Telecom/1996-04-telecom-walnutcreek.iso/back.issues/1993.volume.13/vol13.iss001-050

Internet Message Format | 1993-08-24 | 1MB

Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa18812;
          2 Jan 93 21:03 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA18161
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 2 Jan 1993 19:13:02 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA06239
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 2 Jan 1993 19:12:38 -0600
Date: Sat, 2 Jan 1993 19:12:38 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #1

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 2 Jan 93 19:12:30 CST      Volume 13 : Issue 1

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Administrivia: What You Should Have Received (TELECOM Moderator)
    Volume 12 Accelerated Index Now Available (TELECOM Moderator)
    Yet Another Horrible AOS Story (Chris Petrilli)
    Computer Directed Call Forwarding (Allan D. Griefer)
    Another Payphone Mystery? (John Schmidt)
    Status of Old Bell System Books (Howard C. Berkowitz)
    More Harassment Questions (Jim Rees)
    Changes to AT&T International Help Line? (Dave Leibold)
    Internet/UUCP Dial-up Line in Singapore? (Anto Daryanto)
    The Ultimate Call Screener (Jeffrey Jonas)
    Telephony of the Future (Dave Niebuhr)
    Re: The Future of Wired vs Wireless Services (John Adams)
    Telecomics (Peanuts 1st Jan 1993) (Dave Leibold)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sat, 2 Jan 1993 17:32:19 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Subject: Administrivia: What You Should Have Received


Several unnumbered items were sent out between the end of Volume 12
which had 928 issues and this, the start of Volume 13 and another year
here at TELECOM Digest.

     1) A copy of the FAQ.
     2) A letter to Usenet comp.dcom.telecom readers about the Digest.
     3) An image of the Telecom Archives directory and ftp instructions.
     4) An endless supply of Caller-ID messages and replies ... :)
        (actually, three large files with several messages each in the
        first two and a single longer message in the third.)

If you did not get any of these and feel you must have them, you will
find the first three items already in the archives at one place or
another; the mailings which went out on January 1-2 will not be put in
the archives again (needless duplication). I am not going to put the
clean out of Caller-ID messages in the archives either; so if you for
some reason did not get Parts 1, 2 and 3 of that, you'll need to annoy
me by asking for copies from here.

Happy New Year, and welcome to Volume 13 of TELECOM Digest. The Digest
was started in 1981 by Jon Solomon, and we'll wrap up twelve years of
this in August, 1993.


Patrick Townson
TELECOM Digest Moderator

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

Date: Sat, 2 Jan 1993 15:16:38 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Subject: Volume 12 Accelerated Index Now Available


The Accelerated Index to TELECOM Digest Volume 12 subjects and authors
is now available in the Telecom Archives for grabbing via anonymous
ftp lcs.mit.edu.

It is called an accelerated index since it points to other large files
which contain clusters of back issues (in groups of 50) where the
subject or author will be located.

A typical entry in the index will look like this:

12/101-150: Article Title Here (First Last Name of Author Here)
12/101-150: Re: Response to Article Here (First Last Name of Author)

This would tell you to go to the sub-directory in the archives for
Volume 12, and pull the large file named 'vol12.iss101-150'. When you
have that file available to you, then use grep or other methods of
searching within that file for the desired articles and authors.
Author's names are always in (parenthesis) but sometimes were
shortened in the header (i.e. John Smith became J. Smith or J Smith)
as needed to make it fit on the line in the Digests from which the
index was created. Searching for the last name is better than the full
name since these variances could cause you to miss some entries.

The Accelerated Index is sorted in alphabetical order, with "Re:"
ignored where it appears.  You can dump it out to a printer if
desired, however the file is about 9500 lines in length. All articles
with identical names will usually have one without 'Re:' and one or
more with 'Re:' on the front. Where titles are identical (since the
'Re:' if it exists is ignored in the alphabetical sort) the sorting
then continues by *first* name of author. As an example, "Re: My Life
Story" by Adam Smith would appear before "My Life Story" by John
Higdon.

Depending on the name of the original author, the original article
(that is, the one without 'Re:' on the front) may appear anywhere in
the cluster of identically-named articles. If you see more than one
identical titles and none of them say 'Re:', then it is likely the
'Re:' was somehow overlooked in processing -or- they are two articles
with similar material but both are 'original'.

Conversely, if you see one or more articles with 'Re:' and no
offsetting original article (the one in the bunch without 'Re:' on the
front) one of two things is possible: either there was no 'original
article', i.e. I screwed up in the original publication or the thread
started in Volume 11 and the (Re:)plies got carried over to Volume 12.

Some help is available in the use of the Accelerated Index within
the index itself:   grep -i "Intro:"  for several lines of help at the
start of the file.

A companion file covers volumes 9-10-11 from 1989 through 1991. It is
set up the same way, and is in excess of 24,000 lines. I was thinking
about merging volume 12 into the earlier index, but there were some
problems with that, namely the sorting of entries got very difficult,
and anyway, some of you already have the earlier edition. Besides,
there are simply too many small sites where a file of some 35,000
lines in total simply could not be handled.

Final note:

If you are at a UUCP or BBS site, I strongly recommend you seek
permission from your system administrator before hauling such big
files across the wire; and make sure you have room on your spool for
the uncompressed results.

Remember, these two index files to subject and author names are in
compressed format in the archives. (They have the suffix '.Z' after
their name.)  You must use binary mode to transfer them via ftp, or
else the results will be trashed when you try to uncompress them.

I hope these indexes to subjects and authors in TELECOM Digest since
April, 1989 will be useful to you. It is strongly recommended you have
a good working knowledge of the 'grep -i' command and can be creative
in your use of 'grep' for searching for the best results. Let me know
how it works for you.


Patrick Townson
TELECOM Moderator

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

From: [e-mail] (Chris Petrilli)
Subject: Yet Another Horrible AOS Story
Date: 2 Jan 1993 01:13:16 GMT
Organization: Department of Redundency Department


Just to increase the enjoyment for the holidays, I thought I'd share
my AOS story with everyone.

