other such shenanigans.
You can have Call Screening here if desired, (*60 in many areas) and
have the last call received added to the reject list whether or not
you know the number of the caller. After such a call is received, you
must immediatly dial *60 #01# to add the number. I have found Call
Screening to be the most workable solution for me.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Davidson)
Subject: ISDN From Intel PC Computers
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 02:09:16 GMT


Is there a newsgroup for ISDN questions?

Can anyone direct me to information regarding how I might get ISDN
capability on an Intel PC?


Steve Davidson   Email: [e-mail]   Phone: [phone]


[Moderator's Note: There is comp.dcom.isdn, although such commentaries
are welcome here also in the general discusison.  Perhaps a Digest
reader will have an answer for you.   PAT]

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

Subject: Computer Dialed Calls
From: [e-mail] (Ray Normandeau)
Date: 8 Nov 92 21:21:00 GMT
Organization: Invention Factory's BBS - New York City, NY - 212-274-8298v.32bis
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Ray Normandeau)


This was really for a NYC BBS but others in other cities may like to
see this.  Updated November 4, 1992. They got me again this afternoon
using the 540-4400 number.


FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
=====================

                Computer Dialers Got You By The Calls?
                ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

by Raymond B. Normandeau

Normandeau Newswire - No matter where you are from the Nassau border
to the Hudson River you may have gotten a computer dialed call telling
you that you may be eligible for a fabulous prize.

If you have not gotten such a call yet, cheer-up, you probably will.

The recorded message is played to you extremely fast. You may have won
a life-time supply of amphetatmines so that you too may start a
similar business.

Have you gotten computer dialed calls from "Hopping Harry". Maybe
calls mentioning Reno Nevada? Have these calls told you to call a
540-???? number?

Do you think that maybe the recorded messages failed to tell you the
price of the call? Did the recording mention "Five-Four-Oh" several
times? If the recording said "The call is billed at Five-Four-Oh" they
meant that you are billed $5.40. You WERE paying attention weren't
you? Those are the bargain calls, the sky is the limit.

Was an address speed spoke so fast that "slow you" missed it?

If you have multiple phone lines and have been lucky enough to be the
recipient of multiple calls you may like to go pick up your multiple
prizes in person.

You may have been told to call 540-4400, 540-0100, 540-9900 or another
540-nnnn number.

Now ... back to that address. Sneaky us, taped one of those calls and
played back the address.

Would you like to visit the office where the calls came from?  Are you
Hopping Mad?

Here is the address:

Eagleton Group Inc.
717 East Jericho Turnpike #213
Huntington Station, NY 11746

If the recording tells you that you must call within "n" minutes and
you want to get more information by phone without paying a hefty fee
for the call, then dial 718-830-8781 which is a Queens tie line to the
Huntington Station address. You will only be charged for a regular
local call.

So now you have it. You can pay them a visit!

You may have to speak to them real slowly like.

They don't hear as fast as they talk.

However, no matter how slowly you tell them that you want no more
calls from them, they won't stop calling you - ever.

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

Date: Sun, 08 Nov 92 10:30:54 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: BC Tel Pay Numbers


The following appeared in RISKS Digest 13.89.

It appears to indicate that BC Tel is doing something *really* stupid.
Anybody got any further info?

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

 Date: Mon, 2 Nov 92 11:07:31 PST
 From: [e-mail]
 Subject: Pay-per-call-back-verify

Padgett Peterson was telling me about his recent success in getting a
BBS set up with one of the new modems with a "Caller-ID" feature.  I
think this is going to be a feature that a lot of sysops are going to
want.

It happened that just last week I had a request to look into a
security problem for a local sysop.  He is concerned with security and
misuse of his board, and so he has installed a call-back-verify system
to check out callers.  If he can't call back and get a confirmed phone
number, they don't get an account.  Many sysops use this to avoid
having to "voice verify" each and every caller.

Most call back verify systems have an option that will prevent the
system from returning long distance calls.  Obviously, this will also
apply to "900" pay-per-call numbers.  Padgett reminds me that recently
there was a scam in New York wherein pager wearers were "paged" by
"540" pay-per-minute calls.

The problem in Vancouver is that BC Tel has recently started up
pay-per-call numbers, but they do not yet have identifiable prefixes.
Therefore, ankies have been calling various BBSes that have
call-back-verify, and leaving these pay-per-call numbers.  The sysop
who talked to me had lost about $50 in the last month, and this has
only just started.


Vancouver Inst. for Research into User Security, Canada V7K 2G6 604-526-3676
[e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail]

                       -------

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


[Moderator's Note: Well, that's the price he is going to pay for not
wanting to personally verify his users. I know a couple BBS sysops who
take the trouble to at least call each user once. Having users who
know that you know who they are helps keep boards in nice condition.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Jonathan Roy)
Subject: Leased Line Modems
Organization: The 23:00 News and Mail Service
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 04:26:02 GMT


Where can I find info on CSU/DSU modems? We will need to purchase two
in a few months to establish a 57.6Kbps link over a dedicated (leased)
line. I've been unable to find info anywhere on Usenet ...

Thanks for any information you care to pass on. If one of the dcom
FAQs deals with this, please direct me there. Also, are there any
magazines that deal with this sort of hardware?

Thanks again.


Jonathan Roy, Vice President, Free Access Foundation.    GEnie: J.ROY18
Mail [e-mail] for information, or FTP to halcyon.com:  /pub/faf/
Internet: [e-mail]

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

From: Nigel Allen <[e-mail]>
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 19:00:00 -0500
Subject: OSC Goes Multilingual
Organization: NDA


U.S. Justice Department signs up with AT&T Language Line Services

Here is a press release from the U.S. Department of Justice, which
indicates that an office within the department is now using the
services of AT&T Language Line Services.

DOJ Office on Immigration-Related Unfair Employment Practices Becomes
Multilingual

Contact: Obern Rainey of the Department of Justice, 202-514-2007

   WASHINGTON, Nov. 6 -- The U.S. Department of Justice announced
today that the Office of Special Counsel for Immigration Related
Unfair Employment Practices (OSC) can now communicate with victims of
discrimination in more than 140 languages.

   With the assistance of AT&T Language Line Services, OSC has gained
access to languages as varied as Haitian Creole, Laotian or Slovak,
for example.  Because OSC handles cases involving discrimination based
on national origin or citizenship status, many seeking OSC's
assistance speak languages other than English.  As a result, becoming
multi-lingual will make OSC more accessible to the public.

   Special Counsel William Ho-Gonzalez praised the new development.

   "Removal of the language barrier is a significant development that
will enhance OSC's enforcement efforts.  We expect that many people
who were deterred from contacting OSC because they did not speak
English will now feel free to inform us when they have been subjected
to discriminatory employment practices."

   OSC said that when a person who does not speak English calls, he or
she will be transferred to an interpreter who will take information on
the complaint.  Interpreters are available 24 hours a day, seven days
a week.

   OSC was created by Congress in 1987 to enforce the anti-
discrimination provision of the Immigration Reform and Control Act of
1986.  Since its inception, OSC has received over 2,500 charges.

   For additional information about IRCA's anti-discrimination
provision write or call:

     Office of Special Counsel for Immigration Related
     Unfair Employment Practices
     P.O. Box 65490
     Washington, D.C.  20035-5490

     1-800-255-7688 (toll free)
     [phone] (metropolitan D.C. area)

     TDD 1-800-237-2515 (toll free)
     [phone] (metropolitan D.C. area)


Canada Remote Systems  - Toronto, Ontario
World's Largest PCBOARD System - 416-629-7000/629-7044

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #829
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa18836;
          9 Nov 92 2:24 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA16994
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 9 Nov 1992 00:20:07 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA01317
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 9 Nov 1992 00:19:49 -0600
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 00:19:49 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #830

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 9 Nov 92 00:19:50 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 830

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    News Summaries (Washington Post via Paul Robinson)
    Cordless Phone Newbie Questions (Elizabeth Schwartz)
    Questions About Personal 800 Numbers and Cheap Long Distance (D Bernholdt)
    What's a T1? (John C. Fowler)
    Listings Wanted of CLLIs by Area Code/Exchange (Cliff Sharp)
    Re: Cellular Advice Sought (Henry Mensch)
    Two Cellular Phones on the Same Number (T. Govindaraj)
    Writers Wanted for Telecomm Magazine (Bill Rayl)
    California PUC Sets Limits on Reseller Wholesale Rate (RCR via L Donnelly)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
Date: Sun, 08 Nov 1992  20:37:21 EST
Subject: News Summaries


Summary of Newsworthy Items of Note {Washington Post}, 11/6:

Business Digest.   Page B2.

1.  Time Warner will be the third organization filing a suit over the
cable re-regulation bill, citing a First Amendment violation in
"special burdens on cable companies' ability to supply programming".

2.  "The Justice Department said it would not defend a provision of
the new cable television law that requires cable operators to reserve"
one third of channel capacity for local broadcast stations.

Page B1.

3.  Article titled "New Player on the Cellular Circuit" discusses
AT&T's buying McCaw Cellular, which is AT&T's first involvement in
cellular in ten years.  I think there is a snipe by the Post at Pat's
home telco: "AT&T's entry into cellular service would make it a
provider of a different kind of local service that is growing at a
breathless clip -- though this isn't quite the same thing as
resurrecting Illinois Bell or any of the other Bell Telephone
companies." (I didn't know Illinois Bell was dead; if it isn't dead,
why would it need to be resurrected?)

Cellular wants to grab more radio spectrum and AT&T may help it do
that, by giving a "vote of confidence" in the future of wireless.  It
could also knock down legal and regulatory barriers over what is a
local and what is a long-distance company and who can offer what
services.  AT&T sells 42% of the 90 metropolitan area's cellular
equipment anyway, making it a major supplier.

In some cases, AT&T may actually be competing against companies it
used to own.  Having "AT&T" as a brand of Cellular Phone service may
bring back thoughts of the old national "Bell System".  Ronald Stowe,
President of (Pacific Bell's holding company) Pacific Telesis, said
"They are in a position of constructing their old monopoly with
wireless instead of copper."

AT&T is painstakingly making an effort to be sure that people are
aware it is not going into local phone service.  John Zeglin, AT&T's
General Counsel points out that "Some people are mistakenly believing
that mobile services substitute for the local exchange."  An ex-FCC
executive agreed that cellular is not a competitor to cheap basic
phone service.

Local Telcos can't do long distance, so if AT&T gets away with this,
they want to be able to offer long distance too.  They think they can
compete with AT&T on long distance.  (Like fun.)  Some whining by the
flack for Bell Atlantic.

MCI may have to go into Cellular since Sprint is also buying Centel.
MCI used to own some cellular properties.  It sold them to McCaw in
1986.

4.  "They're Wacky, They're Zany, They're an Ad?" is the title of an
article describing Bell Atlantic's new ad which is being test
marketed.

This ad is a 30-minute infomercial, not using the standard talk show
or demonstration, but using a situation comedy.  You might be watching
the show for ten minutes before you realize it's a commercial for Bell
Atlantic Call Waiting.

The commercial was filmed at CBS Television Studios in Los Angeles,
and is titled "The Ringers."  The main characters are "befuddled dad
Ralph, his wife Rhonda, their wacky kids Ronnie and Rachel, and that
lovable ol' rascal, Uncle Norman."  The ad was written and produced by
Sam Denoff ("That Girl" and "The Dick Van Dyke Show") and Marc
Sheffler (the 1989 "Chicken Soup.")

The show will air in Baltimore and some other places on five stations.
WNUV-TV Channel 54, an independent, will run the show during prime
time.  Bell Atlantic plans to clearly mark the show as a paid
announcement.

Bell Atlantic won't say what it spent, but it is supposedly comparable
to two-30 second commercials, which puts the cost in the six-figure
range.

If the commercial clicks, other markets it will run in include
Washington, Philadelphia, Richmond, Norfolk and Charleston WV.

They might make additional "episodes" if this succeeds.

Page B3.

5.  "Court Voids Syndication Rules In Major Victory for Networks"
tells how a Chicago Federal Appeals court vacated the Financial
Interest and Syndication rules which prevent networks from competing
with studios on sales of reruns to other media.

This also prevented networks from merging with studios.  A separate
action in Los Angeles is expected to vacate a related consent decree
which had the same effect.


Paul Robinson --  [e-mail]
This (excessively) opinionated (and probably inaccurate) summary is my
(incompetent) fault alone; no one else (is stupid enough to be)
responsible for it.

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

From: [e-mail] (Elizabeth Schwartz)
Subject: Cordless Phone Newbie Questions
Organization: University of Massachusetts at Boston
Date: Sat, 8 Nov 1992 05:11:41 GMT


I thought I was a rather techie person, but I just picked up my first
cordless phone and am I confused! A few questions:

1) What's the range on these things? This is a Sony SPP-75, if it matters.

2) What's the "auto security code system" for? Does that keep my phone
 from ringing when someone else's does? From hearing someone else's
call?

3) What's the relationship between the security codes and ten
channels?

4) Is this thing supposed to be left in the base or can I bring it
outside and wait for it to ring? Does it have to stand up in the base?

5) The manual mentions computers and interference. Will the phone
interfere with the computer, or vice versa? If I get a second line,
the phone could have the opportunity to interfere with the modem.

6) Finally is this a particularly good or bad phone?

As you can probably tell, I bought this on a whim during a big sale
and didn't get to talk to the salespeople. There's a 30-day return,
though.

Thanks very much for any advice! Probably best to answer by email and
I'll summarize if there's interest ... I suppose the experienced techs
on this channel don't want to read about Sony buttons.


Thanks,

Betsy
System Administrator      Internet: [e-mail]
MACS Dept, UMass/Boston   BITNET:[e-mail]
100 Morrissy Blvd         Boston, MA 02125-3393

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

Date: Sun, 8 Nov 92 13:23:23 EST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Questions About Personal 800 Numbers and Cheap Long Distance


It looks increasingly like my wife and I will be taking jobs at
different ends of the continent for a while (the well known two-body
problem in science these days).  Consequently, I'd like to ask a few
questions about LD telephone service, which we'll be using a lot of ...

Is there any type of LD service that is likely to be cheaper than AT&T
Reach Out America or the equivalent from other carriers?  I know I can
compare among the different carrier's ROA-like plans, but I want to
know if there might be something better which I hadn't heard of.

One or both of us were to get 800 numbers, is this likely to be
cheaper than somthing like ROA, or is it just a way of changing who
pays for the call?

Also for 800 numbers, does the cost vary with time of day, as it does
for standard LD service?  If so, is the time of the call determined in
the originator's time zone or the recipient's?  (If I live in WA and
she lives in NY and she calls my 800 number at midnight (9pm my time)
would it be "night" or "evening" rate?)

Finally, who offers good personal-800 service? Washington (state) and
New York (state) are likely to be the two endpoints, if that matters.

If you reply by email, I will summarize for the group.  Thanks in
advance.


David Bernholdt        [e-mail]
Quantum Theory Project    [e-mail]
University of Florida   Gainesville, FL  32611     904/392 6365

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

Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 12:22:14 -0700
From: John C. Fowler <[e-mail]>
Subject: What's a T1?


I've seen the abbreviation 'T1' or 'T-1' here in the Digest many times
over the past few years, but I don't think I've ever seen anyone
define exactly what a T1 was.  From context, I have guessed that it is
a direct link to the local telephone company for high-speed data
purposes, or a direct link to a long distance company for the purpose
of bypassing the local telephone company.  But I'm not certain either
of those definitions is correct or tells the whole story.  So, could
someone please summarize what a T1 is and why anybody would want one?
Thanks.


John C. Fowler, [e-mail] (or [e-mail])

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

Subject: Listing Wanted of CLLIs by Area Code/Exchange
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 92 15:45:05 CST
From: Cliff Sharp <[e-mail]>


I'm looking for an _accurate_listing of CLLIs by areacode/exchange,
and the only intelligent sounding being I've reached at the phone
company says they're proprietary and she can't send them out.

   The end output of this will be a program (carefully researched)
which will allow the user to add "SET EXCH=Ill Dearborn" to his
environment and then let him/her get an accurate listing of how much
it costs to call 708-928 or whatever.


Cliff Sharp  |  [e-mail]   OR  [e-mail]
  WA9PDM     |              Use whichever one works

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

From: [e-mail] (Henry Mensch)
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 92 14:01:24 -0800
Subject: Re: Cellular Advice Sought
Reply-To: [e-mail]


Jerry Leichter <[e-mail]> wrote:

> My sister is a surgery resident in San Francisco (and with the kind of
> work she does -- heart surgery, trauma unit, etc. -- I sincerely hope
> none of you meet her on the job).  These days, she's essentially on
> beeper call 24 hours a day, seven days a week -- the beeper is forever
> at her side, and at all hours of the night and day she has to be able
> to reach a phone quickly.  So ... a cellular phone seems like the
> answer.

It seems appropriate to remind that cellphones aren't particularly
private or secure ... which is probably an issue when discussing
patients and their particulars.


# henry mensch / booz, allen & hamilton, inc.  / <[e-mail]>
# for information on the league for programming freedom,
# write to [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (T. Govindaraj)
Subject: Two Cellular Phones on the Same Number
Date: 8 Nov 92 20:39:05 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail] (T. Govindaraj)
Organization: Center for Human-Machine Systems Research - Georgia Tech


Having two phones on the same number is attractive to me since my wife
and I can use the same phone, since we use it primarily for occasional
calls. In fact, I got it so she can use it to call for help if her car
breaks down or if she needs directions for some place.

Is anybody using this option? Only one telephone can be used at the
same time. I understand that if a call is in progress and the second
phone attempts to make a call, the first call will continue as usual
and the other second won't be able to make a connection.  (This is OK
with me.) As for receiving calls, apparently it depends (I don't quite
know on what!).

The agent from whom we bought our original phone (and established the
connection) said that she would sell me a phone for approximately $200
more than the price she would charge if I establish a new connection.
Any ideas where I could buy a phone at a better price?  The C2+
installer suggested a place called Recellular with an 800 number. He
suggested the Motorola Flip Phone, Classic, or Ultra Classic. (We now
have a Panasonic EB3500. A lighter, but not too expensive will be
nice.)

Any comments, ideas, suggestions concerning the two-phone-one-number
option, places to buy a phone, etc. will be appreciated. Thank you.


T. Govindaraj    [phone]       [e-mail],NeXTmail welcome.
Member, League for Programming Freedom    (write [e-mail])
School of Industrial and Systems Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology
765 Ferst Drive, ISyE-0205, Atlanta, GA 30332-0205.


[Moderator's Note: Uh, not to disappoint you, but have you cleared
this with the cellular company?  Most do NOT allow two or more phones
to share the same number because the ESN is different in each phone
and ESN validation is what cellular billing integrity is all about. An
analogy would be two landline customers sharing the same wire pair and
expecting telco to figure out who to bill for which calls. Most
cellular systems will only validate one ESN per line. Even using it
the way you describe it, you could never call *each other* on the
other's cell phone. Why not just get two numbers; that is what
everyone else does. There are inexpensive calling packages for casual
users like your wife and yourself, and there can be a single master
bill generated each month covering both lines.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Bill Rayl)
Subject: Writers Wanted For Telecomm Magazine
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix at U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 92 01:21:12 GMT


Have you ever read a computer columnist's article and thought you
could do as good or better a job of writing?  Well, here's your
chance!

Pegasus Press of Ann Arbor, MI is looking for columnists and reviewers
for CONNECT magazine.  Covering the major commercial online services,
Internet/Usenet and smaller Bulletin Board System networks, CONNECT
focuses on telecommunications from a user-oriented perspective.

User-oriented means that people who know how to get a modem connected
to their personal computer should be able to understand and follow
every article in the magazine.  CONNECT will show them month after
month how to get the most from the pay services they're using.  These
include CompuServe, Delphi, America Online, Prodigy and GEnie.
CONNECT may also introduce them to "free" networks like FidoNet.

CONNECT will also review new telecommunications products, and deal
with complicated subjects in a clear, easy-to-undersand manner.  If
you like getting into the guts of products, and can talk about them in
a manner that doesn't put all your non-tech friends to sleep, then
this could be for you!

So, if you've ever wanted to see your name in print, please request a
Writer's Guide for CONNECT magazine by emailing Patricia Snyder-Rayl
at 70007,4640 on CIS, or UNICORNPUB on GEnie and Delphi, and at
[e-mail] on Internet.  Or, via US mail, contact Pegasus Press
at 3487 Braeburn Circle, Ann Arbor, MI 48108 or call [phone]
(voice) or [phone] (24hr BBS).

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

Date: Sun, 08 Nov 92 08:29:08 CST
From: [e-mail] (Leroy Donnelly)
Subject: California PUC Sets Limit on Reseller Wholesale Rate
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: DRBBS Technical BBS, Omaha


 From the November 9, 1992 issue of RCR (Radio Communications Report)
by Bill Maguire

VIEWPOINT

    The California Public Utilities commission is going to drive
cellular carriers in the state batty.

    The CPUC, in an effort to foster competition, recently voted
unanimously to set limits on wholesale rates charged to resellers, and
to let the resellers construct and operate their own switches.

    Needless to say, the carriers aren't pleased.

    Pacific Telesis Group, McCaw Cellular Communications Inc., US West
Inc. and GTE Corp. reportedly have all filed petitions to overturn the
CPUC's decision.  However, the petitions likely will only temporarily
delay the decision from taking effect.

    It would be difficult to accuse the California commission of being
too hasty in making its decision: It came after four years of study,
and numerous hours of hearings and filings.  It seems the CPUC has
been bent on maximizing competition among the state's cellular
providers; it's unlikely to change its collective mind.

    The resellers say the decision is a major victory for them and
consumers, and it would appear they're right.  They claim basic
charges for cellular service will drop drastically -- as much as $18 a
month and 12 cents a minute.  Not bad.  I may have finally found a
reason to move to California.  Current charges levied by the carriers
are running about $45 a month and 45 cents a minute during peak times.

    The trick, if you will, is in the switch.

    If the decision takes effect, resellers in California will be able
to construct their own cellular switches and connect directly into the
local and long-distance telephone network.  By doing so, they become
mini- carriers within themselves, able to buy large blocks of phone
numbers at substantially lower costs.

    David Nelson, president of the California Resellers Association
and vice president of Cellular Sales Inc., a reseller based in
Glendale, Calif., said he could buy a block of 10,000 numbers for
about $1.10 each if CPUC's decision is upheld, instead of the $32 he
currently spends to buy numbers piecemeal.  Nelson noted that
additional costs will include leasing phone lines, but nevertheless,
the customer will benefit.

    Cellular carriers say not so.  They believe the commission's
decision ultimately will hurt the customer because carriers won't have
incentive to invest in improved technologies.

    "If the decision stands, California telecommunications
infrastructure will fall behind those of other states and a more
flexible regulatory approach," said Mark Hamilton, executive vice
president of external affairs at McCaw Cellular.  McCaw feels the
rate-of-return approach adopted in the decision discourages capital
investment by carriers and is unworkable in an environment where
competing cellar carriers have different costs structures.

    Nevertheless, cellular carriers throughout the rest of the country
should take heed of what's going on at the California PUC.  In typical
trendsetting California fashion, the outcome of the CPUC decision will
have a far-reaching impact on the rest of the country.  Other state
commissions looking to regulate rates and stimulate competition will
be watching closely, if not already taking notes.

    Commissions at both the state and federal levels are aggressively
looking for ways to encourage competition.  In this case, what's good
for consumers in California may be good for consumers elsewhere.


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

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #830
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa20651;
          9 Nov 92 3:25 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA27821
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 9 Nov 1992 01:24:22 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA31578
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 9 Nov 1992 01:24:04 -0600
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 01:24:04 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #831

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 9 Nov 92 01:24:00 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 831

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: ISDN and Stuff (Bob Blackshaw)
    Re: ISDN and Stuff (Barton F. Bruce)
    Re: ISDN and Stuff (James Hanlon)
    Re: AT&T to Eliminate Holiday Rates (Mark Schuldenfrei)
    Re: AT&T to Eliminate Holiday Rates (Andy Finkenstadt)
    Re: Telco Handling of Cable Cut (Jack Adams)
    Re: Telco Handling Of Cable Cut ([e-mail])
    Re: Telephone Phreaks (Todd Lawrence)
    Re: Telephone Phreaks (John Gilbert)
    Re: Silent Caller From Different Numbers (Kenneth Crudup)
    Re: Silent Caller From Different Numbers (Max J. Rochlin)
    Re: Silent Caller From Different Numbers (Mike Morris)
    Re: Splits This Month (Troy Frericks)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Bob Blackshaw)
Subject: Re: ISDN and Stuff
Organization: Corporation for Open Systems
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 14:29:49 GMT


In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Maxime Taksar
KC6ZPS) writes:

> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
> (Doctor Math) writes:

>> Question: Why are things this way? When current modem technology
>> approaches the speed of one ISDN B-channel over an unmeasured dial-up
>> line for one-fourth the CPE cost and less than half the base monthly
>> charge, why would I want ISDN?

> Modem technology will never get near the speed of an ISDN B channel.
> I think that the theortical limit for a modem over a POTS line is
> somewhere in the 25-30Kbps range (someone please remind me how fast a
> Shannon modem is).  This isn't even half of what an ISDN B channel is.

Also, although none of the terminal adaptor manufacturers seem to have
thought about it yet, there is no reason why they could not implement
V.42bis in an ISDN TA. This would nearly double the 64 kbit/s rate.

In the trials at U of WV, from reports that I have heard, users at
home accessing the LAN over a single B-channel are quite happy with
the speed.


Bob

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

From: Barton F. Bruce <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: ISDN and Stuff
Organization: Cambridge Computer Associates, Inc.
Date: 8 Nov 92 22:31:50 EDT
Organization: Cambridge Computer Associates, Inc.


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Doctor Math) writes:

> Since ISDN service IS measured,  try to use it as little as possible.

Is it measured for voice as well as data calls? Not that the phone
company should be allowed to care, but they do try to rip you off for
data.

If voice is free, many products will still let you send data in voice
mode but only using 56kb rather than 64kb. Check out the Digiboard mac
layer ethernet bridges. One at the central site can support two (or
when they activate that second BRI port four) remote similar bridges.

> Question: Why are things this way? When current modem technology

The simple answer is that the telcos want dollars and YOU probably
didn't show up and testify at utility commission hearings when telco
was slipping through their latest tricks.

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

From: [e-mail] (James Hanlon)
Subject: Re: ISDN and Stuff
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 19:33:30 GMT
Organization: ddsw1.MCS.COM Contributor, Chicago, IL


[e-mail] (Maxime Taksar KC6ZPS) writes:

> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
> (Doctor Math) writes:

>> Question: Why are things this way? When current modem technology
>> approaches the speed of one ISDN B-channel over an unmeasured dial-up
>> line for one-fourth the CPE cost and less than half the base monthly
>> charge, why would I want ISDN?

A classic question.

> Modem technology will never get near the speed of an ISDN B channel.
> I think that the theortical limit for a modem over a POTS line is
> somewhere in the 25-30Kbps range (someone please remind me how fast a
> Shannon modem is).  This isn't even half of what an ISDN B channel is.

> Why would you want ISDN?  Because, theoretically, many people and
> businesses will eventually have it.  I'll venture to suggest the Fax
> machine analogy.  A Fax is to SnailMail as ISDN is to POTS.  If ISDN
> does become as popular as it's supposed to, ISDN CPE will cost *much*
> less, just as most technologies go down in cost as market and
> competition for it increase.

The gentleman's problem is not if, when, and will; it's here and now,
he has what he wants, good enough is good enough, and at a fraction of
the cost to boot. He'd be well advised to hang on to his POTS
lifeline. 10kbps is fine for character i/o, and is available for $100
US for DOS boxes. B-channel won't be 100 bucks for years. Why wait?
There is a chicken-and-egg aspect to market predictions -- the fiber
guys have been predicting the end of copper for years.


Jim Hanlon   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Mark Schuldenfrei)
Subject: Re: AT&T to Eliminate Holiday Rates
Organization: Progress Software Corp.
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 16:11:46 GMT


Paul Robinson quoted the following article from his local paper,
(and, it was in the {Boston Globe}, as well)

> NOTICE TO AT&T LONG DISTANCE CUSTOMERS

> On November 2, 1992, AT&T filed tariff revisions with the Federal
> Communications Commission to reduce the number of Special Rate
> Occasions (occasions when special lower rates apply to Evening and
> Night/Weekend Dial Station calls) from ten (10) Evenings and nine (9)
> Night/Weekends to zero (0), and to reduce the number of Floating
> Holidays (those holidays over and above the regular ten (10) federal
> holidays) from four (4) to zero (0).

> These changes are scheduled to become effective on November 16, 1992,
> and will apply to both general and commercial long distance schedules.

I called AT&T Customer service (+1 800 CALL ATT).  I was told that
AT&T had run a number of "specials" in the last year, where they
offered Reach Out America rates to all customers who used AT&T on
certain dates.  In order to do this, they filed a tariff.  In order to
stop doing this promotion, they must file a tariff.

I made the comparison to a supermarket having to file a tariff to run
a special on beef, and another to stop running the special.  The
representative on the phone felt that was remarkably apt.

She said that, at this time, they had no intention of changing the
overall tariff structure for AT&T customers.  As always, I am not a
spokesman for anybody's company, and reserve the right to be either
wrong, or lied to ...  but it made sense to me.


Mark Schuldenfrei ([e-mail])
[I'm just showin' you my opinions: this ain't a gift]

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

From: [e-mail] (Andy Finkenstadt)
Subject: Re: AT&T to Eliminate Holiday Rates
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Vista-Chrome Incorporated
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 18:26:42 GMT


According to an AT&T 800-222-0300 supervisor this has nothing to do
with holiday rates.  It has to do with special deals that AT&T set up
previously for "Call home for less today" for a geographic area or
nationwide.  AT&T had a Florida day recently, for example.

The Tele-Sales Rep I talked with expressed the concern that AT&T has,
since the advertisement should not have been released, was not created
by AT&T, and was in fact "just" a news article.  She said that it had
shown up in both the {Washington Post} and the {Chicago Tribune} and
that the phones were ringing off the hooks by concerned consumers.

She encouraged me to get the word out and then asked if all my long
distance needs were serviced by AT&T.  I told her yes.  (And indeed,
they are.)


Andrew Finkenstadt, Vista-Chrome, Inc., Homes & Land Publishing Corporation
GEnie Unix RoundTable Manager, [e-mail], [e-mail].
Send mail to [e-mail] to join Unix, CASE, and
Desktop Oracle RDBMS Database discussions.

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

From: vixen![e-mail] (22475-adams)
Subject: Re: Telco Handling of Cable Cut
Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 92 13:44:08 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Dan
Mongrain) writes:

> A recent Bell Canada TV commercial shows a raccoom chewing through a
> cable.  A voice-over indicates that even if a line goes down in their
> network, calls will be rerouted so that they are not lost or even
> noticed by the parties at each end.  Is this true?

Not quite.  Calls in the stable ("talking") state will be lost.
However, call attempts (or recall attempts) will be routed around the
cause of failure.  Of course in a xx second program, the fine points
of all of this can not be adequately discussed. The point they are
trying to make is that Bell Canada provides dependable service without
a lot of techno-babble.  BTW, this rests on the assumption that the
company has full circuit *AND* facilities diversity (geographically
diverse routes between network nodes).


Jack (John) Adams        Bellcore NVC 2Z-220
[phone] {Voice}        [phone] {Facsimile}
[e-mail]    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Telco Handling Of Cable Cut
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 92 15:30:20 CST


> A recent Bell Canada TV commercial shows a raccoom chewing through a
> cable.  A voice-over indicates that even if a line goes down in their
> network, calls will be rerouted so that they are not lost or even
> noticed by the parties at each end.  Is this true?

> I always thought that voice switches used circuit switching, which
> means that is a call is interrupted, it has to be re-established
> manually.  I agree there are redundant trunks to by-pass the cut cable
> but always thought that there were no automatic rerouting.

It depends on what kind of multiplexing equipment they use.  In
general, the switches will not dynamically reroute a call should a
trunk fail.  That is, if a switch has multiple paths available, and
one fails, your call will be lost, but the next call will be routed
over a path that is still functioning.

On the other hand, if the trunks are connected to some kind of
multiplexor/ DACS, it may handle the rerouting without knowledge of
the switch.  In this case, the end-to-end path from one switch to
another has not been lost, and your connection will stay up (as far as
the switch and you know nothing ever happened).  The multiplexor will
instead send that channel over an alternate path.  As one example,
imagine a loop of, say, three COs connected by a loop of fiber, each
portion of the loop (i.e. from CO A to CO B, B to C, and C to A)
having capacity for 24 voice trunks (much smaller than actual value,
of course, but it will work for an example).  Then imagine that the
telco only uses 50% of the bandwidth (12 trunks from A to B, B to C,
and C to A).  Now, if the fiber from A to B is lost, the 12 A-to-B
trunks can be rerouted over the spare bandwidth on th C-to-A and
B-to-C fibers.  If this is done by the fiber multiplexing equipment,
all you will notice is a bit of noise as the change to the alternate
path is made.  Some real-world implementations are done as loops, but
there are other topolgies also, and newer equipment, can do a lot of
fancy re-routing.


Brett   ([e-mail])

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

Subject: Re: Telephone Phreaks
From: [e-mail] (Todd Lawrence)
Date: Sun, 08 Nov 92 18:18:27 CST
Organization: (What? Organized??) - Mythical Computer Systems


mertwig![e-mail] (Daniel Drucker) writes:

> Does anyone know if a person's physical cable pair can be discovered by
> a hacker illicitly logged into COSMOS or MIZAR?


Daniel,

 It is entirely possible for a "Hacker" to find your actual cable
pair, pole#, horiz/vertical termination points on the frame ... etc ...
illegally using COSMOS or LMOS.


Todd Lawrence    LOD Communications
Internet:  [e-mail]     uucp:  uunet!valinor!todd

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

From: [e-mail] (John Gilbert)
Subject: Re: Telephone Phreaks
Organization: Motorola
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 23:38:33 GMT


> In article <[e-mail]> mertwig![e-mail]
> (Daniel Drucker) writes:

>> Also, would someone tell me what the STD-III Information Center is?
>> (Dial 950-1288 anywhere in the USA, 2400,8N1.)

When I dial this I get:

            WELCOME TO AT&T INFORMATION ACCESS SERVICE

Please Sign-on:

What is this service used for?


John Gilbert    [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: It is a network server, a lot like Telenet's data
network. You 'sign on' to various other systems such as ATT Mail.
Actually, I dial into it at 9600 baud, although 2400 is okay. We have
discussed this before, and interested parties might want to check out
the file in the Telecom Archives discussing it. Check the directory in
the archives for '950.1288'.     PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Kenneth Crudup)
Subject: Re: Silent Caller From Different Numbers
Organization: Open Software Foundation
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 19:27:36 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> Mike Honeycutt <ecsvax!mah@
uncecs.edu> writes:

> A student complained about receiving frequent phone calls where the
> person does not say anything.  The call can last up to a minute then
> the caller hangs-up.  This pattern is repeated several times a week
> (weekdays only) and occurs between 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m.

> Before [...] I start writing the sequel to "The Cuckoo's Egg", can anyone
> offer a logical explanation for these events.

Sure can. His number is a misprint of a legit fax number that state
offices would have a need to call often.


Kenny Crudup, Contractor, OSF DCE QA
OSF, 11 Cambridge Center, Cambridge, MA 02142    [phone]
[e-mail]    OSF has nothing to do with this post.

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

From: [e-mail] (Max J. Rochlin)
Subject: Re: Silent Caller From Different Numbers
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 01:59:37 GMT
Organization: QueerNet


In article <[e-mail]> Mike Honeycutt <ecsvax!mah@
uncecs.edu> writes:

> We are having a (minor) problem.

> A student complained about receiving frequent phone calls where the
> person does not say anything.  The call can last up to a minute then
> the caller hangs-up.  This pattern is repeated several times a week
> (weekdays only) and occurs between 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m.  We have
> received no other complaints (the phone numbers in our dorms are
> basically sequential) so I've ruled-out a "deamon dialer".

> Now the twist:

> Southern Bell monitored the calls and reported they were coming from
> *various* state agencies within 100 miles of Asheville!  Although this
> raised my eyebrows, Southern Bell seemed even less interested in the
> problem and has put it on a back burner.

Your problem sounds like someone mis-typed the students number in a
list and people (or other systems) are trying to connect a computer.
You might want to add a modem to the student's line and put it in
answer mode and wait for a connection.  Once you connect you can try
to find out who called by asking them (via a terminal or computer) who
they are and where they got this phone number from.


[e-mail]  |   Max J. Rochlin

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

From: [e-mail] (Mike Morris)
Subject: Re: Silent Caller From Different Numbers
Organization: College Park Software, Altadena, CA
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 11:41:39 GMT


Somebody probably published a modem number in a state info flyer and
got a couple digits transposed.  Your student is the innocent victim.
Have him plug a autoanswer modem into the line and a terminal (to play
host system) and see who calls.

The same thing happened to a friend, only it was fax machines that
called at all hours of the day and night.


Mike Morris  WA6ILQ  PO Box 1130  Arcadia, CA. 91077  818-447-7052 evenings
All opinions must be my own since nobody pays
me enough to be their mouthpiece ...

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

From: mcrware!![e-mail] (Troy Frericks)
Subject: Re: Splits This Month
Organization: Microware Systems Corp., Des Moines, Iowa
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 14:24:28 GMT


In article < [e-mail]> Carl Moore (VLD/VMB)
<[e-mail]> writes:

> The history.of.area.splits file has 512/210 taking place last Sunday
> (Nov. 1) and 714/909 as coming on Nov. 14.  Both of these are the
> beginning of the permissive dialing.

Anybody keeping track?  How many area codes are left (unused)?


Troy Frericks                      Internet: [e-mail]
Microware Systems Corporation          UUCP: uunet!mcrware!troyf
1900 NW 114th St                      Phone: [phone]
Des Moines, IA 50325-7077               Fax: [phone]


[Moderator's Note: There are just a couple left under the old
numbering format; several hundred are available using the new scheme
set to begin in a year or so. The old scheme, which called for a zero
or one as the second digit and zero through nine as the third digit --
but never two zeros or two ones, ie 600 or 611 and with x10 held out
until the bitter end -- is about exhausted. Does anyone know if they
will cut the new scheme in earlier than planned (it was set for 1995)
or will the telcos just have to make do with what they have until
then?   PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #831
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa22157;
          9 Nov 92 4:24 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA01333
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 9 Nov 1992 01:55:42 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA17993
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 9 Nov 1992 01:55:27 -0600
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 01:55:27 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #832

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 9 Nov 92 01:55:30 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 832

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Need Widget to Connect Two Faxes or Modems Together (Paul Cook)
    Re: Need Widget to Connect Two Faxes or Modems Together (1012breuckma@vmsf)
    Re: The Worst Phone Lines in the US? (Greg T. Stovall)
    Re: The Worst Phone Lines in the US? (George Rapp)
    Re: Phone Directory on CD (Mike Berger)
    Re: Phone Directory on CD (Todd Lawrence)
    Re: Phone Directory on CD (Bob Clements)
    Re: Music On Call? (Steve Forrette)
    Re: Music On Call? ([e-mail])
    Re: Music On Call? (Dan D. Grove)
    Re: Computerized Sales Call "Locked" My Line (Ray Jones)
    Re: Computerized Sales Call "Locked" My Line (Brian Gordon)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sun, 8 Nov 92 20:24 GMT
From: Proctor & Associates <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Need Widget to Connect Two Faxes or Modems Together


Randolph J. Herber, [e-mail] writes:

> A friend wants to connect two fax machines together via their telco
> connections so that the machines could be used as copiers.  Also, she
> wants to connect a fax modem equipped PC to a fax machine so that the
> fax machine could be used both as a scanner and as a printer.

> She would like a small and inexpensive piece of euipment with two
> modular telephone jacks with just enough "smarts" to supply a dial
> tone and appropriate ringing signals.  The smarts could be a person
> listening on a speaker and using buttons to generate the signals at
> the proper time.

Proctor and Associates makes the 49200 Phone Demo II.  It sells for
$259.95, and gives you real dialtone, ringback tone and ringing via
two RJ-11 jacks ... a miniature Central Office in a box.  There is
also a basic four-line version, and a fancier four-line version that
emulates CENTREX and Caller-ID.

Contact Proctor via one of the addresses below.


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]
Subject: Re: Need Widget to Connect Two Faxes or Modems Together
Date: 8 Nov 1992 02:05:28 GMT
Organization: Marquette University - Computer Services
Reply-To: [e-mail]

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

> A friend wants to connect two fax machines together via their telco
> connections so that the machines could be used as copiers.

The fax machines that I've used can all copy documents, using just the
one unit.  Usually you just put in the document, the same as you would
to fax it, and then press the 'send' key without entering any number.

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

Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 07:07:00 +0000
From: Greg (G.T.) Stovall <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: The Worst Phone Lines in the US?


[e-mail] writes:

> I recently received a newsletter from Telos.  Telos, as some may
> know, is a prominent manufacturer of DSP hybrids for the broadcast
> industry.  Anyway, in the newsletter, Telos writes:

> "As far as we can tell, the worst phone line conditions in the US
> exist in the Dallas/Fort Worth and Miami/Fort Lauderdale areas.  The
> 'Dallas' software [firmware actually -- PMT] is optimized for these
> difficult line conditions."

> I seem to recall that GTE is the LEC in Miami.  Is this correct?
> Who tied them in Dallas?

Dallas is served by Southwestern Bell.  Some of the outlying areas
(like Plano, etc.) are served by GTE.  I personally have never had any
problems in all the years I have lived here, but a friend of mine had
some problems with one of the SWB offices having a line "too hot" (the
signal was being clipped), which really screwed up his modem
transmissions to work.  Strangely enough, it only affected
communications between his home and work.  He could dial every other
place without problem, and I had no problem dialing into the same work
modem from my home ...


Gregory T. Stovall        <[e-mail]>
Bell-Northern Research    Richardson, Texas, USA   [phone]
My opinions are not necessarily endorsed by BNR.

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

From: edsr![e-mail] (George Rapp)
Subject: Re: The Worst Phone Lines in the US?
Reply-To: edsr![e-mail]
Organization: EDS Research
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 00:16:30 GMT


In article [e-mail], [e-mail] () writes:

>> I seem to recall that GTE is the LEC in Miami.  Is this correct?
>> Who tied them in Dallas?

> Actually, you have it backwards. GTE is the LEC in Dallas (but not Ft.
> Worth). Bell South is the LEC in Miami.

Actually, there are two LECs serving area code 214.  GTE is the LEC
for some of the bigger suburbs (largest ones: Garland, Plano,
Carrollton, and Irving), but the LEC for city of Dallas and the rest
of 214 (and all of Fort Worth, to the best of my knowledge) is
Southwestern Bell.  Based on the population of the cities, I'd say
that SWBT holds the majority of the business.  The observation about
line conditions could thus apply to both companies, or to just one,
depending on the source and destination of the test calls, or how they
ran the tests.

Apart from the occasional noisy connection, I've never had a problem
with line quality from either home (GTE turf) or work (SWBT).  One
possible reason for a degradation of quality in this area might be
adverse soil conditions that affect underground cables.  (Most of the
houses I have seen in the area do not have basements, and there are a
lot of foundation problems, because of shifting soil.  Geology is not
my strong suit, so please don't ask me to elaborate.  8^)


George Rapp     Electronic Data Systems Corporation
EDS Research    7171 Forest Lane, C212  Dallas, Texas 75230   214/661-6478
(UUCP: uunet!edsr!midearthmail!gwr)
(Internet: [e-mail] or edsr![e-mail])
The above is the sole responsibility of the author, and is not in any
way connected to EDS.

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

From: [e-mail] (Mike Berger)
Subject: Re: Phone Directory on CD
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 21:06:54 GMT


[e-mail] (Bryan Lockwood) writes:

> Ken Jongsma <[e-mail]> writes:

>> Phone Disc: This $149 product includes telephone listings of 70
>> million U.S. residents plus more than seven million U.S. businesses.
>> DAK Industries, Inc., of Canoga Park, Calif., can be contacted at
>> [phone].
>> I was a bit surprised to see DAK selling this. One usually associates
>> DAK with closeout merchandise. Perhaps the listings are a bit out of
>> date?

> Au contraire. DAK has been working very hard to sell these things. I
> get a flyer about every other month. DAK seems to be working quite
> hard to bring CD-ROM prices down into the realm of affordability for
> the common man.

Are you sure this is the very latest version?


Mike Berger    Internet    [e-mail]

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

Subject: Re: Phone Directory on CD
From: [e-mail] (Todd Lawrence)
Date: Sun, 08 Nov 92 18:06:16 CST
Organization: (What? Organized??) - Mythical Computer Systems


According to the documentation supplied with the particular ads I have
seen pertaining to the telephone listing, CD-ROM quotes that the
software to access the telephone database is supplied on the disc
itself and apparently the data is encrypted. It further goes on to say
the you CANNOT access a record given the phone number.


Todd Lawrence   Internet:  [e-mail]
uucp:  uunet!valinor!todd

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

Subject: Re: Phone Directory on CD
Date: Sun, 08 Nov 92 10:33:54 -0500
From: [e-mail]


[Re: questions about the Phone Directory on CD from DAK]

I've been meaning to answer this from home, where I could get the
details right by checking the disks, but I keep forgetting.  So this
answer is being composed at work, from memory, and may have some
errors in the details.

First I'll say that, like many, I'm uneasy about having all the phone
directories easily and cheaply available to every telemarketer with a
PC.  But that battle has been lost.  So, with some distaste, I decided
to order these CDs and see what was on them and whether I could find
some old lost friends, like the ad says.  I'll try to answer the
questions that have been posted.

[e-mail] (Ken Jongsma) writes:

> One usually associates DAK with closeout merchandise. Perhaps the
> listings are a bit out of date?

I was wondering about this, too.  The CD labels say "Winter 1991"
which, I think, is the winter at the BEGINNING of 1991.  That is
supported by the presence of some business listings for small
companies in this area that fell victim to the recession.  And as
[e-mail] (Philip Gladstone) says, the listings
seem to be somewhat older than the date on the label.  So yes, I think
these are old stock being sold off cheap.

[e-mail] (Steve Rothman) writes:

> Do these new telephone listing CD-ROMs contain addresses, as well as
> names and phone numbers? Can they be searched by phone number (and
> address, if contained), or just by name?

Yes, they contain name, phone number and address.  The BUSINESS disk
also contains a code for the category of the business.  The BUSINESS
disk can be searched by any of the fields, and the search can be
limited to particular areas, and can be set to exclude certain areas.
The example in the manual is to search NYC but exclude addresses with
"Bronx" in them.  You can search by phone number.  I looked at the
block of 7500 DID numbers for my work address, to see how many had
published listings, for example.

The RESIDENTIAL disks have a more limited user interface.  You can
only search by name, though you can limit the search to a particular
state or area code or phone exchange.  But they're always sorted by
name.  So you can't search by phone number but you can limit it to the
exchange and then visually scan through a thousand listings.  Not too
great.

Now how good is the data?

There are an amazing number of errors and omissions.  Some examples:

I was wondering whether my old address and numbers would be listed or
my new ones, since I moved at the end of "Winter 1991".  The answer is
that neither was listed.  I'm not on the disk at all, even though I
had three listed lines at the old house and one at the new house.

My parents in Wisconsin are listed by name and address but the phone
number is missing.  (Many listings are like that.)  But their phone
number has been listed and unchanged for over 25 years.

There are lots of impossible numbers listed.  For example, on the
business disk (which can be searched by phone number) a few are listed
in area code 911!  And a dozen or so are listed in area code 710 (the
strange secret area code we discussed here a while back).  But looking
at those listings, they are obviously typos or scanning errors, since
they are geographically in a few specific places with similar area
codes and are completely ordinary small businesses.

In the search of our DID numbers mentioned above, I found a bunch of
errors:

[Background: You have to know that before the 617/508 split most (but
not all) of the 617-87x exchanges were in Framingham MA, which is now
in 508.  617-873 did not exist until it was created for us, in
Cambridge, which stayed in 617.]

Now on the business disk there are a number of 617-873 listings which
claim to be in Framingham.  So not only are they typos for some other
87x-nnnn but they are in the wrong area code for Framingham.  On the
other hand, there are some listings shown in 508-873, too, and that
exchange doesn't exist at all.

In general, I've found a pretty poor percentage of the people and
companies that I've looked for.

I was surprised to see a large number of business listings on my
completely residential street.  Must be a lot of basement/garage
shops.  I'm not implying that these are errors, though. They're
probably real.

So I'd say these disks are not worth their price to an individual.
They're probably just fine for a telemarketer who doesn't really care
if all the numbers are correct and just wants to be right most of the
time when he/she says "Good evening Mr. Smith.  How are you today?"
Sigh ...


Bob Clements, K1BC, [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: Music On Call?
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 21:05:06 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Jerry
Leichter) writes:

> I came home recently to find a strange message on my answering
> machine: Several minutes of music.  There was no voiceover anywhere in
> the message, or before or after it -- just music.  The sound was of
> surprisingly good quality; I'm quite sure we're talking about a direct
> electrical connection, not pickup by a handset of music playing in the
> background.

One possibility is that it WAS music on hold from somewhere.
Something that could easily happen is that someone calls from a
business and decides to not leave a message.  Instead of hanging up,
they accidentally place you on hold or perhaps (on Centrex) don't hold
down the hookswitch long enough and flash instead of disconnect, which
would also place you on hold.


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Music On Call?
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 92 16:19:41 CST


> I came home recently to find a strange message on my answering
> machine: Several minutes of music.  There was no voiceover anywhere in
> the message, or before or after it -- just music.  The sound was of
> surprisingly good quality; I'm quite sure we're talking about a direct
> electrical connection, not pickup by a handset of music playing in the
> background.

> The music was symphonic; I didn't place the piece, but would guess
> Debussy as the composer.  (Definitely NOT the schlock you typically
> get for music-on-hold.)

> [Moderator's Note: My guess is someone was playing games. They called
> your machine and let it rack up a long 'message' by simply playing
> music for however long it lasted before the machine clicked off.  PAT]

Another possibility is that it was generated by music-on-hold, but not
by someone deliberately placing you on hold to leave you a long
message.  On many PBXs, to initiate a three-way call or transfer a
call, you FLASH and then dial another number.  This places the
original call on hold temporarily, and many PBXs will play
music-on-hold to the caller that has been placed on hold.

In your case, what may have happened is that the caller decided he
didn't want to leave a message on your answering machine, but he had
another call to make, so he hung-up briefly and then dialed the next
number.  If his hang-up wasn't long enough, it would be interpreted as
a FLASH by the switch, which would place you on hold.  After he dialed
the number, the switch would patiently keep you on hold until he
completed the three-way conference or transfer.  Of course, he never
did this, as it was his intention to hang-up on your machine, and was
unaware that it was on hold.  Thus, you got hold music (which was
recorded by your machine) for the entire duration of his second call.
(What would happen when he hung-up his second call depends on the
model of switch that his company has).


Brett    ([e-mail])

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

Date: Sun, 8 Nov 92 08:52:50 CST
From: [e-mail] (Dan D Grove)
Subject: Re: Music On Call?
Organization: Rice University, Houston


Having had this happen a number of times at Rice, here's what may have
happened: someone placed a call to this phone, let it ring until the
answering machine picked up, then flashed and made another call. The
caller generally means to hang up in this case -- flashing on our ROLM
system places the caller on hold, resulting in symphonic music being
left on the answering machine. In our case, the quality is quite good.
I suspect that this may be what happened in this case.


Dan Grove               Rice University
Phone: [phone]   Dept. of Computer Science
Fax: [phone]     Houston, TX  77251-1892

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

From: [e-mail] (Ray Jones)
Subject: Re: Computerized Sales Call "Locked" My Line
Organization: Celestial Software, Mercer Island, WA
Date: Sun, 08 Nov 1992 17:46:26 GMT


In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes,
quoting others:

> I should point out that several years ago (when I lived in
> Nashville) I received a computerized call that would *call back* when
> I hung up on it. I finally managed to convince them they were wasting
> their time by leaving interesting noises (screams, toilet flushes) in
> the place where they wanted you to state your address. I also seem to
> remember suggesting that I would find the number of the company
> president and disrupt *his* dinner to tell him what I thought of his
> machine.

I too had this problem several years ago in San Jose, CA.  I waited
and left my phone number and address.  They called the next day and I
set up an appointment -- but -- insisted that they come to my house at
5 PM on Friday.  That time assured that the salesman would spend at
least two hours on the freeway.  When the salesman did show (late as
expected), I told him I was NOT interested in his product (solar hot
water heater) I just wanted them to get my name OFF the call list.
You take my time -- I take yours.


Onager Systems        Ray A. Jones
18710 NE 59th Ct.    UUCP .....uunet!camco!onager!ray
# 2053               [e-mail]
Redmond, WA 98052       206-885-3568

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

From: [e-mail] (Brian Gordon)
Subject: Re: Computerized Sales Call "Locked" My Line
Date: 8 Nov 92 17:18:19 GMT
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Mt. View, Ca.


Commenting on a message from [e-mail], PAT said:

>>  [Moderator's Note: Do it! Start calling the president of the company at
>>  home during his dinner. If he has the nerve to object, then tell him you
>>  are going to sue him if his machines ever call you again for any reason.
>>  Don't forget to dial *67 before calling him.
>>  It is none of Mister Hotshot's business what your home phone number is.

> Logic error here, I'm afraid.  If he doesn't know what your home phone
> number is, just how is he to make sure that his machines never call it?

> [Moderator's Note: Good point.  PAT]

Gee, I thought that _was_ the point.  The only way to keep from being
harassed (by you) would be for him (i.e. his company) to stop harassing
 _everyone_.


Brian G. Gordon    [e-mail]        [e-mail]
B.GORDON2 on GENie    70243,3012 on CompuServe  BGordon on AOL

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #832
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa22774;
          9 Nov 92 4:40 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA27798
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 9 Nov 1992 02:20:23 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA27176
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 9 Nov 1992 02:20:06 -0600
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 02:20:06 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #833

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 9 Nov 92 02:20:00 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 833

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: DS1 for Multiple Dial in Data Lines? (Barton F. Bruce)
    Re: DS1 for Multiple Dial in Data Lines? (Steve Forrette)
    Re: DS1 for Multiple Dial in Data Lines? (Rob Warnock)
    Re: Who Are the Major Players in CT2 Phones and Equipment? (Brendan Jones)
    Re: Armored Phone (Mike Morris)
    Re: Armored Phone (Dave Levenson)
    Re: AT&T's COLOR Videophone With Motion (Wayne Geiser & Paul Robinson)
    Re: AT&T Takes Away My Call Manager (Steve Forrette)
    Re: Do Tell! (John Higdon)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Barton F. Bruce <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: DS1 for Multiple Dial in Data Lines?
Organization: Cambridge Computer Associates, Inc.
Date: 8 Nov 92 03:19:50 EDT


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Harold Hallikainen) writes:

> In a discussion today, the idea came up of using a single DS1
> or T1 line to handle incoming calls to a BBS type system instead of 24

If your BBS was the size of, say, Compuserve, you might look at
products from Primary Access. They will take up to 20 T1s per rack and
you get out a bunch of x.25 lines with LOTS of individual sessions on
each. Each card has two DSP chips and emulates two modems. The price
you pay could be for low speed modems, and when you need higher speed,
you pay more and load in code for faster modems.

Primary Access can do ISDN and Voice games with the same hardware -
but what they currently offer as products I havn't followed. They can
connect also to FG-B and FG-D trunks. I would assume when you dial
950-1ATT this is the sort of hardware that would be there, NOT a rack
of conventional modems, but don't know for sure.

Your PC speak to an x.25 line?

There are terminal servers and protocol translator boxes that convert
x.25 to LAT or TCP/IP terminal sessions on ethernet. If your PC can't
use an x.25 connection, can you telnet to it?

These are VERY expensive, and a pile of $325 ZyXEL U-1496E modems
will prove much more affordable.

You may be where T1 access is cheap. Here it is a total ripoff -
priced way more than 24 1MBs and sold as a slightly cheaper way of
getting DID trunks. But all DID services are kept very high priced to
protect the way overpriced Centrex telco peddles as: "Saves you from
using expensive DID trunks" - talk about honesty in advertising ...

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: DS1 for Multiple Dial in Data Lines?
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 21:30:54 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Harold Hallikainen) writes:

> In a discussion today, the idea came up of using a single DS1
> or T1 line to handle incoming calls to a BBS type system instead of 24
> individual phone lines and 24 modems driving 24 serial ports.  It
> seems that we should be able to have a single DS1 line driving a
> single interface board in the computer that would sort out all the
> data (figure out which user is on which line and is in which time
> slot, etc.).  This would compare favorably to all that extra hardware.

Keep in mind that once you sort out the datastream into the 24
channels, that the raw data is not the "data" that you're expecting
for the BBS, but rather the digital representation of the analog modem
signal that the caller is sending.  You have to unmodulate that
somehow, either by breaking the T1 into individual channels that have
modems on them, or with some really fancy software and DSPs.


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

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

Date: Sun, 8 Nov 92 05:12:22 -0800
From: [e-mail] (Rob Warnock)
Subject: Re: DS1 for Multiple Dial in Data Lines?
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Rob Warnock)
Organization: Silicon Graphics Inc., Mountain View, CA


Dialogics (and others, I'm sure) makes just a card that connects to a
T1.  It plugs into a PC (ISA) bus. A friend of mine uses them to run a
telephone answering service, complete with DTMF-input/voice-response
on each of the 24 channels (one T1 per PC -- he has quite a few T1's
coming in).

Of course, that just gets you the 24 channels connected to your
computer's bus. You'd still need 24 modems or 24 DSP chips or a
*really* fast CPU to do "the modem stuff" on the 24 PCM bit streams ...


Rob Warnock, MS-9U/510        [e-mail]     [phone]
Silicon Graphics, Inc., 2011 N. Shoreline Blvd., Mountain View, CA  94043

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

Subject: Re: Who Are the Major Players in CT2 Phones and Equipment?
Date: Mon, 09 Nov 92 16:04:12 +1000
From: [e-mail]


In TELECOM Digest Volume 12, Issue 825, [e-mail]
(H.Shrikumar) wrote:

> Who are the major players in CT2 equipments and in CT2 phones?

The major players are in the UK, such as GPT (GEC Plessey
Telecommunications), Orbitel and Ferranti.  However, Motorola also
makes CT2 equipment in the USA and Shaye makes CT2 equipment in Hong
Kong.

> I believe CT2 was either born in UK.

Correct.  It came out of the UK DTI (Department of Trade and Industry)
initiative on "phones on the move" in 1987, or thereabouts.

> Are the major Cellular manufacturers also into CT2?

Not that I know of.  Most consider CT2 to be irrelevant, I think.

> Is CT2 faring well on the other side of the big pond?

Much more is happening outside of the "big pond" than in it (USA !=
World :-)

> If I assert that the only CT2 trials in the world have been in London
> and Illinois will someone here contradict me ? :-)

Someone will!

Three countries that I know of have *commercial* services, they are:

    Singapore
    Hong Kong
    Netherlands

Major pilot systems (pre-commercial) are also operating in:

    United Kingdom (Manchester)
    France (Paris)
    Germany (not sure where)

A major pilot system will shortly be up and running here in Australia.

I've been involved in R&D for one of the Hong Kong operators (there
are two, with a third coming along), which went commercial earlier
this year.  It's been a roaring success over there, the total market
size is over 30,000 customers now (compared with about 1000 customers
all up in the UK the first time around).

> Any CT2 in Japan?

Not that I know of.

> Also, whose standard is CT2?

Originally it belonged to the DTI in the UK (MPT 1375) but it's being
migrated across to ETSI (European Telecommunications Standards
Institute) as an interim standard I-ETS 300-131, the final version
(Release 2) of which is expected to be set in concrete by May/June
next year.

> What is CCITTs position on it (or is it them all along ?)

It's not really their business.  CCITT is only worried about
communications networks that cross national borders.  However, the
work of ETSI is sort of a market/industry based standards group that
acts as a regional preparation for input into CCITT for any issues
that are relevant to it.

ETSI falls under the umbrella of the European Commission.

> I will also be grateful for any pointers to magazine/journal/trade rag
> reports on these questions.

A number of useful journals which can keep one up to date in this
fascinating area include:

    "Mobile Europe"
    "Pan European Mobile Communications"
    "Telecommunications International"


Cheers,

Brendan Jones        ACSnet:  [e-mail]
R&D Contractor          UUCP:  {uunet,mcvax}!otc.otca.oz.au!brendan
Network Access R&D     Phone:  [phone]   Fax:  [phone]
|||| OTC ||          Snail:  GPO Box 7000, Sydney  2001, AUSTRALIA

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

From: [e-mail] (Mike Morris)
Subject: Re: Armored Phone
Organization: College Park Software, Altadena, CA
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 11:35:38 GMT


[e-mail] (andrew m. boardman) writes:

> I need a wall-mountable telephone for indoors use that's fairly theft-
> and vandalism-proof.  Who sells this kind of stuff?

I am posting this rather than replying thru email as others may be
interested in what I found today.

Allen Tel sells armored phones.  Their products are available through
Greybar Electric who has outlets in several major cities.  Ask for
"Freeway Phones".

If you need some, and don't mind spending more money that they are
worth, The local freeway authorities just swapped out > 2000 freeway
phones for solar-powered cellphones.  A local surplus outlet is
selling off the old ones for $65 or so.  They are basically a bright
yellow alluminum housed 500 phone that does not have a dial (blank
panel) or a bell.  Adding a bell is no problem, but adding a dial will
require metal work (or ordering out a new front panel from Allen Tel).

Today I discovered that an acquaintance has a dozen old grey WeCo
rotary units which will probably go much cheaper ... if you are
interested email me for more info.


Mike Morris   WA6ILQ
PO Box 1130
Arcadia, CA. 91077     | All opinions must be my own since nobody pays
818-447-7052 evenings  | me enough to be their mouthpiece...

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

From: [e-mail] (Dave Levenson)
Subject: Re: Armored Phone
Organization: Westmark, Inc.
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 04:38:25 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (andrew
m. boardman) writes:

> I need a wall-mountable telephone for indoors use that's fairly theft-
> and vandalism-proof.  Who sells this kind of stuff?

GaiTronics offers ruggedized telephone enclosures.

Have a look at coin telephones.  You can probably disable the coin
part of it, and still have a vandal-resistant housing.


Dave Levenson        Internet: [e-mail]
Westmark, Inc.        UUCP: {uunet | rutgers | att}!westmark!dave
Warren, NJ, USA        Voice: 908 647 0900  Fax: [phone]

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

Date: Sun, 8 Nov 92 16:37 GMT
From: Tansin A. Darcos & Company <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: AT&T's COLOR Videophone WITH MOTION


 = Forwarded Message =
 Date:     Thu Nov 05, 1992  2:11 pm  GMT
 From:     Wayne Geiser
           EMS: INTERNET / MCI ID: 376-5414
           MBX: [e-mail]
 Subject:  Re: AT&T's COLOR Videophone WITH MOTION

> In an ad on page A47 of the Nov. 4 {Washington Post} is an
> advertisement for AT&T's Videophone.

> The ad claims "{available now}.  Just plug it in, turn it on, and
> dial.  Full {color} with motion.  No special wiring or separate
> costs."

> The last I've heard of for video on a phone line was a {still}
> picture in {black and white}.  This one's got me stumped, as I haven't
> the foggiest idea how they can do {color} on a standard POTS line.
> And supposedly with motion too?  I'm just a lowly telephone operations
> supervisor and sometime computer programmer, I can't see how they can
> do this in such a small bandwidth.

> The phone number for information is 1-800-437-9504.

> If their product is even close to what they promise, Picturetel and
> a few others should be scared excrementless.

> Paul Robinson -- [e-mail]
> Any opinions are mine alone.

Firstly, let me put my disclaimer right up front.  I'm not a video,
audio, compression, network, or telephone expert (although I've
learned more than I thought I ever wanted to since joining PictureTel
:-)).  My background is mostly in compilers, but am currently working
on UI-type stuff.

It is my understanding, from speaking with the people here who ARE
experts in some of this stuff that color does not add all that much to
the data transmission.  That is, you don't get a whole lot of
bandwidth back if you switch from color to B&W.

The AT&T phone that was announced last year (or was it early this
year?) was B&W with "motion."  The "motion" turned out to be something
on the order of a couple of frames per second.  Definitely not a
threat to PictureTel, CLI, Video Telecom, etc's business!

I suspect that this newest variant is much the same speed.  Try to
find an AT&T store with one of these.  Even under the best of
conditions (little motion, plain background, etc) it will be of
noticably poor quality because of the data limitations of the
transmission line.

To put it into perspective, we think that SEVEN frames per second is
terrible and we are trying to eventually get to THIRTY frames per
second.  Thirty frames per second is the same as the number of
animation stills they use in cartooning.  Supposedly, one cannot tell
the difference between live video and thirty frames per second video.

What about audio?  Full Duplex?  Half Duplex?  I suspect theirs is
HALF.  Ours if FULL (i.e., both sides of a video conference can speak
and be heard at the same time).  It's hard to do, that's why I expect
they didn't.

Bottom Line: We're not concerned about AT&T's product line.  In fact,
getting the public aware of the technology is good.  Having them used
to TWO frames per second simply makes our product look all that much
better when they come to see it. :-)


Wayne Geiser ("Drivel King")   Voice:    [phone]
PictureTel Corporation         FAX:      [phone]
One Corporation Way            Internet: [e-mail]
Peabody, MA      01960         CIS:      70313,3615

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: AT&T Takes Away My Call Manager
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 08:19:11 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Craig R.
Watkins) writes:

> Call Manager is a (free) service of AT&T that allows you to touch tone
> in an account code (of the form 15xx where you make up xx) where you
> would normally dial a calling card number when you place a 0+ call.
> Your bill then gets itemized and totaled by account code.

I ran into a similar problem with Call Manager on my secondary lines
as well.

 From what I was able to determine, there is some systematic problem
with multiple lines which are consolidated billed: adding the feature
to the primary line does not automatically pick up secondary lines
(most optional features such as calling plans do this automatically),
and entering individual orders for Call Manager for each secondary
line doesn't work either.  It took me over 30 calls and over a month
to get the problem resolved on my lines.  (After a certain point, it
became sort of a mission to see if I could get through to the right
people at AT&T -- I knew that there must be *someone* who knew what was
going on!)  In the end, they got special instructions to use this
"neat new service" called AT&T Mail to send a message to someone to
add my secondary numbers into the Call Manager database manually.  As
Craig said, don't let them tell you to call the Call Manager office,
as it's only for business service.  Also, Long Lines Repair is of no
help either.

The reason this was done was for fraud control purposes, which mostly
affected businesses.  Since the old default was that it was enabled on
all lines, customers which blocked 1+ but allowed 0+ (such as hotels,
etc.) could get stuck for a 1+ call by clever people who dialed it as
0+ then entered a 15xx format PIN.  To be safe, they now disable it
for everyone except those that specifically request it.  Residence
subscribers can request it over the phone (but you will need to have
special action taken if you have more than one line that's billed
together).  Business customers must fill out and sign a form and send
it back before they will enable it.

As an aside, I got the royal run-around in trying to get this problem
fixed.  Nobody seemed to know what was going on, and the assumption
was always that I just wasn't dialing the calls correctly.  One rep
tried to tell me that since Call Manager is a free feature, that AT&T
didn't place as high a priority on fixing customer problems with it as
they do with other features.  I countered that I used to have a
similar feature with US Sprint which cost me $5/month, but worked when
I wanted it to, and that perhaps another long distance company would
better serve my needs if AT&T didn't feel this feature was a "high
priority."  This changed her tune in a hurry, and suddenly my problem
was quite important to them!  It is unfortunate that things like this
happen, but it would not force me to switch carriers, as I've had
similar problems with Sprint in the past.  In my opinion, all of the
IXC's are going to have the "big company" customer service problems,
so I have to choose based on overall quality of service and price.


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

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

Subject: Re: Do Tell!
Date: 8 Nov 92 23:36:21 PST (Sun)
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)


[e-mail] (Rich Greenberg) wrote:

> The text block at the bottom is a pitch for CentraNet(r) service from
> our old friends from GTE.

I find the ad for "CentraNet" and the concept of Centrex from GTE
highly amusing on two fronts. First and formost is the fact that one
has major difficulty adding so much as two trunks to a PBX in an
industrial park in Long Beach. So how is it that GTE can deliver 50,
60 or 200 lines of Centrex when it cannot even deliver two more
business lines to a phone-starved enterprise in the middle of a major
city? This is either a case of advertising when there is in reality no
product to deliver OR -- GTE is withholding service from its regulated
side so that it will have sufficient facilities on its unregulated
side where the profits are higher. It is one of the two -- both of
which are disgusting.  (In the Long Beach case there simply are no
facilities.)

A second, minor amusement is the fact that ISDN is not available on a
GTD-5, GTE's CO switch of choice in many areas. This means that
"CentraNet" is the weeniest form of Centrex: all features are simple
codes and hookswitch flashes. There are no display features or direct
single key activated functions, unless there is some type of
proprietary phone only available from GTE. (Speed dial from the phone
does not count.) Pac*Bell and most other LECs using NT DMS or AT&T
5ESS offer ISDN features on Centrex, allowing the use of standard ISDN
feature phones, something not possible in any way on a GTD-5.
(Centrex itself has only been available for the last couple of years
on the GTD-5.)

An interesting point comes to mind here. Here in Contel country, the
switches are all DMS and 5ESS. This means that it is technically
possible for ISDN to be offered. If this had been originally a GTE
area (as it soon WILL be), the dreaded GTD-5 switches would have been
installed everywhere in the high desert area, precluding even the
possibility of any ISDN offering in the forseeable future.


John Higdon <[e-mail]> (hiding out in the desert)

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #833
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa29575;
          9 Nov 92 21:49 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA25508
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 9 Nov 1992 19:16:19 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA28716
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 9 Nov 1992 19:16:00 -0600
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 19:16:00 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #834

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 9 Nov 92 19:16:00 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 834

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Advice Needed on Telephone Security Systems (Dave Ptasnik)
    Re: Advice Needed on Telephone Security Systems (Steve Forrette)
    Re: Advice Needed on Telephone Security Systems (Paul Barnett)
    Re: Michigan Bell Charges for Phone Number (John Goggan)
    Re: Michigan Bell Charges for Phone Number (Rob Boudrie)
    Re: Risks Of Cellular Speech (Frank Vance)
    Re: Risks Of Cellular Speech (Rob Warnock)
    Re: HELP Needed on JPEG Standard! (John Rice)
    Re: HELP Needed on JPEG Standard! (Dave Levenson)
    Re: Splits This Month (Carl Moore)
    Re: Splits This Month (Steve Forrette)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 13:59:11 -0800 (PST)
From: Dave Ptasnik <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Advice Needed on Telephone Security Systems


[e-mail] (Kamran Husain) wrote:

> Lately there's been a rash of robberies in our area where the mode of
> operation has rendered most home security systems useless.  (I don't

> Most houses hit have the breakers outside the security zone. Crooks
> snip the phone lines and cut the power off. If someone's home, the
> owner goes out to turn the power on and the alarm off. (S)he then
> walks back in with the crooks. If they are not home for (say for the
> weekend) crooks come back after 24 hour when the battery back up is
> drained for the siren. The alarm monitoring company is NOT notified
> since the phones are dead and that's the only lifeline back.

> a) Is there a secondary way of notifying a monitoring station that AC
> power is out AND that the phones are no longer functoning? Is it done
> on cable TV? or is there a wireless (radio/CB/cellular) transmitter
> for those people who do not have mobile phones?

The phone company provides the means in our area to deal with this
threat.  You have the option of having the phone company put a ping on
your line every few minutes.  You can actually hear the tone if you
have a test set monitoring the line.  The alarm system must then give
back an appropriate tone.  This process is interrupted by the line
being in use on a normal call, without sending out an alarm.  If the
line is cut, or if power fails to the alarm (and it's battery backup
runs out), then the absence of this signalling notifies the alarm
company.  What happens then is between you and your alarm monitoring
company.  I suppose that a REALLY clever burglar could just tie up the
line with a call to a recording or some such, but most burglars
probably just cut the line.  Here in the Seattle/US West area it is a
fairly pricey option at about $8.00 a month.  Is this extra level of
security worth another $100/year to you?  Will you have to pay the
monitoring company more, or have different equipment installed?
You're on your own for those answers.

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: Advice Needed on Telephone Security Systems
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 22:20:28 GMT


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

> Most houses hit have the breakers outside the security zone. Crooks
> snip the phone lines and cut the power off. If someone's home, the
> owner goes out to turn the power on and the alarm off. (S)he then
> walks back in with the crooks. If they are not home for (say for the
> weekend) crooks come back after 24 hour when the battery back up is
> drained for the siren. The alarm monitoring company is NOT notified
> since the phones are dead and that's the only lifeline back.

Ademco is a manufacturer of alarm system equipment that makes a line
of wireless alarm monitoring equipment to supplement the regular
dialup alarm systems.  Other manufacturers may make similar equipment,
but I don't know.  Here's what I know about the Ademco system:

An alarm monitoring company in your area must have the base station
transmitters for the system.  You then subscribe to the radio
monitoring in addition to the regular monitoring with the same
company.  They install one of two types of radio systems to your
current alarm system.  There is a one-way system and a two-way system.
The one-way system sends an immediate signal upon an alarm condition,
and a "keep-alive" signal every minute or so.  If a house was hit as
you describe above and the alarm was triggered, the alarm company
would know right away.  The radio unit usually is hooked up to the
bell output of the alarm, so when the alarm company gets the radio
signal, they don't have detailed information such as which zone, etc.,
was triggered.

Under normal situations, the regular landline dialup mechanism will
deliver this information in the normal manner shortly after the radio
signal is received.  If the radio alarm is not followed by a landline
dialup, this is a good indication to the alarm company that the line
was cut.  Also, the phone line is usually connected to the radio unit
as well.  If the phone line goes dead (such as it would if cut), the
radio unit signals this event immediately to the alarm company.  Power
outages can be signaled, but are not usually done so because of the
number of false alarms this would cause.  Imagine how many systems
would try to dial up if there was a regional power outage.  But in
your case, the alarm company would know immediately that the phone
line was cut, and with the company I've dealt with, this would result
in an immediate police dispatch for investigation.  If this was
followed by an actual alarm condition, this would be further
indication that all was not well at the ranch.  If the alarm and radio
unit is totally disabled, the alarm company still knows of this within
a few minutes when it does not receive the keep-alive transmissions.

The two-way unit is similar, but can also receive messages from the
alarm company.  Instead of sending periodic keep-alive messages, it
responds to polls from the alarm company base station.  If your unit
does not respond to a poll, then the alarm company knows something is
wrong.  As with the one-way unit, phone line cuts and alarm conditions
are transmitted immediately.  Both of these systems are capable of
using multiple frequencies for redundancy.  In the case I'm familiar
with, the alarm company maintained several base stations throughout
the area, with the goal that at least two or three are within range of
every customer.  This way, if one of the base stations stops working,
each subscriber's radio will switch over to one of the other
transmitters on a different frequency.

I'm sure Ademco could give you a reference to an alarm company in your
area that offers this service.  As far as I could tell, there was no
way for someone to defeat the system by just cutting wires, etc.  Even
cutting the antenna to the radio simultaneously with the power and
phone will not defeat it, as the silence from your residence will
alert the alarm company to trouble within a couple of minutes.  Plus,
it would be really difficult to get to the radio unit simultaneously
with the power and phone, without triggering an alarm condition a few
seconds prior in the process.


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Paul Barnett)
Subject: Re: Advice Needed on Telephone Security Systems
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 22:57:29 GMT
Organization: Engineering, CONVEX Computer Corp., Richardson, Tx., USA


In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Kamran
Husain) writes:

> a) Is there a secondary way of notifying a monitoring station that AC
> power is out AND that the phones are no longer functoning? Is it done
> on cable TV? or is there a wireless (radio/CB/cellular) transmitter
> for those people who do not have mobile phones?

Posted for a friend: send mail to [e-mail] for more
info ...

I have information from a company called CELLULAR ALARM PRODUCTS, LTD.
which may be what you are looking for.  The company offers a cellular
phone backup to the landline connection to your alarm monitoring
service.  In the event the landline is cut, a trouble alarm can be
sent via cellular phone.

For more information, I would contact the company at the following address.

      CCellular Alarm Products
      2575 Southwell  Suite 104
      Dallas, Texas 75229
      [phone]  [phone]  FAX [phone]


Paul Barnett             Internet: [e-mail]
Convex Computer Corp.      Office: 214-497-4846
Richardson, TX        Mobile/Home: 214-236-8438

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

Organization: Central Michigan University
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 14:03:53 EST
From: John Goggan <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Michigan Bell Charges for Phone Number


Actually, getting a personalized number from Michigan Bell was not
free up until Oct. 5th.  At least, it wasn't two years ago when I
requested my personalized number for my BBS and they charged me about
$30.

I do agree with you though -- they did write that up as if it were a
"brand new feature" that they had added, while in reality it has been
around for over five years.


John Goggan

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

From: [e-mail] (Rob Boudrie)
Subject: Re: Michigan Bell Charges for Phone Number
Organization: Center For High Perf. Computing of WPI; Marlboro Ma
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 21:09:15 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Ken
Jongsma) writes:

> In the monthly Michigan Bell billing insert, there is a large article
> that gushes about how Michigan Bell will allow you to pick a
> "personalized" telephone number. The cost is only $38!! They conclude
> by stating that your customer service rep will be more than willing to
> help you.

New England Telephone is reputed to be planning this (according to one
of my operatives).  They are preparing for this by withholding "good"
numbers that are likely to be requested ( -xx00, -x000, etc.).  It is
expected that this will be a monthly charge once a "requested" number
has been assigned.

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

From: Frank Vance <airgun![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Risks Of Cellular Speech
Date: 9 Nov 92 19:46:52 GMT
Organization: Western Geophysical, Div. of Western Atlas Int'l, Houston, TX


I for one have been quite disappointed in the way the entire cellular
privacy issue has been handled by the cellular providers and the US
government.

1. First of all, why did the various cellular providers make promises
of "safe and secure communications" when they knew anybody with a
little money could buy a receiver to listen in?

2. Why, instead of fixing the technical deficiencies in their product
do they go sniveling to Congress to make it illegal to listen (as if
they are ever going to be able to enforce it)?

3. Why in the world did our government accept the snivelling and pass
the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, instead of telling the
cellular providers to go fix their own problems?  Most agencies of the
government understand the problem well enough.  That is why a great
many of them have implemented digital scrambling on their own radio
systems.

Who actually believes that just because it is illegal to listen to
cellular telephone conversations that people are not going to do it?
Especially those for whom it is not "recreation", but a method of
gathering information to be used to commit fraud or some other illicit
money-making.

IMO, the cellular companies should come clean on the privacy issue
with their customers and potental customers.  They should also spend
their money on developing true solutions to the problem instead of
lobbying to develop and pass unenforcable regulations.  But I am
afraid this is just another example of our society's inability to
understand that the government can not fix every injustice, much less
every annoyance, and that we (individually and corporately) need to
take more personal responsibility to fix them ourselves.


Frank Vance +1.713.963.2426    Western Geophysical
[e-mail]    10001 Richmond Avenue Fax:
+1.713.963.2758            Houston, TX 77042 USA

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

Date: Mon, 9 Nov 92 04:51:41 -0800
From: [e-mail] (Rob Warnock)
Subject: Re: Risks Of Cellular Speech
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Rob Warnock)
Organization: Silicon Graphics Inc., Mountain View, CA


[e-mail] (Monty Solomon) writes:

> Excerpt from RISKS DIGEST 13.89
> From: Dave King <[e-mail]>
> Bell Canada ... found that 80 percent of all cellular telephone
> traffic is monitored by third parties.  Even more eye-opening is the
> fact that 60 percent of monitored calls are taped...

See the attached retraction found in RISKS DIGEST 14.01.

 --Rob

         ======= attachment =======================
 Date: 03 Nov 92 16:47:58 EST
 From: Dave King <[e-mail]>
 Subject: Risks Of Cellular Speech

I must apologize to the list.  I have been informed that we cannot
confirm the percentage figures that were mentioned in the note that I
quoted in the item that I posted yesterday concerning a study of the
monitoring of cellular traffic in Toronto, Canada.


David L. King, IBM Southeast Region I&TSS, Mail Drop D072, 10401 Fernwood Road
Bethesda, Maryland 20817, [phone]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: HELP Needed on JPEG Standard!
Organization: Teradyne Inc., Telecommunications Division
Date: Mon, 09 Nov 92 20:17:45 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, vixen![e-mail]
(22475-adams) writes:

> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Euee
> S. Jang) writes:

>> Hi. I am a graduate student at Suny at Buffalo. I am about to start
>> the experimentation on JPEG. But I have no program or tool for JPEG.
>                         ^^^^----(SOFT?)
> In case you didn't know, SOFT is an acronym for Spell Out First Time!

Whatever .... Meanwhile his query is in the wrong newsgroup. JPEG is a
graphics compression algorithm and his query would be better answered
in any one of the graphics newsgroups (alt.binaries.pictures.misc,
etc).

John Rice        K9IJ     [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Dave Levenson)
Subject: Re: HELP Needed on JPEG Standard!
Organization: Westmark, Inc.
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 14:32:13 GMT


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

> JPEG has very little to do with telecom.  It's a scheme for
> compressing digitized photographs.  There is an informal group that
 ...

While John is correct, JPEG does turn up in some interesting
telecom-related contexts.  According to some of my informally-received
information, the AT&T model 2500 video phone uses JPEG in real time to
compress video for transmission between sets.

As an aside ... why in the world did they use that model number?  Is
it possible that someone at AT&T didn't know it had been used once
before, for a product that once had what might be called 'significant
market penetration'?


Dave Levenson        Internet: [e-mail]
Westmark, Inc.        UUCP: {uunet | rutgers | att}!westmark!dave
Warren, NJ, USA        Voice: 908 647 0900  Fax: [phone]

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

Date: Mon, 9 Nov 92 14:42:19 EST
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Splits This Month


The archive file history.of.area.splits is designed to help in cases
such as this.  It does not deal with 610 and 710, which don't seem to
be available as geographic area codes, and we notice that N00 and N11
are not used as such either, although 200 thru 600 are available as a
last resort.  Of the other N0X/N1X codes, only 910 has not been
announced or actually put into use yet. January 1, 1995 is the latest
deadline (the original one was July 1, 1995) for switches to be ready
for NXX-form area codes.

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: Splits This Month
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 22:42:56 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> mcrware!![e-mail]
(Troy Frericks) writes:

> Anybody keeping track?  How many area codes are left (unused)?

> [Moderator's Note: There are just a couple left under the old
> numbering format; several hundred are available using the new scheme
> set to begin in a year or so.