I was on the way from Austin, TX -- where I live -- to Dallas to visit
a friend, when I stoped in Garland to make a "routine" call to tell
him that I would be there shortly (Garland is 30 minutes or so from
where he lives), when I foolishly selected a "generic" pay phone at a
Texaco gas station.

Sicne both the origination number and the destination number were in
the 214 area code, I decided to place the call simply using a quarter
(hoping it wasn't long distance).  Anyway, I reached the party, and
spoke to them for a total of about five seconds before the phone
decided that it wanted to eat more of my money ... it asked for
something around $2.50 for the "next two minutes."  At that point, I
dialed the phone number against to use my SWBT phone card, hoping to
force it to deal with SWBT ... no go, I get a "bong" and a "Thank you
for using ATMT" (note this sounds A LOT like "The Phone Company"
AT&T).  I then dialed the standard 10288, the whole number, and then
receive a bong and the same "ATMT" message.  Not even forcing through
to AT&T ... I'm not a happy camper.

To solve the problem, I ended up driving about a block to a SWBT pay
phone that liked what I wanted better ... note that THIS pay phone
allowed me to make the full call on a quarter.


Chris Petrilli   [e-mail]   I don't even speak for myself.

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Computer Directed Call Forwarding
Date: 2 Jan 93 05:39:21 GMT
Organization: IBM Almaden Research Center


I'd like to set up a system that forwards a call to a particular party
based on a code number that's entered by the caller.  In other words,
I want to have the caller call a particular number, say the main
number for a business after hours and enter a four digit code.  the
system would then look up that code and forward the call based on
that.  This would allow us to have people call for emergencies without
releasing the home phone numbers of the employees.

Any ideas how this might be easily implemented?


Opinions are strictly my own,
Allan D. Griefer,       IBM Almaden Research Center, San Jose, CA
VNET/BITNET: GRIEFER at ALMADEN                Fax: [phone]
Internet: [e-mail]               mcimail: 398-8024

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

Date: Sat, 02 Jan 1993 00:42:31 EST
From: JOHN SCHMIDT <[e-mail]>
Subject: Another Payphone Mystery?


I recently visited my Alma Mater, WPI in Worcester, Mass. (A/C 508).
When I got there, I wanted to call my mother in Ahmerst Mass.
(413-253****).

There was a payphone, clearly identified as a New England Telephone
phone, near where I parked.  The long distance carrier was clearly
marked as AT&T.  I dropped a quarter in and dialed the number (1+) The
response was a beep something like a touchtone followed by "Deposit
two dollars please."  Thinking this a bit steep, and not hearing the
AT&T "boing", I hung up and dialed 1-0-288-413-etc.  Same result.

Being thoroughly annoyed at this point, I went into a nearby dorm,
where I found another identically marked payphone, with a NET credit
card phone next to it.  I tried the payphone first, same result both
ways. I then used my AT&T Master Card in the credit card phone, got
the familiar "boing", etc, and placed my call. (The bill on my card,
which arrived last week, was 85 cents.)

What gives with the payphones?  Shouldn't I have gotten AT&T?  (I'm
pretty sure that Worcester and Amherst are in different LATA's.  In
any event, isn't $2.00 a pretty steep rate for a direct dial pay call
of about 35 miles?  I thought charged calls were generally more
expensive than cash payphone calls, but then I rarely make long
distance(?) payphone calls these days.

Any answers welcome.


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] (Howard C Berkowitz)
Subject: Status of Old Bell System Books
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Sat, 2 Jan 1993 22:14:23 GMT


I'm trying to track down the current sources for several references,
the copies of which I have available being pre-Bell-breakup.  I know
some have gone somewhere in AT&T, some in Bellcore, etc.  Others
(e.g., the BSTJ) may have changed name.

Can anyone give me pointers to current titles, ordering sources, and
ideally price for:

       Transmission Systems for Communications
       Engineering & Operations in the Bell System
       Notes on the Network
       Direct Dialing Notes

Thanks.

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

From: [e-mail] (Jim Rees)
Subject: More Harassement Questions
Date: 2 Jan 1993 20:50:06 GMT
Organization: University of Michigan CITI
Reply-To: [e-mail]


Suppose someone calls me every morning, lets the phone ring once, then
hangs up, so that I never actually pick up the phone.  Is that still
considered harassement?

If someone calls and lets the phone ring only once, will Caller-ID
still be delivered?

I'm asking for a friend.  My own ringer is on a timer, so I don't hear
it early in the morning.  Two of my lines don't even ring at all.


[Moderator's Note: Tell your friend that everywhere I know, deliberatly
causing the telephone of another person to ring for no purpose other
than to harass or annoy is against the law. There need not be any
actual conversation. Since Caller-ID is delivered between the first
and second rings, it may or may not be delivered on such a call. Here
in Chicago, it seems the data is sent immediatly on the end of the
first ring, and most of the time when I've gotten 'one-ringers' the
number has gotten here before the originating CO had a chance to tell
my CO to disconnect the call, etc. I think it would be worth a shot to
learn the identity of the caller; your friend might have to wait for a
few calls to have the two CO's out of synch with each other just
enough to allow your friend's CO to slide the information out to him.
Then, he'll need to observe this a few more times just to assure
himself that it is a deliberate, calculated activity. Won't the caller
be surprised!  Actually I think 'return last call received' -- *69 --
might be even more reliable than Caller-ID, because once the caller
hits your friend's CO, his number *is* in the buffer, and even if the
CO does not get around to sending the ID in time (before the caller
breaks the connection), causing the ID not to show up or to show up
with errors in it, etc ... he'll still be able to call back.   PAT]

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

Date: Sat, 2 Jan 1993 17:18:18 -0500
From: [e-mail] (Dave Leibold)
Subject: Changes to AT&T International Help Line?


AT&T operated an international calling assistance line at 1 800
874.4000 for some time. Now, it seems that AT&T has changed the
number, or at least cut out access from Canada. I don't know whether
the line is still active in the U.S. or not.  I believe there was a
regular telephone number which could be called collect from other
countries as well ... anyone have that information handy?