I feel really sorry for the people in the area where the first "new
scheme" area code is implemeted.  Can you imagine the number of people
that will not be able to call them because of COCOTs, PBXs, etc., that
will reject the call because the second digit isn't a 0 or 1?


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: I feel sorry for anyone who gets victimized by an
idiot, which is how a lot of PBX and COCOT administrators could be
defined, although not all by any means.  About ten years ago I
regularly used a ROLM PBX here which could not seem to understand that
a zero or one was permissible as the second digit in a seven digit
local number.  I kept turning in trouble reports, using the approved
method of doing so, to tell the people involved that (among others)
518 was a perfectly valid prefix in the 708 area. All my reports went
into the circular file I suspect; nothing was ever changed. Finally I
dealt with this problem by changing *my phone number* in the company
records to 708-518-xxxx which was a number I used to use occassionally.

Since I only went to see these people whenever they called me with a
problem of one sort or another, that meant there would soon be some
hassles that might bring about a fix to the phone system. Sure enough
about three days later, they are calling me from a pay phone in the
lobby of the building. I gave them a stall and told them I would have
to 'check my files, and could they call me back in about ten minutes.'
I knew that would tick them off, having to go back to the lobby pay
phone again; so I did it twice more, each time telling them to give me
another ten or fifteen minutes to 'research my records'. When I went
by a couple days later, I was told the Vice President - Operations had
gone to see the Telecom Manager with fire shooting out of his nostrils.
Presto!   For the past few years now, I've been taking care of that
PBX system myself on a part time basis, spending a few hours each week
making requested changes in service and reconciling telco billings.  PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #834
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa01959;
          9 Nov 92 22:40 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA21580
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 9 Nov 1992 20:11:44 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA12935
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 9 Nov 1992 20:11:27 -0600
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 20:11:27 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #835

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 9 Nov 92 20:11:30 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 835

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: UK Dialtone Competition? (Bryan Montgomery)
    Re: Caller ID Approved In Arizona (Hans Mulder)
    Re: Northern Telecomm (Ben Harrell)
    Re: Fax Back From DTMF Selection? (Steve Elias)
    Re: Private Lines, Bandwidth (Alan Boritz)
    Re: 700 Numbers From Overseas (Gordon Grant)
    Re: Need Widget to Connect Two Faxes or Modems Together (Mike Gordon)
    Re: Help Needed With DTMF Tones (Joe Smooth)
    Re: Phone Service in the Great White North (Tony Harminc)
    Re: Voice-Operated Phone (William Petrisko)
    Re: Very Weird Telephone Problem (Norman R. Tiedemann)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 9 Nov 92 11:40:00 GMT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: UK Dialtone Competition?


Charles (C.A.) Hoequist <[e-mail]> wrote:

> A query for the telecommies in the UK: my manager last week insisted
> that he had been told by reliable sources that competition for local
> service is allowed in the UK, and not just by Mercury, but by a lot of
> small local companies.

> Can this be? I lived in the UK 1986-88 and never saw anything of the
> sort, but up-to-date information would be appreciated.  Is there a
> choice of local dialtone providers? If not, is there legislation for
> such in the Commons, or any other move that would provoke my manager's
> belief?

This is only in very recent times, and I believe that Mercury has very
little interest in local residential dial-tone (business is a bit
different).

The main rivals are the CATV companies that have won licences in
certain areas. A recent report by the Independent Television
Commission stated a 500% rise in installed lines over the last year.
This is caused by an increase in operators providing 'phone service
and the areas receiving cable. There are currently 61,158 residential
and 11,523 buisness lines (as of Oct 1). this shouldn't be taken as a
definitive split due to the areas where service is currently
available.

On a personal note, NYNEX have been installing CATV and POTS in my
local area for the last 15 months solid, involving many miles of
pavement (sidewalk) being laid with conduit. And also posing a serious
rival to DSB (Direct Satellite broadcast).


Bryan Montgomery  (Production Engineer)

Tel : +44 (705) / [phone] Extn 8593  Mail Point 32/21
Fax : +44 (705) / [phone]            IBM Havant
Tie : 721 - 8593                           Havant
Internet : [e-mail]              Hampshire, PO9 1SA
VNET     : BRYANM at HVTVM4                Great Britain

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

Date: Mon, 9 Nov 92 13:15:08 +0100
From: [e-mail] (Hans Mulder)
Subject: Re: Caller ID Approved In Arizona


In <[e-mail]> the Moderator notes:

> [Moderator's Note: It is not his 'girlfriends Caller-ID equipped
> phone', it is *his* phone at home equipped that way that ratted on
> him. His only option would be to press *67, and I'm afraid that would
> make the wife suspicious also.   PAT]

But he *did* press *67.  Unfortunately, his girlfriend's phone had per
line blocking and the *67 unblocked it.  How could he have known?


HansM

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

From: [e-mail] (Ben Harrell)
Subject: Re: Northern Telecomm
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Ben Harrell)
Organization: Computers and Technologies Theme Program-NCSU-NC
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 14:10:26 GMT


[e-mail] (Scott Matthews) writes:

> Does anybody have any internet hosts (email addresses) for Northern
> Telecom?

To my knowledge, all of our hosts are secure.  Without an ID and
password, you would not be able to log on to one of them.


Ben Harrell    [e-mail]   or [e-mail]

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

Subject: Re: Fax Back From DTMF Selection?
Date: Mon, 09 Nov 92 09:59:20 PST
From: Steve Elias <[e-mail]>


Please see my replies in comp.dcom.fax, comp.dcom.patents, or call
Brooktrout for product information.  617 449 4100 / faxback 617 449
9010.  Anyone with pointers to other vendors, please post or email.


eli

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

Date: 09 Nov 92 19:47:50 EST
From: Alan Boritz <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Private Lines, Bandwidth


[e-mail] (JOHN SCHMIDT) writes:

> Telco tariffs and technical standards have specific limits on signal
> levels and baud rates, to prevent crosstalk into other services.

> "Program" circuits are limited to +8 dbm, as measured on a "VU" meter
> (+18dbm peak), although I have run much hotter levels in unamplified
> loops without "detection" (read 'complaint').

> in the late '60s, we connected a program circuit here to the 70volt 20
> watt output of a PA amplifier, and had a 12" speaker with only a line

AT&T, NY Tel, and just about every other telco in the US use *0 dBm*
as their nominal level transmission standard, NOT +8.

That's a hell of an example to set for a public radio station at an
educational institution: know your standards ... and ignore them.


Alan Boritz    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Gordon Grant)
Subject: Re: 700 Numbers From Overseas
Organization: Joint European Torus
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 14:35:35 GMT


In an article by Holger Reusch (Dipl. Gerhard + Joe) our esteemed
Moderator notes:

> [Moderator's Note: Cynics in Europe can call it whatever they like; I
> read some papers from the UK and other places in Europe which carry
> advertisements for companies in Europe. *They* do the same thing; I
> have seen their ads with only '0800' numbers and the like. Shall I
> now devote several issues of this Digest to complain about 'European
> centrism' because I can't call them on their nickle?  Your complaint
> should be directed to companies which advertise in media read around
> the world while failing to include telephone numbers which can be
> dialed internationally. Maybe a lot of those companies simply are not
> soliciting business from other countries for reasons of their own,
> possibly involving customs taxes, copyright problems, etc.  Or maybe
> their advertising copy writers are simply stupid. In either case, why
> blame telco for omissions by merchants in their advertising?   PAT]

Come off it Pat.  0800 and <insert code used in your country> numbers
mixes several issues in one big cocktail that is not to everyone's
taste.  Telcos all over world should be able to offer better more
flexible products to their customers.

An 0800 number combines:

A non-geographical based number where the call can be automatically
routed to regional centre based on the location of the caller.

A fine service but I don't see why the customer should not define
default destination for calls from areas or countries without a region
centre.

An incoming call barring service, where the recipient declines calls
 from certains numbers or groups of numbers. Again a useful service we
all expect from a telco.

Defines a "non-standard" payment method, in this case all who can
connect to the number get the call paid for by the recipient.

Such a rigid product may have been acceptable twenty years ago, but
today it seems to retained more for the benefit of the telco than
either their customers or service user.

Why are these service "the same the whole world over"?  Is it
international agreement or disagreement?


[e-mail]                Gordon Grant             Jet Abingdon OX14 3EA UK
Fidonet: (2:253/170)     Voice [phone]     Fax [phone]


[Moderator's Note: Everything you described above is available in the
USA on 800 numbers. And there are international 800 numbers; that is,
800 numbers for people in the USA to use which terminate in Europe or
some other international point. Likewise, there are 0800 (or other
code per country) which in fact terminate in the USA. A business in
the USA which desires to have reverse-charge calls to it from an
international point can quite easily ask AT&T to arrange it for them
with the telecom administration in the desired country. A business in
London which solicits customers from the USA need only ask British
Telecom to set it up with AT&T; then presently an 800 number in the
USA on a certain prefix which is intended for such international
arrangements will be up and connected for them.

The simple fact is that many/most(?) businesses in the USA --
particularly in areas of high tech -- are not in a position to deal
directly with customers in other countries due to taxes, customs
regulations, restrictive laws pertaining to the export of certain
technology, etc. You do not do any favors for anyone by rigging up a
call into a gateway in the USA which then goes outbound to someone's
800 number here. You force them to pay for a call they otherwise would
not pay for (had it been dialed in a straight-forward way from the
other country). On the other hand, if a business in the USA has an
0800 (or whatever) number in another country, by all means use it if
you wish ... they *want* you to call them.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Mike Gordon)
Subject: Re: Need Widget to Connect Two Faxes or Modems Together
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix at U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 92 15:30:39 GMT


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

> A friend wants to connect two fax machines together via their telco
> connections so that the machines could be used as copiers.  Also, she
> wants to connect a fax modem equipped PC to a fax machine so that the
> fax machine could be used both as a scanner and as a printer.

> She would like a small and inexpensive piece of euipment with two
> modular telephone jacks with just enough "smarts" to supply a dial
> tone and appropriate ringing signals.

    I just saw this in the Tiger Software Catalog.  (Sorry, its at
work, so I don't have the phone number.  It should be available at
1-800-555-1212.)

    The device is called Fax Scanner and it connects any fax machine
with any fax modem to allow the fax machine to be used as a scanner
and a printer.  Because it says 'any' fax and fax modem, I'm sure that
the connection is via the telephone line connections.  Since there was
not any mention of special software (other than the usual fax modem
software) I assume that it provides the usual dial tone, ringing and
talk battery.

    I have never actually seen this item work, so my info is just what
I read from the ad and speculated.  If anyone out there has this
device, maybe they'd like to tell us how it works.  It could have some
widespread use as the "telco line simulator" that everyone here has
been looking for.

    I believe the price was $90.  (Don't qoute me on that.)


Mike Gordon   N9LOI [e-mail]

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

From: Joe Smooth <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Help Needed With DTMF Tones
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 18:20:35 GMT


I'm sure exactly what you mean, but DTMF stands for Dual Tone,
Multi-Frequency, meaning that there are going to be two tones at once
(and at two different frequencies). For example. if you hit a '1' key
on the telephone, you would really be hearing a 697hz and 1209hz tones
simultaneously.

In your project, are both of the tones playing at the SAME time? If
not, it will not trigger anything on the telephone.

Just for information, the DTMF telephone tones are as follows:

1 - 697/1209Hz        2 - 697/1336Hz        3 - 697/1477Hz
A - 697/1633Hz        4 - 770/1209Hz        5 - 770/1336Hz
6 - 770/1477Hz        B - 770/1633Hz        7 - 852/1209Hz
8 - 852/1336Hz        9 - 852/1477Hz        C - 852/1633Hz
* - 941/1209Hz        0 - 941/1336Hz        # - 941/1477Hz
D - 941/1633Hz        --------------          --------------


I hope that helped out a bit.

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

Date: Mon, 09 Nov 92 13:10:51 EST
From: Tony Harminc <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Phone Service in the Great White North


[e-mail] (John J Butz) wrote:

> I hear that Canadian phone service underwent/is going through a
> divestiture, similar to the one AT&T experienced.

In a word -- no.  There is no divestiture or breakup of any of the
Canadian telcos planned or even talked about, no matter how much some
of us might wish it.  In fact Bell Canada (the largest of the telcos)
has recently increased its power and influence over telecom even in
the (large) parts of the country it doesn't operate in.

What has happened recently -- and what you are probably confusing with
divestiture -- is that long distance competition has been approved,
with essentially no restrictions.

> Could anyone write to me and explain the current situation, the major
> players, the regulators, recent deals, etc.  Perhaps there are good
> articles in newspapers or trade journals that explain the current
> Canadian telephony environment?

*Very* briefly, the major players are the existing monopoly telcos
(Bell Canada being by far the largest, followed by BC Tel, and ten or
so other regional ones), Unitel (owned 40% by Rogers (largest cable
system owner in the country and also owner of Cantel -- nationwide
cellular system) and 60% by Canadian Pacific (of railway fame)), A
consortium headed by BC Rail and Lightel.  There are also various
resellers sort of hanging around the fringes.

Unitel and BCRL/Lightel applied to the CRTC (the federal regulator)
for permission to offer competing LD service.  Bell and friends
opposed this, claiming ingenuously that they were not opposed to
competition (ha, ha) but were concerned about the problems of lack of
continued subsidization of local rates by LD rates.

The CRTC eventually approved the application, and surprised almost
everyone by actually encouraging the entry of new, facilities-based
carriers into the market.  (In practice there are few organisations
with installed facilities other than the telcos and Unitel, but as in
other countries, all sorts of rights-of-way (electric power corridors,
etc.) will doubtless come out of the woodwork.)

Bell and friends have appealed the CRTC decision, and have at least
one more level of appeal after that, but it is widely thought that the
decision will be upheld.  The appeal is also widely seen as a delaying
tactic.  One of the hot topics of the appeal is Bell's contention that
it should pay none (!) of the costs of interconnecting its equipment
to competitors' networks.

In the interim, Unitel is offering a somewhat Mickey Mouse (TM?)
service using local seven-digit numbers and access codes.

If you are sufficiently interested, the decision itself is available
from the CRTC:

Canadian Radio-Television and Telecommunications Commission
Ottawa, Ontario    K1A 0N2     [phone]

Pages more could be written -- if you get any I would like to see
them.


Tony Harminc

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Voice-Operated Phone
Date: 9 Nov 92 03:17:15 MST
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: University of Arizona, College of Engineering and Mines, Tucson


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

> Is there such a thing as a voice-operated telephone dialer for home
> use?

DAK had a two-line speakerphone with voice-activated auto-dialer quite
a long time ago, you might want to call them and ask.  I believe it
was under $150.  800-DAK-0800, from memory ... might want to verify
this thru DA.

No idea how well it works, if you've seen "LA Story", you might
remember the scene w/Steve Martin and his new voice-dialer.  "Dial
Mom." <pause> <ring> <ring> "Hello, Domino's Pizza!"

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

Date: Mon, 9 Nov 92 13:53:26 EST
From: [e-mail] (Norman R Tiedemann)
Subject: Re: Very Weird Telephone Problem
Organization: AT&T


> The phone rang a third time. This time it *was* my sister on the line,
> but it was a very bad connection, as if she was in Argentina or
> something. I asked her if she had called me the previous two times,
> and she said, "No, I just got home. And anyway, you just called *me*".
> We determined that we had *each* heard the phone ring, and picked it
> up, and found ourselves connected to each other!

> or something ... is this a pre-Halloween prank, or what?

Halloween Prank is the best explanation. It is possible (not very
likely) that something "went wacko" in the phones and set up this
bizarre interaction. (Note: "went wacko" and "bizarre" are the
official Bell Labs terms for these event. :-))

But, I have listened to a DJ here in Chicago do this exact thing. He
calls two people (often same last names), connects them and then
listens to the results. Normally, the results are like you described
two semi-confused people arguing about who called whom. The reason for
the first rings and no one on the line, is the DJ must time the two
calls so you both answer about the same time. In your case, you
answered but your sister did not yet, so the DJ had to wait until they
answered (leaving you in silence) or keep trying both numbers until
you were both near enough to the phone to answer at about the same
time.

Next time this happens, tune in the local "wild and crazy" radio
station and check if you hear yourselves. (Or start shouting
obsenities.)


Norm Tiedemann        AT&T Bell Labs  IH 2G-429
att!ihlpm!normt        2000 Naperville Rd.
[e-mail]    Naperville, IL    60566

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #835
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa11745;
          10 Nov 92 3:44 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA24698
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 10 Nov 1992 01:39:44 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA22481
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 10 Nov 1992 01:39:27 -0600
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 01:39:27 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #836

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 10 Nov 92 01:39:30 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 836

Index To This Issue:                       Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Low Noise Cordless Phone Info Wanted (Steve Schear)
    Re: Bandwidth on Demand Specification Wanted (Toby Nixon)
    Re: Cellular Advice Sought ([e-mail])
    Re: Airfone -- Phooey (Dave Levenson)
    Re: ISDN From Intel PC Computers (Christopher J. Ambler)
    Re: Telephone Phreaks (Christopher J. Ambler)
    Re: AT&T Takes Away My Call Manager (Craig R. Watkins)
    Re: What's a T1? (Jack Adams)
    Re: Listing Wanted of CLLIs by Area Code/Exchange (Jack Adams)
    Re: Odd Survey (Dave Lapin)
    Re: Telco Handling Of Cable Cut (Jack Adams)
    Re: Advice Needed on Telephone Security Systems (Doug Rorem)
    Re: Advice Needed on Telephone Security Systems (Thomas B. Clark III)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Steve Schear)
Subject: Re: Low Noise Cordless Phone Info Wanted
Organization: Cylink Corp.
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 92 01:43:11 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> Steven L. Johnson <johnson@
tigger.jvnc.net> writes:

> I am wondering how the newer 902/928 MHz phones (digital or analog)
> compare with the more popular 46/49 MHz ones.  I'm interested in
> comparisons or recommendations on the different noise reduction
> methods that the phones use.

> Specifically the Panasonic KX-T9000 looks interesting, but is it
> really noticably better than the best of the 46/49 MHz flavor?

The 900 MHz phones should be substantially quieter then the 46/49 MHz
variety.  This is due to the mainly to this band's relative lack of
users, and especially other cordless phones, and the reduced
interference from harmonics generated by digital devices (esp.
computers).

The digital phones will, all other things being equal, be much quieter
than the analog units, and probably only slightly more expensive. Of
the digital phones the spread-spectrum types should by far be the best
(e.g., Escort's), due to their improved noise immunity and power
output.  Whereas the analog and digital narrow band 900 MHz phones are
limited to less than one milli- watt of power output, the spread
spectrum units can legally use up to one watt (of course battery life
in the hand-held won't permit this).


sds

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

From: Toby Nixon <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Bandwidth on Demand Specification Wanted
Date: 9 Nov 92 14:20:41 EDT
Organization: Hayes Microcomputer Products, Norcross, GA


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail].
tek.com (Jim Edwards) writes:

> Does anybody know where I can get a copy of the Bandwidth On Demand
> (BOND) specification?  Thanks.

The document is now known as "Aggregation of Multiple Independent 56
kbit/s or 64kbit/s Channels into a Synchronized Wideband Connection".
Work is being done in Technical Subcommittee TR-41.4 of the
Telecommunications Industry Association, under project number PN-3014.
The project editor is:

    Richard T. Beckman
    Bellcore  Room NVC 2X-280
    331 Newman Springs Road
    Red Bank  NJ  07701
    [e-mail]

The document is currently intended for review only among members of
the committee, but if you contact Mr. Beckman he might send you a
copy, particularly if you promise to give it a thorough technical
review and return comments to him.


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]
Subject: Re: Cellular Advice Sought
Date: 9 Nov 1992 01:51:05 GMT
Organization: Marquette University - Computer Services
Reply-To: [e-mail]


In article <[e-mail]>, Jerry Leichter <leichter@
lrw.com> writes:

> Question: She can't be the only one who wants to keep her beeper along
> with her cellphone.  Does anyone make a combined beeper/cellphone?

I understand there are cellphones now that will, if you desire, answer
a call by themselves and accept a touchtone message that you can
retrieve later.  You do, then, get charged for one minute of airtime.

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

From: [e-mail] (Dave Levenson)
Subject: Re: Airfone -- Phooey
Organization: Westmark, Inc.
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 13:45:33 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Henry
Mensch) writes:

[ regarding Airphone service ]

> Is anyone happy with these things?  I've never gotten one to work to
> my satisfaction ...

I have received numerous Airphone calls from a business associate who
was inflight between the West and East Coasts.  The background noise
level is high enough to be objectionable, but the voice is
recognizable.  I'm sure they're using a noise-cancelling microphone on
those handsets, but I'm also sure I've heard better ones.


Dave Levenson        Internet: [e-mail]
Westmark, Inc.        UUCP: {uunet | rutgers | att}!westmark!dave
Warren, NJ, USA        Voice: 908 647 0900  Fax: [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Christopher J. Ambler, Phish)
Subject: Re: ISDN From Intel PC Computers
Organization: Fantasy, Incorporated: Reality None of Our Business.
Date: Mon, 09 Nov 1992 11:56:43 GMT


[e-mail] (Steve Davidson) recently asked us:

> Is there a newsgroup for ISDN questions?

Like Pat said, comp.dcom.isdn.

> Can anyone direct me to information regarding how I might get ISDN
> capability on an Intel PC?

Can you be more specific? Do you mean just data? I connect via the
RS232 in the back of my telrad set to get 9600BPS packet switch on the
D channel, and 19.2 (will be 38.4 with equipment upgrades next week
(hurray)) KBPS circuit switch on the B channel.

If this is what you mean, then it's that simple!


[e-mail]   [phone]/ISDN

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

From: [e-mail] (Christopher J. Ambler, Phish)
Subject: Re: Telephone Phreaks
Organization: Fantasy, Incorporated: Reality None of Our Business.
Date: Mon, 09 Nov 1992 12:09:14 GMT


[e-mail] (John Gilbert) recently informed us:

>> In article <[e-mail]> mertwig![e-mail]
>> (Daniel Drucker) writes:

>>> Also, would someone tell me what the STD-III Information Center is?
>>> (Dial 950-1288 anywhere in the USA, 2400,8N1.)

> When I dial this I get:

>            WELCOME TO AT&T INFORMATION ACCESS SERVICE

I get:

(SIT TONES) The long distance company indication for this call is
incorrect. Please try your call again or call your long distance
company for assistance.

I have, and just verified (7005554141) that I have AT&T. I will assume
that it's an AT&T number because of the 288 (ATT).

Now I'm curious what that recording meant. Anyone?


[e-mail]  [phone]/ISDN

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

From: Craig R. Watkins <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: AT&T Takes Away My Call Manager
Date: 9 Nov 92 09:28:10 EST
Organization: HRB Systems, Inc.


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

> It took me over 30 calls and over a month to get the problem
> resolved on my lines.

I noticed it on a Saturday and didn't get very far with it on the
weekend (see below) but I did talk to someone on Monday morning that
was very interested in solving the problem.  She escalated the problem
to some problem solving group, but simultaniously put through a "rush
order" for new service on my other lines.  It was working within 24
hours.  She personally called back a few days later to make sure
everything was OK.

> As Craig said, don't let them tell you to call the Call Manager office,
> as it's only for business service.  Also, Long Lines Repair is of no
> help either.

This was my problem during the weekend.  Repair would refer me to the
Call Manager office which (as a business office, I suppose) is closed
on weekends.  If I knew to call residential service during the
weekend, I might have solved the problem sooner.

One amusing part of weekend was when I dialed 00 to get AT&T.

00:  AT&T....
Me:  Could you give me the number for AT&T Repair?
00:  For Call Manager, sir?
Me:  (a little spooked at this) Uh, um, yes.
     (thinking there might be a major failure) How did you know?
00:  Oh, it's on my screen!

OK -- Now I know they have ANI, but this was rediculous!  After some
more questioning I find out the fact that I HAVE Call Manager was on
her screen and she finally admited that when people with Call Manager
call repair it usually involves a problem with Call Manager!

I should at this point admit that Call Manager is really helpful to me
and it is free and it is working again.  I'm happy.


Craig R. Watkins    [e-mail]
HRB Systems, Inc.   [phone]

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

From: vixen![e-mail] (22475-adams)
Subject: Re: What's a T1?
Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 92 14:35:54 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, John C. Fowler <fowlerc@
magellan.colorado.edu> writes:

> I've seen the abbreviation 'T1' or 'T-1' here in the Digest many times
> over the past few years, but I don't think I've ever seen anyone
> define exactly what a T1 was.

Although many good treatments abound, allow me to offer a "Reader's
Digest" version:

T1 is a type of digital carrier system which was originally deployed
in 1962 to solve a number of problems inherent in congested
metropolitan area short haul (less than 50 mile) carrier needs.  T-1
(Or T1 as you like) specifies a four wire circuit transmitting signals
at 1.544 megabits/second (Mbps).  T1 carries its information in the
format known as DS1 (Digital Signal 1).  DS1 is a member of the
hierarchy of digital signals and describes which bits belong to what
sublevels of the hierarchy.  The signals applied to the cable are
digital bi-polar pulses (Alternating + and - ) where the 1s are
represented by pulses and 0s are represented by 0 voltage. In metallic
systems, this scheme allows for the reduction of DC bias as well as
simple single bit error detection.

The carrier system is in widespread use with each of its 24 channels
(DS0) able to support either support a voice channel or
56kbps/64kbps(clear channel) data. The entire time division multiplex
(TDM) hierarchy, generally described as DS levels 0 through 4, extends
from an analog voice channel up through 274.176 Mbps with each level
time division multiplexing up to the next.

To further compound telephoneeze, the DS1 signal (that which is
carried by a T1 system) is also referred to as a digroup (DIgital
GROUP).


Jack (John) Adams    Bellcore NVC 2Z-220
[phone] {Voice}    [phone] {FAX}
[e-mail]    [e-mail]

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

From: vixen![e-mail] (22475-adams)
Subject: Re: Listing Wanted of CLLIs by Area Code/Exchange
Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 92 15:23:14 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, Cliff Sharp <clifto@indep1.
chi.il.us> writes:

> I'm looking for an _accurate_listing of CLLIs by areacode/exchange,
> and the only intelligent sounding being I've reached at the phone
> company says they're proprietary and she can't send them out.

While not up proprietary issues, I suspect she is accurate in that
statement.

> The end output of this will be a program (carefully researched)
> which will allow the user to add "SET EXCH=Ill Dearborn" to his
> environment and then let him/her get an accurate listing of how much
> it costs to call 708-928 or whatever.

I'm not sure whether having a complete list of Common Language
Location Identifier codes (CLLI) would be of much help in what you are
trying to do.  If your user is an average telephone subscriber, he/she
would have much difficulty abstracting where they are (either calling
from or to) from these ten character code names which identify
physical locations within the telephone companies.  For instance, in a
given town, there probably are more than one physical location for the
phone company (Chicago and other towns come to mind).  More
importantly, these locations are often encoded with streets and/or
other less widely recognized designators.

I suspect that correlating an NPA-NXX with LaSalle Street might be a
stretch for the average customer.  In addition, not all CLLIs have End
Offices in them, a digital radio relay CEV (Controlled Environment
Vault) or other type of hut are CLLI designated but have no NPA/NXX
associated with them.

Moreover, the CLLIs are often assigned to buildings with no networks
in them whatsover. Consider the warehouses which hold the spare plug
in electronic equipment units, but which bear a CLLI because they
contain these Common Language Equipment Identification (CLEI) items.

I suspect that a search of your tariffs (publicly available) will be
of more value in completing your project as they fully designate all
rates, routes, etc.

Maybe I'm missing something?


Jack (John) Adams    Bellcore NVC 2Z-220
[phone] {Voice}    [phone] {FAX
[e-mail]    [e-mail]

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

From: DNA15A![e-mail]
Date: 09 NOV 92 10:41
Subject: Re: Odd Survey


Rob Knauerhase asks:

> This afternoon, I got a call from an overly-friendly man named John
> something, who worked for Chilton Research.  He asked if I'd take part

 .....

> Has anyone heard of this company, or heard of this type of survey?

Chilton Research is a part of the Chilton Press outfit (those people
who bring you the many auto repair books) that does various surveys.
One of the many that you might have seen recently was on Tuesday,
November 3 for either ABC or CBS, predicting election results.

Chilton Research (at least the part doing the election returns) is
located in one of the Philadelphia suburbs (Radnor, PA).


Dave Lapin ASN/ECDC [phone] (net**2 385-3508)
internet:  [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: I think they are part of the empire in Radnor, PA
known as {TV Guide}.  PAT]

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

From: vixen![e-mail] (22475-adams)
Subject: Re: Telco Handling Of Cable Cut
Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 92 15:47:08 GMT


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

>> A recent Bell Canada TV commercial shows a raccoom chewing ...

> It depends on what kind of multiplexing equipment they use.  In
> general, the switches will not dynamically reroute a call should a
> trunk fail.  That is, if a switch has multiple paths available, and
> one fails, your call will be lost, but the next call will be routed
> over a path that is still functioning.

Correct.

> On the other hand, if the trunks are connected to some kind of
                     ^^
> multiplexor/ DACS, it may handle the rerouting without knowledge of
> the switch.           ^^^

Not true.  As soon as the circuit (circuit switched voice call) is
lost, supervision on the circuit indicates it has gone idle.  I know
of no switching system (I could be wrong here) that will automatically
reconnect the ends of a failed circuit switched call.  Furthermore, I
have not experienced voice trunks that are switched through a DCS
(Digital Cross Connect System) after the End, Tandem, or Access Tandem
machine finishes switching them.  There are multiple ways of routing
(Hierarchical, Dynamic Non-Hierarchical-DNHR, and Real Time
Non-Hierarchical-RTNR), but all of these are accomplished through
routing tables contained in the switches themselves.


Jack (John) Adams    Bellcore NVC 2Z-220
[phone] {Voice}    [phone] {FAX}
[e-mail]    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Doug Rorem)
Subject: Re: Advice Needed on Telephone Security Systems
Organization: University of Illinois at Chicago
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 00:48:53 GMT


[e-mail] (Kamran Husain) writes:

> Most houses hit have the breakers outside the security zone. Crooks
> snip the phone lines and cut the power off. If someone's home, the
> owner goes out to turn the power on and the alarm off. (S)he then
> walks back in with the crooks. If they are not home for (say for the
> weekend) crooks come back after 24 hour when the battery back up is
> drained for the siren. The alarm monitoring company is NOT notified
> since the phones are dead and that's the only lifeline back.

Your only options would appear to be using a leased line or radio
system to an alarm monitoring company.  I know of fire alarm systems
which use a metallic leased line (not always available) which when cut
cause a 'trouble' indication to the monitoring station.  They (the
municipality) will roll fire trucks in that instance.  I'm sure there
are private alarm companies which offer similar services, however the
cost (for a leased line) would be high.  Your cheapest solution might
be to buy a cellular phone and use it as a secondary (or primary)
means to notify the alarm company. I'm not sure how many alarm systems
offer this as an option, but they should....


Doug Rorem     UIC   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Thomas B. Clark III)
Subject: Re: Advice Needed on Telephone Security Systems
Organization: UNC-CH School of Medicine
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 03:45:21 GMT


Concerning the possibility of robbery or burglary after cutting the
phone lines ...

I removed the cable from the telephone company's nid and dug up the
last several feet of it.  I drilled through the foundation of the
house (underground) and terminated the cable in my crawl space.  I
then ran one line directly to my alarm dialer and an "emergency
phone."  The cable then goes back out the foundation and up to the
interface device.

If anyone cuts my cable, I can still make a call and so can my alarm
system.

I know this is of questionable propriety, but my safety comes before
telephone company regulations.  I have been a bit nervous the two
times a telephone repair person has been by, but so far they haven't
caught on.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #836
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa12295;
          10 Nov 92 4:22 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA02032
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 10 Nov 1992 02:14:22 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA17428
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 10 Nov 1992 02:14:04 -0600
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 02:14:04 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #837

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 10 Nov 92 02:14:00 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 837

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: AT&T's COLOR Videophone With Motion (Paul Robinson)
    Re: AT&T's COLOR Videophone With Motion (Robert J. Woodhead)
    Re: AT&T's COLOR Videophone With Motion (James Turner)
    Re: Risks of Cellular Speech (Paul Robinson)
    Re: Risks Of Cellular Speech (Shrikumar)
    Re: Computerized Sales Call "Locked" My Line (Cliff Sharp)
    Re: Compuserve/MCI Email (Steve Forrette)
    Re: The Worst Phone Lines in the US? (Steve Forrette)
    Re: Personal 800 Numbers (Paul Robinson)
    Re: Music On Call? (Tom Gray)
    Re: Sprint/United Telephone Wants Your Old Equipment (Mike Morris)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
Date: Mon, 09 Nov 1992  18:39:02 EST
Subject: Re: AT&T's COLOR Videophone With Motion


In an ad on page A47 of the Nov. 4 {Washington Post} is an
advertisement for AT&T's Videophone.

The ad claims "{available now}.  Just plug it in, turn it on, and
dial.  Full {color} with motion.  No special wiring or separate
costs."

The last I've heard of for video on a phone line was a {still} picture
in {black and white}.  This one's got me stumped, as I haven't the
foggiest idea how they can do {color} on a standard POTS line.  And
supposedly with motion too?  I'm just a lowly telephone operations
supervisor and sometime computer programmer, I can't see how they can
do this in such a small bandwidth.

The phone number for information is 1-800-437-9504.

If their product is even close to what they promise, Picturetel and a
few others should be scared excrementless.


Paul Robinson -- [e-mail]
Any opinions are mine alone.

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

From: [e-mail] (Robert J Woodhead)
Subject: Re: AT&T's COLOR Videophone With Motion
Organization: Foretune Co., Ltd.
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 05:56:49 GMT


[e-mail] (Tansin A. Darcos & Company) writes:

> To put it into perspective, we think that SEVEN frames per second is
> terrible and we are trying to eventually get to THIRTY frames per
> second.  Thirty frames per second is the same as the number of
> animation stills they use in cartooning.  Supposedly, one cannot tell
> the difference between live video and thirty frames per second video.

Full motion animation, such as seen in Disney films, is 24 frames per
second, the normal rate for films (and, by the way, each frame is
usually projected multiple times to reduce apparent flicker).  TV is
60 fields per second, interlaced, for a 30 frame/second effective
rate.

Most non-theatrical animation is twelve or eight (or less) different
frames per second, recorded on film at 24 frames per second (so two,
three or four sucessive frames are identical, as opposed to full
motion animation where every frame is different).  A variety of
techniques are used to make this look less-jerky; for example, camera
moves (pans) are done at 24fps, even though the animated characters
are only moving (for example) eight times a second.

To give you some perspective, the average 1/2 hour animated show for
kids uses between 6,000 and 10,000 sheets of cel material, and as each
character is usually on a sheet by him/her/itself, this means that at
any time, two or three sheets are needed for a single frame.  In full
motion animation, 5,000 (10,000 / 2) frames would last less than four
minutes; this gives you some idea of the "compression" that those who
draw Smurfs for a living can achieve.


Robert J. Woodhead, Biar Games / AnimEigo, Incs.    [e-mail]
AnimEigo US Office Email (for general questions): [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (James Turner)
Subject: Re: AT&T's COLOR Videophone With Motion
Organization: Interleaf, Inc.
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 92 20:14:02 GMT


Tansin A. Darcos & Company <[e-mail]> writes:

> To put it into perspective, we think that SEVEN frames per second is
> terrible and we are trying to eventually get to THIRTY frames per
> second.  Thirty frames per second is the same as the number of
> animation stills they use in cartooning.  Supposedly, one cannot tell
> the difference between live video and thirty frames per second video.

You certainly shouldn't be able to, since commercial video IS 30FPS ...

Actually, to be absolutely accurate, NTSC (Never Twice the Same
Color... :-) defines two half-frames or "fields", each of which
consists of 1/2 the lines (525 in total) on the screen, transmitted in
an interleaved manner.  So there are really 60 fields transmitted each
second.  But in terms of full frames, there are only 30.

Animation does not use 30FPS (except direct to video animation).  They
use 24FPS, just like the movie industry.


James M. Turner        Senior System Engineer
Interleaf, Inc         [phone]
[e-mail]    * uunet!leafusa!turner

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

Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
Date: Mon, 09 Nov 1992  22:56:37 EST
Subject: Re: Risks of Cellular Speech


In TELECOM Digest 12-834, Frank Vance <airgun![e-mail]>
wrote:

> I for one have been quite disappointed in the way the entire
> cellular privacy issue has been handled by the cellular providers and
> the U.S. Government

I'd like to quote from two books by Robert A. Heinlein.  In his last
book before he died, "To Sail Beyond The Sunset" there is --
coincidentally -- a telecommunication question asked where someone
notices that the video telephones used (in the story) in Kansas City
are flat, and the video in Dallas is stereophonic.  He asks "Why is
Kansas City still using flatties?  Dallas phones are all tanks now."
To which his mother informs him "Donald, any question that begins with
'Why do they' can usually be answered, 'Money.'"

In the second Heinlein book, "The Moon is a Harsh Mistress," the main
character Mannie points out that people always ask for a law to stop
other people from doing something that they don't like those people
doing.  "Nobody ever says, 'Please pass a law to make me stop doing
something I know I should stop."

So the point is that it's all about money.  It's a lot cheaper (and
dishonest) to leave cellular phones totally open and make it illegal
to listen to them, while causing people to have the (misguided)
impression that the medium is secure.

Another point is that some agencies of the government DO NOT want
telecommunications to *really* have privacy; there are some rumors
that NSA monitors *all* overseas calls, or at least all overseas calls
to 'sensitive' countries.  I am sure NSA, FBI and a few others DO NOT
want real security.

Also, you might ask the same question about why the members of
Congress involved with Mr. Keating of American Savings didn't tell him
to fix the problems with his S&L instead of "accepting the sniveling."
Call it very effective ahem "campaign contributions."  Did the same
thing happen in this instance?  We'll probably never know unless some
Senator's aide does what one did to Ted "Chappaquittick" Kennedy.


Paul Robinson -- [e-mail]
These opinions are MINE alone and nobody else's

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

Date: Mon, 9 Nov 92 23:13:42 -0500
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Risks Of Cellular Speech
Organization: UMass, Amherst MA + Temporal Sys & Computer Networks Bombay India


In article <[e-mail]> airgun![e-mail]
wrote:

> 2. Why, do they [Cellphone cos] go sniveling to Congress to make it illegal

Easier for them than to take on very complicated issues in encryption.

> 3. Why in the world did our government accept the snivelling and pass the
> Electronic Communications Privacy Act, instead of telling the cellular
> providers to go fix their own problems?  Most agencies of the government
> understand the problem well enough.  That is why a great many of them have
> implemented digital scrambling on their own radio systems.

  Perhaps easier for the government to pass a law than to open what is
really proving to be a can of worms .. legal status of encryption
technology in the context of national and international security.

   Consistently there has been a desire from all governments not to
have too many encrypted messages buzzing around, except what their own
military needs. If encryption were to become common, how can law
enforecement work?

  (This takes us right into that controversy, and I hope we dont waste
c.d.t bandwidth on this (OK government need to monitor, but what about
my privacy, they can misuse ...) unless someone has real news :-) The
topic has been beaten and all views possible have been expressed in
such groups as comp.risks, sci.crypt and I'm sure many others.)

  But that still does not convince me why they could not specify and
authorise a "weak" encryption system for cellular. Tho' I think I can
see it ... how can a govt live up to face the fact that they
deliberately wrote into law a system known to be "weak". Also it is
not easy to ban export of encryption schemes and yet have to import
your phones from Taiwan ... hmm what a bind!

  No government has ever been technically faulted for administrative
laws, and therefore it is easy to see why they's prefer such a step to
a slippery technological one. Till said technology comes to be
accepted enough.

Me thinks so ...


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Cliff Sharp)
Subject: Re: Computerized Sales Call "Locked" My Line
Date: 9 Nov 92 19:13:35 GMT


>> [Moderator's Note: Well you are right of course that 20-30 seconds
>> can mean life or death under some conditions. But the current telco
>> technology is such that if the man wants his phone line back (more or
>> less) immediatly, he will need to disconnect and wait about that
>> period of time for the CO to get rid of the other party who is hanging
>> on the line.  PAT]

   I've found that (at least locally) I can get those calls off the
line by shorting tip to ring.  Not a _nice_ thing to do, but very
effective.  I figure the total impedance in the runs from the CO to
the house should very effectively prevent any real burnout, and so far
I've been right (or lucky) about that.  Don't know _why_ it works, but
it does.

   Fortunately, I haven't had any such calls in a good long time; it
also seems that the local CO shuts those things off no matter what.
(My sister had a habit of calling me and going to sleep on the phone,
and we were effectively out of service until someone found the phone
and replaced the handset; that's what initially led me to experiment.)


Cliff Sharp   [e-mail]   OR  [e-mail]
WA9PDM                    Use whichever one works

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: Compuserve/MCI Email
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 21:38:49 GMT


[story about problem with CompuServe-MCI e-mail gateway deleted]

> [Moderator's Note: Actually, the fault may very well be with MCI Mail.
> They routinely dump huge amounts of mail from the Internet undelivered.
> The sender may or may not get notice of non-delivery, depending on the
> way things occured.  Their complaint is that a single address in the
> envelope is bad; someone quit subscribing to MCI Mail but never told
> me to remove their name. The mail gets there, MCI sees one bad address
> and dumps it all.

While we're dumping on e-mail carriers, I've a couple of gripes as
well.  cc:Mail does exactly what Pat has described above, and as the
maintainer of a host-based email system that must talk to a cc:Mail
system, I can attest to the frustration of having a message with a
large distribution list dumped in its entirety because of a single bad
address.  (If only the USPS would do this for bulk mail! :-))

CompuServe also has a major problem in my opinion.  They don't support
multiple line email addresses.  This is crucial to get to many
addresses on MCI Mail for example.  We have a gateway from our host
email system to MCI that uses a so-called REMS account.  Among other
things, this means that it takes a three line address to reach most of
our users.  Since CompuServe doesn't support more than one line, most
of our users can't receive mail from CompuServe users.  CompuServe has
been aware of this problem for several years now and chooses not to do
anything about it.  It is really silly when you consider that if one
of our users sends a message to a CompuServe user, that the CompuServe
user can't even use the REPLY command, because it will reject the
multi-line address.  It's pretty hard to dispute that this is a bug on
CIS's part as far as I can see.


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: The Worst Phone Lines in the US?
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 22:48:50 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (G.T.)
writes:

> Dallas is served by Southwestern Bell.  Some of the outlying areas
> (like Plano, etc.) are served by GTE.

I seem to remember a story that appeared in the TELECOM Digest several
years ago about the SWB-GTE situation in Texas.  There was a large
company, Atlantic Richfield I think, that moved a large complex from
an area served by SWB to one served by GTE.  The GTE service was so
inadequate that they had all of their local lines terminate in SWB
territory, then piped them into their office in GTE territory via
private microwave.  GTE got upset about this and sued.  The
precedent-setting ruling was that this was okay, since the company in
question was legitimately paying for the SWB lines in SWB territory,
and what they did with them on their side of the demarc (in whatever
small space they rented in SWB territory) was their business.


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

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

Date: Tue, 10 Nov 92 01:03 GMT
From: Tansin A. Darcos & Company <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Personal 800 Numbers


AT&T will offer a regular 800 number, for $15 a month plus usage which
is, if I'm not mistaken, a flat 31c/Minute.  This ties into an
ordinary phone number.  There is a charge of $30 to install it.

Sprint is about the same, except the per minute rate is about the same
as dialed direct calls.

In the case of both AT&T and Sprint, the number can be listed with 800
Directory; Sprint will take two company names for a single 800 number
with no problem; up to four can be put on a number but more than two
requires proof those names actually use it, i.e. letterhead submitted
to them.

MCI has the $5 a month 800 number, but it's a shared number; after
someone dials the 800 number, they dial a passcode.  The passcode
indicates which subscriber to connect to.

I had the 800 number service from Mid Atlantic Telecom of Washington,
DC for a while.  It's $8 a month plus usage which ranges from 16c to
31c per minute depending on distance and time of day.  Also, Mid
Atlantic does an additional thing that's surprising, the "Caller ID
List" or "ANI List", in which included with your bill is a printed
listing of the time and date, length of time and calling number of
everyone who called your 800 number.

MCI also has a standard non-shared 800 number, but it's more
expensive.

I saw an announcement on here for Cable and Wireless' 800 number which
allows the customer to change the destination number on his own.

Also, Sprint allows you to have an 800 number route to a specific
place depending onthe caller location.

So here's your answer: Get Sprint's 800 number. In your area code,
have calls to that 800 number routed to the other party; in their area
code, have calls to that 800 number routed to you.  Or substitute
"areas you travel in" for area code.  If you're on the West Coast and
they are on the East Coast, it's real simple; put calls in the Pacific
and Mountain States to direct to them; put Central and Eastern Time
Zone calls to you.


Paul Robinson -- [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Tom Gray)
Subject: Re: Music On Call?
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 16:38:51 -0500
Organization: Mitel. Kanata (Ontario). Canada.


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Jerry
Leichter) writes:

> I came home recently to find a strange message on my answering
> machine: Several minutes of music.  There was no voiceover anywhere in
> the message, or before or after it -- just music.  The sound was of

> [Moderator's Note: My guess is someone was playing games. They called
> your machine and let it rack up a long 'message' by simply playing
> music for however long it lasted before the machine clicked off.  PAT]

A more likely possibility is that you received a call from someone
behind a PBX. Hearing your answering machine message, this person
attempted to make a new call by depressing the switch hook to get dial
tone. He did this so quickly that the off hook was interpreted as a
switch hook flash by the PBX. The PBX put you on soft hold while it
waited for the user to set up the conference call or what not.

You heard, the PBX's MOH signal while the originator blithely went
about his business not knowing of the connection to your phone.

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

From: [e-mail] (Mike Morris)
Subject: Re: Sprint/United Telephone Wants Your Old Equipment
Organization: College Park Software, Altadena, CA
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 07:36:10 GMT


[e-mail] (TELECOM Moderator) writes:

> United Telephone - Northwest  (A Sprint Company)
> CASH FOR USED TELEPHONE or COMPUTER EQUIPMENT!

> United Telephone (a Sprint Company) is interested in purchasing your
> USED TELEPHONE or COMPUTER equipment.

> So anyone with old equipment they don't want might consider this as
> one way of getting rid of it -- and help Sprint upgrade their service
> at the same time, yuk, yuk!

Hey - a place where I can unload all my 1A, 1A1 and 1A2 equipment!


Mike Morris   WA6ILQ    818-447-7052  evenings
PO Box 1130       Arcadia, CA. 91077
All opinions must be my own since nobody pays
me enough to be their mouthpiece...

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #837
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa28206;
          11 Nov 92 5:07 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA23319
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 11 Nov 1992 02:54:42 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA28508
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 11 Nov 1992 02:54:27 -0600
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 02:54:27 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #838

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 11 Nov 92 02:54:30 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 838

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    The Fax Pest (Middlesex News via Adam Gaffin)
    Re: What's a T1? (Alan L. Varney)
    Experience With AT&T Language Line (Peter G. Capek)
    Copper -> Fiber DS1 Cutover Systems (Rob McKaughan)
    Re: Advice Needed on Telephone Security Systems (Bill Petrisko)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Adam Gaffin)
Subject: The Fax Pest
Organization: Electronic Frontier Foundation
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 15:08:17 GMT


{Middlesex News}, Framingham, Mass., Nov. 10, 1992

"Moroney's World"

The faxman calls again

     Have you been faxed by the Fax Pest?

     Daniel Gregory, the nationally known fax freak of Holliston, has
struck again.

     This time, he faxed out a pre-election newsletter, "Fax-Line
News," to some 5,000 unsuspecting recipients. Some of them are quite
teed off.

     Helen Lemoine of Framingham, for example, was jolted from a deep
sleep at 3:32 a.m. on election morning.

     "When the phone rang at that time of the night, I just jumped a
mile high," she said.

     Lemoine doesn't know Gregory "from a hole in the wall." And
although he won't discuss it, Gregory apparently used a computer
dialer and mailing list to make the calls and send the faxes, pulling
off the fast-growing nuisance crime of the '90s.

     Hit-and-run junk faxing.

     You may remember this self-employed fax freak from headlines last
winter. The American Honda Motor Co. won a permanent injunction after
Gregory bombarded their fax machines with junk, including a 14-foot
fax that read "Dan Gregory is not happy with his car."

     In his election newsletter, Gregory, who is about 31 and single,
urged people to vote against state reps Barbara Gray and Barbara
Gardner and congressional candidates Ed Markey and Peter Blute.

     Guess what? All four won.

     That doesn't annoy him, Gregory said. But when I contacted him
yesterday, that did annoy him -- especially when I called him a pest.

     "I'm no more of a pest than you are dishonest," he replied
angrily.

     Then he told me I was sneaky and underhanded.

     If you want a full transcript of our conversation, you might want
to contact the Fax Pest himself. He recorded it.

     Gregory also said that if people think he's obnoxious, and if
they treated him badly solely on the grounds that he is obnoxious,
they would be trampling on his civil rights.

     "So what if I'm obnoxious? We have civil rights laws ... to
protect all kinds of behavior," he said.

     We also have a federal fax statute which goes into effect Feb.
28, but this is where it gets scary: The new law apparently doesn't
protect us against Gregory and people like him.

     According to Gregory, the law simply requires senders to provide
their telephone numbers and time and date of the fax on the cover
sheet. Also, senders may not send unsolicited advertising.

     If he repeatedly calls a certain fax number, then he can be
prosecuted under harassment laws.

     But if he just does a mass faxing, one per household, not even
the state Attorney General's office can touch him, he says.

     "I hope he (the AG) tries to torpedo me because it will show
that the people have installed a moron in that office," Gregory
boasted.

     That's the FP for you, making friends wherever he goes.

     The truth is, people are fed up with junk faxes. My newsroom gets
a forest's worth every day, with Congressman Joe Kennedy the biggest
offender. When Kennedy gets indigestion, we hear about it in a fax.

     Gregory received about ten written complaints at his post office
box, the only address on the newsletter. He characterized the nastier
respondents as hypersensitive and thin-skinned.

     A Marlboro women said, "I really think you have a helluva nerve
 ... you don't even have the testicular fortitude to put your return
fax number on the fax."

     A Norfolk engineering company sent Gregory a bill for $75 for
"inconvenience to our customers; paper and clerical charges; annoyance
factor."

     An unmarked letter returned Gregory's own newsletter with the
word "sick" circled and this note: "Yes, you are sick. Get some
help. Stop inundating people's phone lines, you nut."

     I couldn't have faxed it better myself.


Adam Gaffin     [e-mail]     Voice: [phone]
Putting the Internet on paper!


[Moderator's Note: Adam Gaffin is a staff writer for the {Middlesex
News} and he shares his gems with the Digest from time to time. Thanks
again Adam!  PAT]

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

Date: Tue, 10 Nov 92 17:44:37 CST
From: [e-mail] (Alan L Varney)
Subject: Re: What's a T1?
Organization: AT&T Network Systems, Lisle, IL


In article <[e-mail]> vixen![e-mail]
(22475-adams) writes:

> In article <[e-mail]>, John C. Fowler <fowlerc@
> magellan.colorado.edu> writes:

>> I've seen the abbreviation 'T1' or 'T-1' here in the Digest many times
>> over the past few years, but I don't think I've ever seen anyone
>> define exactly what a T1 was.

> Although many good treatments abound, allow me to offer a "Reader's
> Digest" version:

> T1 is a type of digital carrier system which was originally deployed
> in 1962 to solve a number of problems inherent in congested
> metropolitan area short haul (less than 50 mile) carrier needs.  T-1
> (Or T1 as you like) specifies a four wire circuit transmitting signals
> at 1.544 megabits/second (Mbps).  T1 carries its information in the
> format known as DS1 (Digital Signal 1).

   Hi, Jack -- Well, you beat me to it!  But I was going to offer the
"Scientific American" version ... anyway, here's some added details on
"T1".

   While 1962 was the beginnings of T1, the current almost-8-bit PCM
encoding wasn't used until the D2 system was deployed.  D1 used 7-bit
samples and simple framing patterns (alternating 0 & 1). The AT&T D4
digital channel banks were introduced in 1976.

  I've never seen exact descriptions of the "T1" vs. "DS1" terms, so
I'll mention my version of them:

   T1 refers to a (bidirectional) digital transmission FACILITY
      operating at a bit rate of 1.544 Mb/s, originally copper,
      with all the physical/electrical/maintenance interfaces.
      D4 channel banks (and digital switches, etc.) interface
      with the T1 facility, but are not part of the facility.

   DS1 refers to the digital BIT STREAM format at the 1.544 Mb/s
      rate -- in this case, 24 PCM voice channels (or data).  The
      DS1 stream "flows" through D4's and switches interconnected
      with T1 facilities.

   DS1 operates with a "sub-frame" of 193 bits, carrying 24 PCM voice
channels, arranged with a framing bit and 8 bits/channel (192 bits).
Each sub-frame takes 125 micro-seconds to transmit, yielding 8000
sub-frames/sec.  For a given channel, the net rate is 8000 x 8 bits or
64,000 bits/second of sampled voice.  The PCM samples are formed by
converting the sampled analog voltage to a binary code using
non-linear mu=255 companding, better known as "mu-law" encoding.

   In order to detect where sub-frames begin (so that channels and
8-bit PCM bits can be located), the D4 channel bank organizes the DS1
stream into "Frames" of six sub-frames each and "Superframes" of 12
frames each. (I believe the D1 system first called these "frames", and
D4 stayed with the same terminology).  Each Superframe thus contains
an "A-frame" and a "B-frame".  The lone framing bit of each sub-frame
is set to 0 or 1 in a way that allows the system to detect "loss of
synchronization" with a far-end transmitter.

   The framing bit for the first and subsequent "odd" sub-frames
alternates in a "1 0 1 0 1 0" pattern.  The framing bit for even
sub-frames follows a "0 0 1 1 1 0" pattern.  The resulting bit pattern
is {10001101110}.  When the "odd" sub-frame pattern isn't consistently
detected by the receiver, "sync" has been lost.  Sync is restored by
forcing the far end to transmit a fixed pattern in the 24 "channel"
positions and the full 12-bit framing pattern.  Once in sync, only the
"odd" sub-frame pattern is checked.

   The DS1 stream does not have "room" to carry the DC on-hook and
off-hook signals of the analog trunks it replaces, so several means
have been used to substitute for those signals.  The most common is
"robbed-bit" or "AB bit" signaling, which uses the lowest bit in each
PCM sample of the 6th and 12th frame as an "A" and "B" bit.  In many
cases, A=1 means off-hook -- B is used in schemes where FX "lines" are
provided via T1 and power ringing or such must be signalled.  (The 6th
and 12th frames are where the framing bit of the "even" sub-frames
change from "0" to "1" or "1" to "0".)

   Since the "even" sub-frame's framing bit isn't needed to maintain
sync, it can also be used as a slow-speed data link, at about 4Kb/s.
When the D4 bank is used in the SLC(tm)-96 loop carrier system, the
data-link is used for both call signaling and alarm/maintenance data.
The D4 bank can also be used in a "48-channel" mode (DS1C=3.152Mb/s),
and in a paired 96-channel arrangement (DS2=6.312Mb/s).  These can be
connected to T1C and T2 facilities, respectively.


Al Varney

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

Date: Wed, 11 Nov 92 01:56:53 EST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Experience With AT&T Language Line


I recently had occasion to use the AT&T Language Line service, and
thought readers here might be interested in hearing about it.  The
service which is offered is that of oral translation between English
and any of about 140 other languages.  It is implemented by setting up
a three-way phone call between the originator (me), an interpreter,
and the party to whom I wish to speak, but not until I have had a
chance to brief the interpreter as to the nature of the call (e.g.,
name of called party, background information, how the interpreter
should identify the caller on whose behalf he is speaking, etc.)  The
cost is $3.50/minute for the interpreter, plus the cost of the call if
the other party is outside the U.S.  I made about six calls in three
weeks and was very happy with the service, with one exception.

I was calling Czechoslovakia and requested a Czech interpreter.  Each
time I called, it took no more than a minute or so to get the
interpreter on the line with me.  The interpreter was identified to me
by number, and after about the third call, I was asked if I had a
preferred interpreter.  I did, and was able to get her if she was
available.  Getting the same interpreter has the added advantage that
it reduces the amount of briefing the caller has to give to the
interpreter, assuming he remembers the previous call(s).

The one unsatisfactory call involved an interpreter who elected to
answer the questions being asked himself, rather than translating them
for the remote party.  He did this to both ends repeatedly.  Since the
other "end" was an attorney, this was particularly inappropriate.
AT&T was happy to give credit for the call when I complained.  I
presume the offending interpreter was dropped from the roster.  On the
other hand, when the Czech-speaking party dictated a short document to
be translated, the interpreter asked me if I wished the translation
immediately or after the remote party had gotten off the phone,
thereby saving me the long distance charges which would have been
incurred if I had kept the remote party on the line while I listened
to the translation.  I was very pleased with this initiative by the
interpreter.

The interpreters are located throughout the US, although the service
is headquartered in Monterey, California.  I believe that is, not
accidentally, where the US (Navy? Army?) translator's school is
located.

I believe that some of the other international carriers offer similar
services, but I have no experience with them.


Peter G. Capek

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

From: Rob McKaughan <[e-mail]>
Subject: Copper -> Fiber DS1 Cutover Systems
Organization: Harvey Mudd College, Claremont, CA 91711
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 07:54:50 GMT


I am working on a student engineering project and would like some
information.

We are trying to design a device which cuts from a copper based DS1
(T1) system to a fiber based sytem.  (We are making the cut over on
the copper side of the fiber optic terminal).  We want to be able to
make this cutover with the system live, and do it transparently.  We
do not want to have to shut down the circuit to add and remove the
cutover device.

So far, we see that our problems are: 1) cutting over in less than the
50ms that protection switches cut over in; 2) keeping everything
terminated properly while adding and removing the box.

So, I've got some questions.  If you have any information on this
subject, I'd very much appreciate hearing about it.

1> Does anyone know of a system out there that already does this or
something very similar to it?

2> Does anyone know any good ways of cutting a DS1 line and
immediately terminating it?  I'm sure cut-and-terminate devices exist
out there.  What are some brands?

3>  Anyone know of any brands of DS1 line testers (for live circuits)?


Thanks!

Rob McKaughan                      Internet: [e-mail]
Harvey Mudd College                UUCP:     ..!uunet!jarthur!rob
Computer Science System Staff

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

Subject: Re: Advice Needed on Telephone Security Systems
From: [e-mail] (William Petrisko)
Date: 11 Nov 92 01:11:27 MST
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: University of Arizona, College of Engineering and Mines, Tucson


> Lately there's been a rash of robberies in our area where the mode of
> operation has rendered most home security systems useless.  (I don't
> have the exact number of houses hit so far, and the cops here are
> understandably close mouthed about it.)

> Most houses hit have the breakers outside the security zone. Crooks
> snip the phone lines and cut the power off. If someone's home, the
> owner goes out to turn the power on and the alarm off. (S)he then
> walks back in with the crooks. If they are not home for (say for the
> weekend) crooks come back after 24 hour when the battery back up is
> drained for the siren. The alarm monitoring company is NOT notified
> since the phones are dead and that's the only lifeline back.

Padlock on the breaker box?

> My house was hit day before yesterday but we stayed indoors and used a
> mobile phone (luckily!! inside the house!) to call the sheriff.  No
> theft, but scared us witless when the both our regular POTS phones
> were dead. Also, we found on later examination that our cable TV coax
> was cut. (Why cable???)

> This brings me to the questions:

> a) Is there a secondary way of notifying a monitoring station that AC
> power is out AND that the phones are no longer functoning? Is it done
> on cable TV? or is there a wireless (radio/CB/cellular) transmitter
> for those people who do not have mobile phones?

There are several devices available.  I'm not sure where you are
located, but most major cities now have several radio-type devices
available for installation.  Also, there is a cellular interface that
automatically backs up your alarm -and- your house line in the event
of a line-cut.  The only part that might scare you is the price.
DEALER pricing on the radio equipment is several hundred dollars (plus
whatever the monitoring station wants to rape you every month), the
cellular box is $700 COST for dealers.  Plus a monthly with the
cellular carrier ...

> b) Any recommendations on such devices out there?

It's been awhile since I've been in the security business, if you
really want to know, mail me back and I'll dig up some copies of
industry magazines and get back to you.

> c) Why were cable connections cut? Do some monitoring stations use
> cable coax for communications back to the head node for purposes other
> than cable TV channel $$$ monitoring?

Yep.  While in Tucson, I saw remnants of an alarm-cabletv interface.
Apparently, the cable co. was in the alarm business a few years back.
Nice idea, having a dedicated-line installed in the house already,
guess they couldn't handle it though.

> d) How can I hide the phone connections at my house or make the
> snipping a less than trivial process?

Rebuild the house and don't leave anything outside? ;) Or build some
sort of lockable "cage" around the telco protector, adhere it to the
wall with non-reversible screws.

> I would appreciate any advice.

Honestly, a cheap answer to your problem would be a small board (the
manufacturer name escapes me) that monitors the phone line voltage,
and connect it to the alarm so it trips the siren. It might trick the
theives into thinking that *someone* was notified ... besides, it
doesn't sound like these theives would stick around after cutting
wires and tripping the siren.  Another backup-battery in parallel (or
just a bigger aH in it's place) might make you feel more secure too.

The BEST solution would be the cellular backup AND the line-monitoring
board.  The cell-phone would back it up, and the line-monitor would
trip a zone (silent OR audible) that could notify the alco it was
running on the backup line.  The only drawback would be cost.

If you don't mind me asking, that kind of alarm are you using and who
monitors it?

Also (being in the business brings this part out), having an alarm is
no reason to shortchange the rest of your home's security (deadbolts,
solid doors, good locks on windows, lighting, etc.)

Hope it helps.


bill petrisko                    [e-mail]
   aka n7lwo   ...!uunet!4gen!warlok!gargle!omnisec!thumper!bill

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #838
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa28310;
          11 Nov 92 5:12 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA20022
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 11 Nov 1992 03:11:26 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA06723
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 11 Nov 1992 03:11:08 -0600
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 03:11:08 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #839

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 11 Nov 92 03:11:00 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 839

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Telco Handling Of Cable Cut ([e-mail])
    Re: Telco Handling Of Cable Cut (David G. Lewis)
    Re: Telco Handling Of Cable Cut (John McHarry)
    Re: Fax Back From DTMF - Summary (Ted Shapin)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Telco Handling Of Cable Cut
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 92 15:12:13 CST


>> On the other hand, if the trunks are connected to some kind of
                      ^^
>> multiplexor/ DACS, it may handle the rerouting without knowledge of
>> the switch.           ^^^

> Not true.  As soon as the circuit (circuit switched voice call) is
> lost, supervision on the circuit indicates it has gone idle.  I know
> of no switching system (I could be wrong here) that will automatically
> reconnect the ends of a failed circuit switched call.  Furthermore, I
> have not experienced voice trunks that are switched through a DCS
> (Digital Cross Connect System) after the End, Tandem, or Access Tandem
> machine finishes switching them.  There are multiple ways of routing
> (Hierarchical, Dynamic Non-Hierarchical-DNHR, and Real Time
> Non-Hierarchical-RTNR), but all of these are accomplished through
> routing tables contained in the switches themselves.

> Jack (John) Adams    Bellcore NVC 2Z-220
> [e-mail]    [e-mail]

First, let me clarify exactly what I meant.  The point I was making is
that a switch need not know that anything has happened.  As an
example, lets assume there is a T1 line connecting Switch A and Switch
B (which could be any type of switches -- Local CO, Access Tandems,
etc).  The switch does not know or care how the T1 gets from Switch A
to Switch B.  As long as everything that switch A spits out on the T1
gets to switch B, they are happy.  If the T1 connecting them goes
through equipment that is able to very rapidly reroute the T1 around a
failure, then the T1 path between the switches will never actually
fail, the switch will not know what happened, and the call will stay
up.

Equipment to do this DOES exist.  I work for a railroad, in the
telecommunications department (although not the switched network
group), and we have equipment (I can't remember the name - I'll refer
to it as a DACS, although that is not really an accurate name) that
does this.  Basically, a network of DACS is created, with the nodes
connected by T1s.  Ports are then added to the various nodes (Ports
can be voice, data, T1s, etc).  You then instruct the system to
connect any port to any other port, and it finds available bandwidth
in the network and routes the circuit.  Should any Network T1 fail,
the connections that were routed over that T1 are dynamically, and in
real-time, re-routed.  Therefore, if we want a T1 trunk group to
connect switch A to switch B, we connect the T1 output of switch A to
a DACS port, the output of switch B to a DACS port, and instruct the
DACS to connect the ports.  Bingo -- a T1 trunk group that will stay
alive even if the actual transmission medium connecting them fails
(because the DACS will reroute it around the failure without the
switch noticing).  Of course, if there were an active call on the
trunk, you would hear silence while the reroute was taking place (so
modem calls might be dropped), but the call would stay up (assuming
that the DACS was able to reroute the connection, which assumes that
sufficient backup bandwidth is available).  Note that a connection
between a port on Node A and a port on node B need not necessarily be
routed over a T1 from Node A to Node B -- it may go via one or more
intermediate nodes on its way.

Notice here that the DACS is doing no circuit switching.  It is simply
maintaining a path between the switches (regardless of whether or not
the switch is using the data path).  (Actually, I have greatly
understated the capabilities of this "DACS", and it does do some
things such as not wasting bandwidth with Voice T1 channels that are
idle, etc, but the general idea is there).  NOTE: DACS is not an
accurate term here, but its the best one that I can come up with.

I an fairly certain that supervision on the trunk will not be lost
during the interval that the trunk is being rerouted.  If it was,
then, of course, the call would be dropped, but there are easy ways
around that.  (This post is long enough without the details).

Do any telephone companies actually use this for voice circuits?  I
don't know, but my point was that it could be done if they wanted to.


Brett   ([e-mail])

(As usual, I speak neither for the university via which I access Usenet
nor for my employer.)




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

From: [e-mail] (david.g.lewis)
Subject: Re: Telco Handling Of Cable Cut
Organization: AT&T
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 22:35:53 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> vixen![e-mail]
(22475-adams) writes:

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

>>> A recent Bell Canada TV commercial shows a raccoom chewing ...

>> ... In
>> general, the switches will not dynamically reroute a call should a
>> trunk fail.  That is, if a switch has multiple paths available, and
>> one fails, your call will be lost, but the next call will be routed
>> over a path that is still functioning.

>> On the other hand, if the trunks are connected to some kind of
>> multiplexor/ DACS, it may handle the rerouting without knowledge of
>> the switch.

> Not true.  As soon as the circuit (circuit switched voice call) is
> lost, supervision on the circuit indicates it has gone idle.  I know
> of no switching system (I could be wrong here) that will automatically
> reconnect the ends of a failed circuit switched call.  Furthermore, I
> have not experienced voice trunks that are switched through a DCS
> (Digital Cross Connect System) after the End, Tandem, or Access Tandem
> machine finishes switching them.  There are multiple ways of routing
> (Hierarchical, Dynamic Non-Hierarchical-DNHR, and Real Time
> Non-Hierarchical-RTNR), but all of these are accomplished through
> routing tables contained in the switches themselves.

Stepping back a pace: the original post referred to a physical cable
failure (namely, a racoon chewing through a cable).  If this physical
cable is carrying facilities which are 1+1 or 1:N protected by the
multiplexers, transmission systems (e.g. fiber optic terminals), or
wideband/broadband DCSs, and the protection switch occurs in less than
three seconds, the facilities will switch to the protection system
before Carrier Group Alarm (CGA) occurs.  From the point of view of
the switch, the "circuit" is never "lost", and the calls are not
cleared.

I don't know exactly what you mean by switching "after" the switch
"finishes switching" trunks, but it is certainly possible to have
interswitch trunks riding on top of protected facilities.  Whether or
not it's economically justified for voice traffic is a different
question.

AT&T uses FASTAR (Fast Automatic Restoration), which uses DCSs to
control rerouting of facilities; it's not fast enough to avoid CGA,
but does succeed in rerouting 100s of DS3s in minutes, which is pretty
good.  (And I know that's not proprietary cause I saw Frank Ianna
talking about it on TV...) (I wonder if a future version of FASTAR
which is fast enough to avoid CGA will be called FASTERAR?)

When I worked at Teleport, we used 1+1 protection with diverse
facilities (route diversity in the majority of cases; conduit
diversity where only one route was feasible, and sheath diversity
where there was only a single conduit, usually only at building
entrances).  Any facility failures would cause a roll to the
protection fibers in one second or less, which would be detectable as
a hit on a data line, possibly detectable as a brief dropout on a
voice line, and wouldn't cause any switches to go into CGA.  Any
equipment rolls we did had the procedures very carefully designed to
meet the "three second test" -- you don't cause any hits lasting more
than three seconds.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (John McHarry)
Subject: Re: Telco Handling Of Cable Cut
Organization: The MITRE Corporation
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 13:04:50 GMT


In <[e-mail]> vixen![e-mail]
(22475-adams) writes:

>> On the other hand, if the trunks are connected to some kind of
>                     ^^
>> multiplexor/ DACS, it may handle the rerouting without knowledge of
>> the switch.           ^^^

Some trunking systems implement "protection switching."  There is an
extra path in parallel with one or more of those actually in use that
can be quickly switched in before calls are dropped.  Most subscriber
carrier systems have this option, including DMS-1U, DMS-1, and even
the SLC-96.  It was very common in microwave trunking systems to
reroute around squalls--remember the connections that got noisier and
noisier, then, clunk!, a clear connection?


John ([e-mail])

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

Date: 10 Nov 1992 11:00:44 -0800 (PST)
From: Ted Shapin <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Fax Back From DTMF - Summary


Here is a summary of what I found from my inquiry on a fax back system
that will use audio response and DTMF tones to select a stored fax
document that will then be transmitted to the caller's fax machine.
This is called "fax on demand".

Systems can be either "one call" or "call back." With one call you
dial from your fax machine and everything is completed in one call.
With call back you call from any phone and give the phone number of
your fax machine which will then be called back.  The latter method is
covered by a Brooktrout patent. Some systems will let you leave a
voice mail message after you have made your selections.  Some systems
are expandable to hundreds of phone lines.  Some systems allow private
fax mailboxes so users can dial in and receive any faxes that have
been sent to them and stored in their fax mailbox.

Mike Bray says: "Here's something to consider (or not) ...

> All the ones I've tried will NOT work with an older group-II
> FAX machine. Yes, group-II machines are slow and lame, but
> that's no excuse for these services not working with them.

> So... if you have a choice, I'd avoid the ones that don't
> support group-II (and be sure to tell them why)."

Here are the companies I found together with demonstration numbers so
you can try them yourself.

Mfr: AudioFAX, 2000 Powers Ferry Rd., Marietta, GA 30067
Voice: 404-933-7600 or 800-283-4632
FAX: [phone]
Description: Series 100 -- 2 to 8 ports, Series 300 -- 24 ports,
    Series 300I rack nounted. Fax on demand, fax store and
    forward, fax mail.
Demo number: 404-618-4555

Mfr: Brooktrout Technology, 144 Gould St., Needham, MA  02192
Voice: 617-449-4100
FAX: [phone]
Description: Product is the FlashFAX automated document delivery
    system. A small two voice two line system sells for $10,000
    and is built into a small PC compatible. Hardware and
    software for larger systems and other operating systems
    including Unix, OS/2 and QNX is available. Software
    toolkit for custom applications. Company supplies OEM
    systems. This company owns U.S. patent 4,918,722. See the
    discussion at the end regarding this.

Mfr: The Complete PC, 1983 Concourse Dr., San Jose, CA 95131
Voice: 408-434-0145 or 800-229-1753
FAX: [phone].  BBS: 408-434-9703
Description: The Complete Communicator is an add-in board for
    an IBM compatible PC. Their demo system is for retrieving
    application notes and must be called from your fax
    machine. I thought this was the poorest system that I
    tried.  I heard bursts of modem noise and CNG tones mixed
    in with the voice response.
Demo number: 408-434-9749

Mfr: FaxBack, Inc., 15250 N.W. Greenbrier Pkwy., Beaverton, OR
    97006-5674
Voice: 800-873-8753 or 503-690-6360
FAX: [phone]
Decription: A FaxBack IV system hardware and software which
    goes into your own PC and supports two incoming voice lines
    and two fax lines costs $8400.  A multi-language support
    option which will support up to ten languages is $1500.
    Intel fax boards and Dialogic voice boards are used.
    A rack model handles 24 incoming voice and 24 outgoing
    fax lines simlutaneously. An Intel spin-off.
Demo number: 800-329-2225

Mfr: Ibex Technolgies, Inc., 550 Main St.,
Placerville, CA 95667
Voice: 916-621-4342
FAX: [phone]
Description: Uses GammaLink fax boards and Dialogic voice
    boards. The boards and software are used with your own
    386 PC. A kit for two incoming voice lines and one
    outgoing fax line is $5600. Multi-language support
    option. Allows call transfer to a voice system. Each
    incoming line may start a specific application.
    An interactive forms option allows a user to mark on a
    form and fax it. The system does both mark sensing and
    OCR which can do whatever custom software wants to do
    with the data.
Demo number: 800-289-9998

Mfr: SpectraFAX Corp., 209 S. Airport Rd., Naples, FL.
Voice: 813-643-5060
FAX: [phone]
Description: Product name is Special Request. Private and
    public fax mailboxes. Fax forwarding. Can connect to data
    on host main frames and LANS. Will work with phone systems
    such as Rolm. Used by Hewlett Packard. Uses Intel
    connection coprocessor boards. About $5000 per line.
Demo number: 800-289-1329 or 813-643-8720.

Mfr: Technology Partners AB, Bjornnasvagen 12, S-113 47 Stockholm
     Sweden
Voice: [phone]  Fax:  [phone]
Description: - Uses GammaLink Faxboards and NMS voice boards. Up
     to 16 lines in a chassis. Based on a Basic like script
     language, which makes it easy to change the voice response
     tree. For info, send postal address to Lennart Regebro
     <[e-mail]>

Mfr: Telephone Response Technolgies
Voice: 916-784-7777
Description: ProVIDE is an integrated package of application
    development tools for producing sophisticated multi-line
    interactive voice response systems.  Used and sold by
    Programmer's Connection.  Uses Intel SatisFAXtion board
    and Dialogic speech card. Two-line system about $1600.
Demo number: 216-494-7727 (Programmer's Connection) Ask for
    documents 5283, 5284.

Mfr: Unknown. Distributed by Hello Direct, 5884 Eden Park Pl.,
    San Jose, CA  95138
Voice: 800-444-3556 or 408-972-1990.
Description: Robofax $1000.  Software and two hardware boards
    for use with a dedicated IBM compatible PC. Single line
    only.

Mfr: PaperWorks Supplies, P.O. Box 5014, Fremont, CA 94537-9979.
    (A subsidiary of Xerox.)
Voice: 800-962-5343 or 510-651-7199
Description: This is a completely different catagory of product.
    Voice response and DTMF is not used.  Instead, documents are
    requested by marking boxes on a form which is faxed to the
    host PC.  That PC then faxes the requested documents. The
    initial form can be received on a fax machine by sending
    just a blank piece of paper. Introductory price of $250
    includes a Complete PC fax card and software. Works with
    a single phone line.

Mfr: Rhetorex, CA
Voice: 408-370-0881
Description: Manufacturer of voice boards.  Their VARS
    usually use their voice boards together with Intel fax
    boards to supply fax on demand systems.

Here are quotes from the discussion of U.S. patent 4,918,722 in the
comp.patents newsgroup:

Abstract:

Delivery of binary encoded character data and facsimile encoded data
to a specified recipient is controlled rapidly, simply and with
versatility, by, e.g., DTMF commands sent by a user.

"It looks from the text as if they want to patent any remote retrieval
of faxes which can definitely hurt anyone doing software for FaxBack
type services or business people trying to retrieve faxes while on the
road etc.

This patent is being fought by a group called the 'Fax Response
Industry Asoociation (FRIA)'

Dialogic Corp in Parsippany NJ
GammaLink Inc
Ibex Technologies Inc.
AudioFax
FaxBack Inc.

Michael A. Shiels                     [e-mail]
MaS Network Software and Consulting   [e-mail] "


"Not quite.  Only remote retrieval which is directed at a third phone
number.  Retrievals done within a single phone call are not covered,
and were patented in non-US countries earlier than 1988...

/* [e-mail] */
Organization: S.P. Dyer Computer Consulting, Cambridge MA"

                       === end ===


Ted Shapin                 Internet:  [e-mail]
Beckman Instruments, Inc.     Phone:     [phone]
2500 Harbor, M/S X-11           FAX:     [phone]
Fullerton, CA  92634-3100

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #839
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa15189;
          12 Nov 92 4:50 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA18130
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 12 Nov 1992 02:12:22 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA26765
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 12 Nov 1992 02:12:02 -0600
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 02:12:02 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #840

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 12 Nov 92 02:12:00 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 840

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Cordless Phone Experiences (Russell Kroll)
    Motorola Alphanumeric Pagers? Any Info? (Paul A. St.Amand)
    Cellular Snooping and Privacy Issues (Richard McCombs)
    South African Telecom (Mark Wuest)
    Conclusion (Hopefully) of Harassment Case (Luigi Semenzato)
    World News by Email Wanted (Alfredo Cotroneo)
    Caller ID and the #5 ESS (Phil Benchoff)
    What Shows up on OSPS Screen? (Bill Berbenich)
    Stupid Phone Systems Blocking N[01]X Prefixes (Jim Rees)
    Voice Line Signalling Jargon (Stephen Davies)
    Citifone a Flop in New Jersey (Alan Boritz)
    Confusion in Terms: It Was MTS/IMTS, Not AMPS (Alan Boritz)
    Two Cellular Phones on the Same Number (Alan Boritz)
    Help Wanted With Keyline System (Jack Stephens)
    Seek Modem Information -- Codex 5208-R (Fred E.J. Linton)
    Request: Large Format FAX (Richard B. August)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Cordless Phone Experiences
From: [e-mail] (Russell Kroll)
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 92 22:56:49 GMT
Organization: Unka Phaed's UUCP Thingy, Houston, TX


The cordless phone I have here is an AT&T 5500 and you can do some
quite interesting things.  It will function as a cordless ten channel
scanner if you press the right buttons fast. Basically, you hit
INTERCM on the remote while hitting OFF at the base at the same time.
If you succeed, the INTERCM light will stay on at the remote and it
will go off at the base.

Now, walk around your house and hit CHAN until you hear something.  I
can pick up my neighbors and all kinds of stuff. It's fun hearing
someone talk and calling their number from another (wired) phone in
the house and hearing the call-waiting go <click>.

The best part about this kind of scanning is that you don't need any
special equipment and your phone will return to normal the next time
you use it after hitting (OFF).


[e-mail] (Russell Kroll)
Unka Phaed's UUCP Thingy, Houston, TX, [phone]
1200/2400/9600/14400 v.32bis/v.42bis

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Motorola Alphanumeric Pagers? Any Info
Organization: Yale University, Department of Computer Science, New Haven, CT
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 03:01:23 GMT


Hello Net,

I'm looking for information on a Motorola Advantage Alphanmumeric
pager.  I've search the newsgroup is this seems to be just about the
closest match to post a message to.

I'd like some technical specs on sending formatted data to one of
these pagers and take advantage (no pun) of any advanced feature that
the pager has.  Does any one now if tech specs exists and can mere
mortals get a hold of them.


Thanks,

Paul R. St. Amand                    | DECNET(ctstateu) CCSU::STAMANDP
Central Connecticut State University | Internet [e-mail]
ITT Hartford, Finance                | BITNET   [e-mail]
DECUS CVLUG                          | (203) 547 - 4030 (Business)

 Disclaimer: These comments are mine and do not reflect the administration
           or policies of Connecticut State University or ITT Hartford.

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

Subject: Cellular Snooping and Privacy Issues
From: [e-mail] (Richard McCombs KB5SNF)
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 92 20:22:25 CST
Organization: The Red Headed League; Lawton, Ok


[e-mail] (Monty Solomon) writes:

> After discussing privacy laws, legalities, and realities, Flinn notes
> that at Scanners Unlimited in San Carlos, CA, "about a quarter of the
> customers are interested in telephone eavesdropping."

I wonder if sales have increased since it will soon be illegal to sell
receivers that still include cellular (such as the Icom R100), also I
wonder if the new scanners will no longer be easily modifiable to
receive cellular?


Internet: [e-mail],      [e-mail]
UUCP: ...!rwsys!ricksys!rick,   {backbones}!ricksys.lonestar.org!rick
BITNET: bo836%cleveland.freenet.edu@cunyvm  Fidonet: Richard McCombs @ 1:385/6

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: South African Telecom
Organization: AT&T
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 17:53:00 GMT


I have a friend who is trying to economically exchange e-mail with
someone in Johannesburg, South Africa.  He personally uses Compuserve
(they have internet access).  For some reason, Compuserve in South
Africa is quite expensive.  MCI Mail can't give a straight answer on
how his friend would connect.  His friend is pretty net-illiterate.
Can people in South Africa e-mail me any ideas?  I'll post a summary
and let the Moderator decide if it's interesting enough to use up

bandwidth.  ;-)


Mark Wuest      *MY* opinions, not AT&T's!!
[e-mail]   [e-mail] (NeXT Mail)


[Moderator's Note: In this same issue, I've included some comments by
Stephen Davies of Capetown on a different topic. Perhaps if he sees
this he will correspond with you; or you could contact him. He
describes himself as a 'computer-nerd'; might be just your man!  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Luigi Semenzato)
Subject: Conclusion (Hopefully) of Harassment Case
Date: 11 Nov 1992 01:47:10 GMT
Organization: University of California, Berkeley


The phone harassment case came to a swift and fairly peaceful
conclusion over the week-end.  For now at least.

It turns out that my friend George had been misinformed: with
selective call forwarding, he has no way to specify `forward all calls
from the number that just called to xxx-xxxx'.  He would always have
to know the caller's number.  This is how it works in this area.

However, he had a suspicion about the identity of the harasser, and
selectively forwarded THAT number to ITSELF.  So whenever that person
called she would get a busy line.  Moreover, when selective forwarding
is enabled, every forwarded call produces a single short ring at the
dialed phone.  George was then able to verify that a number of calls
at the usual TV-commercial intervals were in fact being forwarded.
After he was sure, he turned the forwarding off.

Next day he called her and told her he had a log of the calls, showing
they were all from her number.  I don't know the exact details of the
conversation, but she kept denying.  Apparently she has stopped
calling.


Luigi

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

From: [e-mail] (Alfredo Cotroneo)
Subject: World News by Email Wanted
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 92 10:30:39 MET


I am posting this request on behalf of a radio station in Russia. They
would be interested in receiving world news summaries on a daily or
hourly basis via e-mail. Since their budget is quite small, they would
be interested to know if there is such service available thru
USENET/Internet for free, or some organization does make this
available at cost.