Dave Leibold - via FidoNet node 1:250/98
INTERNET: [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: Yes, 800-874-4000 is working from the USA. AT&T
says people not in the USA should call collect to a 412 number.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Anto Daryanto)
Subject: Internet/UUCP Dial-up Line in Singapore?
Organization: Delft University of Technology
Date: Sat, 02 Jan 1993 09:32:16 GMT


Hi, I am now living in Holland but in five weeks I am going back to
Indonesia. Here I frequently use Internet access from university for
my study, and I know I'll miss it.

Does anybody know whether a dial-up line available in Singapore so
that I still can use the access to internet? (We don't have an
internet access yet in Indonesia). If it exist how can I contact them?

Thanks in advance and Happy New Year ...


Anto Daryanto

Delft University of Technology,     Faculty of Electrical Engineering,
Telecommunication- and Traffic-Control Systems Group
E-Mail: [e-mail]

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

Date: Sat, 02 Jan 93 18:16:14 EST
From: [e-mail] (Jeffrey Jonas)
Subject: The Ultimate Call Screener


I recall a story about an author who devised a doorbell that worked as
follows: you inserted a $10 bill to ring the bell.  If the person home
thought it was worth answering the door, you got your money back.

How about having only a 900 number?  If it's someone to whom you
wanted to speak, there would be no charge.  All other calls were
charged something like $10 for bothering you.  (This is assuming that
there's such a thing as a variable rate 900 number).


Jeffrey Jonas   [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: There are carriers like MCI who will deliver 900
service to you without doing the billing on it. They deliver the ANI
with the call and you figure out who/how to bill. Even if all you
charged was 25-50 cents per call, it would cut down on many of your
wrong numbers, sales calls, etc.  PAT]

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

Date: Sat, 02 Jan 93 08:39:21 EST
From: [e-mail] (Dave Niebuhr)
Subject: Telephony of the Future


Re: PAT's request for what we think telephony will be future will be
like in 2000 or maybe even 2100.  I'd like to post my $.02.

I think that we will see a much larger proliferation of the cell phone
industry; e-mail directly via satellites as opposed to wire and
satellites today; the physical size of the hardware in each switch
will shrink.

Who really can imagine what our children and grandchildren will
witness?  I can't but I'd sure like to be around to see what happens.

As I said, just my $0.02.


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


[Moderator's Note: I imagine all kinds of things we consider
impossible now will be reality.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (adams,john)
Subject: Re: The Future of Wired vs Wireless Services
Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ
Date: Sat, 02 Jan 93 14:26:07 GMT


I hope fellow netters will pick up this discussion, but for the moment,
my $.02:

In case you suspect that any of the following represents any parties
opinions other than my own, allow me to reassure you that these are
*MINE*, only *MINE*!

I suspect that outside sociological, economic, and political pressures
will do more to answer the posed question than mere technology alone.
Issues such as the makeup of the future family, ecological issues, the
global "shrinking" phenomina and others will sharply influence what
types of telecommunication prevail.  Will technology alone "make
markets"?  Evidence abounds that it takes more than shear technical
brilliance to make a difference.  I suspect that each of us who earns
her/his daily bread in this industry needs to sharpen our focus on the
other "softer" sciences.  At least from my perspective, the softer
sciences are indeed *MUCH* harder to master than those we use daily.

Will the current industry infrastructure (Don't you just love the way
we can beat this politicisms to death :-) ) remain viable by 2010?  I
sure don't know!  But lack of knowledge never stopped me before ;-)!
When all else fails, the basic survival instinct is alive and well in
most businesses.  My only concern is that the Bumbling Baristers of
Boondoggleville (aka Washington Beltway Bandits) will somehow seek to
call *ALL* the plays in telecommunications in the future.

Competition? ... you bet!  But let's have some real competition, not
the contrived kind we have all witnessed as fashioned by the warring
lobbyists on the steps of the Capital.

Remember that *NO* business will remain in business without a proper
profit to reward those risk takers who provide the fuel of any
venture.  Profit is not a dirty word!  I am convinced that rate of
return regulation will die a natural death before the year 2000.
While price cap regulation seems to be in vogue with our lawyer
friends(?), I'm almost positive that zero regulation (price/cost only)
will be in effect by 2010.


Jack (John) Adams        Bellcore NVC 2Z-220
[phone] {Voice}        [phone] {Facsimile}
[e-mail]    [e-mail]

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

Date: Sat, 2 Jan 1993 17:58:26 -0500
From: [e-mail] (Dave Leibold)
Subject: Telecomics (Peanuts 1st Jan 1993)


The Peanuts comic appearing today (1st January 1993) featured a
telephone conversation between Peppermint Patty and Charlie Brown as
follows:

Peppermint Patty to Charlie Brown:

"Hi, Chuck ... just calling to wish you a Happy New Year ... do you
love me, Chuck?"

Charlie Brown in reply:

"I'm sorry, but your call cannot go through ... please hang up, and do
not dial again ..."

 ...

On a loosely related note, the Adam comic that appears in {The Toronto
Star} now has a grainier appearance, with digital style contours on
the artwork. The era of syndicators faxing those cartoons to
newspapers is well underway.


Dave Leibold - via FidoNet node 1:250/98
INTERNET: [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: Some of the cartoonists have even made reference to
their use of the fax machine: consider 'Family Circus', where in one
episode, by artist/author Bill Keane (whose cartoons deal with his
family and himself) the picture is a picture of Keane himself as he
draws the cartoon and a caption telling his son Billy to 'hurry up and
get this in the fax machine to the Syndicate right away, or it will be
too late for the Sunday papers ...'  :) PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #1
****************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa27026;
          2 Jan 93 23:48 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA11932
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 2 Jan 1993 21:22:28 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA15194
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 2 Jan 1993 21:22:02 -0600
Date: Sat, 2 Jan 1993 21:22:02 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #2

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 2 Jan 93 21:22:00 CST      Volume 13 : Issue 2

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: All Circuits Are Busy Now ... (Roger B.A. Klorese)
    Re: All Circuits Are Busy Now ... (James Borynec)
    Re: All Circuits Are Busy Now ... (Todd Lawrence)
    Re: All Circuits Are Busy Now ... (Dave Ptasnik)
    Re: All Circuits Are Busy Now ... (Hans-Gabriel Ridder)
    Re: Sad to Say, Telemarketing Works (E. Siegman
    Re: Sad to Say, Telemarketing Works (Jon Sreekanth)
    Re: Anybody Know of LARGE Modem Server Systems? (Tom Benham)
    Re: Anybody Know of LARGE Modem Server Systems? (Paul Schauble)
    Re: Suggestions Wanted For Phone Device to Restrict Toll Charges (Albrecht)
    Re: Suggestions Wanted For Phone Device to Restrict Toll Charges (A. Dunn)
    Re: Suggestions Wanted For Phone Device to Restrict Toll Charges (Forrette)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Roger B.A. Klorese)
Subject: Re: All Circuits Are Busy Now ...
Date: Sat, 2 Jan 1993 01:59:16 GMT
Organization: QueerNet


John Higdon <[e-mail]>:

> How soon we forget. Hours after the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake, I
> tried at some length to get though to my home from southern
> California.  All circuits were busy. Then I tried Sprint. The call
> went right through. Discussions right here on the Digest pointed to
> the policy of AT&T of purposely restricting incoming access to a
> disaster area. I, for one, was very grateful for the fact that AT&T's
> policies are not always imitated by the competitors.

I am, personally, very grateful that AT&T's policy was as it was.  It
enabled me to *reach* my loved ones outside the area quickly when I
*could* get to a phone and *chose* to contact them, rather than being
locked out by my neighbor's Aunt Minnie calling their answering
machine to see if the cat was OK.

The disaster area residents should be in control of the flow of
information and the resources used to achieve it.  AT&T made a
splendid call on that one.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (James Borynec; AGT Researcher)
Subject: Re: All Circuits Are Busy Now ...
Organization: University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada
Date: Sat, 02 Jan 1993 21:19:40 -0700


On 25 Dec 92 21:26:00 GMT, [e-mail] (John Higdon) said:

> I would have thought that by now AT&T would have stopped its annoying
> practice of drastically reducing its capacity on holidays. A number of
> AT&T employees have told me that for reasons that are not very clear,
> the company has traditionally blocked off a major amount of the
> system's capacity on various holidays such as Christmas and Mother's
> Day.

Network managers, traditionally have two means of controlling
high-volume traffic.  They can either re-route or they can block.
Re-routing is useful if the place they route it to has capacity to
spare.  Selective Blocking can actually RAISE the number of completed
calls by stopping calls that would fail anyway before they chew up
any more trunks.

Under traditional signalling schemes, a call attempt will aquire
available trunks until it either succeeds and is billed or fails and
releases the trunks.  In the second case, no money comes to the telco.
The Telco (AT&T in this case) seeks to avoid the second case, in order
to maximize revenue.


j.b.

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

Subject: Re: All Circuits Are Busy Now ...
From: [e-mail] (Todd Lawrence)
Date: Sat, 02 Jan 93 01:25:01 CST


> The Amateur Radio Emergency Service and National Traffic System hold
> health and welfare inquiries until the disaster scene is ready to
> accept them, placing a much higher priority on real emergency traffic.

> I recall hearing a few years ago that AT&T long distance circuits were
> setup to limit incoming calls, when necessary, so outgoing calls
> always would have circuits available.

I have an old (four or five years old) AT&T trunk service/reference
guide that has a passage to the effect that upon reaching 60-70% trunk
group saturation, 4ESS will return a reorder to all but callers with a
priority class of service code. I do not know if this practice is
still in effect but I would suspect that something very similar is for
exactly the reasons mentioned in the preceding thread.


Todd Lawrence
LOD! Communications          internet : [e-mail]
IMF Data Acquisition Group   uucp     : uunet!valinir!todd

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

Date: Sat, 02 Jan 1993 10:32:49 -0800 (PST)
From: Dave Ptasnik <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: Dave Ptasnik <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: All Circuits Are Busy Now ...


On 25 Dec 92 21:26:00 GMT, [e-mail] (John Higdon) said:

> I would have thought that by now AT&T would have stopped its annoying
> practice of drastically reducing its capacity on holidays. A number of
> AT&T employees have told me that for reasons that are not very clear,
> the company has traditionally blocked off a major amount of the
> system's capacity on various holidays such as Christmas and Mother's
> Day. This is the real reason you get the "All Circuits Busy"
> recording, not because there is an inordinate amount of traffic.

> Naturally, there is no trouble calling anyone on Sprint or MCI since
> these companies do not engage in this silly ritual of network choking.

To which [e-mail] (Andy Sherman) replied:

> They also don't have anywhere near the market share, which means their
> networks aren't presented with anywhere near the load.  I *have* heard
> that the OCCs have more headroom, since they have all those trunk
> routes in place but lower market share ...

> Maybe one of my ex-colleagues will address this issue?

 From a previous life as an OCC vendor, I'm not at all surprised that
MCI and Sprint provide better service on holidays.  They have a higher
percentage of business customers than AT&T.  Business have higher long
distance bills, and therefore more incentive to search out low rates.
Most residential users (probably no one who reads this list) have very
little long distance usage, so rates are not a significant factor in
their LD choices.  They are more interested in reliablilty and ease of
use.  AT&T at least provides the perception that they are the best for
these.

With a higher percentage of business usage, most OCC's have very
little traffic on their switches at nights, on weekends, and holidays.
The trunks that are busily full during the day sit idle.

We used to periodically get directives from our switch manager to sell
more residential accounts, and try to busy up the lines at night a
little more.  We were paying fixed monthly charges on the lines, as
well as usage charges.  More evening traffic let us better afford the
fixed monthlies, as well as helping our rate taper charges (don't mean
to be obscure with that term, if you don't know what rate taper on
WATS lines was all about, you didn't miss much).  Unfortunately
finding residential users with long distance bills in excess of, say,
$50.00/month was really tough and time consuming.  Mangement actually
started paying us bonuses for res customers.