I have checked other LISTS on Internet, but nothing regarding World
News was found. Thank you.

Please reply directly to:

Alfredo E. Cotroneo, NEXUS-IBA, PO BOX 10980, I-20110 Milano, Italy.
fax: [phone] / phone [phone] or [phone]
email: [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Phil Benchoff)
Subject: Caller ID and the #5 ESS
Date: 11 Nov 92 20:23:07 GMT


The local phone company (C&P) is about to cut over to a #5 ESS.  They
will be offering Caller ID as a service.  I called the business office
today and asked about blocking caller id.  Their answer was that there
was no way to do that, even if you have an unlisted number.

Does anyone know just what the capabilities of the #5 ESS are as far
as Caller-ID goes?  Is this something that is not available in the
software, or just something they won't do?


[Moderator's Note: It is just something they won't do; either that or
they will do it and you got an ignorant representative.   PAT]

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

Subject: What Shows up on OSPS Screen?
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 12:43:14 +0000 (GMT)
From: Bill Berbenich <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]


An article in a recent TELECOM Digest about Call Manager got me to
thinking.  Just what exactly shows up on the OSPS (operator) console
screen when I dial 00 for the AT&T operator?

I know that they at least have MY number if it's POTS and I know that
they have the number that I have dialed if I 0+ it.

So what else?


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Jim Rees)
Subject: Stupid Phone Systems Blocking N[01]X Prefixes
Date: 11 Nov 1992 18:11:19 GMT
Organization: University of Michigan CITI
Reply-To: [e-mail]


You would think that cellular providers would be sensitive to the
problem of dialing numbers with a 0 or 1 as the second digit, since
many cellular prefixes are of this type.  But our latest cell phone
number is in the 600 prefix, and we've found that we can't roam
anywhere, even where our provider has a mutual roaming agreement with
the remote provider.  The reason?  It seems that most cellular
providers can't deal with the 600 prefix.

I really like Pat's solution to this problem (make the party with the
problem call you at your "problem" prefix) but don't think I can
implement it in this situation.


[Moderator's Note: When you say they 'cannot deal with the 600 prefix'
do you mean other carriers refuse to accept it as a valid phone number
for purposes of billing roamers, or do you mean they refuse/cannot
accept it for the purpose of incoming calls passed along through the
local xxx-ROAM number?  I'd say the best recourse here is to simply
refuse to pay any roaming charges under the circumstances. That is, if
you get assessed a charge for roaming when you turn your phone on in
their territory yet they won't accept outgoing and/or imcoming calls,
then when roaming charges show up on your cellular bill just deduct
them and add a note saying 'roaming service unavailable in (place),
obviously the bill is in error.'  Let the cell carriers squabble among
themselves over accepting (or not) the chargeback.  PAT]

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

Subject: Voice Line Signalling Jargon
From: [e-mail]
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 92 13:55:41 SAT
Organization: Compustat (Pty) Ltd


Hi Pat and esteemed TELECOM Digest readers,

Our company is about to install a networking device known as the Micom
NetRunner.  This box, amongst other things, is able to carry voice
traffic.

I am a computer-nerd and am ignorant about telecom.  Similarly, our
PABX supplier (Telkom SA) is/are telecom-nerds (do you get them?) and
don't know too much about computers.

So we have an understanding gap.  The Telkom guys are used to
installing PABX tie-lines using two-wire analogue leased lines between
the two premises.  My NetRunner voice-cards support the following
"interfaces":

  E&M (two or four wire)
  KTS
  OPX

Would anyone care to define these for me?

As I understand things, the NetRunner provides a full-duplex anologue
link -- presumably these acronyms are something to do with signalling
so that the NetRunner knows that the PABX wants a connection to the
remote PABX, and so that the remote NetRunner can alert the remote
PABX to the incoming connection (c.f. going off-hook and ringing).

Anyhow, I guess I want to know which of these options is most like
"copper" ...


Thanks for your time,

Stephen Davies, Compustat (Pty) Ltd, Cape Town
[e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: Purely by coincidence Stephen's mail arrived about
the same time as the question from Mark Wuest earlier in this same
issue. Perhaps, Stephen, you could answer Mark's question about email
in and out of South Africa.   PAT]

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

Date: 11 Nov 92 07:15:39 EST
From: Alan Boritz <[e-mail]>
Subject: Citifone a Flop in New Jersey


The largest bank in the US doesn't seem to want to keep it's New
Jersey customers.  Citifone, a service of Citibank, N.A., has a 201
area (New Jersey) access number in Rockaway, New Jersey.  Rockaway is
a premium toll call from most of Northeast New Jersey, and is more
expensive than calling their New York City access number (you can make
international calls for less than what it costs from southern New
Jersey).  They have an 800 access number, but it won't work anywhere
in the tri-state area (New York, New Jersey, and Connecticut).  I
honestly don't understand how Citibank executives can dress and feed
themselves without assistance after seeing this nonsense firsthand.
Are there any similarly large banking organizations doing anything
creative and efficient with customer services without similarly making
their customers pay through the nose for their stupid mistakes?


Alan Boritz    [e-mail]

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

Date: 11 Nov 92 07:15:24 EST
From: Alan Boritz <[e-mail]>
Subject: Confusion in Terms: It Was MTS/IMTS, Not AMPS


TELECOM Moderator notes:

> [Moderator's Note: I am reminded of how children forty years ago liked
> to listen to the VHF radio and spy on the mobile phones of that era. I
> think the service was called AMPS.

Ack!  Shame on you, Pat!  AMPS was the grandfather (or second uncle
twice removed ;) of what we know today as CELLULAR service.  One
former boss (who's most striking thoughts about working with Alexander
Graham Bell's original notes were that his handwriting was so graceful
(no kidding!)) worked on the original AMPS project when he was a
scientist at Bell Labs.  The contemporary "mobile phone" service forty
years ago would have been MTS (which was followed by IMTS and
eventually Cellular some years later).

BTW, the "children 'spying' on mobile phone conversations" scenario
was used very similarly in a paper used to justify mobile telephone
subscriber equipment purchases for (former) New York City Mayor Koch,
as well as his commissioners (and cook).  In retrospect, it sort of
reflected characteristic poorly set priorities.  Municipal executives
worried about a child's pastime, while they let vital communications
resources (office telephone and two-way radio systems) deteriorate.
But that's a topic for another time ... ;)


Alan Boritz    [e-mail]

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

Date: 11 Nov 92 07:15:55 EST
From: Alan Boritz <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Two Cellular Phones on the Same Number


[e-mail] (T. Govindaraj) writes:

> Having two phones on the same number is attractive to me since my wife
> and I can use the same phone, since we use it primarily for occasional
> calls...Is anybody using this option?

> [Moderator's Note: Uh, not to disappoint you, but have you cleared
> this with the cellular company?  Most do NOT allow two or more phones
> to share the same number because the ESN is different in each phone
> and ESN validation is what cellular billing integrity is all about.

Change "most" to ALL.  There should be NO US cellular carriers that
will permit more than one ESN to operate on any particular phone
number.  Failure to validate the ESN is a serious violation of FCC
rules (EIA standards incorporated into the CFR).

But Pat, why are you applying analog logic to a digital problem? ;)
Don't forget that a digital switch runs the cellular exchange.
Generic switch features can be used to similate two phones bridged on
a single line.


Alan Boritz    [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: You are correct that generic switch features can be
used for this simulation, however my point was that *provided there
has been no tapering with the wire pair between subscriber and CO*, the
pair identifies the subscriber regardless of what the subscriber may
say to the operator or what tricks he might play on a long distance
company, etc.  As an absolute recourse against billing fraud and
other forms of tomfoolery, once a call has been traced at the CO to
your wire pair, it has been traced to you (as the person responsible
for the use of your instruments, etc). You can lie about your phone
number, you can put improper tones on the line, etc, but the wire pair
serves as the absolute identity of who you are, playig the same role
as the <E>lectronic <S>erial <N>umber does in cellular.   PAT]

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

From: infmx![e-mail] (Jack Stephens)
Subject: Help With Keyline System
Organization: Informix Software, Inc.
Date: 11 Nov 92 19:37:32 GMT


I'm about to move into a house that is currently outfitted with an
older phone system ("key line", I think). It uses older phones and
five lighted push buttons connecting to some sort of central trunk.

Obviously, my knowledge and information is sketchy. Before I pay
PacBell's usurious rates for inside wiring work, I'm trying to gauge
how much work it would be to do my own wiring.  I've done a fair
abount of work on phones in other apartments, but they have all been
of the "modularjack to twisted pair" variety.

Any and all help would be much appreciaited.


Thanks!

Jack Stephens       [e-mail]   Informix Software

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

Date: 12-NOV-1992 19:46:27.62
From: Fred E.J. Linton <[e-mail]>
Subject: Seek Modem Information -- Codex 5208-R


I've recently acquired a Codex (Motorola) 5208-R modem, vintage 1984,
without any accompanying manuals/spec-sheets/etc.

Perhaps some kind TELECOM reader can share with me what I need to know
to put this modem to good use -- or at least point me to information
sources.

Many thanks in advance.  E-mail replies preferred (spare the
Moderator).


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)

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

Date: Wed, 12 Nov 1992 13:37:21 PST
From: [e-mail] (Richard B. August)
Subject: Request: Large Format FAX


We have the need for a large format FAX capability.  By "large format"
we mean C/D size drawings (C=18x24, D= 24x36).  Any assistance is
greatly appreciated.

Thanks in advance.


Richard B. August     [e-mail]  [e-mail]
[phone]  FAX [phone]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #840
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa00333;
          13 Nov 92 3:36 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA26782
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 13 Nov 1992 00:03:33 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA27800
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 13 Nov 1992 00:03:08 -0600
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 00:03:08 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #841

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 13 Nov 92 00:03:00 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 841

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Review of Ameritech Personal Communication Service (Andrew C. Green)
    New SPARCstation LX Has Built-in ISDN From AT&T (Monty Solomon)
    RBOC Exit From CPE Market? (Joe Bergstein)
    No Caller-ID in Texas (George Rapp)
    "New" Centrex Features (Phydeaux)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 10:57:51 CST
From: Andrew C. Green <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Review of Ameritech Personal Communication Service


You may recall that several months ago, I reported my being signed up
for a long-term test of Ameritech's Personal Communication Services.
This is essentially a cellular-phone type of network, but uses
digital-transmission radio frequencies between the user's portable
phone and local transceivers.  The idea is to develop a very small
cell network (i.e. approximately 1/4 mile per cell) using 10mw digital
transceivers for handsets. Ameritech has wired up sections of downtown
Chicago, the Lincoln Park residential area to the north, and downtown
Arlington Heights in the northwest suburbs. For the record, I'm using
"cellular" as a shorthand description, though Ameritech itself does
not describe the PCS as such.

At the end of September I finally received a call from Ameritech: they
had received their latest batch of prototype phones, and was I still
interested in joining the test? I said I was.  :-) A huge box soon
arrived, containing the following items:

1) The PCS phone itself, a flip-style pocket phone. It's 6 1/2" long,
2 1/4" wide and 1 1/4" thick, with a single-segment 4" flexible whip
antenna. The literature claims a weight of 6.6 ounces, though with the
3.6-volt battery installed (roughly the size of two AA batteries), it
weighs in by my measurements at a porky 7.3 ounces. ;-)

2) A small charging stand for the phone powered by a brick transformer.
It includes a recessed port for simultaneous charging of the spare
battery (included).

3) A "base station", 9"W by 6 1/2"D by 3"H, which connects to your
home phone line and allows the PCS to function at home as a cordless
phone.  The base station itself also functions as a very nice
speakerphone and signalling intercom to the PCS. It's powered by yet
another brick transformer and six AA backup batteries.

4) A quantity of instructional documents, including a slick glossy
manual for the PCS, an instructional videotape and a map showing the
service areas for making calls in downtown Chicago, Lincoln Park and
Arlington Heights.  Ameritech told me today that they are currently
expanding the service area with additional transceivers, though the
new boundaries are unclear.

A number of immediate observations here:

1) The phone and base station both arrived in retail-quality packaging
bearing a "SilverLink" logo, and the base station's packing list
mentions an instruction manual that was not found. Apparently they are
existing products that have been modified for the PCS test. Ameritech
did tell me that the phone was a current model that had been modified
with a pager unit. I noticed it also didn't match the unit shown in
the videotape, which they said was a non-pager prototype.

2) The host of the instructional video should be beaten with sticks.
My wife and I had to really grit our teeth through a variety of awful
Star Trek "Beam-me-up-Scotty" jokes and insulting European accents in
a segment about international calls before we were done. Anyone who
gave up on the videotape halfway through would miss some information
at the end.

3) It would be nice if the production-model PCS base station had the
phone charging stand built in. This would save quite a bit of space
and spaghetti wiring.

The phone itself: It operates in two modes: Public (i.e. a cellular
phone) and Private (a cordless extension phone). It has a small LCD
display and 18 backlit soft-touch buttons covered by the flip-type
microphone cover. A rubber-like molding around the perimeter contains
Mute/Backlighting and Volume Step-Up/Step-Down buttons. The molding
itself is a weird aqua blue color that gives a sort of toy-like look
to it ("Hot new PCS colors for Fall: Strawberry and Wild Peach!!!").
Setup options include Pager On/Off and Phone On/Off, the latter for
keeping the phone on when the cover is closed, required for ringing
the phone from the base station in Private mode. It can store up to 30
frequently-called numbers and five received pages; the numbers are
scrolled on its screen and can be dialed automatically off the
display.  As a side-note, the phone makes a variety of cheerful
warbling tones to confirm commands; this apparently is the source of
the stupid Star Trek communicator jokes on the videotape.

Making a call is more conventional than cellular. You open the phone
and press a green button to get a line. The phone apparently "pings"
the nearest transceiver (or base station) to get an open line, and
once a handshake is established, you get a dial tone. At this point
you dial your phone number. I found this tricky; the PCS tries to
buffer the digits as you dial, but often tends to drop digits or fire
off truncated DTMF tones that are too short to register. Dialing
slowly is recommended, though its redial feature can rattle off the
tones with no problem.

Incoming calls are handled in a sort of indirect fashion. Unlike a
typical cellular system, the PCS network has no idea where any
particular phone is, and therefore cannot ring it directly. Callers
dialing your number are routed to an Ameritech Voicemail box where
they are directed (by your own greeting or a company-supplied default)
to leave a voice message or to punch in a phone number.

Callers leaving voice recordings will trigger a page to your PCS phone
with your own number displayed; you then call it and play back your
message(s) after entering a seven-digit password. Callers entering DTMF
numbers will trigger a page of that number to the PCS. (Any voice
message from that same DTMF call is discarded, I found.) In either
case, the incoming page number is displayed on the PCS, and (assuming
you're within the service area) pressing the green Call button will
automatically dial the displayed number for you. As the PCS uses an
existing pager network, the performance has been fine throughout the
Chicago area, with only one attempted page lost that we know of so
far.

Call quality with digital transmission is, as you might expect,
superb.  The phone does suffer from frequent dropouts, however,
depending on battery strength and your proximity to the transceiver
antenna. Callers tell me that they don't notice dropouts as much as I
do; perhaps some software somewhere is filling in short dropouts with
interpolated values, although I found it rather distracting at my end.
A boost in power from 10mw would be nice, as on one occasion I was
standing within 40 feet of an antenna and still getting dropouts. The
phone is supposed to generate a warning tone before you blunder out of
range and lose a call, but I found in practice that dropouts became so
severe at long distances that the warning tone, which I have yet to
hear, would be somewhat redundant.

So do I like the PCS? Yes. Its small size is a big asset, its digital
transmission quality is exceptional (dropouts aside) and secure, and
its pager system for incoming calls is an acceptable compromise, as it
is not positioned as a competitor to a cellular phone. I see the PCS
as a sort of low-end communication device suitable for the occasional
caller; in fact the early brochures I received show scenarios such as
a lady shopping at our local supermarket and kids at an amusement
park. The only snags I can see at the moment are the low power
limitations, which presumably can be bumped up if necessary, but
primarily the density of transceiver installations required under the
current design. Packing antennas and phone lines into infrastructure
at the rate of one every quarter-mile or so seems like quite an
undertaking to me.

I want to add a particular good word for their 800 support line:
granted this is a test program, and one should expect the
highly-competent support we are getting for this, but it is
nevertheless extremely satisfying to have one's call for help answered
promptly by people who have all the answers at their fingertips, as
opposed to being put on hold by Public Relations salesdroids who can't
answer a simple question.

This test program is scheduled to continue through the end of next
year, and I'll post further developments as they occur.


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

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

Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 08:29:36 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <[e-mail]>
Subject: New SPARCstation LX Has Built-in ISDN From AT&T


SMCC INTRODUCES COLOR RISC WORKSTATION PRICED LESS THAN A PC

Also Unveils Graphics System, Server Product Based On SPARC/Solaris

    SAN JOSE, Calif. -- Nov. 10, 1992 -- Sun Microsystems Computer
Corporation (SMCC) today introduced the SPARCclassic(TM), a fully
loaded workstation that, at $3,995 (quantity 12), is the world's least
expensive color RISC system. It is based on the revolutionary new 50
MHz microSPARC(TM) processor designed by SMCC and Texas Instruments, a
"workstation on a chip" that is the most highly integrated, low-cost
RISC processor ever available.  SMCC also unveiled a new accelerated
graphics computer called the SPARCstation(TM) LX that features the
GXplus accelerator, CD-quality audio, a 424-megabyte internal disk and
built-in ISDN (Integrated Services Digital Network).  ISDN is the
global telephone and networking standard that will allow the merger of
computer and phone functions.  The SPARCstation LX system is the
lowest-cost accelerated graphics workstation available, priced at
$7,995.

    These new Sun(TM) workstations deliver 59.1 MIPS, with the
SPARCclassic offering industry-leading value at $63 per MIPS.

    SMCC designed the new workstations to meet users' number-one
demand: low-cost color systems that still offer high performance and
networking. The new systems will enable millions of users to access
client-server technology. The company achieved unparalleled price
points through innovations in integration -- in the microSPARC
processor, in a new I/O subsystem that reduced seven controller chips
to two advanced new ASICs, and in a highly integrated system board.
Other methods employed to reduce costs include new TAB (Tape Automated
Bonding) processor packaging and a new, low-cost, 15-inch color
monitor (1024x768 resolution). Other Sun monitors are also supported.

    Besides the breakthroughs in cost and integration, SMCC is
setting the stage for another important first in the workstation
industry -- an innovative pricing model similar to the PC industry.

SMCC has given the SPARCclassic workstation non-discountable end user
pricing.  Unlike a PC, however, the new Sun workstations serve as
all-purpose machines.  They can run the UNIX(R) as well as DOS and Mac
applications; they can connect with a wide range of systems, including
IBM mainframes, DEC VAXes and PCs in a Novell(R) network; they have
built-in multimedia features such as audio and video; and the
SPARCstation LX even includes ISDN.

    These new systems deliver more performance than `486 PCs, with
59.1 MIPS, 26.4 SPECint92 and 21.0 SPECfp92. The standard features of
the SPARCclassic include 16 megabytes of memory, expandable to 96
megabytes, a 207-megabyte internal disk, expandable to 1.0 gigabytes,
two SBus slots for add-on boards, support of up to 21 gigabytes of
external disk, audio and graphics. The SPARCclassic and SPARCstation
LX are the first systems to come bundled with the just-introduced
Solaris(R) 2.1 distributed computing environment.  This business-ready
system software is the highest-performance version ever available and
offers many new features such as simplified administration,
installation, security and internationalization.

    These new workstations again demonstrate SMCC's commitment to
superior application performance. They include performance features
like 10-megabyte/second SCSI and a direct memory access (DMA)
controller for fast access found in the high-end SPARCstation 10
family introduced in May.  In addition, the systems' optimized I/O
architecture supports 16-byte transfers and other performance
enhancements designed for optimal results that are far beyond high-end
PC capabilities.

    These versatile new products provide cost-effective solutions
for any work environment.  Since the SPARCclassic workstation offers
PC prices with full color workstation functionality, it is expected to
penetrate many existing networked PC markets.  The SPARCstation LX
workstation gives technical users working in areas like PC CAD a
low-cost alternative with maximum performance and expansion.

New Server Boosts Workgroup Productivity:

    Based on the same technology, a low-cost SPARCclassic server
is also being offered by SMCC. This versatile workgroup server can be
used to increase file sharing throughput, offload printing and
communications tasks and support demanding applications such as
database or PC-CAD.  It comes with built-in Ethernet, a SCSI
interface, two serial ports, a parallel port, SBus I/O, memory, and an
internal 1-gigabyte preconfigured disk.  It's built for networks --
unlike its PC server counterparts.

Technology Licensing:

    Continuing its support of open systems, SMCC is making
available all the chips it developed for these new workstations.  SMCC
has licensed its silicon partners to supply these chips on the general
market.  Included are the microSPARC processor from Texas Instruments,
SBus I/O devices from NCR, ISDN capability from AT&T, and a graphics
accelerator available from LSI Logic and Fujitsu Microelectronics.

Upgrades, Pricing, Availability:

    Aggressively priced upgrades are available for all the
current low-end desktops such as the SPARCstation ELC and IPC.

        The fully configured SPARCclassic (207-megabyte disk, 16
megabytes of memory, 15-inch color monitor) is priced at $3,995
(U.S.list/quantity 12) or $4,295 in single quantities.  The fully
configured SPARCstation LX (424-megabyte disk, 16 megabytes of memory,
16-inch color monitor) is priced at $7,995.  Both systems feature a
new one-year warranty and will be available in December.

       SPARCclassic server (1-gigabyte disk, 16 megabytes of memory)
is priced at $5,295 and will be available in January 1993.

    Sun Microsystems Computer Corporation (SMCC), a subsidiary
of Sun Microsystems, Inc., is the world's leading supplier of open
client-server computing solutions. SMCC has its headquarters in
Mountain View, Calif.

                ###

Sun, Sun Microsystems, Sun Microsystems Computer Corp., the Sun logo
and Solaris are trademarks or registered trademarks of Sun
Microsystems, Inc.  All SPARC trademarks, including the SCD Compliant
logo, are trademarks or registered trademarks of SPARC International,
Inc.  SPARCstation, SPARCclassic and microSPARC are licensed
exclusively to Sun Microsystems, Inc. Products bearing SPARC
trademarks are based on an architecture developed by Sun Microsystems,
Inc. UNIX is a registered trademark of UNIX System Laboratories, Inc.
Novell is a registered trademark of Novell, Inc. All other product or
service names mentioned herein are trademarks of their respective
owners.

For reader inquiries, telephone [phone].


PR contact:

Sun Microsystems Computer Corp.
Carrie Dillon [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Joe Bergstein)
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 07:23:58 -0500
Subject: RBOC Exit From CPE Market?


Has anyone heard either rumors or specific information regarding Bell
Atlantic selling their CPE business back to Northern Telecom? (from
which they bought a big chunk not too long ago)?

Is this a trend?  Are other RBOC's getting out of the CPE business?

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

From: edsr![e-mail] (George Rapp)
Subject: No Caller-ID in Texas
Reply-To: edsr![e-mail]
Organization: EDS Research
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 19:59:27 GMT


Just heard on the radio that Caller-ID has been officially denied to
Texas residential subscribers.  It was just a snippet, so no details
were provided, but the issue was recently presented to the Texas PUC
(Public Utilities Commission), and I assume they made this decision.

The major point of contention was not the privacy issue, as it has
been in other states, but the Texas state law that prohibits attaching
"wiretap" or "trap and trace" devices to phone lines.  (From what I
understand, a "trap and trace" device is defined as one that is
capable of recording the phone number from which a caller is calling.
I have no idea why this type of device was ever outlawed.  Looks like
we have a law that needs changing.)

Telemarketers and ACLU privacy fanatics, rejoice -- you win.
{grumble, grumble} (I'm not happy about this ... 8^)


George Rapp        Electronic Data Systems Corporation
[e-mail]    (EDS Research)

The above opinions are mine alone.  As far as I know, EDS does
not share them.

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

Date: Thu, 12 Nov 92 12:57:59 PST
From: [e-mail] (Phydeaux)
Subject: "New" Centrex features


Hi!

This morning I woke up to hear my clock-radio spewing out an Illinois
Bell Centrex advertisement that announced several "new" features ...
call waiting, three-way calling, etc.

    Welcome to the stone age, IBT!


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


[Moderator's Note: I think you must be mistaken if you think they
referred to these services (ina centrex setting) as 'new'.  We've had
centrex for a quarter-century here, and ESS in some parts of the city
for nearly twenty years. Those features on centrex were common years
ago to say the least.  Or maybe you heard right and IBT is going crazy
in their ad copy again ... it wouldn't be the first time.   PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #841
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa24085;
          15 Nov 92 15:20 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA27206
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 15 Nov 1992 13:12:15 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA01296
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 15 Nov 1992 13:11:57 -0600
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 13:11:57 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #842

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 15 Nov 92 13:12:00 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 842

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    MCI Goes Into PCS (Washington Post via Paul Robinson)
    More Pay Phone Restrictions (Rob Knauerhase)
    BCE to Take 20% Stake in Mercury Communications (David Leibold)
    Help Wanted Setting up Paging (Jeff Bennington)
    Weird Sales Call (John Higdon)
    Re: Music on Hold (Phillip Remaker)
    NBC/IBM to Test Video on Demand (Wasington Post via Paul Robinson)
    Microsoft/Intel Team up on Video for PCs (Washington Post via P. Robinson)
    Telephone Headsets and Cordless Headsets (Jeff Bier)
    How Do I Make a Phone Ring? (Peter L. Rukavina)
    Sorry For My Slipup (was Cellular Privacy) (H. Shrikumar)
    Does SS7 Support Early Busy Signal? (Peter Capek)
    Jacksonville FL: 1 + 10D Within 904, and Semi-Local Calling (D. Leibold)
    MCI vs Sprint For Residential Service (Rob B.)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992  02:32:05 EST
Subject: MCI Goes Into PCS


Article Summary:

"MCI Enters Wireless Phone Race" {Washington Post}, Nov 18, Page B1

MCI asked the Federal Communications Commission to license "a
consortium of companies" to build and operate a nationwide network?
The companies would probably be companies that are already involved in
wire: other telcos, cable companies and those already involved in the
technology, as well as entrepreneurs.

It's suspected the pressure built up on MCI because AT&T is spending
$3.8b to buy McCaw Cellular.  Both AT&T and McCaw have been
independently working on wireless data and telephone service and will
probably pool their efforts.  Obviously, MCI makes the usual claim
that they were working on this beforehand.  Another mention that
Sprint is merging with Centel.  So far there are some 200 applicants
for experimental PCS tests.  It rementions that three companies got
"pioneer preference" as stated earlier.

Questions involve who gets to operate, how they will be licensed, and
what is the way the country is to be divided. In the consortium, MCI
would be minority partner, providng billing and bill collection,
technical standards, marketing and network plans, as well as the means
used to locate the destination telephone.  MCI apparently will provide
the brains and the partners the capital, technical capability and
local presence; one alleged advantage is "It would enable participants
otherwise too small to survive in a national or even regional PCS
market to play a significant role in PCS nonetheless," MCI told the
FCC (i.e where without MCI's capabilities they couldn't.)  Dozens of
companies filed comments.  "At state are billions of dollars of
investment" on a network that could be in operation by 1994.

MCI wants the FCC to award three national licenses to consortia after
the hearings are held to pick who wins, with the idea that a consortia
will need a "national manager."  Three guesses as to which company it
thinks will get that position (Hint, it's a telephone company with
three letters in its name).  Wayne Schelle, President of American
Personal Communications, the PCS company owned by the Post, is not
pleased with that idea. "They are too big and unwieldy. We think they
are anti-competitive.  This is not like awarding a national license in
Costa Rica.  We're talking about three million square miles."
Questions about the part local telcos will have has lead comments such
as Bell Atlantic Corp which wants to have two licenses available to
allow the local telephone companies to have at this new system as
well.


Paul Robinson -- [e-mail]
"If I or anyone else on this account are caught giving opinions,
the Secretary will disavow any knowledge of my actions..."

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

From: Rob Knauerhase <[e-mail]>
Subject: More Pay Phone Restrictions
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 02:19:23 CST


FYI (everyone), from a news brief:

       (CLEVELAND)--Ohio Bell and the City of Cleveland are initiating
two new methods to limit the use of public telephones for illegal
purposes, such as drug dealing. Ohio Bell will begin working with the
city to identify public phones that are being used for illegal
purposes. The new methods eventually will be available statewide to
other communities served by Ohio Bell.

       One of the two methods: Restricted Call Access makes it
impossible to use coins to complete a call during late evening and
early morning hours. Calls can be completed during these hours only by
the use of calling cards or other billing arrangements. Customers will
continue to have access to information operators, 9-1-1 emergency
services, and 800 numbers from the public telephones.

I guess since this is a "brief" they decided not to mention the other
method; this sounds pretty much the same as was in Chicago (mentioned
in past Digests).

I wonder if "other billing arrangements" includes the right to
third-party billing at $.25 rather than the usual operator-assisted
rate.


Rob Knauerhase           University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
[e-mail]       Dept. of Computer Science, Gigabit Study Group


[Moderator's Note: I think you will find there will be no
accomodations at all made by telco where billing arrangements are
concerned, and that the normal surcharges will apply on calls from the
restricted payphones. Someone raised this point with Illinois Bell,
saying IBT would profit from the surcharges made necessary to callers
from the restricted phones. IBT took umbrage at that and said there
was little to be gained by them; that they were making the restrictions
available only because of community demand for same, and that they
(telco) were not happy with the arrangement. IBT took a neutral stance
on the matter of payphone 'mis-use' (i.e. calls to/from drug dealers)
here and finally capitulated to the politicans, etc.  PAT]

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

Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 20:34:16 EST
From: David Leibold <[e-mail]>
Subject: BCE to Take 20% Stake in Mercury Communications


A deal between BCE (Bell Canada's parent company) and Cable and
Wireless (Mercury's owner) means that BCE will pick up a 20% stake in
Mercury while Mercury will invest $60 million (CAD$) in BCE Cable (UK)
Ltd, a cable television company, according to {The Toronto Star}.

Mercury reportedly has 7% of the UK telecom market, and wants to
expand its residential services (but didn't say whether this was in
terms of local loop, or better long distance access).

Cable companies can use phone lines in the UK, thus all the
connections between cable and telephone companies.


[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Jeff Bennington)
Subject: Help Wanted Setting Up Paging
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Jeff Bennington)
Organization: Mellon Capital Management Corp., San Francisco
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 01:55:37 GMT


A consultant friend of mine has an application where he wants to set
up a private paging network which will span the continental US.

Please reply to this email box.

Thanks!


Jeff Bennington    [e-mail]
Mellon Capital Management Corp, San Francisco CA

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

Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 08:39 PST
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Weird Sales Call


A few days ago during the dinner hour I had the most unusual sales
call of all time. Phone rings and when I answer it the person on the
other end says, "Jim?"  When I indicated that the person must have a
wrong number, I waited the usual 500 ms for a reply and then receiving
none, hung up the phone.

He then immediately calls back and says, "John?" "Speaking" "I got the
name wrong; you will have to be a little more patient. This is Jeff
Somebodyorother with Somethingorothertronics and I'm calling about
some equipment you might be interested in."

At that point I interrupted with, "Wait a minute. You call me during
the dinner hour, disturb my meal, call me by the wrong name and then
tell me to be more patient? I don't know if I am really interested."

The person at the other end let out a small, Sardonic chuckle, and
then hung up the phone in my ear. Now this is what I call slick
salesmanship.

Here is my theory: The person was from an antenna components
manufacturer. He got wind that I am about to move an AM transmitting
facility and called to hawk his wares. It so happens that this
particular company does indeed make quality parts and it is highly
likely that they may be used in the new project. But this particular
salestype has a lot to learn about his presentations and his
preliminaries!

As it happens, there is another, well-known-in-the-broadcast-biz
salescritter whom I will never buy from again. We were buying
equipment for a major project for a station in San Francisco and this
gentleman called late in the afternoon. I had stepped out and got his
message upon my return. Since it was late in the day, I opted to
return his call the next morning. When I did so, Mr. Salescritter
launched into a lecture on telephone courtesy, lambasting me for not
returning his call the day before (at 4:55 PM when I got the message).
I told him that I did not think it was really his place to instruct me
on "how to be a good customer and polite telephone user." His
"retaliation" for my remarks was to call the station owner and tell
him what a bad person I was and how I was impossible to work with.

The station owner, who has known me for years and years, agreed. His
solution to the problem? He cancelled all of the orders with this guy
and told him that he would not have to deal with me anymore. And
another distributor got the station's business.

And who says life is not fair?


John Higdon  |   P. O. Box 7648   |   [phone]     |       FAX:
[e-mail] | San Jose, CA 95150 | 10288 0 700 FOR-A-MOO | [phone]

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

From: Phillip Remaker <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Music on Hold
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 08:46:26 PST


> I came home recently to find a strange message on my answering
> machine: Several minutes of music.  There was no voiceover anywhere in
> the message, or before or after it -- just music.  The sound was of
> surprisingly good quality; I'm quite sure we're talking about a direct
> electrical connection, not pickup by a handset of music playing in the
> background.

> Nothing like this has happened before or since.

> Any guesses?

> [Moderator's Note: My guess is someone was playing games. They called
> your machine and let it rack up a long 'message' by simply playing
> music for however long it lasted before the machine clicked off.  PAT]

PAT:

This is a classic:

Using a POTS line on a PBX:

PBX user calls some place and is put on hold.
PBX user gives up, hangs up and plcaes another call.
User does not hold switchook long enough to disconnect, unwittingly
 puts the music on hold 'on hold'.
PBX user calls you, gets your answering machine, hangs up.
The music on hold is 'transferred' to your machine.

Two machines are now locked on to each other.  If your answerphone is
VOX activated, kiss your tape goodbye.

Anyway, using that scheme (thinking you hung up when you really
didn't), you can imagine how strange stuff gets on your answerphone.


Phillip A. Remaker [e-mail]
cisco Systems Customer Engineering  800-553-24HR
1525 O'Brien Drive  Menlo Park, CA 94025

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

Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
Date: Sun 15 Nov 1992  02:34:10 EST
Subject: NBC/IBM to Test Video on Demand


News Summary

"Network Nexus: PC Meets Nightly News."
{Washington Post}, Nov 10, Page B1

(NBC, IBM are teaming up to test 'Video on Demand' System)
See Also: Microsoft & Intel on Video Technology for PCs.

NBC and IBM are going to create a system called "NBC Desktop News"
using Multimedia technology to produce "news on demand" from a video
tape library and view the material on PCs.  You won't be able to get
it at home but business and large subscribers will be able to call up
various news segments including weather reports, stock summaries and
some films.  It's claimed to be designed for both business and
government organizations.

They're going to test it with some unnamed corporations in 1993 and
hope to make it available publicly by 1994.  They will use the NBC
news and CNBC cable channels for material, with hourly updates.  NBC
TV is in third place in the ratings and video competitors are eating
its lunch.  Capital Cities/ABC is thinking about the same thing.  This
won't be either Prodigy or HBO as no entertainment or ads are proposed
at this time.


Paul Robinson -- [e-mail]
These opinions are MINE alone.

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

Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992  02:35:03 EST
Subject: Microsoft/Intel Team up on Video for PCs


Article Summary
{Washington Post}, Nov 10, Page B4
"Microsoft, Intel to Team Up on Video Technology for PCs"
See Also: NBC and IBM to test Video on demand.

Microsoft and Intel are putting together a combined software and
hardware package to allow people to work with video, including editing
and retrieving video footage into documents, thus allowing a PC to
work in a manner similar to a video player.  Apple Computer already
has a product, but the market has stayed smalll because the technology
isn't always there and it's expensive.  50 companies will announce
products that work with theirs.

Bill Gates is expected to hold a press conference to announce the
software part at $200.  The hardware board to go in a PC is from Intel
and is around $1,000.  For obvious reasons, it's designed to use MS
Windows 3.1.  Demand remains uncertain, and the product will have to
fight it out.

Note: The article -- either because the writer thinks it's dead, or
because he's never heard of it -- fails to say anything about the
Video Toaster that has been out for the Amiga for two years and
already does this stuff.


Paul Robinson -- [e-mail]
These opinions are mine alone.

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

Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 11:08:41 PST
From: [e-mail] (Jeff Bier)
Subject: Telephone Headsets and Cordless Headsets


I'm seeking recommendations on telephone headsets.  I have in mind the
kind that replaces the handset on a typical telephone.  I'm also
curious to know if anyone makes a cordless telephone headset.


Thanks,

Jeff Bier   [e-mail]   [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Peter L. Rukavina)
Subject: How do I Make a Phone Ring?
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 07:51:07 EST
Organization: The Systems Group, Trent University


I am assisting a novice theatre director in staging a play.  We need
to make a stand-alone, not-connected-to-phone line phone ring.  I
assume this involved a battery, switch and some wires.  Which ones and
what voltage battery?


Peter Rukavina                                           [e-mail]
The Systems Group Research Project                             [e-mail]
Champlain College Room D163                        Telephone: [phone]


[Moderator's Note: Perhaps some readers will respond direct to Peter
with advice for his project.    PAT]

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

Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 05:15:03 -0500
From: [e-mail] (H.Shrikumar)
Subject: Sorry For My Slip Up in Cellular Privacy


Hi PAT,

  I seem to have implied and said a statement more stronger than my
thoughts about encryption for cellular phones in my post, as I
realised when I got this mail from [e-mail] ...

> I think that you jumped in over your head on this one -- there is
> encryption available for cellular phones.  The biggest drawback is
> cost.

  That is true ... I do know that about existance of the encryption
scheme that is included in the IS-54B standard which I have heard
governs cellular phones. And if no one else flames me on my mistake,
please include this in the digest to correct my error. My apologies.

  However, my sentiment was directed at the fact that this encryption
is not "known for any strength" ... and what amount of security it
will provide is yet to be seen to be believed.


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

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

Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 02:27:17 EST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Does SS7 Support Early Busy Signal?


While trying to make a credit card call to a persistently busy number
recently, after typing in the card number for the n-teenth time, I
wondered if SS7 protocol would allow the calling exchange to "look
ahead" at the called number and inquire if it is (at that instant)
busy, before prompting me for the card number.  Of course, I might
still get a busy if either the line became busy after I keyed in the
credit card number, or if the response to the query didn't make it
back to the originating exchange in time. The advantage (to me) would
be not having to repeatedly pound in the billing.  The advantage
(small) to the carrier would be not having to do the credit card
verification, and perhaps getting the line on which I'm calling free a
bit quicker.  If the call in question were third party bill, or
collect, the savings could be a lot greater.


Peter Capek

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

Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 21:11:59 EST
From: David Leibold <[e-mail]>
Subject: Jacksonville FL: 1 + 10D Within 904, and Semi-Local Calling


I found the June, 1992 Jacksonville, Florida directory on Phonefiche
tonight.

It's official, that 1 + 904 + number is required within 904 area code
(northern Florida), even though that NPA is probably nowhere near
saturation with its NNX scheme. All of Florida must now dial 1+area
code within the area code, thus it looks like Southern Bell opted for
state-wide consistency in dialing, and changing things well in advance
of the interchangeable NPA system in North America by January, 1995.

Meanwhile, another note in the directory announces the start of a
semi-local dialing from Jacksonville to Hilliard at a cost of 25c/call
*flat rate*. This was effective 6 August 1992. Perhaps this
arrangement is the shape of local dialing to come.


[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Rob B.)
Subject: MCI vs Sprint For Residential Service
Organization: University at Buffalo
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 09:52:00 GMT


Hi there.

I was wondering which you feel is better for residential long distance
service. We don't make many calls each month, so I don't care about
MCI's and Sprint's calling plans.  I just want to know which has
better promotions. MCI's friends and family list is a pain because
they only give the discount of 20% to phone numbers which have MCI as
the primary carrier.  MCI also has some thing where they give you ten
minutes off the longest call to someone in the calling circle. It's
called Free Speech.  I thought that I saw something that said Sprint
had an automatic discount on your longest call of the month no matter
what the phone number is. Does anyone know about any more promotions?
I think I should change to Sprint so I get the ten minutes off my
longest call regardless of the receipient.


[e-mail]   [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #842
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa25265;
          15 Nov 92 15:49 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA21745
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 15 Nov 1992 13:48:43 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA06521
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 15 Nov 1992 13:48:26 -0600
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 13:48:26 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #843

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 15 Nov 92 13:48:30 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 843

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: No Caller ID in Texas (Guy J. Sherr)
    Re: No Caller-ID in Texas (Steve Shapiro)
    Re: No Caller-ID in Texas (John Higdon)
    Re: No Caller-ID in Texas (Jerry Blackerby)
    Re: No Caller ID in Texas (Sean Malloy)
    Re: Two Cellular Phones on the Same Number (Troy Frericks)
    Re: Two Cellular Phones on the Same Number (Bob Sherman)
    Re: Two Cellular Phones on the Same Number (Bob Furtaw)
    Re: Two Cellular Phones on the Same Number (Joe Bergstein)
    Re: Stupid Phone Systems Blocking N[01]X Prefixes (Jim Rees)
    Re: Stupid Phone Systems Blocking N[01]X Prefixes (Steve Forrette)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 10:29 GMT
From: Guy J. Sherr <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: No Caller ID in Texas


Restrictions on "Trap and Trace" come from a law which does not
guarantee privacy under the 9th Amendment, but rather a law relying
upon the 4th Amendment, which promises freedom from unreasonable
search and seizure.  (At least I hope it's the 4th one -- I am not a
lawyer.)