I think I'm glad again that I'm not doing that any more.


All of the above is nothing more than the personal opinion of -
Dave Ptasnik          [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Hans)
Subject: Re: All Circuits Are Busy Now ...
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation - DECwest Engineering
Date: Sat, 2 Jan 1993 19:02:22 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> John Higdon <[e-mail].
com> writes:

> BTW, some AT&T tech called yesterday to tell me that the blocking that
> I experienced on Christmas Day was the result of my local telco, not
> AT&T. Yeah, right. And just whose recording is "408-2T"?

The recording I was getting when trying the big three carriers was
"206-2T".  It sounded the same on each carrier.  Wouldn't that make
you think it was an LEC issue?


Hans-Gabriel Ridder <[e-mail]>
DECwest Engineering, Bellevue, Washington, USA
Any opinions expressed are not those of my employer, honest.

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

Date: Sat, 02 Jan 93 14:02:56 PST
From: Anthony E. Siegman <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Sad to Say, Telemarketing Works
Organization: Stanford University


   Concerning this issue, let me post the following suggestion once
again, because it seems to be a good, workable, practical, effective
proposal: Enact legislation requiring that all telemarketing calls
come with Caller-ID from a uniquely designated area code prefix, like
600, 700, whatever.  No freedom of speech issues are involved; the
technical/economic burden on the telemarketer is very modest and
affordable; no central data banks are required; and individuals can
block or not as they choose, at very low cost, with no effect on the
rest of their telephone usage.  It's just like marking special
advertising inserts in magazines as "Advertising" on each page, so you
know what you're getting.

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

Date: Sat, 2 Jan 1993 09:47:24 -0500
From: [e-mail] (Jon Sreekanth)
Subject: Re: Sad to Say, Telemarketing Works


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

> Simple mechanisms exist to prevent autodialers from reaching you.
 ...

> I assume, therefore, that there is another device out there which
> *DOES* identify whether the calling party is human or machine, and can
> block all calls from one or the other.  I also assume that this is
> available for a price that the average person can afford, and is not a
> hassle to them to use (i.e., you don't force the caller to go through
> a menu or anything just to get to you -- it all happens behind the
> scenes).

Yes, what _are_ the simple mechanisms?

One I can think of is: answer the phone silently. Outbound message
gadgets probably wait for the called party to say something ("Hello ")
before beginning their spiel. At the expense of confusing some of your
human callers, have a box at your end pick up the incoming call, wait
silently for voice energy, and then ring you.


Jon Sreekanth

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

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

From: [e-mail] (Tom Benham)
Subject: Re: Anybody Know of LARGE Modem Server Systems?
Organization: Cybernet BBS, Boca Raton, Florida
Date: Sat, 02 Jan 1993 03:09:32 GMT


[e-mail] (Vance Shipley) writes:

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

>> I have a customer who may need to set up a huge number of modem
>> lines to service incoming calls to his UNIX system, and he wants to
>> find a system that already does this rather than roll his own.  While
>> we could probably do it ourselves for small numbers of lines (say, up
>> to 32), these may just not scale up very well to handling several
>> hundred modems and serial lines and phone lines.

Digiboard has a line of serial concentrators.  You might try them.
IBM also sells some RS6000 stuff that allows many lines in.


Tom

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

From: [e-mail] (Paul Schauble)
Subject: Re: Anybody Know of LARGE Modem Server Systems?
Organization: Bull HN Information Systems, Inc., Phoenix Product Division
Date: Sat, 02 Jan 93 08:13:06 GMT


The request for a modem server for lots of modems brings up something
I've been wondering about for a long time:

Lots of modems means lots of incoming phone lines.

First question: At what point does it become cheaper to have an incoming T1
or T3 line and a switch on site?

Second question: once you reach this point, the signal path becomes:

    - incoming DIGITAL signal delivered via Tx carrier
    - DIGITAL signal deliver to line card.
    - line card converts signal to ANALOG
    - ANALOG signal carried via wire pair to modem.
    - modem (usually) converts signal to DIGITAL
    - modem feeds DIGITAL signal to DSP to demodulate.

This multiple conversion seems silly. Doesn't anyone make a modem that
can directly eat the demultiplexed Tx data? Or better, eat the T1
signal directly?


 ++PLS

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

Date: Sat, 2 Jan 93 16:33:02 CST
From: [e-mail] (Bruce Albrecht)
Subject: Re: Suggestions Wanted For Phone Device to Restrict Toll Charges


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

> The Moderator noted:

>> discovered that in the two or three seconds the phone was off hook
>> (with dial tone) before the autodialer started doing its thing, his
>> pocket tone dialer could cut that dial tone and let him call anywhere
>> on the store's nickle.  Provided he got his digits dialed before the
>> autodialer cut in, telco accepted his digits and ignored those from
>> the device.

> There are auto-dialers available that prevent this.  I tried this
> trick with the elevator phone in our building.  When you take the
> phone off-hook, you hear dialtone, then hear it dial the answering
> service for the elevator company.  As soon as the dialer hears a
> touchtone generated from the headset, it hangs up the line.  Boy, they
> won't let anybody have any phun these days!

Wouldn't it be easiest to rig a circuit that disconnects the handset
circuitry until the phone had completed the predetermined dial
sequence?  I suppose, to be safe, it would also need to recognize the
dial-tone so that it would cut the handset out if someone left the
phone off the hook after disconnect.


[e-mail]

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

From: Andrew M. Dunn <[e-mail]>
Organization: A. Dunn Systems Corporation, Kitchener, Canada
Subject: Re: Suggestions Wanted For Phone Device to Restrict Toll Charges
Organization: A. Dunn Systems Corporation, Kitchener, Ontario, Canada
Date: Sat, 02 Jan 93 01:52:40 GMT


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

> trick with the elevator phone in our building.  When you take the
> phone off-hook, you hear dialtone, then hear it dial the answering
> service for the elevator company.  As soon as the dialer hears a
> touchtone generated from the headset, it hangs up the line.  Boy, they
> won't let anybody have any phun these days!

Seems to me there'd be a _much_ easier way to do this.  Simply add a
set of contacts on the autodialer which close after the sequence is
dialed (most autodialers work that way anyhow, with some sort of 'end'
circuit).

Use this to close the outbound voice path.  That way, nothing from the
mic gets sent until _after_ the number's dialed.

Solves the problem quite neatly.


Andy Dunn   <[e-mail]> or <[e-mail]>

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: Suggestions Wanted For Phone Device to Restrict Toll Charges
Date: 2 Jan 1993 01:21:55 GMT
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA


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

> There are auto-dialers available that prevent this.  I tried this
> trick with the elevator phone in our building.  When you take the
> phone off-hook, you hear dialtone, then hear it dial the answering
> service for the elevator company.  As soon as the dialer hears a
> touchtone generated from the headset, it hangs up the line.  Boy, they
> won't let anybody have any phun these days!

> [Moderator's Note: Now that is interesting! I wonder how they do it?
> Apparently if the autodialer hears a tone, and *it* did not make the
> tone, it disconnects. Is that how it works?  PAT]

Yes, this is exactly what it does.  The reason I was trying to dial
out is that I was calling the ANAC number to get the elevator's phone
number.  Then, I was going to call it when co-workers were in it to
conduct the 'elevator survey' that was talked about here a couple of
years ago.  But, I suspect that if the auto-dialer is smart enough to
prevent me manually dialing with a pocket dialer, that it probably
blocks incoming calls from reaching the phone as well.


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: I've seen elevators with autodialers on their
phones but quite a few have a direct ring-down circuit instead. That
is, you take it off hook and it immediatly starts ringing the other
end of the dedicated wire. In the 77 West Washington Building
downtown, (Chicago Temple Building) each elevator has a ring-down
phone which rings to the elevator supervisor in the lobby on a
multi-line phone with several buttons. Going off hook in the elevator
lights a button on his phone; if he goes off hook it rings the
elevator phone associated with that line/button. There is an
'extension' phone with many buttons in the elevator machine room on
the 21st floor so the building engineer or elevator mechanic can also
talk to people in each car. The lobby supervisor can talk to the 21st
floor via the building's PBX system. He also has an illuminated panel
which tells him where each car happens to be in the shaft at that
moment and if it is moving or sitting there, etc.  PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #2
****************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa29450;
          3 Jan 93 0:35 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA07753
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 2 Jan 1993 22:14:53 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA28980
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 2 Jan 1993 22:14:30 -0600
Date: Sat, 2 Jan 1993 22:14:30 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #3

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 2 Jan 93 22:14:30 CST      Volume 13 : Issue 3

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Good Opportunity For Fraud (John R. Levine)
    Re: Good Opportunity For Fraud (Shrikumar)
    Re: EasyLink and Internet? (Steven H. Lichter)
    Re: Easylink and Internet? (Jim Gorak)
    Re: Format of ZIP Code Bars on Envelopes (Doug Sewell)
    Re: Format of ZIP Code Bars on Envelopes (Dave Grabowski)
    Re: Practical Peripherals V42bis Modem (Tom Benham)
    Re: Practical Peripherals V42bis Modem (Jim Budler)
    Re: SS7 Links Fron CA to NY via AT&T? (Bob Yazz)
    Re: GTE Betting the Bankroll on Wireless (Dave Ptasnik)
    Re: More Idiocy From GTE (Andy Sherman)
    Re: How to Prepare For the Startup of an AM Radio Tower Nearby (Nick Sayer)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Re: Good Opportunity For Fraud
Organization: I.E.C.C.
Date: 2 Jan 93 11:36:23 EST (Sat)
From: [e-mail] (John R. Levine)


> [Zounds! The whole calling card number is on the mag stripe.]

I think you will find that historically with telco calling cards there
hasn't been a distinction made between a "non-secret" part, the first
ten digits, and a "secret" part, the last four.  In years past when
calling fraud wasn't such an issue, the check code was so simple that
the operator could validate it as the call was placed by checking a
little cheat sheet.  If a calling card number was compromised, the
telco would issue an entirely made up number in which the fourth digit
was a 1.

The only use to date that I have found for the mag stripe on a calling
card is in the card reader phones found mostly at airports, which read
the whole calling card number and stuff it down the line at the
appropriate time as you're making a phone call.  These phones are
already hard enough to use, and I suspect that if they read ten digits
from the card and asked you to enter the other four by hand, nobody
would use them at all.

If you are concerned about the security of your calling card, leave it
at home.  Every phone I've ever seen that reads calling cards also
lets you punch in the number by hand.  Admittedly, then you have to
look out for shoulder surfers, but I guess this again proves that
there's no free lunch.


Regards,

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

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

Date: Sat, 2 Jan 93 13:22:35 -0500
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Good Opportunity For Fraud
Organization: UMass, Amherst MA + Temporal Sys & Computer Networks Bombay India


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

> I've been working on a credit card / phone project, and discovered
> something that is probably known to many but was news to me: My PIN is
> _on_ my calling card!  Recorded on Track 2, offset 23 characters after
> the SS.  In the clear.

I believe the bankcard passwords are also often in the clear in the
ISO mag stripe. Shudder! Remember having read something to that
effect on the net. Could some please deny ... please .. please!

Or do the ATMs check with the central computer each time (hope the
traffic is encrypted.)


shrikumar ([e-mail])

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

From: [e-mail] (Steven H. Lichter)
Subject: Re: EasyLink and Internet?
Date: 2 Jan 1993 16:57:18 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA)


As far as I can tell you could always send to Internet from EasyLink.
In the help files it tells you how. A bit costly I would guess, but if
you needed to send a message I guess the cost would not matter.  I
tried it once when I first got on Internet and it worked fine. I was
even able to send one to myself on GTEMail. As time passes more of the
systems seem to be linking.