Anyway, maybe it is outdated.  On the other hand, Texas probably still
writes search warrants over phone tap orders.  This decision may
recognize that Texas law enforcement authorities would probably get
CNID equipment and then use it.  Can you imagine.

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Shapiro)
Subject: Re: No Caller-ID in Texas
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation - Marlboro, MA
Date: 15 NOV 92 07:36:31 EST


In article <[e-mail]>, edsr![e-mail]
(George Rapp) writes:

> Just heard on the radio that Caller-ID has been officially denied to
> Texas residential subscribers.  It was just a snippet, so no details
> were provided, but the issue was recently presented to the Texas PUC
> (Public Utilities Commission), and I assume they made this decision.

> The major point of contention was not the privacy issue, as it has
> been in other states, but the Texas state law that prohibits attaching
> "wiretap" or "trap and trace" devices to phone lines.  (From what I
> understand, a "trap and trace" device is defined as one that is
> capable of recording the phone number from which a caller is calling.
> I have no idea why this type of device was ever outlawed.  Looks like
> we have a law that needs changing.)

This is nothing new, it has been an ongoing issue for several years.

In Austin, there is an organization called the Central Texas SysOps
Association which is a group of BBS SysOps and Users. We have been
active in a variety of telephone company related issues at the local,
state and national level.

Anyway, about two years ago we had a meeting in which the guest
speaker was from the state Attorney Generals office to discuss the
issues surrounding this law.

The AG's office is on both sides of the issue. On the one side, this
IS state law and must be enforced. On the other side, the AG's office
realizes the benefit of being able to know beforehand (or during the
call), where the person is calling from (in fact, they would like the
capability for their own offices for situations where they need it for
official reasons).

However, it seems that in Texas, the "right to privacy" seems to be on
the person invading YOUR privacy, ie: the person who calls YOU is
entitled to privacy rather than YOU being entitled to privacy from
unwanted calls.

So it goes ...


Regards,

Steve Shapiro                 * All views and opinions expressed
SKS Computer Consulting, Inc. * are my own and are offered as-is
[e-mail]  BBS: [phone] N81

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

Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 09:30 PST
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: No Caller-ID in Texas


edsr![e-mail] (George Rapp) writes:

> The major point of contention was not the privacy issue, as it has
> been in other states, but the Texas state law that prohibits attaching
> "wiretap" or "trap and trace" devices to phone lines.

Actually, it probably IS the "privacy" issue, but the activists are
simply (successfully) using another law to further the cause. Another
state, Pennsylvania, has already beat Texas to the punch on this one
with a similar ruling.

> Telemarketers and ACLU privacy fanatics, rejoice -- you win.
> {grumble, grumble} (I'm not happy about this ... 8^)

On a personal note: I have a simple application that requires
Caller-ID. It is not available in California at this time. What do I
do? I order direct trunks from a long distance carrier, install 800
numbers that provide real-time ANI delivery, and proceed with my
application. The ANI delivery gives me, in effect, universal
non-blockable Caller-ID. Of course the expense is much higher than
Caller-ID would have been, but that just proves my point that denying
CPID to residential users merely keeps out of the average user's hands
what is available to any business with the money.

For some reason, it makes the "privacy" activists very happy to have
business customers the only entities than can have caller number
delivery. I have never been able to figure this out.


John Higdon  |   P. O. Box 7648   |   [phone]     |       FAX:
[e-mail] | San Jose, CA 95150 | 10288 0 700 FOR-A-MOO | [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Jerry Blackerby 214-907-7810)
Subject: Re: No Caller-ID in Texas
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Ericsson Network Systems, Inc.
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 08:59:48 GMT


Maybe if people in Texas would find out the phone numbers of the PUC
(Public Utility Commission) members and everyone start calling each of
them at "odd hours", they might decide there could be a reason to have
Caller-ID.


Jerry

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

From: [e-mail] (Sean Malloy)
Subject: Re: No Caller ID in Texas
Date: 15 Nov 1992 12:48:05 -0600
Organization: Texas A&M University, College Station


According to the Nov 11 {Houston Chronicle}, the PUC in Austin ruled
that Caller ID (for residential customers) violates state wiretapping
laws.  Certain businesses would be allowed to use the service if they
can prove that they need the service to "protect their property or if
it's necessary for their operations".  Southwestern Bell hasn't
decided if it will offer the service to commercial customers or not.

The law that prevents the adoption of the service predates the
development of Caller ID (The No. 5 ESS?) and prevents anyone outside
law enforcement and some businesses from using trap-and-trace devices.
Legislation has already been drafted that would amend the law to allow
the use of Caller ID.

Several groups, including the ACLU (Texas) and the Texas Council on
Family Violence are happy with the PUC's ruling and want to see it
left alone.

Southwestern Bell had proposed to offer per-call blocking as well,
requiring the customer to dial a *XX code to not transmit the
information on a call-by-call basis.  The State Office of Public
Utility Counsel (sic) and several consumer groups wanted SW Bell to
offer per-line blocking, which would allow a customer to automatically
prevent the transmission of the number unless they first dialed a *XX
code to allow it.

One of the commissioners who voted against Caller ID stated that "One
of the basic problems with the proposal is that people who pick up
their phones to make calls wouldn't necessarily know they were also
sending out the number of their phone and the name of the person who
pays the bill.  I believe we must have further legislative guidance
before we can proceed."

Thirty-six other states now have Caller-ID.


Sean C. Malloy  -  Texas A&M University  -  [e-mail]

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

From: mcrware!![e-mail] (Troy Frericks)
Subject: Re: Two Cellular Phones on the Same Number
Organization: Microware Systems Corp., Des Moines, Iowa
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 14:34:28 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> Alan Boritz <72446.461@
CompuServe.COM> writes:

> [e-mail] (T. Govindaraj) writes:

>> Having two phones on the same number is attractive to me since my wife
>> and I can use the same phone, since we use it primarily for occasional
>> calls...Is anybody using this option?

>> [Moderator's Note: Uh, not to disappoint you, but have you cleared
>> this with the cellular company?  Most do NOT allow two or more phones
>> to share the same number because the ESN is different in each phone
>> and ESN validation is what cellular billing integrity is all about.

> Change "most" to ALL.  There should be NO US cellular carriers that
> will permit more than one ESN to operate on any particular phone
> number.  Failure to validate the ESN is a serious violation of FCC
> rules (EIA standards incorporated into the CFR).

Pat,

I know it's not right (legal), but I have to throw it out anyway.
What about changing the ESN on the second phone to match that of the
first one that already has service.  I beleave this is how some people
with some older Panasonic phones are stealing service -- intercept the
ESN as it is broadcast, then burn a PROM, and insert it into their
phone.

Note you would NOT be able to call each other, or both receive calls.
You may not even both be able to place calls at the same time when on
the same cell (or same area).  Probably could get around that by
having one phone on service B, other roam on service A.  Food for
thought.  Disclaimer: Info for educational enrichment only, not to be
implemented.


Troy Frericks                      Internet: [e-mail]
Microware Systems Corporation          UUCP: uunet!mcrware!troyf
1900 NW 114th St                      Phone: [phone]
Des Moines, IA 50325-7077               Fax: [phone]

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

From: Bob Sherman <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Two Cellular Phones on the Same Number
Date: 15 Nov 1992 10:08:27 -0500


In <[e-mail]> Alan Boritz <72446.461@Compu
Serve.COM> writes:

> Change "most" to ALL.  There should be NO US cellular carriers that
> will permit more than one ESN to operate on any particular phone
> number.  Failure to validate the ESN is a serious violation of FCC
> rules (EIA standards incorporated into the CFR).

No, I think most is more accurate than all. Bell South in the South
Florida (Miami/Ft. Lauderdale) area DOES offer to allow the usage of
two phones on the same number. They do charge quite a bit extra for
the second phone, which of course must be registered with them in
order to work.


[e-mail] | [e-mail]  | MCI MAIL:BSHERMAN
[e-mail]  |                         |

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

From: [e-mail] (Bob Furtaw)
Subject: Re: Two Cellular Phones on the Same Number
Organization: Motorola
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 00:14:53 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (T.
Govindaraj) wrote:

> installer suggested a place called Recellular with an 800 number. He
> suggested the Motorola Flip Phone, Classic, or Ultra Classic. (We now
> have a Panasonic EB3500. A lighter, but not too expensive will be
> nice.)

Motorola makes a package that is called the Extended System.  It
basically copies your Mico-Tac's phone number, when mounted in a
pocket, into your permanently mounted car telephone.  When in the car,
you get all the features of your car phone ... hands free, high power
RF PA, car speaker, external car antenna, etc. When removed the
number remains the same.  One phone number, one bill.  As an option,
you can get two numbers so you can call the other when the Micro-Tac
is not installed.  When you get one number, the car phone is
essentially dead when the Micro-Tac is removed.

> [Moderator's Note: Uh, not to disappoint you, but have you cleared
> this with the cellular company?  Most do NOT allow two or more phones
> to share the same number because the ESN is different in each phone
> and ESN validation is what cellular billing integrity is all about. An
> analogy would be two landline customers sharing the same wire pair and
> expecting telco to figure out who to bill for which calls. Most
> cellular systems will only validate one ESN per line. Even using it
> the way you describe it, you could never call *each other* on the
> other's cell phone. Why not just get two numbers; that is what
                                       ^^^^^^^^^^^^
Now there's an option.

> everyone else does.
  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
There are inexpensive calling packages for casual only becuase they
didn't know of availability.


Bob Furtaw - W8IL   CFI-A/G/I/MEI, CGI-A/I
All disclaimers ever written by anybody apply. :-)

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

From: [e-mail] (Joe Bergstein)
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 00:06:44 -0500
Subject: Re: Two Cellular Phones on the Same Number


In msg. on 11/9, T. Govindaraj writes:

> Having two phones on the same number is attractive to me since
> my wife and I can use the same phone, since we use it primarily for
> occasional calls. In fact, I got it so she can use it to call for help if
> her car breaks down or if she needs directions for some place.

What happens if you're using your phone, and your wife needs to call
911 because of an emergency (accident, fire, personal attack)? Doesn't
sound like such a great idea, just to save a few bucks, if someone's
safety is at stake.

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

From: [e-mail] (Jim Rees)
Subject: Re: Stupid Phone Systems Blocking N[01]X Prefixes
Date: 15 Nov 1992 00:05:06 GMT
Organization: University of Michigan CITI
Reply-To: [e-mail]


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Jim Rees) writes:

> You would think that cellular providers would be sensitive to the
> problem of dialing numbers with a 0 or 1 as the second digit, since
> many cellular prefixes are of this type.  But our latest cell phone
> number is in the 600 prefix, and we've found that we can't roam
> anywhere, even where our provider has a mutual roaming agreement with
> the remote provider.

> [Moderator's Note: When you say they 'cannot deal with the 600 prefix'
> do you mean other carriers refuse to accept it as a valid phone number
> for purposes of billing roamers, or do you mean they refuse/cannot
> accept it for the purpose of incoming calls passed along through the
> local xxx-ROAM number?

The former.  We haven't tried to get incoming calls while roaming.

> I'd say the best recourse here is to simply refuse to pay any
> roaming charges under the circumstances.

We would do that, but no charges show up on our bill.  We are simply
unable to make any outgoing calls while roaming, short of contacting
every cell service provider in the US, I can't think of any good
solution.  Looks like we will have to ask our local provider for a
different number in a more "normal" prefix.

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: Stupid Phone Systems Blocking N[01]X Prefixes
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 01:24:35 GMT


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

> You would think that cellular providers would be sensitive to the
> problem of dialing numbers with a 0 or 1 as the second digit, since
> many cellular prefixes are of this type.  But our latest cell phone
> number is in the 600 prefix, and we've found that we can't roam
> anywhere, even where our provider has a mutual roaming agreement with
> the remote provider.  The reason?  It seems that most cellular
> providers can't deal with the 600 prefix.

There may be another explanation.  Was the 600 prefix recently put
into service by your home cellular carrier?  The cellular carriers
that have roaming agreements regularly exchange data as to which
prefixes they have in their home areas.  The other carriers then
update their switches with this data.  What can happen with new
prefixes is that the prefix is turned on, and the other carriers don't
program their switches for the new prefix right away, either because
they didn't get the data in a timely manner from the home carrier, or
because they don't act on the new data quickly enough.

Either way, the symptom is that a subscriber who has service on a new
prefix in their home area is unable to use the phone for any calls,
incoming or outgoing, in another area.  Note that this problem is not
restricted to any particular prefix, but just to the prefix's
"newness."  I have a friend that used to be a cellular phone dealer,
and this happened serveral times to customers who bought a new phone
immediately before going on a trip, and were very disappointed that
the phone didn't work in certain roaming areas.  But, it could also be
a problem specific to x00 prefixes as well.


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #843
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa26292;
          15 Nov 92 16:31 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA18698
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 15 Nov 1992 14:37:26 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA21192
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 15 Nov 1992 14:37:03 -0600
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 14:37:03 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #844

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 15 Nov 92 14:37:00 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 844

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: AT&T's COLOR Videophone With Motion (Martin McCormick)
    Re: AT&T's COLOR Videophone With Motion (Kenneth A. Becker)
    Re: AT&T's COLOR Videophone With Motion (Jim Rees)
    Re: AT&T's COLOR Videophone With Motion (Wayne Geiser)
    Re: AT&T's COLOR Videophone With Motion (Daniel Drucker)
    Re: AT&T's COLOR Videophone With Motion (Andy Sherman)
    Re: Cellular Advice Sought (Steve Forrette)
    Re: Cellular Advice Sought (Troy Frericks)
    Re: Cellular Advice Sought (Andrew C. Green)
    Re: Cellular Snooping and Privacy Issues (Jim Rees)
    Re: Cellular Snooping and Privacy Issues (William H. Sohl)
    Re: Cellular Snooping and Privacy Issues (Gregory Youngblood)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Re: AT&T's COLOR Videophone With Motion
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 11:54:54 -0600
From: [e-mail]


In a previous posting, Wayne Geiser was quoted as saying:

> we are trying to eventually get to THIRTY frames per
> second.  Thirty frames per second is the same as the number of
> animation stills they use in cartooning.  Supposedly, one cannot tell
> the difference between live video and thirty frames per second video.

Standard NTSC television is thirty frames per second.  There may be a
bit of confusion, here, because each video frame is divided into two
fields.  The odd-numbered lines make up one field and the even lines
follow, next.  This produces a frame rate of thirty, but a field rate
of 60 per second.  Each field contains half the 525 scan lines,
scanned such that they interlace.  This makes the picture flicker less
than it would if the entire image was scanned straight through from
top to bottom.

    The video systems used in much of the rest of the world are
based on a 50HZ standard and contain 25 frames per second, scanned
just like the NTSC frames.  Movie projectors which interface to film
chains have to do some fancy optical framing with their shutters to
match the 24-frame per second film speed with television frame rates.


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

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

Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 13:12:21 EST
From: [e-mail] (Kenneth A Becker)
Subject: Re: AT&T's COLOR Videophone With Motion
Organization: AT&T


Well, the local AT&T phone store brought their wares to sell and vend
to the inhabitants of the building I work in (Yeah, it's an AT&T
location).  They also brought one of those color videophones.  While
it wasn't hooked up to a telephone line, you could hit the "self-view"
switch.  After some 1-2 second dalay, a color picture did appear with
very recognizeable faces and such like on it.

I tried holding a memo up to it, but it wan't able to reproduce the
text, at least not for the short time I tried it.  It is definitly not
full motion; the picture is jerky (five to ten times a second
refresh?).  You can tell, however, if the person on the other end is
smiling, frowning, or making faces at you very well.  The screen is
about 4.5" square or thereabouts.  As I understand it, there's some
really hot digital signal processing and compression/decompression
schemes implemented in these phones.  Your mileage may vary.


Ken Becker    [e-mail]
Opinions expressed here are mine, all mine!

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

From: [e-mail] (Jim Rees)
Subject: Re: AT&T's COLOR Videophone With Motion
Date: 15 Nov 1992 10:46:47 GMT
Organization: University of Michigan CITI
Reply-To: [e-mail]


In article <[e-mail]>, Tansin A. Darcos & Company
<[e-mail]> writes:

> To put it into perspective, we think that SEVEN frames per second is
> terrible and we are trying to eventually get to THIRTY frames per
> second.  Thirty frames per second is the same as the number of
> animation stills they use in cartooning.  Supposedly, one cannot tell
> the difference between live video and thirty frames per second video.

In the US, broadcast video is 30 fps.  Elsewhere it's 25 fps.  Cartoon
animation is never done at 30 fps, even by Disney.  8 or 12 is
typical.  Motion pictures usually run at 24 fps.

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

From: pictel!nail.NoSubdomain.NoDomain![e-mail] (Wayne Geiser)
Subject: Re: AT&T's COLOR Videophone With Motion
Organization: PictureTel Corporation
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 09:29:14 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, Tansin A. Darcos & Company
<[e-mail]> writes:

>  = Forwarded Message =
>  Date:     Thu Nov 05, 1992  2:11 pm  GMT
>  From:     Wayne Geiser
>            EMS: INTERNET / MCI ID: 376-5414
>            MBX: [e-mail]
>  Subject:  Re: AT&T's COLOR Videophone WITH MOTION

I'm very disappointed with Mr. Robinson.  He (or someone else)
apparently forwarded this private mail message to this group without
my knowledge.

I am not ashamed of what I said.  However, I feel that it should be
placed in perspective.  As you undoubtedly all could see from my mail,
I have only the vaguest grasp of any of these topics.

On past occasions when I've seen interesting discussions in public
forums, I've passed the appropriate questions on to those people here
who *DO* know all the nitty gritty details.

Please do not take any of what I wrote as opinions of my employer,
PictureTel.  They are my (partially informed) opinions only.  If you
want more accurate commentary from a PictureTel employee on this
subject, you'll have to ask someone other than me.


Wayne Geiser ("Drivel King")    Voice:    [phone]
PictureTel Corporation          FAX:      [phone]
One Corporation Way             Internet: [e-mail]
Peabody, MA      01960           CIS:      70313,3615


[Moderator's Note: Mr. Geiser, I want to apologize for the
unauthorized use of your correspondence in the Digest. I make some
assuptions about the material which is sent here; one being that the
parties involved have consented to its use. The heavy volume of stuff
arriving daily makes personal confirmation by myself difficult.  But
in any event, all articles appearing in the Digest are deemed to be
the personal opinion of the writer, and in no way a reflection on the
official policy of the person's employer.  PAT]

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

Subject: Re: AT&T's COLOR Videophone With Motion
From: mertwig![e-mail] (Daniel Drucker)
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 01:36:15 EST
Organization: Odd Parity Hacker's Group


> To put it into perspective, we think that SEVEN frames per second is
> terrible and we are trying to eventually get to THIRTY frames per
> second.  Thirty frames per second is the same as the number of
> animation stills they use in cartooning.  Supposedly, one cannot tell
> the difference between live video and thirty frames per second video.

All video is 30fps.


Daniel Max P. Drucker

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

From: [e-mail] (Andy Sherman)
Subject: Re: AT&T's COLOR Videophone With Motion
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 15:00:30 EST


On 8 Nov 92 16:37:00 GMT, [e-mail] (Wayne Geiser) was
quoted as saying:

> To put it into perspective, we think that SEVEN frames per second is
> terrible and we are trying to eventually get to THIRTY frames per
> second.  Thirty frames per second is the same as the number of
> animation stills they use in cartooning.  Supposedly, one cannot tell
> the difference between live video and thirty frames per second video.

That's because live video *is* 30 frames per second.  Standard
interlaced video (in the US) consists of 60 fields per second.  Each
field contains either all the odd numberd lines or all the even
numbered lines, hence a full frame is two fields, and you get 30 of
them per second.

Aren't you glad your video guys gave you such a complete background
lecture?  :^)

Also, the AT&T Video Phone 2500 was never meant to compete with video
conferencing systems, like CLIs.  (Is that also the market niche that
PictureTel is in?  I don't recall).  The 2500 is a consumer product,
aimed at a price that a consumer might actually afford.


Andy Sherman  Salomon Inc - Unix Systems Support - Rutherford, NJ (201)
896-7018 - [e-mail] or [e-mail]
"These opinions are mine, all *MINE*.  My employer can't have them."

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: Cellular Advice Sought
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 11:04:06 GMT


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

> I understand there are cellphones now that will, if you desire, answer
> a call by themselves and accept a touchtone message that you can
> retrieve later.  You do, then, get charged for one minute of airtime.

The OKI 900 does this (also private labelled by AT&T).  If you enable
this mode, it will answer with the standard "beep-beep-beep" that
callers would associate with a display pager.  If you combine this
mode with turning off the ringing volume, this is a handy feature to
use when you're in a meeting, expecting a call, and don't want to be
disturbed.  I find that no-answer transfer to voicemail works better
for me, though.


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

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

From: mcrware!![e-mail] (Troy Frericks)
Subject: Re: Cellular Advice Sought
Organization: Microware Systems Corp., Des Moines, Iowa
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 13:46:54 GMT


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

> In article <[e-mail]>, Jerry Leichter <leichter@
> lrw.com> writes:

>> Question: She can't be the only one who wants to keep her beeper along
>> with her cellphone.  Does anyone make a combined beeper/cellphone?

> I understand there are cellphones now that will, if you desire, answer
> a call by themselves and accept a touchtone message that you can
> retrieve later.  You do, then, get charged for one minute of airtime.

For one, the high end AT&T hand-held cell phone (3710 I believe).
Cost is about $500.00.  Why not just answer the call though?  I don't
use the feature.


Troy Frericks                      Internet: [e-mail]
Microware Systems Corporation          UUCP: uunet!mcrware!troyf
1900 NW 114th St                      Phone: [phone]
Des Moines, IA 50325-7077               Fax: [phone]

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

Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 11:25:06 CST
From: Andrew C. Green <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Cellular Advice Sought


Jerry Leichter <[e-mail]> writes:

> Question: She can't be the only one who wants to keep her beeper along
> with her cellphone.  Does anyone make a combined beeper/cellphone?

Uh, Yes and No. This is a perfect description of the Ameritech
Personal Communication Services phone that I'm involved in long-term
testing of.  You may recall that a few months back, I posted a message
saying that I had been signed up by Ameritech here in the Chicago area
to be a tester of the product (along with several hundred other
people) when the prototypes were rolled out. I've now had the phone
for about six weeks.

It functions exactly as you described; incoming calls are routed to a
VoiceMail box which beeps you on the phone with either your own number
(if the caller left a voice message) or with another number entered by
the caller in your mailbox. You then return the call as you see fit.
Unfortunately this is only a test, with severely limited service areas
for using the phone for outgoing calls, although the incoming call
paging goes through Ameritech's standard pager system and will reach
you anywhere. They tell me that similar systems are being tested by
other Bell companies around the country, so you might want to see if
anything similar is available in San Francisco.

I'm working on a report for Telecom on my experiences with this
system.

Disclaimer: I have no connection to Ameritech; speaking for myself only.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Jim Rees)
Subject: Re: Cellular Snooping and Privacy Issues
Date: 15 Nov 1992 09:58:42 GMT
Organization: University of Michigan CITI
Reply-To: [e-mail]


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Richard McCombs KB5SNF) writes:

> I wonder if sales have increased since it will soon be illegal to sell
> receivers that still include cellular (such as the Icom R100), also I
> wonder if the new scanners will no longer be easily modifiable to
> receive cellular?

A local radio shop reports a large increase (about 10x) in the number
of scanner sales since the law was passed.  They didn't know whether
the law would prohibit scanners that don't receive cellular out of the
box but can be modified with a simple diode cut.

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

From: [e-mail] (sohl,william h)
Subject: Re: Cellular Snooping and Privacy Issues
Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 15:14:37 GMT


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

> [e-mail] (Monty Solomon) writes:

>> After discussing privacy laws, legalities, and realities, Flinn notes
>> that at Scanners Unlimited in San Carlos, CA, "about a quarter of the
>> customers are interested in telephone eavesdropping."

> I wonder if sales have increased since it will soon be illegal to sell
> receivers that still include cellular (such as the Icom R100), also I
> wonder if the new scanners will no longer be easily modifiable to
> receive cellular?

The new law includes language which states that new scanners must NOT
be easily midifiable to receive cellular.  So, the law at least
dictates that thought, ut it remains to be determined what the FCC
will consider the threshold of "easily modified" to be.

More importantly, the ability for someone to construct a broadband
frequency converter is and always will be relatively easy and that,
will still provide those with a desire to listen to cellular, an
alternative means to enable their scanner to recieve cellular without
any internal modification.  For those that might not know what a
broadband converter is, it is a simple device that takes a range of
frequencies and shifts them by a finite frequency shift to another
range.  For example, you could build a broadband converter that takes
all the frequencies from 700-1000mhz and shifts them to 500-800mhz.
By doing that, the cellular frequencies in the 800mhz range come out
at 600mhz and can then be idividually derived by any scanner that
includes a receive capability that goes up to the 600mhz range.

This very subject was initially mentioned by the editor of "Monitoring
Times" magazine when the new cellular scanner ban law was sent to the
white house.  The reality is that there is simply nothing that can be
done to ensure that no one is listening to any cellular call that is
not encrypted.

It is for this very reason that I have emphasised to my family and
friends that they should always treat any cellular (or cordless) phone
conversation as if it were being broadcast to the public at large and,
therefore, they should not divulge anything (e.g. credit card numbers,
etc.) when using those type phone calls.


Standard Disclaimer- Any opinions, etc. are mine and NOT my employer's.
Note - If email replying to me with an automatic addressing process
bounces, manually address the resend using one of the addresses below.

Bill Sohl (K2UNK) BELLCORE (Bell Communications Research, Inc.)
Morristown, NJ             email via UUCP      bcr!dancer!whs70
201-829-2879 Weekdays      email via Internet  [e-mail]

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

Subject: Re: Cellular Snooping and Privacy Issues
From: srcsip!tcscs![e-mail] (Gregory Youngblood)
Reply-To: srcsip!tcscs![e-mail]
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 18:45:57 CST
Organization: TCS Consulting Services


[e-mail] (Richard McCombs KB5SNF) writes:

> [e-mail] (Monty Solomon) writes:

>> After discussing privacy laws, legalities, and realities, Flinn notes
>> that at Scanners Unlimited in San Carlos, CA, "about a quarter of the
>> customers are interested in telephone eavesdropping."

> I wonder if sales have increased since it will soon be illegal to sell
> receivers that still include cellular (such as the Icom R100), also I
> wonder if the new scanners will no longer be easily modifiable to
> receive cellular?

According to the debate raging in alt.privacy, it will be illegal to
import or manufacture equipment capable of receiving or easily
modified so that it can receive those frequencies used by cellular.


Greg
TCS Consulting Services   P.O. Box 600008   St. Paul, MN  55106-0008
 ..!srcsip!tcscs!zeta                ..!src.honeywell.com!tcscs!zeta
[e-mail]                      tcscs![e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #844
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa28172;
          15 Nov 92 17:24 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA28015
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 15 Nov 1992 15:27:16 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA29030
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 15 Nov 1992 15:26:57 -0600
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 15:26:57 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #845

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 15 Nov 92 15:27:00 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 845

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Advice Needed on Telephone Security Systems (Macy Hallock)
    Re: Advice Needed on Telephone Security Systems (Barton F. Bruce)
    Re: Advice Needed on Telephone Security Systems (Steve Forrette)
    Re: Advice Needed on Telephone Security Systems (Dave Ptasnik)
    Re: Advice Needed on Telephone Security Systems (Mark J. Elkins)
    Re: HELP Needed on JPEG Standard! (Jack Adams)
    Re: HELP Needed on JPEG Standard! (Ken Stox)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 01:00 EST
From: fmsys![e-mail] (Macy Hallock)
Subject: Re: Advice Needed on Telephone Security Systems
Organization: F M Systems, Inc.  Medina, Ohio 44256 USA


In article <[e-mail]> is Kamran Husain writes:

> Lately there's been a rash of robberies in our area where the mode of
> operation has rendered most home security systems useless.

OK, I'll give you the perpective of someone who has been actively
involved in the alarm industry for fifteen years.  I also have been
involved in telecommunications for over twenty years.  Combining this
knowledge has resulted in some interesting solutions.

> Most houses hit have the breakers outside the security zone. Crooks
> snip the phone lines and cut the power off. If someone's home, the
> owner goes out to turn the power on and the alarm off. (S)he then
> walks back in with the crooks. If they are not home for (say for the
> weekend) crooks come back after 24 hour when the battery back up is
> drained for the siren. The alarm monitoring company is NOT notified
> since the phones are dead and that's the only lifeline back.

First, not all states require an external power disconnect.  However,
the same effect can be gained by removing the electric meter ... you
should lock the disconnect if you can.

This mode of compromise has been performed by "clever" intruders in
the past.  Our company discovered a similar scenario during a local
rash of intrusions several years ago.  We ended up catching them in a
house, as they had become very bold and decided to ignore a siren that
sounded when they cut the phone lines (this was in a rural area).
They were very surprised when the sheriff's cars pulled up ...  (See
item four below for the method that caught them)

Once the perpetrators are apprehended, the problem is lessened
somewhat.  Nonetheless, the general trend is increasing sophistication
on the part of many intruders.  Generally speaking, the common
everyday thief is not using techniques such as these often ... yet.
Its wise to consider this when designing a residential security
system.

When a homeowner decides to cut the cost of a residential system,
extra measures such as the ones below are often dropped.  Many alarm
companies are so sensitive to price competition that they do not
propose some type of line/transmission security unless specifically
asked to do so.

> My house was hit day before yesterday but we stayed indoors and used a
> mobile phone (luckily!! inside the house!) to call the sheriff.  No
> theft, but scared us witless when the both our regular POTS phones
> were dead.

Very smart move.  You may have saved yourselves from physical harm.

> Also, we found on later examination that our cable TV coax was cut.
> (Why cable???)

There are a few areas in which alarm transmission services are
avaiable via cable TV.  It sounds like the intruders are trying to be
thorogh ... or are just plain paranoid.

> a) Is there a secondary way of notifying a monitoring station that AC
> power is out AND that the phones are no longer functoning? Is it done
> on cable TV? or is there a wireless (radio/CB/cellular) transmitter
> for those people who do not have mobile phones?

There are several alternatives:

1. Cellular transmission.  That's what we use for those who want the
most effective solution.  Its also rather costly.

2. 900 mhz or other type of mid range radio transmission.  Ademco,
Radionics and others make such systems.  They are generally sold only
by a few alarm companies.  Some of these work reasonably well, but few
alarm installers are able to cope with the complexity of properly
installing RF transmitters and antennas.  If installed well, and
favorable propogation/location characteristics are present (with
respect to the receiving antenna), many brands work well.  Note that
many of these systems are unable to warn you of an antenna failure,
except by frequent testing.

3. Short range radio transmission (to a neighbor's location) ... also
called "buddy system" radio.  Uses a low power transmitter to signal a
telephone line failure to a nearby receiver, usually in a neighbor's
location, which then calls the alarm central station to report the
failure.

4. Decoy wiring and good batteries.  We often will arrange for a
customer's phone lines to enter underground with no appearence on the
outside of the customer's premise.  A decoy telephone interface box,
complete with exposed cable going into the ground is installed, and
wired to a tamper alarm circuit in the alarm system.  24 to 48 hour
standby power is also installed in the alarm.  This method has saved
several customers, and has also frightened a couple of telephone
repairmen [grin] ... but they were GTE employees and seemed to survive
the experience.

The telco also don't mess with our customers anymore.  They now call
us and ask when they see our alarm stickers on a premises.  Serves
them right for all the RJ31X's they miswired and disconnected on us
over the years.

5. Subcarrier telephone connections.  In a few areas of the country,
telephone companies installed special equipment to allow alarm
signalling to occur "under" the regular voice use of a phone line, and
was monitored in the central office just like a dedicated leased line
(like jewelry stores use).  This worked reasonably well, but was more
expensive that digital dialers.

These methods have had a noticable effect on our customers security.
We have far less attempts against our alarm systems now that we did
ten years ago.  Not so for most of our competitors, it seems
(according to casual conversations we've had with law enforcement
personnel).

The extent we go to secure our communications link (as opposed to most
of our competitors) is one of the small differences in our system
installations.  It does add to the cost of installing a system.

Remember, the best alarm benefit is to deter, not capture.  Sorry to
say, would-be intruders do not leave "Sorry, we missed you" cards on
your doorknob when they decide not to break in after looking around.

Once they enter or, worse yet, confront you, the chances of a loss or
tragedy increase dramatically. (BTW: NEVER, EVER CONFRONT AN INTRUDER.
That's how people get hurt or killed.  If you hear them coming in,
call 911, or better yet, leave quickly.)

The theory here is to "harden the target" to an extent that
discourages the would be intruder.  Unfortunately, you may never know
if you actually succeeded.

> b) Any recommendations on such devices out there?

See above.  All work.

> c) Why were cable connections cut? Do some monitoring stations use
> cable coax for communications back to the head node for purposes other
> than cable TV channel $$$ monitoring?

Yes, but very few cable companies do it anymore.  It seems as though
the cable plant designs of years gone by did not accomodate two way
operation well.  (I'm thinking of Warner's QUBE in Columbus, Ohio)
There were some TOCOM based systems that worked better, I'm told.

Now that fiber is starting to be deployed by cable operators, this
might change.  Don't know if the economics will work.

> d) How can I hide the phone connections at my house or make the
> snipping a less than trivial process?

See item four.  Remember to examine the "pedestal" terminal the phone
company keeps nearby for local connections.  It should be either
bolted shut with a security bolt, or locked.

IMHO, this is a point of failure common to several premises, but the
phone company does not take securing these very seriously until they
encounter repeated vandalism.  Oddly enough, we have not had problems
with tampering in these terminals...except by seasoned pros after high
value goods.  (You don't stop the real pros that easily ... that's why
we use cellular for high security.)

I could easily write another lengthy article on what we have gone
through to obtain telco cooperation in securing residential telephone
lines.  The telco is not very interested in security.  We have to do
all the work for them.

In alarm systems, like other things, a bit of knowledge and working
with an organization of high integrity makes a difference.  Try and
buy a cheap alarm system, and that's exactly what you might get.

Note: I've intentionally not given out names of manufacturers or model
numbers in an attempt to be fair ... and non-commercial.  All
operational descriptions are general in nature.  Your milage may vary.
Engage common sense before operating.


Macy Hallock  +1.216.723.3000  Fax [phone]  [e-mail]
F M Systems, Inc.  150 Highland Drive  Medina, OH USA     [e-mail]

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

From: Barton F. Bruce <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Advice Needed on Telephone Security Systems
Organization: Cambridge Computer Associates, Inc.
Date: 15 Nov 92 01:45:01 EDT


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Kamran Husain) writes:

> Lately there's been a rash of robberies in our area where the mode of
> operation has rendered most home security systems useless.  (I don't

> Most houses hit have the breakers outside the security zone. Crooks
> snip the phone lines and cut the power off. If someone's home, the

> a) Is there a secondary way of notifying a monitoring station that AC

Some central stations will accept "I'm OK" calls every 24 hours. Maybe
your alarm system can be set to do those more frequently and maybe the
central station will accept and ACT if they don't get them.

The key here is that the central station MUST notice that you did not
call in on time. This should NOT be a manual operation with a printer
and a tub of customer cards, but a computerized company that can set
limits that will automatically alarm if you don't call in within a
designated schedule.

Note well that the unit steals your phone line to call in, so if you
had a six hour schedule, you want a separate alarm line lest a call of
yours be chopped by the alarm dialer.

If the alarm company and the cops figure out what is happening, they
can be quietly waiting when the crooks return.

A local alarm can be raised whenever the phone line is cut. Readily
available line monitor cards can do that. Smart burglar would clip a
LARGE capacitor across your line to preclude rotary or tone dialing,
but NOT cut it. Or could clip a 9 v radio battery across line so your
line monitor would see some battery, and then CUT the line beyond the
battery. In general, unless they really want YOUR house, they won't be
that careful.

Use exterior lighting that uses 12 v DC electronic ballasts for 14 -
18 watt flourescents - readily available from Solar supply houses.
Normally feed it from a transformer plus rectifier, but when power
fails have it switch to a couple of BIG Sears DieHards in parallel
that are normally trickle charged.

Have some inside lighting powered from it too. You can get MANY hours
of light easily that way, and a 14 watt flourescent puts out a LOT of
light.

Run your alarm off another such battery (but with NO lights to drain
it) and the crooks won't wait enough days for it to die out.

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: Advice Needed on Telephone Security Systems
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 10:52:03 GMT


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

> The phone company provides the means in our area to deal with this
> threat.  You have the option of having the phone company put a ping on
> your line every few minutes.  You can actually hear the tone if you
> have a test set monitoring the line.

When I was learning about the radio alarm systems I spoke of in a
recent post, I had the opportunity to speak to the chief engineer in
charge of it for a major alarm company.  Since I was aware that
Pacific Bell had trialed the service you describe above and was
touting it to customers, I asked why the alarm company didn't use this
new service, as it seemed a lot cheaper than installing a network of
their own base stations and leased lines from them to HQ.  At the
time, I think Pacific Bell was charging $1.50 a month or so for this
service.

The engineer was quite familiar with the Pacific Bell service, and in
fact sat on the comittee of alarm company folks that Pacific Bell had
commissioned to work on integration issues.  He said that the alarm
companies had all concluded that they would not use this service, and
would rather invest in their own wireless technologies.  He said that
on more than one occasion in the past, Pacific Bell had gotten them
down the path of some new service for alarm monitoring, only to screw
the alarm companies once they had gotten far enough to make changing
impratical.  He was absolutely convinced that if the alarm companies
went with this new service, and didn't install their own wireless
infrastructure, that as soon as there was enough of an installed base,
Pacific Bell would skyrocket the rates, as they had done in the past
for other special alarm circuits.  This opinion was apparently shared
by all of the alarm companies, as I know of none that ever used this
service outside of the trials.


Steve Forrette, [e-mail], I do not speak for my employer


[Moderator's Note: Speaking of radio alarms, I saw something curious
the other day at the local Western Union affiliated currency exchange
here. On a shelf in the cashier's cage was a small unit with an
antenna on it which looked a lot like a little portable battery
operated radio, but it also had a thing inside which looked like a
casette tape --  a 'Walkman'-like thing. The odd part was the label on
the front: the phrase "Western Union" and that company's logo. At
first I thought it was an alarm of some sort, but I don't see how it
could have any long-range transmission ability. Maybe it was a
receiver of some sort. Any ideas?  PAT]

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

Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 09:55:51 -0800 (PST)
From: Dave Ptasnik <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Advice Needed on Telephone Security Systems


Several people have asked me about the telco feature that notifies
alarm monitoring compaines that your line has been cut, so I called US
West to get a few more details:-

US West offers the service under the name Scan Alert.  Installation is
$60.00, monthly is $7.50.  Not all alarm companies are able to receive
the signalling, but many of the big boys can, including ADT and Sears.
The US West office that works with the alarm companies has the number
[phone].  They may be able to help you find the "magic words"
to order the service from your local phone company.  I did confirm
that the service works on existing lines, and notifies the alarm
company if your phone line gets cut.

All of the above is nothing more than the personal opinion of:


Dave Ptasnik          [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Advice Needed on Telephone Security Systems
Organization: Mark's Machine (Working for Olivetti Africa)
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 06:32:59 GMT


In <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(William Petrisko) writes:

Here in South Africa there are no cellular services.  On my (old)
house alarm, I had a telephone dialer (with my paging and office
numbers) and a radio link.  There is a transmitter in the roof (loft).
Almost all alarms in this country are connected in this fasion.
Connections by phone are more the exception -- do you trust wires?
Most transmitters are single signal varieties.  There are alarm
'clearing houses' who receive the signal and then phone/relay the
signal to your prefered Reaction Unit (which is big buisness in RSA).
Some Reaction Units do have their own recievers.  You pay a small
installation charge and monthly rental.  The cost for alarm and armed
response was 95 rand a month, about US $35.

Newer transmitters monitor four circuits:

1) Alarm,
2) Forced alarm deactivation (man with gun at you head saying "Switch
it off"),
3) Low Power (Battery, not mains :-),
4) Fire detection.

>> d) How can I hide the phone connections at my house or make the
>> snipping a less than trivial process?

In my new house, I needed more lines.  In agreement with Telkom, I
laid an underground poly-pipe to the distribution poll.  All my cables
are now underground, but the old wires are in the air (unconnected at
both ends). I'm hoping that any criminal activity will cut the
obvious overhead wire.

> Honestly, a cheap answer to your problem would be a small board (the
> manufacturer name escapes me) that monitors the phone line voltage,
> and connect it to the alarm so it trips the siren.

Are US phone lines _that_ reliable?  (Amusing thought of criminal
element taking out a major phone trunk -- just to see what happens ...)

> Another backup-battery in parallel (or just a bigger aH in it's
> place) might make you feel more secure too.

Most alarms are 12 volt; got an unused car battery?


Olivetti Systems & Networks, Unix Support - Africa
UUCP: uunet!olsa99!mje (Mark J. Elkins)
[e-mail] (Postmaster) Tel: [phone]

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

From: vixen![e-mail] (22475-adams)
Subject: Re: HELP Needed on JPEG Standard!
Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 13:02:37 GMT


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

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

> compress video for transmission between sets.
> As an aside ... why in the world did they use that <2500> model number?  Is
> it possible that someone at AT&T didn't know it had been used once
> before, for a product that once had what might be called 'significant
> market penetration'?

Or could it be that some marketeers hope for a repeat performance with
the new "2500"?


Jack (John) Adams        Bellcore NVC 2Z-220
[phone] {Voice}        [phone] {Facsimile}
[e-mail]    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Ken Stox)
Subject: Re: HELP Needed on JPEG Standard!
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Ken Stox)
Organization: AC Nielsen Co.
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 21:47:55 GMT


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

> While John is correct, JPEG does turn up in some interesting
> telecom-related contexts.  According to some of my informally-received
> information, the AT&T model 2500 video phone uses JPEG in real time to
> compress video for transmission between sets.

> As an aside ... why in the world did they use that model number?  Is
> it possible that someone at AT&T didn't know it had been used once
> before, for a product that once had what might be called 'significant
> market penetration'?

Were I the guessing sort, I would say that this was quite intentional.
Someone believes that this will become as popular as the original 2500
set. NOT!


Ken Stox     Consultant to A.C. Nielsen    [e-mail]
#include <std_disclaimer.h>

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #845
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa29915;
          15 Nov 92 18:23 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA00931
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 15 Nov 1992 16:23:28 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA00453
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 15 Nov 1992 16:22:58 -0600
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 16:22:58 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #846

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 15 Nov 92 16:23:00 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 846

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: The Worst Phone Lines in the US? (Greg Stovall)
    Re: The Worst Phone Lines in the US? (Steve Glaser)
    Re: Private Lines, Bandwidth (Kenny Adams)
    Re: Private Lines, Bandwidth (John Higdon)
    Re: Airfone -- Phooey (Andrew C. Green)
    Re: Airfone -- Phooey (Jordan Hayes)
    Re: Personal 800 Numbers (New C&W Pricing) (Dave Ptasnik)
    Re: Personal 800 Numbers (David H. Close)
    Re: Personal 800 Numbers (Henry Mensch)
    Re: Risks of Cellular Speech (David H. Close)
    Re: Risks Of Cellular Speech (Henry Mensch)
    Re: Risks Of Cellular Speech (H. Shrikumar)
    Re: Cellular Phones Free? (Dwight Johns)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 06:50:00 +0000
From: Greg (G.T.) Stovall <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: The Worst Phone Lines in the US?


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

> I seem to remember a story that appeared in the TELECOM Digest several
> years ago about the SWB-GTE situation in Texas.  There was a large
> company, Atlantic Richfield I think, that moved a large complex from
> an area served by SWB to one served by GTE.  The GTE service was so
> inadequate that they had all of their local lines terminate in SWB
> territory, then piped them into their office in GTE territory via
> private microwave.  GTE got upset about this and sued.  The
> small space they rented in SWB territory) was their business.

Hmm.  Maybe that explains the microwave array on the roof.  When AR
vacated their old facility in Richardson (consolidated into the new
Plano facility) there were still active microwave links on the roof.
I don't know if these were remaining local links for just that
building or if AR still rented the roof space for SWB transmissions.


Gregory T. Stovall        <[e-mail]>
Bell-Northern Research    Richardson, Texas, USA   [phone]
My opinions are not necessarily endorsed by BNR.

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

Subject: Re: The Worst Phone Lines in the US?
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 11:13:55 -0500
From: [e-mail]


[e-mail] (Steve Forrette) described a story with Atlantic
Ritchfield buying Southwestern Bell (SWB) lines and using private
microwave to send the over to GTE territory.

I heard that Burroughs (now Unisys) did the same trick in the LA area
back in the 60s for their Pasadena CA plant.

On a different, but related front ...

In the early 70s, SWB in Houston realized that they had a major mess
in their cable plant.  They hired phone workers from lots of other
Bell companies for a major "document and rewire the city" effort.  For
about a year it was not unusual to see phone trucks all over town with
Mountain Bell / Pacific Bell / Southern Bell / ... logos on them.  A
college friend that worked for SWB during the summers told me the
story.

Maybe they just didn't "do" Dallas? :-)


Steveg


[Moderator's Note: Is that what they meant when they made the movie
"DEBBIE Does Dallas"?  DEBBIE = Decrepit, Eroded Baby Bell, Inc. Etc.
I wish 'they' would do Chicago also. It is a mess here too.  :)  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Kenny Adams)
Subject: Re: Private Lines, Bandwidth
Organization: University of Prince Edward Island
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 06:32:24 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> Alan Boritz <72446.461@
CompuServe.COM> writes:

> [e-mail] (JOHN SCHMIDT) writes:

>> Telco tariffs and technical standards have specific limits on signal
>> levels and baud rates, to prevent crosstalk into other services.

>> "Program" circuits are limited to +8 dbm, as measured on a"VU" meter
>> (+18dbm peak), although I have run much hotter levels in unamplified
>> loops without "detection" (read 'complaint').

> AT&T, NYTel, and just about every other telco in the US use *0 dBm*
> as their nominal level transmission standard, NOT +8.

> That's a hell of an example to set for a public radio station at an
> educational institution: know your standards ... and ignore them.

In Canada the contracts that we (CBC) have with the various telephone
companies for program circuits specify 0vu = +8dBm with program peaks
to +18 dBm.  the signal travels over twisted pairs at this level. it
is processed before going into their mux at the co.  the contracts
have clauses in them restricting the length of +18 dBm tone we may
feed on the circuit. in fact we are supposed to ask the carrier for
permission to do headroom testing on analogue multiplexed circuits, as
the high audio levels could exceed the maximum loading for the mux
resulting in the loss of all of the calls on the channel.  this is not
a problem with digital transmissions or with audio subcarriers on top
of our video circuits. we have several hundred program audio circuits
with the various telcos.

I work for CBC as an electronics maintenance technician in both radio
and TV. These are my ramblings and not those of the Canadian
Broadcasting Corp.


kenny adams                charlottetown prince edward island canada
[e-mail]   standard disclaimers apply....

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

Subject: Re: Private Lines, Bandwidth
Date: 15 Nov 92 01:27:45 PST (Sun)
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)


Alan Boritz <[e-mail]> writes:

> AT&T, NY Tel, and just about every other telco in the US use *0 dBm*
> as their nominal level transmission standard, NOT +8.

> That's a hell of an example to set for a public radio station at an
> educational institution: know your standards ... and ignore them.

Decades ago, I was involved with a small classical station that had
its studio in Los Gatos (GTE).  We had just moved the programming
operation from the transmitter site up on the hill and had 15KHz phone
lines installed. From day one, the lines were nothing but trouble.
They were muddy. They were unreliable. They had about 50 db loss. If
you think GTE is incompetent now, you should have seen it back in the
late sixties!

Since the studio and the transmitter were "served" out of the same
office, it would have seemed a simple matter for GTE to have provided
decent circuits. But no. We managed to equalize the muddiness out
ourselves. But the worst problem was the incessant "dialing clicks"
that could be heard over the loudest fortissimo passages and that
would raise one right out of his chair during the pianissimo segments.

Our solution was unconventional. We impedance-matched a pair of Dynaco
amplifiers to the phone lines at the studio end. Then we drove them at
about the ten-watt level. This had the effect of pushing the dial
clicks down about thirty decibels, but had the additional effect of
leaking symphonic music into a number of telephones in the area. GTE
was furious. So were we. It ended up being a standoff (GTE did not
disconnect us; we did not go to the PUC) until the station was sold
and the new owners bought a 950 MHz link to the studio and also began
playing rock music.


John Higdon <[e-mail]> (hiding out in the desert)

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

Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 09:35:17 CST
From: Andrew C. Green <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Airfone -- Phooey


[e-mail] (Henry Mensch) writes:

> Is anyone happy with these things?  I've never gotten one to work to
> my satisfaction ...

Happiness is in the eye of the beholder, but I find the process of
setting up a call to be a bit counterintuitive at best. I had to read
the directions several times to comprehend them, and as a computer
programmer I don't feel I'm particularly dense in these matters. If
memory serves, you have to wait until a green light stops blinking
before swiping your credit card through the handset, THEN you have to
wait until the green light goes OUT before dialing. Something like
that. As someone else pointed out, you must wait for a collection of
beeps and boops to finish, then dial the call; the delay seemed to be
due to the phone trying to get an authorization from my AmEx card
before proceeding. After following the instructions to the letter and
dialing very slowly, it still took two or three attempts before I got
through.

I chalked up the experience to Early Technology and took comfort in
the fact that a few years earlier, I would have had no means of making
the call at all.


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

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

Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 18:18:55 EST
From: [e-mail] (Jordan Hayes)
Subject: Re: Airfone -- Phooey
Organization: Investment Management Services Inc., NYC


Kenny Crudup <[e-mail]> writes:

> "No RJ11 jack (for modem)" - the bandwith ain't good enough to
> let you use one, from the specs I've read here.

Actually, Peter Honeyman recently put an accoustic coupler onto one at
35,000 feet and got his modem to connect, albeit at 300 baud.  He got
PPP up and working, but was getting 60 second round trip times from
ICMP echo packets ... I guess they were spending all their time
getting corrected between the modems ... :-)


jordan

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

Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 09:59:32 -0800 (PST)
From: Dave Ptasnik <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Personal 800 Numbers (New C&W Pricing)


Cable and Wireless has recently changed their 800 pricing.  A new
option allows no monthly charges and a per minute day rate of $.29.
This comes with an ANI calling number printout at the end of the
month.  Call set up time is pretty long, at least on my number.
Probably not suitable for normal business applications.

All of the above is nothing more than the personal opinion of:


Dave Ptasnik          [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (David H. Close)
Subject: Re: Personal 800 Numbers
Date: 15 Nov 1992 01:44:05 GMT
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena


Tansin A. Darcos & Company <[e-mail]> writes:

[ a list of 800 vendors and prices ]

Just FYI, "Call Home America" offers unpublished 800 service (real
number, no password after connect) for $3.75/month plus usage between
16c and 25c/ minute.  Full ANI billing, charged to your credit card.
Portable in that you can change the destination number anywhere in the
US.  IMHO, a terrific deal, cheaper than collect or calling cards
(especially if an AOS gets involved), can't be abused like the Call-Me
card.  Great for college students.

CHA is at 800 594 3000.  I'm only a satisfied customer.  True, they
would offer me a rebate for referrals, but only if you knew my account
number.


Dave Close, [e-mail], BS'66 Ec

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

From: [e-mail] (Henry Mensch)
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 23:12:17 -0800
Subject: Re: Personal 800 Numbers
Reply-To: [e-mail]


Tansin A. Darcos & Company <[e-mail]> wrote:

> AT&T will offer a regular 800 number, for $15 a month plus usage which
> is, if I'm not mistaken, a flat 31c/Minute.  This ties into an
> ordinary phone number.  There is a charge of $30 to install it.

Is this really the personal 800 tariff?  I'm using Pac*Bell's personal
800 service and I'm only paying $5/month and $0.25/minute (billed in
six-second intervals). The service is actually provided by Sprint;
they bill the Sprint $15/month fee on the bill I get for usage, and a
credit appears simultaneously.  I pay the $5/month to Pac*Bell. This
gives you a real 800 number, and not one of those bogus "call this 800
number and then dial this extra code" crapola.

I get the listing of callers (with phone number, city, date, time and
length of call) in my personal 800 Sprint bill.

My only gripe is that my number is either very close to someone else's
number, or was recycled too soon, because I get bills with calls that
weren't authorized (I know this because I've not given out the number
to anyone ... I use it myself for one specific purpose). The total
cost of these calls has been less than $0.15 over the past few months,
so this isn't a big deal for me ... but it might be for someone else.


# henry mensch / booz, allen & hamilton, inc.  / <[e-mail]>
#     for information on the league for programming freedom,
#                     write to [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (David H. Close)
Subject: Re: Risks of Cellular Speech
Date: 15 Nov 1992 01:31:52 GMT
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena


[e-mail] writes:

> Also, you might ask the same question about why the members of
> Congress involved with Mr. Keating of American Savings didn't tell him
> to fix the problems with his S&L ...

Keating was associated with Lincoln Savings which is defunct.
American Savings, my employer, is healthy and so profitable that the
Fed is trying to renegotiate its contracts.  Just thought you ought to
know.


Dave Close, [e-mail], BS'66 Ec



[Moderator's Note: Tell your employer to watch their backside very
closely, and check out the number the feds did on Talman Federal
Savings in Chicago. Uncle Sugar talked (then healthy) Talman into
taking over all sorts of horribly managed, deeply in debt S&L's over
the years, and promised to allow 'goodwill credit' on the books of
Talman if they got in trouble as a result of trying to save so many
sinking ships. Talman bought Uncle's line of crapola; there are now a
dozen S&L's merged into the LaSalle-Talman-Home Federal group; the
whole thing is drenched in red ink, and Uncle Sugar, like any good
used car salesman has forgotten (or denies making) all those promises.
Tell your employers they have been warned to watch out and accept no
worthless promises from Uncle.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Henry Mensch)
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 23:53:16 -0800
Subject: Re: Risks Of Cellular Speech
Reply-To: [e-mail]


Frank Vance <airgun![e-mail]> wrote:

> 1. First of all, why did the various cellular providers make promises
> of "safe and secure communications" when they knew anybody with a
> little money could buy a receiver to listen in?

Money.  It wouldn't sell if they couldn't say these things, and it was
easier to fib than to do anything about it.

> 2. Why, instead of fixing the technical deficiencies in their product
> do they go sniveling to Congress to make it illegal to listen (as if
> they are ever going to be able to enforce it)?

Money; it's cheaper to buy Congress than to retrofit every phone in
the field.

> 3. Why in the world did our government accept the snivelling and pass
> the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, instead of telling the
> cellular providers to go fix their own problems?

They were just doing the job the cellular phone companies paid them to
do.

Am I being too pessimistic?


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


[Moderator's Note: Pessimistic? Not at all, Henry. The US Congress is
just as easily bribed as a judge in Chicago; only the rates are a
little higher since the 'territory covered' is greater.  PAT]

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

Date: Sun 15 Nov 92 08:27:10 -0500
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Risks Of Cellular Speech
Organization: UMass, Amherst MA + Temporal Sys & Computer Networks Bombay India


> Excerpt from RISKS DIGEST 13.89

>  Date: 02 Nov 92 12:00:22 EST
>  From: Dave King <[e-mail]>
>  Subject: Risks Of Cellular Speech

> [The following was distributed here at work by our security folks. I

> Two Bell Canada security managers shared some startling data with us
> recently.  In a three-month study of the Metro Toronto area earlier
> this summer, Bell found that 80 percent of all cellular telephone
> traffic is monitored by third parties.  Even more eye-opening is the
> fact that 60 percent of monitored calls are taped for closer scrutiny

 Gee now I am beginning to get confused as to which article I saw in
RISKS and which in CDT, the only two newsgroups I read!

 If indeed this was in RISKS, I also remember that the next issue had
a retraction saying that "they had not authority to say 80%" or give
any such percentage. Someone happened to challenge how this survey
could have been conducted at all!


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


[Moderator's Note: Yep, and I think the retraction appeared here also
about the same time.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Dwight Johns)
Subject: Re: Cellular Phones Free?
Date: 15 Nov 92 01:46:09 GMT
Organization: U S WEST NewVector Group, Inc.


Maybe the phone itself is free, but it might say "my first Sony" or
"Fisher Price" on the side of it, and I would be willing to bet that
you will have to sign up for at least one year of service with
whatever cellular carrier is sponsoring the promotion. Nothing is
really free ... except that one extra Life Saver in that little roll,
that really is free.


Dwight Snake Doward Johns   [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #846
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa03817;
          15 Nov 92 20:22 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA09893
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 15 Nov 1992 18:24:03 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA16547
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 15 Nov 1992 18:23:41 -0600
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 18:23:41 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #847

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 15 Nov 92 18:23:40 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 847

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Help Needed With DTMF Tones (Tony Pelliccio)
    Re: Help Needed With DTMF Tones (Alistair Grant)
    Re: Help Needed With DTMF Tones (Koos van den Hout)
    Re: Armored Phone (Joe Bergstein)
    Re: Computerized Sales Call "Locked" My Line (Todd Lawrence)
    Re: Airfones -- Phooey! (Todd Lawrence)
    Re: New SPARCstation LX Has Built-in ISDN From AT&T (John Adams)
    Re: RBOC Exit From CPE Market? (Ben Harrell)
    Re: Cordless Phone Newbie Question (Bill Pfeiffer)
    Re: BC Tel Pay Numbers (Andy Sherman)
    Re: Telephone Phreaks (Daniel Drucker)
    Re: Telephone Phreaks (Jan Richert)
    Re: Request: Large Format FAX (Tony Harminc)
    Re: South African Telecom (Steve Forrette)
    Re: Two Cellular Phones on the Same Number (Laird Broadfield)
    Re: Personal 800 Numbers (Paul Barnett)
    My Apologies (Paul Robinson)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 18:10:22 EST
From: Tony Pelliccio <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Help Needed With DTMF Tones


As far as how fast you have to send them, it depends on where you are.
Here I can dial fairly reliably at a 35ms tone rate, Ie. the actual
tone lasts 35ms, the spacing is probably the same. Not really sure. In
some areas 40ms is the lowest, in others, especially xbar systems,
70ms.


Tony    [e-mail]

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

Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992  19:27:33 EST
From: Alistair Grant <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Help Needed With DTMF Tones


Hello,

     The response about DTMF tones was great. Every one says I need
both tones, not the average -- ok -- but my physics book says that
when two pure frequencies are emitted then the resultant frequency and
frequency only is the average.

     Anyway with just one speaker how do I emulate two tones so as to
fool the phone? I have seen watches that dial telephone number; how do
they do it?


Ta -

Alistair GRANT

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

From: koos![e-mail]
Subject: Re: Help Needed With DTMF Tones
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 20:17:13 GMT


Alistair Grant <[e-mail]> writes:

> phone dialer, I have the tones: I have a program that creates the
> average of these tones for the corresponding number

Both tones need to be transmitted at the same time with equal loudness
(yup, that's two tones ... there goes the PC speaker ...)

> Can you tell me what is going wrong? I have the tones last for 0.5 of
> a second and seperated by 0.1 of a second.

Mark and Space times (On and Off) need to be of the same length (>=0.5
sec) to be recognized as valid.

> If you can shed any light on the subject that would be cool.

Cool? Winter is cool. This is autumn ...


Grtx. KH
Koos van den Hout -----------------------------------------------Sysop --\
Student Computer Science (AKA HIO)       BBS Koos z'n Doos ([phone])
Inter-: [e-mail]                 300..14400 MNP2-5,10,V42bis)
net   : [e-mail]          Fido: Sysop @ 2:500/101.11012
Surfnet RUUMTC::VANDENHOUT

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

From: [e-mail] (Joe Bergstein)
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 17:12:07 -0500
Subject: Re: Armored Phone


[e-mail] (andrew m. boardman) writes:

> I need a wall-mountable telephone for indoors use that's fairly theft-
> and vandalism-proof.  Who sells this kind of stuff?

Try  CEECO
     1580 N.W. 65th Avnue
     Plantation, Florida 33313
     305.587.5430   305.587.5440

Saw this firm's booth at a trade show last year.  They specialize in
producing steel clad phones for use where vandalism is highly likely.
I believe their main market is for phones is *prisons*.

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

Subject: Re: Computerized Sales Call "Locked" My Line
From: [e-mail] (Todd Lawrence)
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 14:24:03 CST
Organization: (What? Organized??) - Mythical Computer Systems


[e-mail] (Cliff Sharp) writes:

>> [Moderator's Note: Well you are right of course that 20-30 seconds
>> can mean life or death under some conditions. But the current telco
>> technology is such that if the man wants his phone line back (more or
>> less) immediatly, he will need to disconnect and wait about that
>> period of time for the CO to get rid of the other party who is hanging
>> on the line.  PAT]

>    I've found that (at least locally) I can get those calls off the
> line by shorting tip to ring.  Not a _nice_ thing to do, but very
> effective.  I figure the total impedance in the runs from the CO to
> the house should very effectively prevent any real burnout, and so far
> I've been right (or lucky) about that.  Don't know _why_ it works, but
> it does.

Just to re-iterate, as Pat originally stated, in an ESS environment,
you will recieve your dialtone after closing the switchhook for 30-40
sec's or so (depending on your particular switch/configuration/system
load).  In a step system you will never get your dialtone back unless
the calling party hangs up first (unless an addon (at the CO) disconn-
ecting device has been added on your switch -- unfortunately not the
case in my hometown growing up!).

Also be advised for those of you trying the "shorting ring to tip"
trick, doing so as far as I can tell would not cause any damage to the
system per say, however on an ESS switch, doing so will cause a "line
showering" ("SHWL Etc.." for those who like telco acronyms) error to
appear on the local maintenance TTY and if the telco see enough of
these they may dispach a repairman out to see if he can determine why.
Line showering also indicates partial short conditions or sometimes
impedance mismatch situations.


Todd Lawrence    [e-mail]    uunet!valinor!todd

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

Subject: Re: Airphones -- Phooey!
From: [e-mail] (Todd Lawrence)
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 14:24:03 CST
Organization: (What? Organized??) - Mythical Computer Systems


Someone referring to the Airphone stated that they were using noise
cancelling mikes. Actually to the best of my knowledge none that I
have had the opportunity to use seemed to have any kind of active or
passive ("hole in the back") noise cancellation schemes however, as a
Pilot for USAir, I can give a few facts:

1) The typical noise level in a cabin class aircraft using bypass
turbofans (quiet engine, ie.. B757), or even turbojet (noisiest
version of commercial jet engine (ie b737-100 series) is quite low.
This would not require any noise cancellation at all.

2) The noisier commuter type aircraft, cabin class turboprop such as
emb-120 (Brasilia) are not equipped with airphone systems since for
the most part trips on such aircraft are of a short duration and
installing such a system would be "cost innefective".

For the most part, I have been happy enough to use these phones for
their intended purpose, to place a call that really can't wait until I
get onto the ground.


Todd Lawrence    [e-mail]    uunet!valinor!todd

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

From: [e-mail] (adams,john)
Subject: Re: New SPARCstation LX Has Built-in ISDN From AT&T
Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 12:48:54 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Monty
Solomon) writes:

> SMCC INTRODUCES COLOR RISC WORKSTATION PRICED LESS THAN A PC

> Also Unveils Graphics System, Server Product Based On SPARC/Solaris

>     SAN JOSE, Calif. -- Nov. 10, 1992 -- Sun Microsystems Computer
> Corporation (SMCC) today introduced the SPARCclassic(TM), a fully

I'm not sure about other readers / contributors, but I find
publishing a full new product / press release in c.d.t. less than
acceptable.  Patrick, please comment!


Jack (John) Adams        Bellcore NVC 2Z-220
[phone] {Voice}        [phone] {Facsimile}
[e-mail]    [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: Well, I am ambivilent about it. You ought to see
some of the ones I toss out and don't publish. I've never seen too
much harm in it as long as it was clearly a new product announcement
rather than a 'news item' ... that is, the sender was clearly shown to
be an employee of the company making the announcement. Lord knows I
print enough stuff from AT&T on their new products, so it is probably
fair to do it for others.  If TELECOM Digest were like *some* telecom
magazines I could name, the product release would not be printed
unless the company bought a big advertising spread from me at the same
time, and then it would be printed -- but disguised as news!  :) My
rule of thumb on them is if they seem interesting to me, I assume
others might find it interesting also.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Ben Harrell)
Subject: Re: RBOC Exit From CPE Market?
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Ben Harrell)
Organization: Computers and Technologies Theme Program-NCSU-NC
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 13:23:22 GMT


[e-mail] (Joe Bergstein) writes:

> Has anyone heard either rumors or specific information regarding Bell
> Atlantic selling their CPE business back to Northern Telecom? (from
> which they bought a big chunk not too long ago)?

> Is this a trend?  Are other RBOC's getting out of the CPE business?

It's my understanding that this is true.  I also understand that NT is
considering purchasing some of the other CPE businesses or
partnerships it sold or created in the '80s.  Mystery to me why ...


Ben Harrell    [e-mail] ...........<business>
[e-mail] ...<pleasure>

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

From: [e-mail] (Bill Pfeiffer)
Subject: Re: Cordless Phone Newbie Question
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 10:50:30 -0600 (CST)


In a recent TELECOM Digest, [e-mail] (Elizabeth Schwartz)
writes:

> I just picked up my first cordless phone and am I confused! A few
> questions:

> 1) What's the range on these things? This is a Sony SPP-75, if it
> matters.

Range is advertised as 1000 feet, but in 'real world' urban
conditions, expect anywhere from 100 - 300 foot 'usable' range.  This
figure is dependent upon a myriad of conditions from location of base
unit, type of building construction, portable battery level and
interference from other phones and devices that share the frequencies
that the phones use.

> 2) What's the "auto security code system" for? Does that keep my phone
> from ringing when someone else's does? From hearing someone else's
> call?

Security codes are used by the phone to make it more unlikely that
others can gain access to your line, by using a handset on the same
frequency as your unit.  Security codes also can be used to keep your
portable from ringing when a neighbor's phone is called. They have
nothing to do with overhearing or being overheard.

> 3) What's the relationship between the security codes and ten
> channels?

None.  Channels are the actual radio frequuencies over which the call
is transmitted, security codes are information sent over those
channels as described above.

> 4) Is this thing supposed to be left in the base or can I bring it
> outside and wait for it to ring? Does it have to stand up in the base?

No need to keep it in the base, except for charging.  However, it is
best NOT to keep charging and recharging. Better to use the batteries
until the battery-low light comes on.  Continued short charges can
cause the battery to aquire a short-memory, and begin to lose it's
ability to stay charged for a full term.

> 5) The manual mentions computers and interference. Will the phone
> interfere with the computer, or vice versa? If I get a second line,
> the phone could have the opportunity to interfere with the modem.

The interference is caused BY the computer's cpu clock, and causes the
phone to whistle and whine.  The phone will not bother the computer.

> 6) Finally is this a particularly good or bad phone?

I have heard good things about the Sony.  Never owned one.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Andy Sherman)
Subject: Re: BC Tel Pay Numbers
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 15:11:49 EST


On 8 Nov 92 17:30:54 GMT, [e-mail]
(Leonard Erickson) said:

> The problem in Vancouver is that BC Tel has recently started up
> pay-per-call numbers, but they do not yet have identifiable prefixes.
> Therefore, ankies have been calling various BBSes that have
> call-back-verify, and leaving these pay-per-call numbers.  The sysop
> who talked to me had lost Erickson> about $50 in the last month, and
> this has only just started.

To which our Esteemed Moderator noted:

> [Moderator's Note: Well, that's the price he is going to pay for not
> wanting to personally verify his users. I know a couple BBS sysops who
> take the trouble to at least call each user once.  Having users who
> know that you know who they are helps keep boards in nice condition. PAT]


Pat,

It must be wonderful to be so perfect and smug and sanctimonious.  You
moan and groan about the upsurge in crime, and about the downsurge in
people taking responsibility for their own actions.  Yet you
consistantly excuse criminals who prey upon an unsuspecting public
with tricks such as this and the beeper scam.

It's one thing to expect people to know about what a 900 number is.
But when the pager scam happened in New York, public awareness of the
nature of 540-xxxx numbers was very low, unless you read the seamier
ads in the back pages of the {Village Voice}.  And Leonard has stated
that BC Telecom has *NOT* made their pay-per-call numbers clearly
identifiable.  So how is somebody to know *before* they call that the
call will cost them money?

Using ruses to get people to call your pay-per-call line based on
their ignorance is fraud, pure and simple.  The a**holes who do it
deserve the full force of the bunko laws.  Your attitude that the only
people with the technical sophistication of a contributor to this
forum have a right to any consumer protection is insufferable and
unsupportable in any but the most dog-eat-dog lassaiz-faire world.


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

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

Subject: Re: Telephone Phreaks
From: mertwig![e-mail] (Daniel Drucker)
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 21:31:05 EST
Organization: Odd Parity Hacker's Group


[e-mail] (John Gilbert) writes:

> In article <[e-mail]> mertwig![e-mail]
> (Daniel Drucker) writes:

>> Also, would someone tell me what the STD-III Information Center is?
>> (Dial 950-1288 anywhere in the USA, 2400,8N1.)

> When I dial this I get:

>             WELCOME TO AT&T INFORMATION ACCESS SERVICE

> Please Sign-on:

> What is this service used for?

> [Moderator's Note: It is a network server, a lot like Telenet's data
> network. You 'sign on' to various other systems such as ATT Mail.
> Actually, I dial into it at 9600 baud, although 2400 is okay. We have
> discussed this before, and interested parties might want to check out
> the file in the Telecom Archives discussing it. Check the directory in
> the archives for '950.1288'.     PAT]

How do I get to the Telecom Archives?

And what would I say at Please Sign-On: to use ATT Mail?


Daniel Max P. Drucker


[Moderator's Note: You would respond: 'AT&T Mail'. Actually instead of
'please sign on' it should say 'Where do you wish to be connected?'.
The Telecom Archives is accessible using anonymous ftp lcs.mit.edu.
When you log in, use name@site as your password, and 'cd telecom-archives'.
Would anyone be willing to host the Telecom Archives on a site with a
dialup attached so our non-Internet users could participate?   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Jan Richert)
Subject: Re: Telephone Phreaks
Date: 15 Nov 92 15:08:33 GMT
Organization: Krefcom UUCP Server, Krefeld, FRG


[e-mail] (Christopher J. Ambler, Phish) writes:

> Also, would someone tell me what the STD-III Information Center is?
> (Dial 950-1288 anywhere in the USA, 2400,8N1.)

> (SIT TONES) The long distance company indication for this call is
> incorrect. Please try your call again or call your long distance
> company for assistance.

That's what I get: "Your international call cannot be completed as
dialed. Please check the number and dial again or call your AT&T
operator for assistance."


Greets,

Jan Richert (NIC-ID: JR482)   | Internet:   [e-mail]
Krefeld, FRG                  | BTX:        02151399843-0001
Voice & FAX: [phone]  | IRC-Nick:   jrichert

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

Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 20:23:46 EST
From: Tony Harminc <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Request: Large Format FAX


[e-mail] (Richard B. August) wrote:

> We have the need for a large format FAX capability.  By "large format"
> we mean C/D size drawings (C=18x24, D= 24x36).  Any assistance is
> greatly appreciated.

I just saw a Xerox ad yesterday for exactly such a beast.  It looks
huge -- more like a floor standing whiteprinter or similar.  I don't
remember the model number, but the ad said something about G3
compatibility.

Ask your local Xerox office.


Tony Harminc

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: South African Telecom
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 01:36:26 GMT


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

> I have a friend who is trying to economically exchange e-mail with
> someone in Johannesburg, South Africa.  He personally uses Compuserve
> (they have internet access).  For some reason, Compuserve in South
> Africa is quite expensive.  MCI Mail can't give a straight answer on
> how his friend would connect.

MCI Mail launched a new service earlier this year which gives
customers direct dialup access in 27 countries.  You dial a local
access number (much like dialing into Telenet or Tymnet in the US),
request a connection to the MCI computers in the US, and off you go.
No account is required with the local PTT, and access is charged at
US$.50 per minute and appears on your MCI Mail bill (standard MCI Mail
per-messages charges still apply).  Access in South Africa is provided
in Cape Town, Durban, and Johannesburg.  I've sent a detailed
announcement to Pat in case he wishes to put in the archives.


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: This will be in the archives later this week for
interested people along with a few other new files in recent days.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Two Cellular Phones on the Same Number
Organization: "Well, a head on top, an arm on each side, two legs...."
Date: 15 Nov 92 01:19:26 GMT


In <[e-mail]> Alan Boritz <72446.461@CompuServe.
COM> writes:

> Change "most" to ALL.  There should be NO US cellular carriers that
> will permit more than one ESN to operate on any particular phone
> number.  Failure to validate the ESN is a serious violation of FCC
> rules (EIA standards incorporated into the CFR).

Wait a minute; this is a *clear* example of [I forget, there's a Latin
term for it], where somebody says something that *appears* to follow
from something else, but there's actually no relation between the two.

"Failure to validate the ESN" has *nothing* to do with a design
failure that does not permit more than one valid ESN per number.  That
would be like saying that if I verify credit card numbers at all, then
I cannot allow more than one card to bill to the same account.  There
is no sensible reason, other than a reluctance to challenge design
difficulties, that an entire list of ESNs could not be valid for a
single number.  The voice path issues, as Alan says later, are just a
switching issue.


Laird P. Broadfield     [e-mail]    ...{ucsd, nosc}!crash!lairdb

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

From: [e-mail] (Paul Barnett)
Subject: Re: Personal 800 Numbers
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 22:48:12 GMT
Organization: Engineering, CONVEX Computer Corp., Richardson, Tx., USA


In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (David H.
Close) writes:

> Just FYI, "Call Home America" offers unpublished 800 service (real
> number, no password after connect) for $3.75/month plus usage between
> 16c and 25c/ minute.  Full ANI billing, charged to your credit card.
> Portable in that you can change the destination number anywhere in the
> US.

It should be noted that the destination number must be changed by
calling customer service, and it is promised to take up to ten days
(although a recent change precipitated by moving took less than seven
days).  It isn't something that can be done "on-line" at a moment's
notice like AT&T's 700 service.

Rates are a bit higher if the call originates and terminates in Texas.

> IMHO, a terrific deal, cheaper than collect or calling cards
> (especially if an AOS gets involved), can't be abused like the Call-Me
> card.  Great for college students.

There are only two dangers: giving the number to someone that likes to
talk on your nickel, and wrong numbers.  However, CHA gives credit for
wrong numbers, if your 800 number is not published.


Paul Barnett             Internet: [e-mail]
Convex Computer Corp.      Office: 214-497-4846
Richardson, TX        Mobile/Home: 214-236-8438

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

Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 22:34 GMT
From: Tansin A. Darcos & Company <[e-mail]>
Subject: My Apologies


I would like to apologize publicly for what was something which was a
mistake on my part.

I have already sent a message to Mr. Geiser about quoting his message
to me, and the only reason I did this was to allow someone from
Picturetel -- even if not an official spokesperson -- to be able to
say why AT&T's product isn't necessarily that good.

If it wasn't for the fact I felt they should know about it, I wouldn't
have even sent anyone at Picturetel anything about the message in the
first place.  Had I thought there would be a problem, I would never
have forwarded the message.

I am used to using other systems where every message sent is public
anyway, so I'm not all that used to having mail that is strictly
private for me alone, that no one else has seen.

This incident will not be repeated.


Paul Robinson

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #847
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa10197;
          15 Nov 92 23:18 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA14568
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 15 Nov 1992 21:18:34 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA14596
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 15 Nov 1992 21:18:16 -0600
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 21:18:16 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #848

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 15 Nov 92 21:18:15 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 848

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Michigan Bell Charges for Phone Number (Steve Forrette)
    Re: AT&T Takes Away My Call Manager (Craig R. Watkins)
    Re: Today's LECs Would Prefer Metering (Brian Cooper)
    Re: 700 Numbers From Overseas (Eric Tholome)
    Re: Very Weird Telephone Problem (James Hartman)
    Re: Experience With AT&T Language Line (Brad Dolan)
    Re: Telco Handling Of Cable Cut (Jack Adams)
    Re: Music On Call? (Cliff Sharp)
    Re: Listing of CLLIs (Cliff Sharp)
    Re: Two Cellular Phones on the Same Number (Gregory Youngblood)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: Michigan Bell Charges for Phone Number
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 10:56:27 GMT


>> In the monthly Michigan Bell billing insert, there is a large article
>> that gushes about how Michigan Bell will allow you to pick a
>> "personalized" telephone number. The cost is only $38!! They conclude
>> by stating that your customer service rep will be more than willing to
>> help you.

> It is expected that this will be a monthly charge once a "requested" number
> has been assigned.

Pacific Bell started doing this a couple of years ago, charging both a
setup fee and a per-month fee.  Recently, they did away with this
policy.  Any customers which were paying monthly fees don't have to
pay any more.  I recently got an -xx00 assingment without any one-time
or monthly fee without any particular hassle.


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

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

From: Craig R. Watkins <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: AT&T Takes Away My Call Manager
Date: 15 Nov 92 07:26:42 EST
Organization: HRB Systems, Inc.


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (I) write:

> Call Manager is a (free) service of AT&T that allows you to touch tone
> in an account code (of the form 15xx where you make up xx) where you
> would normally dial a calling card number when you place a 0+ call.
> Your bill then gets itemized and totaled by account code.

In recent literature that I have received from AT&T it seems that the
account code can be from one to four digits long (after the 15).  I
think this has changed since I started using it.

I always hit a # after my account code to speed the call along.


Craig R. Watkins    [e-mail]
HRB Systems, Inc.   [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Brian Cooper)
Subject: Re: Today's LECs Would Prefer Metering
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: University College of Wales, Aberystwyth
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 16:35:52 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail].
co.uk (Richard Cox) writes:

> [e-mail] said:

>> each five minutes amounts to a new call. They could not have implemented
>> it before they got these fancy stored program exchanges, so that's one
>> nice thing about strowgers and crossbars :-)

> and asks:

>> I heard that some PTTs in Europe have always had metered local calls,
>> or at least that it was so planned ... is that true?

> In the UK all calls are metered by time, local or not: with the
> exception of one city (Kingston upon Hull -- Hull for short) where
> local calls are untimed.

> The arrangement here (apart from in Hull) is that a "new call" is
> registered every "time unit" -- which varies from *57.5 seconds* in the
> morning to three minutes forty seconds in the evening and (also at
> weekends.)

> We are somewhat envious of the tariffs enjoyed in the USA !

Since British Telecom, which was a state owned monopoly, was
denationalised in 1984, the price of local calls has increased sharply
whilst the cost of long distance inland calls has fallen. The ratio of
most/least expensive calls used to be nine -- it is now down to four.
My guess is that under the impact of competition on long distance
routes, this ratio will fall further.

Perhaps telephone usage tariffs have been a long way from being cost
based ever since the legions of "long distance telephone operators"
were made redundant by the technology?  If anyone has any historical
cost data on this subject I would be most interested to hear from
them.


Brian Cooper, Research Associate, University of Wales, Aberystwyth, UK.
Voice [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Eric Tholome)
Subject: Re: 700 Numbers From Overseas
Date: 15 Nov 92 17:10:05 GMT
Organization: ESF Headquarters, Berlin, FRG


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

> [...] A business in the USA which desires to have reverse-charge
> calls to it from an international point can quite easily ask AT&T to
> arrange it for them with the telecom administration in the desired
> country.

Well, I saw an ad a couple of weeks ago from an American company in a
French magazine. This ad was indeed customized for France: it was in
French, and said that one could get more information by calling them
for free. How, you ask? They were listing an 800 number to be called
from within the USA, and were also saying that someone calling from
France should call collect another listed number.

Of course, you could always say that maybe this company didn't want to
go through the trouble of arranging a real reverse-charge number from
France.

But this company was ... AT&T!

Well, if AT&T itself doesn't do it, who's going to do it?

Pat, are you really sure this is all that simple?


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


[Moderator's Note: Sure it is.  All the (country) Direct lines in the
USA to foreign countries have 800 (USA style) numbers. Ring the 800
number here and connect with an operator at British Telecom in order
to call someplace in the UK on your BT calling card as an example.
There are a couple of 800-xxx prefixes specifically tariffed to handle
international traffic (so people in the USA can call 800-style to
places in other countries). Ditto the other way around. There is an
0800 number in the UK which rings CBS News in New York. I think the
USA Direct service which AT&T operates in other countries in at least
a few cases relies on 0800 (or whatever) style numbers in the distant
place to connect with the AT&T operator in this country. Just because
AT&T doesn't use the service in the particular application you
mentioned does not mean it is not available. Nor do I know specifically
what the arrangement for this is with France.   PAT]

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

Subject: Re: Very Weird Telephone Problem
From: [e-mail] (James Hartman, Sysop)
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 00:15:49 GMT
Organization: Unka Phaed's UUCP Thingy, Houston, TX


[e-mail] (Norman R Tiedemann) writes:

> Next time this happens, tune in the local "wild and crazy" radio
> station and check if you hear yourselves. (Or start shouting
> obsenities.)

According to recent FCC blurbs, it is illegal for a radio station to
broadcast your voice unless you've either been asked and said OK, or
if you call as part of an obvious phone-in portion of a program.

Follow-ups to rec.radio.broadcasting.


[e-mail] (James Hartman, Sysop)
Unka Phaed's UUCP Thingy, Houston, TX, [phone]
1200/2400/9600/14400 v.32bis/v.42bis

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

Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 8:40:17 EST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Experience With AT&T Language Line


Capek writes, "...the service is headquartered in Monterey, CA.  I
believe that is, not accidentally, where the US (Navy? Army?)
translators school is located."

The Defense Language Institute, at the Presidio of Monterey, provides
language training to students from all service branches and other
organizations.  I studied there in 1978.  It's a neat school and is
located in one of the most beautiful places on earth.


Brad Dolan N4VHH 700.NUCLEAR [e-mail]

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

From: vixen![e-mail] (22475-adams)
Subject: Re: Telco Handling Of Cable Cut
Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 14:37:39 GMT


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

> First, let me clarify exactly what I meant.  The point I was making is
> that a switch need not know that anything has happened.

> Equipment to do this DOES exist.  I work for a railroad, in the
> telecommunications department (although not the switched network
> group), and we have equipment (I can't remember the name - I'll refer
> to it as a DACS, although that is not really an accurate name) that
> does this.

If railroad signaling (I'm a RR wannabe as a hobbyist) is what is
carried, it is natural to have protection switching (What the telecom
industry calls its schemes to maintain reliable transmission
facilities) in place for safety reasons. In the public switched
telephone network (PSTN), the consequences of dropping a connection
are not as severe.