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

Date: Sat, 2 Jan 93 06:24 GMT
From: Jim Gorak <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Easylink and Internet?


[e-mail] (Donald R. Newcomb) writes:

> I have long understood that sending email between EasyLink and
> Internet was out of the question. ....(part deleted)

> Can anyone tell me there has been a change of policy at EasyLink re.
> Internet mail? Can we send to EasyLink? If so, what is the proper
> set-up for the address envelope? Can they send to us? What does the
> address look like?

There are a couple of ways to address e-mail from the Internet to an
AT&T Easylink subscriber. I have been using the "Easy" way. I'm not
sure that this official but, so far, it has worked every time for me.

You need to find out the Easylink subscriber's Easylink number (ELN),
i.e. 62925933, which is my Easylink number. the Internet address is:

            [e-mail]

An Easylink subscriber can send to an Internet address bu using the
following format: (i.e. for [e-mail])

IPM
PRIMARY
COUNTRY US
ADMD ATTMAIL
ORG UUCP
DDA ID-internet(b)dnewcomb(a)whale.st.usm.edu
END+
(message text...)
   "      "
   "      "
   "      "
(message text...)
MMMM


Hope this works for you.


Regards, Jim Gorak

X.400  S=Gorak;DDA:ID=3735974;A=MCI;C=US | Internet   [e-mail]
MCI    Jim Gorak / 373-5974              | CompuServe >MCIMAIL:373-5974
Telex  6503735974  "6503735974MCI UW"    | Tele-Home  [phone]
Post   3231 S. Landl Lane  #108          | Tele-Work  [phone]
       Milwaukee, WI 53227-4474  USA     | Tele-FAX   [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Doug Sewell)
Subject: Re: Format of ZIP Code Bars on Envelopes
Date: Sat, 2 Jan 1993 14:22:56 GMT


say,halim s ([e-mail]) wrote:

> Does anyone know or could you tell me a reference for this "standard"?
> I am sure some address generator software would have this algorithm.

Here's the algorithm (about two months ago I translated it into a 4GL
language for our DBMS.  There was also an article in a recent PC
magazine including source code).  Your post was pretty well
on-the-money.

Here's the algorithm (with a disclaimer that I'm working from memory
after having glanced briefly at the code last week, and double-checked
it against the bar-codes of some bills I have to mail):

(1) Coding can be five digits (rare), nine digits (most common) and
    more to include house codes/street address numbers (this is not
    very common yet).

(2) You have a tall start bar, N+1 sets of five bars (the +1 is a check
    digit) and a tall stop bar.  The tall bars are ones, and the short
    bars are zeros.  The code is self-clocking (that's scanner termin-
    ology).

(3) There will always be two tall bars and three short bars.  The bars
    are numbered 7, 4, 2, 1, and 0 and are summed together (with the

    means that 0-9 are:

    0 - 11000
    1 - 00011
    2 - 00101
    3 - 00110
    4 - 01001
    5 - 01010
    6 - 01100
    7 - 10001
    8 - 10010
    9 - 10100

(4) The check digit is 10 - mod(sum of digits,10).  So for 32232-5121
    the check-digit is 9 (3+2+2+3+2+5+1+2+1 = 21, 10 - mod(21,10) - 9.
    For 43218-2210 it's 7, for 50360-0001, it's 5.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Dave Grabowski)
Subject: Re: Format of ZIP Code Bars on Envelopes
Organization: New Jersey Institute of Technology, Newark, N.J.
Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1993 02:05:47 GMT


  {The New York Times} had a short article with diagram that explained
the mysterious barcodes on January 28, 1990. Here's the gist (jist?)
of it:

  Bars are divided into sets of five. Within a set, each bar,
left-to-right, represents the numbers 7, 4, 2, 1, and 0. In each set
of bars, only two are tall. These two represent the numbers that
should be added to get a digit. (By convention, 7 + 4 = 0).

  The barcode starts and ends with a tall bar. The check digit is the
number that would be required so that the sum of all digits plus the
check digit is evenly divisible by ten. i.e., if the zip+4 code was
15230-9821 (digits add to 31), the check digit would be 9, because
31+9=40, which is divisible by 10.


Dave
Kappa Xi Kappa - Over & Above!                         [e-mail]
9 Sussex Ave., Newark, NJ (car theft capital USA)   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Tom Benham)
Subject: Re: Practical Peripherals V42bis Modem
Organization: Cybernet BBS, Boca Raton, Florida
Date: Sun, 03 Jan 1993 03:02:28 GMT


[e-mail] (John Boteler) writes:

> I don't sell ZyXELs, but thought I'd throw in my $0.02 to aid in the
> discussion of such fancy modems.

On the topic of modems.  DO any of these modems also support
synchronous transmission for HDLC?  I was looking at Motorola's line
and they apparently have two different lines: one 'Sync-UP' and the
other 'FasTalk'.  It is not clear to me why there should be two lines
of modems.  Currently I've got a V.32b+Fax+++ async modem, but it does
NOT support synchronous xmit which I need for SDLC connections.
Guidance appreciated.


Tom

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

From: [e-mail] (Jim Budler)
Subject: Re: Practical Peripherals V42bis Modem
Organization: Silvar-Lisco
Date: Sat, 02 Jan 1993  07:06:10 GMT


The PPI modem doesn't currently do Caller-ID. I'm using one right now.
It could probably offer it with a firmware change, but it doesn't.


Jim Budler            [e-mail]
Silvar-Lisco          [e-mail]
703 E. Evelyn Ave.    [e-mail]
Sunnyvale, Ca. 94086  +1.408.991.6115

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

From: Bob Yazz <[e-mail]>
From: [e-mail] (Bob Yazz)
Subject: Re: SS7 Links Fron CA to NY via AT&T?
Date: Sat, 02 Jan 1993 21:26:52 GMT


John Higdon <[e-mail]> writes:

> But what people do not understand is that those preciously private
> telephone numbers will soon be displayed out of state on a wide scale.
> It is only other CALIFORNIANS that will not see the number displayed.