> I an fairly certain that supervision on the trunk will not be lost
> during the interval that the trunk is being rerouted.  If it was,
> then, of course, the call would be dropped, but there are easy ways
> around that.  (This post is long enough without the details).

The previous post (this issue) from Al Varney about signaling on DS1
indicates a very short (less than 125 us) interval needed to maintain
supervision.  Protection switching operates with switching times of at
least two orders of magnitude higher. As such, it is highly unlikely
that individual circuit supervision will survive such a switch.
Moreover, in current digital facilties (FT3 comes to mind), this
protection switching is built in to automatically switch to a spare
line when the BER exceeds 10-6(?).

> Do any telephone companies actually use this for voice circuits?  I
> don't know, but my point was that it could be done if they wanted to.

Now that we've beaten this to death, I reiterate that I know of NO
telephone companies (this doesn't mean that none exist!) that use this
approach.

BTW, I think DACS is a trademark of AT&T (Before trademarking it stood
for Digital Access and Cross-connect system). Any of you Baldrige
award winning AT&T transmission folks wanna help out here?


Jack (John) Adams        Bellcore NVC 2Z-220
[phone] {Voice}        [phone] {Facsimile}
[e-mail]    [e-mail]

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

Subject: Re: Music On Call?
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 11:09:59 CST
From: Cliff Sharp <[e-mail]>


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

>> I came home recently to find a strange message on my answering
>> machine: Several minutes of music.  There was no voiceover anywhere in

>> [Moderator's Note: My guess is someone was playing games. They called

> Another possibility is that it was generated by music-on-hold, but not
> by someone deliberately placing you on hold to leave you a long

   I've also had calls (my machine limits them to 30 seconds) where
I'd be treated to several seconds of elevator music followed by
"Hello?  Hello?"  and end-of-message.  Someone told me that several
companies are using a gadget that basically calls you and says a
canned message like "Hello, this is the X corporation.  We'd like to
discuss something with you; please stay on the line and a
representative will be with you shortly.", then music, then somebody
appears on the line expecting a human.  Their initial message seems to
be shorter than my outgoing one, so I never hear that part.

   Gee, I hope I didn't miss my opportunity to call a $4/minute and
listen to a sped-up recording telling me I missed out on winning all
those amphetamines ...  :-)


Cliff Sharp   [e-mail]   OR  [e-mail]   WA9PDM


[Moderator's Note: The use of those dialers to pre-connect calls
before anyone is ready to talk to you is the height of rudeness. I
always disconnect instantly when one of those things calls me. I'll
gladly hold for a few seconds *if* you are already talking to me and
have a incoming call-waiting. I won't wait when you had no intention
of being available immediatly when you dialed.   PAT]

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

Subject: Re: Listing of CLLIs
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 23:11:41 CST
From: Cliff Sharp <[e-mail]>


In article <[e-mail]> vixen![e-mail]
(22475-adams) writes:

> I'm not sure whether having a complete list of Common Language
> Location Identifier codes (CLLI) would be of much help in what you are
> trying to do.  If your user is an average telephone subscriber, he/she

   Actually, I'm cross-referencing one file against another by a
common field (not exactly relational database but similar idea); the
field could just as well contain ABCDEFGH as CHCGILCA but the latter
might come in handy some day.

> would have much difficulty abstracting where they are (either calling
> from or to) from these ten character code names which identify

   There was a list (containing some inaccuracies in NPA/NXX/CO name)
circulating BBSes around here when 312 split, and it contained eight-
letter abbreviations; don't know if it was deliberately letting me
mislead myself, but the RBOC person I mentioned them to seemed to
accept them as at least fairly close to what I thought they were; cf.
CHCGILCA above, listed as one of three CLLIs for the Canal CO.

> physical locations within the telephone companies.  For instance, in a

   I was told the other day that they not only identify physical
locations, but also are used to identify which switch in a given
office the NXX is connected to ... that would be interesting stuff to
me if I could pin it down.

> given town, there probably are more than one physical location for the
> phone company (Chicago and other towns come to mind).  More
> importantly, these locations are often encoded with streets and/or
> other less widely recognized designators.

   In that (probably inaccurate) list I had, every CO in the City of
Chicago began with CHCGIL, and the suburban ones had abbreviations
that roughly allowed them to be matched to village names.

> I suspect that correlating an NPA-NXX with LaSalle Street might be a
> stretch for the average customer.  In addition, not all CLLIs have End

   Ah, but TEYE, in my laBOratory, am not your average customer...!

[evil scientist grin]

> Offices in them, a digital radio relay CEV (Controlled Environment
> Vault) or other type of hut are CLLI designated but have no NPA/NXX
> associated with them.

  Didn't know that!  Wonder if that figures in their distance
measurements for measured service (I can see where the distance from a
CEV wouldn't count on per-minute cellular charges, but ...)?

> Moreover, the CLLIs are often assigned to buildings with no networks
> in them whatsover. Consider the warehouses which hold the spare plug
> in electronic equipment units, but which bear a CLLI because they
> contain these Common Language Equipment Identification (CLEI) items.

   So far, against the list I've had and the list I've maintained by
hand from Illinois Bell's MSA-1 list, I've at least managed to
identify the COs; with a little luck I might be able to cull the
others.

> I suspect that a search of your tariffs (publicly available) will be
> of more value in completing your project as they fully designate all
> rates, routes, etc.

   I would dearly love that, but (1) some service rep told me that
they no longer keep a copy of the Illinois tariffs available for the
public (!!! I thought they were required to, and suspect this is
stonewalling), (2) The ICC will xerox this tome for me for $0.25/page
(probably a few tens of bux I can't afford), and (3) my bad back would
keep me from travelling very far or sitting very long to read it
anyway.  And to top that, my handwriting is bad enough after a few
minutes of writer's cramp that even I wouldn't be able to decipher my
own scrawl.

> Maybe I'm missing something?

   Right on target so far, thanks.


Cliff Sharp   [e-mail]   OR  [e-mail]   WA9PDM


[Moderator's Note: The tariffs are available to the public. Go to
the 225 West Randolph / 212 West Washington Building downtown.  PAT]

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

Subject: Re: Two Cellular Phones on the Same Number
From: srcsip!tcscs![e-mail] (Gregory Youngblood)
Reply-To: srcsip!tcscs![e-mail]
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 17:02:46 CST
Organization: TCS Consulting Services


mcrware!![e-mail] (Troy Frericks) writes:

>> Change "most" to ALL.  There should be NO US cellular carriers that
>> will permit more than one ESN to operate on any particular phone
>> number.  Failure to validate the ESN is a serious violation of FCC
>> rules (EIA standards incorporated into the CFR).

> I know it's not right (legal), but I have to throw it out anyway.
> What about changing the ESN on the second phone to match that of the
> first one that already has service.  I beleave this is how some people
> with some older Panasonic phones are stealing service -- intercept the
> ESN as it is broadcast, then burn a PROM, and insert it into their
> phone.

> Note you would NOT be able to call each other, or both receive calls.
> You may not even both be able to place calls at the same time when on
> the same cell (or same area).  Probably could get around that by
> having one phone on service B, other roam on service A.  Food for
> thought.  Disclaimer: Info for educational enrichment only, not to be
> implemented.

Some places are offering such services with a software update in their
switch that allows this type (two phones/one number).  The only
drawback is these are used only locally in the local switches at this
time(or at least the time I learned about it), and that when roaming,
there was a 'MAIN' phone and a secondary phone.  The main phone is the
only phone authorized for roaming privileges.  Everything is
registered, everything is legal.  The main phone ESN is reported to
remote carriers when roaming.

I don't know what switches are supporting this, but from what I
understand it is a software update to several switches.


Greg
TCS Consulting Services   P.O. Box 600008   St. Paul, MN  55106-0008
 ..!srcsip!tcscs!zeta                ..!src.honeywell.com!tcscs!zeta
[e-mail]                      tcscs![e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #848
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa12847;
          16 Nov 92 0:38 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA09533
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 15 Nov 1992 22:14:15 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA07754
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 15 Nov 1992 22:13:58 -0600
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 22:13:58 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #849

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 15 Nov 92 22:14:00 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 849

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Phone Records: Public or Private? (David Gast)
    Re: Two Cellular Phones on the Same Number (Sam Swett)
    Re: Large Format FAX (Timothy K. Hong)
    Re: Cellular Scam (Steve Forrette)
    Re: The Worst Phone Lines in the US - Ha! (Tony Pelliccio)
    Re: PP 2000 -- Phooey (Dave Levenson)
    Re: Message Center and Call Waiting (Cliff Sharp)
    Re: Please Explain "Crossed Lines" (Cliff Sharp)
    Re: News Summaries (Steve Forrette)
    Re: Compuserve/MCI Mail (Darren Ingram)
    Introduction to a New Subscriber (Tom Goodden)
    Re: Northern Telecom Email Addresses (Ben Harrell)
    Looking For Home PBX System (Bill Huttig)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 12:25:35 -0800
From: [e-mail] (David Gast)
Subject: Re: Phone Records: Public or Private?


(Steven A Rubin) [e-mail] wrote and asked about
phone records:

> I am trying to find out if the customer records the RBOCs keep on what
> exchanges customers call is public record.  Also, are long distance
> records public?

It depends what you mean by public record.  If you mean, can you
typically walk into an RBOC or IXC and ask to see the calling records
of someone, then the answer I presume is usually no.  If you mean, if
you walk in with enough money in your pockets, are the RBOCs and the
IXCs able to give you the information, the answer is yes.  A program
on bounty hunters (that is, people tracking down people who have
skipped bail) shows the bounty hunter calling up PacBell or GTE and
getting the information necessary to track someone down.  I do not
believe any money was exchanged.  If you want to know if your records
are confidential, the answer is definitely no.  If you want
confidentiality, go to a pay phone and pay with cash or a stored value
card where available.

While I do not claim to have any knowledge of individual states, the
following are the federal rules.  (BTW, this information is not new;
PAT must have missed it or disregarded.  If you want the exact FCC
ruling number and the precise section of the ECPA, I would search the
archives in late February or March, 1992).

The ECPA allows transactional information, as opposed to the content
of the calls, to disclosed to any non-governmental organization or
person.  Government has to get a court order.

The FCC has ruled that the IXCs *must* share information transactional
information with other IXCs.  Their reasoning is that by sharing info,
the oligopolies will lower prices.  (I don't believe it for a minute).

An interesting aside to this conversation is who owns the information
when you call an 800 or 900 number?  LL Bean, for example, believes
that since they pay for the call, they should own the data.  Their
carrier says that since they carried the call, they should.  At
dispute is whether the carrier can sell information about who calls LL
Bean to LL Bean's competitors.  I think that neither of them should
have the right to do anything with it since I did not give them
permission.  So to that end I don't use 800 numbers.

> [Moderator's Note: No sir, they are not! They are proprietary records
> of the telco, released only to the customer or by subpoena to law
> enforcement agencies, etc. ...
> But other than for billing and/or investigative purposes *no one* is
> to get records of your calls.   PAT]

Not true according to the ECPA.  Read it.

Joe Konstan <[e-mail]> writes:

> Didn't we have a discussion about this some six months ago.

We did.

> that the upshot was that LONG DISTANCE call records had to be
> disclosed by your long distance company to any other long distance
> companies to "help them effectively compete" for your business.

> [Moderator's Note: I do not think other LD companies can get your call
> records, name, address or phone number for any reason other than
> billing purposes, at least not legally.

They are required to be given access by the FCC.  The only exception
is if you have 25 or more lines.  Big business likes it privacy.


David

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

Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 20:44:31 -0500 (EST)
From: Sam Swett <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Two Cellular Phones on the Same Number


> Wait a minute; this is a *clear* example of [I forget, there's a Latin
> term for it], where somebody says something that *appears* to follow
> from something else, but there's actually no relation between the two.

    I believe the phrase you're looking for is "non sequitor", meaning
"does not follow"...


sam (equipped with airbag)

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: 13 Nov 92 03:59:00 UT
Subject: Re: Large Format FAX


I just received some information on the Xerox 7124SH Digital Facsimile
System.  The 7124SH is a scanner/copier/facscimile all rolled into one
device.  Here is a very brief list of features:

o Scan documents for fax and non-fax applications.  Documents can be
  stored, printed, faxed or viewed on the screen (requires PC).
o View scanned images or fax received images.
o Single or multiple copies of documents up to 24"x36".  100% or 200%
  enlargements of original.
o Multiple methods of sending faxes: menu, DOS prompt or local mode from
  the Xerox 7124S.
o Electronic Outgoing Job Control.  Single or batch fax to one or more
  locations (immediately or delayed).
o Incoming faxes can be:
  - printed on Xerox 7124S (single or multiple)
  - stored electronically
  - viewed then printed
  - saved
  - re-faxed to another destination
o Fax A, B, C or D sizes from Xerox 7124S to a Xerox 7124S.
o Fax A, B, C or D sizes from Xerox 7124S to a Standard G3.  B, C & D
  drawings are divided into multiple faxes.
o Receive A or B size faxes from Standard G3 (partially supported).  Up
  to 4 A size per phone call.
o Other:
  Compatibility - CCITT Group 3 facsimile
  Max size input - 24"x36"
  Image buffer - 4MB
  Transmission Speed - 9600, 7200, 4800, 2400 bps, with auto fallback.
  Output - Thermal line print (23.76"x35.3")
  Resolution - Fine: 203x196 ppi
               Standard: 203x98 ppi
               16 levels of gray scale
  Media - Direct thermal roll paper (24"x300')

Sorry, I don't have any prices.  You should probably contact Xerox for
more information.  I personally like the idea of being able to fax a D
size drawing to a standard G3 machine.  Hope this was of some help.


Timothy Hong  ([e-mail])
GTE Hawaiian Tel - Beyond The Call
Usual Disclaimer! Nothing I submit has anything to do with my employer.

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: Cellular Scam
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 21:26:43 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> MPA15AB!RANDY@TRENGA.
tredydev.unisys.com writes:

> The {L.A. Times} reported that a "hacker" probably sold the serial and
> phone number combination for a freeway call box to a ring which used
> it to make 11,733 calls charged to the one phone.

> "I don't think we can tell you what we did to fix it because we don't
> want it to happen again," a county sokesman said with a laugh.

The fix is pretty obvious, at least if they fixed it properly: They
did what should have been done in the first place -- flag the call box
numbers with a special class-of-service that can only call the Highway
Patrol numbers.  Then even if you spoof your phone to match a call
box's MIN and ESN, it won't do you any good.


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

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

Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 18:14:59 EST
From: Tony Pelliccio <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: The Worst Phone Lines in the US - Ha!


I lived in North Providence, RI for a bit and was assigned a
Pawtucket, RI telephone number since New England Telephone likes to do
things like that, break a small town up (only about 4.5 miles long)
into three different exchanges that can call each other and a certain
amount of RI for the basic rate, but then each has it's own little
special calling areas.

In any case, the next street over began the next exchange so I got
jacked with a Pawtucket number and the absolute WORST telephone
service one could ask for. Seems I was at the end of the loop and
couldn't even get my modem to connect at 300 baud to a system that was
only about two miles away in Providence.

I went through three months of sheer hell until I finally due to a
rising toll bill, got a foreign exchange. Now the interesting part is
that the line from my phone to the Pawtucket CO was the same, but boy
did it work better. Yup ... you guessed it, they put all sorts of
range extenders, amps, conditioners etc on the line when you're paying
for FX service.

Also ... NET has this strange way of completing orders here ... they
sometimes send TWO techs on different days to fix the same thing. :)

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

From: [e-mail] (Dave Levenson)
Subject: Re: PP 2000 -- Phooey
Organization: Westmark, Inc.
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 14:35:12 GMT


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

>> On the other hand, I am impressed with the new AT&T Public Phone 2000.

> I'm not.  I was at JFK airport last week and having a few minutes to
> kill, I tried to call my computer at home and check my mail using a
> PP2000.  After tediously working through their "user friendly" menu,
> I set it to 2400 bps, called in, modems shook hands, then nothing, no
> characters, no nothing.  Didn't work at 1200 bps, either.  Nobody else
> has any trouble calling in here.  What gives?

Perhaps the PP2000 you found was, like many other phones at JFK, out
of order?  I have spent quite a few hours waiting around between
flights at EWR, ORD, HOU, and DFW lately, and have never had a problem
logging into the Westmark UNIX system from any of them.  I've even
posted an article to this Digest from one such terminal, in which I
described the device.

I only wish it could talk at 9600, and that I could find the ~ on
its keyboard!


Dave Levenson        Internet: [e-mail]
Westmark, Inc.        UUCP: {uunet | rutgers | att}!westmark!dave
Warren, NJ, USA        Voice: 908 647 0900  Fax: [phone]

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

From: Cliff Sharp <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Message Center and Call Waiting
Date: 15 Nov 92 14:56:25 GMT


> [Moderator's Note: Yes, there is a different call waiting signal for
  ...
> with or without three way calling. In Chicago, the distinctive ringing
> numbers (you can have two plus the main number) can be programmed at

   ??? My local (Schiller Park) phone book says "Distinctive Ringing:
Lets you designate calls from up to ten numbers for 'special' ringing..."


Cliff Sharp    [e-mail]   OR  [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: The terms get used interchangeably sometimes; I
should have used the proper name: Multi-Ring, which is the service
which allows a second and/or third actual telephone number to be
assigned to a main number and ring with a different cadence. You are
correct that Distinctive Ringing is one number with up to ten callers
entitled to cause a special ring when they call.   PAT]

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

From: Cliff Sharp <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Please Explain "Crossed Lines"
Date: 15 Nov 92 16:31:39 GMT


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

> In my case, it was exactly as Pat desribed: someone else had my line
> on their secondary pair.  In this instance, it was a second line at my
> parents' house that I had installed for my use when I visited.  During
> the time when my "phantom" calls were made, there had not even been a
> phone plugged into that line, so there was nobody to hear the other
> person, no unusual ringing, etc.  What disappointed me was that when
> Pacific Bell located the spurious jumper, they just removed it and
> reported this fact to me.  They made no effort to identify where it
> went so that the proper people could be billed for their calls.
> Devious or not, the other people should rightfully expect to pay for
> their calls, even if it was their honest mistake.

   In my case, I ended up several years ago calling the phone co.
sheepishly and saying "This sounds crazy, but I think my line is
tapped."  They sent someone out who found a surreptitious connection
down the alley and removed it, then explained to me in great detail
what had happened and told me that TelCo Security was being called in.

   The second time this happened, some years later, the man who came
out gave me what sounded very much like a canned answer (something
like, "There are no unauthorized connections to your line").  I asked
the neighbor across the alley (a TelCo lineman) what that meant, and
he laughed and told me that what he said was TelCoEse for "Your line
is being tapped, but by a court order."  I had no idea who would want
to listen to long, boring conversations between hams and/or computer
hackers (that last made me think...).

   Again, years later, I kept picking up the phone and hearing someone
hang up the phone, no dial tone.  I "invented" a 555 circuit to
monitor the line and every time it lit, I picked up the phone and
yelled, "I'm gonna get you, you @!%&@!!" and they'd hang up.  Finally,
upon calling the TelCo, I got someone who went up the pole to the
oooooold box there and found that mine was the outermost (easiest to
grab) pair, and that linemen were hooking their butt packs to my line
with great regularity.  He put the pair waaaay back in the box, and I
had no battery!  Turns out they'd used it so much that the
insulation-piercing clips they used scored the wire enough that it
broke when moved.


Cliff Sharp    [e-mail]   OR  [e-mail]  WA9PDM

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: News Summaries
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 22:29:42 GMT


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

> 3.  Article titled "New Player on the Cellular Circuit" discusses
> AT&T's buying McCaw Cellular, which is AT&T's first involvement in
> cellular in ten years.  AT&T sells 42% of the 90 metropolitan area's cellular
> equipment anyway, making it a major supplier.

Yea, execpt for McCaw Cellular, which has been replacing its AT&T
switches with Erricson switches for the past few years!


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

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

Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 19:27:38 GMT
From: [e-mail] (Darren Ingram Media Services)
Subject: Re: Compuserve/MCI Mail


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

> CompuServe also has a major problem in my opinion.  They don't support
> multiple line email addresses.  This is crucial to get to many

I have the same problem with Netcom's system, as it continually send
back copies of the Satnews biweekly Satellite Newsletter Digest to the
listserv ([e-mail], subscribe satnews your_name ).


Darren
DIMS (newsdesk mailbox)([e-mail])
184 Brookside Avenue, Whoberley, Coventry CV5 8AD UK
Tel:[phone]/Fax:[phone]/Tlx 94026650

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

Date: 15 Nov 92 12:52:00 EST
From: TOM GOODDEN <[e-mail]>
Subject: Introduction to a New Subscriber


     Greetings to all from a newcomer.  Some of you saw and were kind
enough to respond to my first unsucdfessful attempt at an introduction.

     I am Tom Goodden, a graduate student pursuing a Doctorate in
Public Administration (DPA) here at George Mason.  My dissertation
topic is the influence of a nation's political system on its
telecommunications development.  Hudson, Jussawalla, Snow, and many
others have treated the impact of national economics on
telecommunications and the reverse.  I believe it would be valuable to
consider looking at political behavior which tends to open or close
society via telecommunications.  I am fortunate to be studying under
Professors R. Akwule, R.P. Clark, S.M. Lipset, S. Ruth, and L.G.
White, who have excellent backgrounds in comparative political
systems.

     I have written to each of 213 operating PTT's world-wide
requesting annual reports, statistical summaries of operations,
planning documents, and telephone directories of the national capital
city.  Surprisingly, perhaps, over 40 have thus far responded.  I have
also a growing data base of ITU, World Bank, NTIA, and other
government statistics.  I have also extracted from six of the major
public telecom journals for the last eight years.

     As you might guess, the major need is grass roots community level
data, especially from rural villages and hamlets.  I need to know how
many telephones are in the villages?  Who has them?  How many calls
are made per month?  For what general purposes, work, family,
emergency, government assistance?  How much do calls cost per minute?
How reliable is service (call completion rates)?  How long are waiting
periods for telephone installation?  Repair?

     Some may recognize my queries as essentially based on the work of
Dean Ahmad Kamal and Professor Ali H. Dessouki, University of Cairo,
as reported by Indu Singh (1983).  If anyone has interest in this
topic, I invite correspondence and would offer such as I might find on
U.S. telecommunications in return.


I am,

T. Goodden@GMUVAX  on BITNET, add gmu.edu for INTERNET.  Regards.

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

From: [e-mail] (Ben Harrell)
Subject: Re: Northern Telecom Email Addresses
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Ben Harrell)
Organization: Computers and Technologies Theme Program-NCSU-NC
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 19:06:51 GMT


[e-mail] (Scott Matthews) writes:

> Does anybody have any internet hosts (email addresses) for Northern
> Telecom?

Sorry I misunderstood the question in my previous response.

All email addresses at Northern Telecom have the following form:

    [e-mail]

for direct Internet to Internet email.  You can also send email to
internal NT email accounts via IBM Mail or IBM Mail's X.400 gateway.

In both cases however, the NT employee has to be registered with the
appropriate NT MIS gateway administrator to use the external mail
connections.  If they are the best way to get their address is to ask
them to send you a message at your Internet address.

If they don't know how to get registered to use the external email
gateways, ask them to send me an internal email message and I will
forward the information.  My internal email address is my name:

     Ben Harrell

Hope this helps more than my first message...  :-)


Ben Harrell   [e-mail] ...........<business>
[e-mail] ...<pleasure>

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

From: [e-mail] (Bill Huttig)
Subject: Looking for Home PBX System
Date: 15 Nov 92 19:12:45 GMT
Organization: Florida Institute of Technology, Melbourne USA


I would like to purchase a HOME PBX that has at least three lines.

Features wanted:
   SMDR with Caller ID for inbound calls
   Flexable numbering
   Speed Dialing
   Dialing of extesions and Speed dial (and local) from inbound call
   Least Cost Routing/Select Outbound line

And lots of other things.

Any suggestions?


Bill

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #849
******************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa15173;
          16 Nov 92 1:42 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA28284
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 15 Nov 1992 23:11:19 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA11263
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 15 Nov 1992 23:11:02 -0600
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 23:11:02 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #850

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 15 Nov 92 23:11:00 CST    Volume 12 : Issue 850

Index To This Issue:                      Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Equal Access Numbers: How to Find Them (Rick Bronson)
    E1 vs. T1 Signalling (Michael Peters)
    At NYNEX, CNID is Coming Before E911 (Joshua E. Muskovitz)
    Lightning Protection on Telephone Lines (Richard Thomsen)
    HELP! Need Pointers to Info on Frame Relay, ISDN (Mark Marino)
    A Telephone Service Call (Mark Boolootian)
    Panasonic Information Request (Peter Eisch)
    Ohio Bell to Cripple Pay Phones in Cleveland (Jim Rees)
    San Jose Mercury Again (John Higdon)
    A New DMS-100 in Town (Richard D. Mccombs)
    Cellular Misinformation (Barry Nelson, RISKS via Monty Solomon)
    Looking for Caller Display Hardware (Dan Gould)
    Looking for ISDN PC Adapters (Jeff Yu)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Rick Bronson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Equal Access Numbers: How to Find Them
Organization: Milwaukee Internet Xchange BBS, Milwaukee, WI U.S.A.
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 04:38:48 GMT


  Here is something you real phone phreaks will love and will leave
others asking "why in the hell would anyone want to do that?".

  First a few definitions: An Equal Access Number is the number you
dial before you dial the long distance number to "override" your
normal long distance carrier and select a different carrier.  As an
example, lets say you had MCI for your 1+ long distance carrier and
you wanted to make a call to 1-212-555-1212 using AT&T, you would dial
10288-1-212-555-1212 (10288 is AT&T's Equal Access Number).  You would
then receive a bill from AT&T for this call.

The second thing I need to tell you is (and many of you already know
this) that when you dial 1-700-555-4141 a recording tells you which
long distance carrier you've selected.  If you preface 1-700-555-4141
with say AT&T Equal Access Number (10288-1-700-555-4141) then you will
get AT&T's recording regardless of who your long distance carrier is.
If you dial 10123-1-700-555-4141 where 10123 is an invalid Equal
Access Number then you get a recording from your local phone company
saying the Equal Access Number is invalid.

  Ok, so I plopped a analog to digital converter on to a circuit board
which can be read via the parallel port and feed a signal which
indicated the level of sound from my modem's speaker into the
converter.  Then wrote a program to auto-dial all Equal Access
Number's from 10000 thru 10999 followed by 1-700-555-4141 then time
when some relatively loud sound came on.  In this way the program
could tell if this was an invalid one (short time) or if it was real
(long time) in which case it logged the number to a file.  I later
dialed these numbers by hand to see what the recording told me. Most
of the time it would say "Thank you for selecting XYZ as your long
distance carrier" but once it said "you have dialed a private network"
and once I got a modem tone so I dialed into it with my computer and
it said "Easylink UserID:".  What follows is the results of my test
which were made from the 414 area code (Milwaukee).


Equal Access
Number
(10-???)        NAME

222             MCI[A
223             (800-486-8686)
231            *Datanet/American Sharecom
233            *Cable & Wireless
252            *US Sprint Hospitality
288             AT&T
319             Conquest
333             US Sprint
375             Easylink (2400 Baud)
387             (smn 231) AT&T operator
400            *Datanet/American Sharecom
401             Telecom*USA
432            *LCI (Litel)
444             Allnet
450            *MidAmerica
488             MetroMedia
500            *Schneider
551             Access Plus (800-541-4155)
552             Lake States
555            *ITI Encore
658            *ITI Encore
689             (IAB)
696            *DialMED? (800-533-4245)
707            *Pay per view order line
732             Private network
805             MCI
810             Logicall
835             Telecom*USA
880             One Call
887             (IAB)
888             MCI
898             MCI
954            *Prime Time
999             MetroMedia
* Business only

  I'd really like to try 950-0000 thru 950-9999 but would have to get
more sophisticated on what I look for on the modem speaker because
just using the time to getting sound would not work. Any ideas?  Also,
can someone give us the scoop on 950 prefix numbers, I think these are
toll-free local numbers, but where do they terminate: in one place per
area-code to the local switch?

  Thanks for your indulgence.


Rick Bronson                Tel [phone]
Marquette Electronics Inc.  FAX [phone]
8200 W. Tower Ave.       "The views expressed
Milwaukee, WI 53223           are mine alone"
Internet: [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: Of course what Mr. Bronson is overlooking is that
he only connected with the carriers (or services) which have
arrangements *in Milwaukee* to provide long distance calling (or their
services). Except for pretty much the 'Big Three', the remainder of
the numbers on his list may or may not do anything in other cities or
telco territories. We've got a list of these codes in the Telecom
Archives (anonymous ftp lcs.mit.edu) which covers the entire USA; not
all listings work in all places.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (MBX Michael Peters)
Subject: E1 vs. T1 Signalling
Organization: EUnet Login/Mailbox Service
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 05:39:48 GMT


I am looking for E1 signalling specifications.

If someone knows of an FTP site that has this information (and perhaps
how it differs from T1) could they please mail me.

TIA (thanks in advance)


Michael Peters - FRANKLIN DATACOM
[e-mail]
Voice(in CH): 41 52 213 9347
FDI HQ: V: 1 805 373 8688
Fax: [phone]

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

Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 10:06:18 EST
From: Joshua E. Muskovitz <[e-mail]>
Subject: At NYNEX, CNID is Coming Before E911


I just got off the phone with by customer rep at NYNEX, to make sure
that I get per-line blocking on my residential number here in
Kingston, NY.  (Kingston gets CNID on Monday.)

To their credit, the rep understood everything I said, but pointed out
that in this area, at least, we do not have enhanced 911 and so I must
dial *67 911 in order for them to be able to find me.  She claimed
that the delay in setting up E911 ("we've been working on it for three
years") is from the post office -- they have to convert all the Rural
Route addresses and such to street addresses before an E911 system can
be installed.

Personally, I don't believe it.  Why not simply install it now for the
more urban addresses, and update it for those addresses when they are
converted?

Oh well.  At least she offered to send me stickers for my phones.


josh.


[Moderator's Note: If she told you 'you must dial *67-911 in order for
them to find you' then I would question how much she understood about
what she was saying. *67 usually toggles the status of CLID delivery,
but in any event it *never* affects the 911 display (if there is one;
some older 911's don't have it.)  PAT]

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

Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 09:58:58 -0700
From: [e-mail] (Richard Thomsen)
Subject: Lightning Protection on Telephone Lines


I live in the mountains, where lightning and my location are
synonymous.  I have lost telephone equipment several times.  Once,
about three feet of my telephone cord exploded, separating the wires
in the modular cable, and removing the copper in one wire.  (It arced
to my X-10 controller, which did not do so well with the arc.  There
was a black spot inside where the circuit board said "F1" should be  :-)).

A second time, I woke up in the middle of the night to see sparks
comming out of the base of my cordless telephone.  I unplugged the
telephone line, but the thing never worked again.

Last summer, I got a modem line protector along with a surge protector
for my computer.  When I went to use the telephone in it, it did not
work.  Checking inside, I found that the wires in the modular jack are
melted, when it apparently arced to the metal frame.  The telephone
cord from the wall jack to the protector no longer works, and is
burned on both ends.

Needless to say, I cannot leave modems, answering machines, cordless
telephones, or any other sensitive electronic equipment connected to
the lines.  But I have not lost anything on the regular electrical
system, only when it interfaced to the telephone lines.

It seems to be arcing between the telephone lines and the electrical
system.  The telephones themselves are not hurt, unless they are
plugged into the house wiring or touching something that is plugged
in.

I got some gas discharge tubes from Radio Shack and put them on the
telephone line outside (both sides to ground), but that was a few
years ago, so they do not seem to have done much good.  Last weekend,
I wired the telephone ground line outside to the electrical ground
outside (the copper rod driven into the ground just under the
electricity meter), and I hope that this will help some.

Does anyone know where I can get some *good* gas discharge tubes or
any other suggestions for protecting my telephone wiring?  I live in
Contel (now GTE) area, so I am not sure how much good it would do to
call them.  Other people in my area have come home to find pieces of
telephone all over their living room, so this is not an isolated
situation up here.

I have been thinking of mounting a box outside next to the telephone
line, wiring the line to a terminal strip.  I would then mount sharp,
pointed wires making an air gap to the contacts, hoping that the
lightning would arc over that, if the gas discharge tubes could not
handle it.  I would also put MOVs on it.

Also, how do you test gas discharge tubes and/or MOVs to see if they
are still good?

Any suggestions?


Richard Thomsen   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Mark Marino)
Subject: HELP! Need Pointers to Info on Frame Relay, ISDN
Organization: Open Software Foundation
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 17:27:51 GMT


Hi all,

   I'm investigating the possibility of supporting remote connections
to our network via methods other than FracT1 and DDS2.  Unfortunately,
I'm not well versed in the other methods.

   If someone could give me a pointer to a paper, article, or book
which describes any one of the following, I'd be forever indebted:

    * Frame Relay
    * Switched 56
    * ISDN
    * X.25

Are there any other newsgroups other than those I posted to where this
info might be discussed?

Please reply via e-mail.


Thanks,

Mark Marino              | [e-mail]        | uunet!osf!omar
Open Software Foundation | 11 Cambridge Center | Cambridge, MA 02142

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

From: [e-mail] (Mark Boolootian)
Subject: A Telephone Service Call
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 09:48:00 -0800 (PST)


This has passed through several hands and I thought I would pass it on
to the folks here.  I got a good laugh out of it.


 Date: 10/30/92 8:59 AM
 From: Gene Ledbetter
 Judith,

I used to be in Telephone Operations (long ere ever ye knew me), and I
KNOW without a doubt that some of your old hands would love to hear
the following gospel-true story (which just arrived over the wire from
a friend in D.C.):

A TELEPHONE SERVICE CALL

This story was related by Pat Routledge of Winnepeg, ONT about an
unusual telephone service call he handled while living in England.

It is common practice in England to signal a telephone subscriber by
signaling with 90 volts across one side of the two wire circuit and
ground (earth in England). When the subscriber answers the phone, it
switches to the two wire circuit for the conversation. This method
allows two parties on the same line to be signalled without disturbing
each other.

This particular subscriber, an elderly lady with several pets called
to say that her telephone failed to ring when her friends called and
that on the few occasions when it did manage to ring her dog always
barked first.  Torn between curiosity to see this psychic dog and a
realization that standard service techniques might not suffice in this
case, Pat proceeded to the scene. Climbing a nearby telephone pole and
hooking in his test set, he dialed the subscriber's house.  The phone
didn't ring. He tried again. The dog barked loudly, followed by a
ringing telephone. Climbing down from the pole, Pat found:

    a.   Dog was tied to the telephone system's ground post via an iron
         chain and collar.
    b.   Dog was receiving 90 volts of signalling current.
    c.   After several jolts, the dog was urinating on ground and barking.
    d.   Wet ground now conducted and phone rang.

Which goes to prove that some grounding problems can be passed on.


Mark Boolootian        [e-mail]        [phone]


[Moderator's Note: Oh dear me! This story has been around *so long* --
it has appeared in this Digest at least a half-dozen times over the
past ten years. When Jon Solomon used to moderate this Digest several
years ago he printed it once or twice; I've used it before also. I
guess it makes a good story for the newcomers now and then.  :)  PAT

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

From: [e-mail] (Peter Eisch)
Subject: Panasonic Info Request
Organization: University of Minnesota
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 19:16:40 GMT


Got my first cell-phone yesterday.  It is a used Panasonic.  No books
came with it or other information.  Does anyone have a phone number to
any siginificant Panasonic office?


[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Jim Rees)
Subject: Ohio Bell to Cripple Pay Phones in Cleveland
Date: 15 Nov 1992 22:30:41 GMT
Organization: University of Michigan CITI
Reply-To: [e-mail]


According to a UPI story, Ohio Bell has announced plans to cripple
some pay phones in Cleveland.  They have already started converting
pay phones from tone dial to rotary, and restricting them to outgoing
calls only.  Now they will also be disallowing coin calls (credit card
and collect will still be allowed) at certain hours of the day, and
disabling the tone pad after dialing on those phones that still have
tone dials. They claim that this will limit the use of pay phones for
illegal purposes.


[Moderator's Note: Rob K. also wrote about this in the Digest over the
weekend in issue 842.  I hope you are not blaming Ohio Bell for this
situation. I doubt sincerely that telco is doing anything other than
reacting to community pressure in the 'war on drugs'. IBT did this
about a year ago only after the local politicians, neighborhood block
clubs, etc pushed them on it. IBT is neutral on the use of their pay
phones as long as the call gets paid for; I suspect OBT is also.  PAT]

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

Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 19:25 PST
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: San Jose Mercury Again


The {San Jose Mercury News} is calling again. Now the big guns come
out.  Tomorrow, I am calling the non-emergency police number and file
a police report for harassing phone calls. A rep at Pac*Bell thought
that this would be a wonderful plan and suggested that if I could get
a number of other people to do the same, things might be set right in
a hurry.

So how about it, Bay Area folks? If you are tired of the {San Jose
Mercury} constantly calling you at the dinner hour, why not "call the
cops"? For those of you who think this is a bit drastic, remember that
I have already done the following:

Repeatedly spoken to the president of the telemarketing firm;

Repeatedly spoken to the SJMN telemarketing manager;

Repeatedly given them the list of numbers at my residence;

Had my attorney write to both;

Complained of "harassment" to telco;

Faxed net articles bad-mouthing the paper to SJMN management.

And after filing my police report, I will make a report to the BBB for
good measure.

Any other ideas?


John Higdon  |   P. O. Box 7648   |   [phone]     |       FAX:
[e-mail] | San Jose, CA 95150 | 10288 0 700 FOR-A-MOO | [phone]


[Moderator's Note: Because you acted so strongly against this
originally, I have to wonder if the latest call(s)? were deliberate or
made in error by a new person or were due to an error in the software.
They surely could not be so willful as to deliberatly start the calls
again. Why not make some copies of your earlier correspondence and
send them by registered mail or courier to the telemarketing firm and
ask them what happened ... did something go wrong in their system,
etc, as you can't belive they are *willfully* violating your request.  PAT]

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

Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 06:24:01 -0500
From: [e-mail] (Richard D. Mccombs)
Subject: A New DMS-100 in Town
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Richard D. McCombs)
Organization: The Redheaded League; Lawton, OK, USA


We have a new DMS-100 in town, is there anything in particular I
should know?


Internet: [e-mail], [e-mail]
UUCP: ...!rwsys!ricksys!rick,  {backbones}!ricksys.lonestar.org!rick
BITNET: bo836%cleveland.freenet.edu@cunyvm Fidonet: Richard McCombs @ 1:385/6

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

Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 19:11:42 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <[e-mail]>
Subject: Cellular Misinformation


Excerpt from RISKS DIGEST 14.03

 Date: Tue, 10 Nov 92 14:58:48 EST
 From: "Barry C. Nelson" <[e-mail]>
 Subject: Cellular Misinformation

The {Boston Globe}, 9 Nov 1992, had a human interest story
illustrating some good uses for the ubiquitous cellular phones.  In
many places you can dial *SP for the State Police, and this had been
credited with getting rapid assistance to accident and crime victims,
as well as apprehending a dangerous escapee. They mentioned problems
with routing 911 calls.

What I found more interesting was a discussion about the Coast Guard
preparing to adopt *CG as a maritime cellular distress number.  A
local official was quoted as saying that the existing broadcast
channels will remain in operation because anyone nearby will hear you
and the CG operates Direction Finding stations to pinpoint your
location. Okay ...

But then he went on to say that cellular calls "only give you a point
to point channel", leading one to the wrong belief that they couldn't
DF a cellular user, and that nobody else could listen if they wanted
to.


BC Nelson

P.S.: After a PGN talk at MIT recently, someone in the audience
claimed that the FBI has multiple "trunks" attached to the local
cellular hub in Boston and they can monitor both sides of a
conversation by just typing in your number.  Thank goodness that this
is a democracy.  :-^


[Moderator's Note: If Mr. Nelson got the impression the author was
saying 'no one can listen to you because cellular is point to point'
then that is his misunderstanding. I wouldn't have come to that
conclusion based on the author's statement. Would you, readers?   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Dan Gould)
Subject: Looking for Caller Display Hardware
Date: 15 Nov 92 19:40:54 GMT
Organization: HP Panacom Div Waterloo ON Canada


I am looking for a hardware software package to use my Telco's caller
display feature with a PC running windows. I would like incoming calls
to be announced by a window popping up. I would also like to give the
software a list of numbers I know about so that the caller's name will
also appear.

It should interface to the PC via a serial port if possible.

Thank you in advance for any leads you may be able to offer.


Dan Gould    [e-mail]

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

From: esl![e-mail] (Jeff Yu)
Subject: Looking for ISDN PC Adapters
Date: 15 Nov 92 18:20:48 GMT
Organization: ESL Inc., Sunnyvale, CA


Hi,

   I am looking for an ISDN adapter card for an IBM-compatible PC.  I
am primarily interested in ab Basic Rate Interface (BRI), but Primary
Rate Interface (PRI) cards (if any) are also of interest.  I would
appreciate any direct comments, pointers to {PC Week / Data Commun-
ications} /etc. guides, or FTP archives.  If this is a FAQ, I would
appreciate a pointer to that FAQ list.

   I would prefer responses by direct e-mail, since I don't follow
this newsgraoup regularly (yet).  I will post a summary of responses
later.


Thanks in advance,

Jeff Yu        Advanced Systems Laboratory
jcyu@.esl.com    ESL Inc.
The opinions expressed here do not necessarily reflect those of anyone at all.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V12 #850
******************************