You don't seriously believe such a state of affairs will stand, do you
John?  The PUC will order that numbers not be delivered, period.  I
can even see the potential for lawsuits against Pac Bell over this.

Sounds like an incentive to switch to a long distance company that
does not use SS7.  How do you think AT&T might feel about this?


Bob Yazz

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

Date: Sat, 02 Jan 1992 11:09:07 -0800 (PST)
From: Dave Ptasnik <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: GTE Betting the Bankroll on Wireless


willard![e-mail] (Leigh Melton) wrote:

> GTE is betting the bankroll on wireless systems.  It's the number one
> priority in Stamford HQ, or so I'm told by a friend who works for GTE.
> They apparently feel that wireless is their chance to "dig ATT's
> grave" and finally beat Ma Bell at a *different* game, as they never
> could using current systems.  So far, the wireless PBX seems to be the
> item that everyone is drooling over.

I love it!  The telco with one of the worst basic dial tone
reputations in the business is chasing a silly pipe dream.  Why can't
these guys get a clue and start improving the one thing that is their
bread and butter.  They should be offering more and more dial tone
features for basic service, ISDN at realistic prices with realistic
features, Caller ID (at least at the Higdon estate), etc.  But
NOOOOOOOOO, they have to play games with selling equipment.

"Wireless" PBX's will continue to be a very small part of the market
for a long time.  They still require a ton of wiring (all those little
antennas and mux's all over the building).  The equipment cost is
higher on a per phone basis, so is not practical for large phones with
lots of feature keys that sit on desks.  Most people don't really want
to carry a small personal phone around with them all the time, they
leave their offices to avoid phones.  Many women's outfits don't have
pockets or belts for storing the phones.  Because the sets have to be
small and light, they tend to be number code intensive for feature
activation, customers LOVE codes ;-).  Sure cordless is great for some
people in some applications.  But certainly not most people and most
applications.

I'm sure AT&T is quaking with fear, and GTE rate payers and
stockholders are gibbering with glee.  Once again everyday users will
see rates go up, and/or slow feature realeases, and/or service
degredation to pay for this latest folly.  C'mon GTE, get a life.


All of the above is nothing more than the personal opinion of -
Dave Ptasnik          [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Andy Sherman)
Subject: Re: More Idiocy From GTE
Date: Sat, 02 Jan 93 16:46:52 EST


On 28 Dec 92 15:07:25 GMT, [e-mail] (Charles
Mattair) said:

> As I'm at a friends house, I decide to put the call on calling card.
> 102880+10D.  <boing> GTE.  Huh ...?  I know this is intralata but I
> told them to use AT&T.  They can't override my choice of carrier can
> they?  Try it again except as 102880 + 7D (713 has gone 1/0 + 10D on
> all LD calls but who knows what GTE is doing).  <boing> GTE.

Local exchange carriers look at the whole number before passing it off
to an IXC, precisely because of what you tried to do.  AT&T is very
likely not tariffed to carry that call, so the switch knows better
than you do, and routes it via the LEC.  However, AT&T issued CIID
card should still be good for a GTE carried call.  AT&T has reciprocal
card verification and billing agreements with virtually every LEC in
the country so that your AT&T card is AOS-proof and OCC-proof but not
LEC-proof.  (That is a feature, not a bug).


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Nick Sayer)
Subject: Re: How to Prepare For the Startup of an AM Radio Tower Nearby
Organization: The Duck Pond public unix: [phone], log in as 'guest'.
Date: 03 Jan 1993  02:56:23 UTC


[e-mail] writes:

> Can anyone suggest any measurements, recordings, or other things that
> should be done now, before broadcasting starts, that will help if we
> need to later complain to the FCC about interference, bad phone noise,
> etc.?  If there are any firms that specialize in this type of
> measurment, their names or numbers would be appreciated.

This pushes one of my hot buttons.

In the vast majority of cases the interference is the fault of the
home electronics equipment designers who failed to adequately shield
the equipment from high density RF fields. In all but the tiniest
minority of cases the transmitter in question is operating entirely
normally, legally, and totally within the norms of modern engineering
practice. In many cases it is simply the sight of an antenna that gets
the xenophobes working. It is common practice for a new Amateur Radio
operator in the neighborhood to put up an antenna without connecting
it to a transmitter for a month or two. Invariably a couple RFI
complaints come in from the xenophobic community.

The solution is to make consumer electronics less susceptable to RFI.
The FCC has jurisdiction over susceptability regulation of all home
electronics. They have chosen to abrogate that responsibility in favor
of letting the manufacturers have their own way.

If you suspect that the transmitter is emitting harmonics or other
out-of-band emissions, then you can indeed sick the FCC on them.  It
is incredibly unlikely that a commercial station would put out illegal
amounts of spur simply because spurs cost money A) in fines from the
FCC and grief from the guy at double the frequency and B) it's wasted
energy and therefore wasted money (a 7 kW FM transmitter with a -13 dB
spur is putting out 350 watts on that spur. That's 10% waste. Techies:
Yes, a -13 dB spur is pretty outrageous, and the math is simplified,
but it sort of illustrates the idea).

There is one exception: CB stations with (illegal) amplifiers almost
always throw out spurs because the operators of those stations don't
know how to tune the amp properly. This is NOT the case with Amateur
radio stations (yes, Virginia, there is a bloody huge difference) --
for one thing the amps in the Amateur service aren't illegal (Hams can
use up to 1500 watts PEP, CBers can use about 5 [I forget the actual
number, but it's very tiny]).

So what to do?

1. Don't be a xenophobe. If it's not bothering your home electronics,
don't throw a tantrum!

2. If it IS causing you trouble, it is PROBABLY because your device is
susceptable NOT because the transmitter is doing something wrong. Call
the transmitting agency with this attitude and you'll be a lot more
likely to get help than if you call 'em up and insist that everything
was fine before they came along. Being the cause of RFI and being "at
fault" are two entirely different things.

3. Tell the FCC that the consumer electronics industry is entirely
incapable of regulating susceptability in consumer electronics, as
they have proven quite conclusively.


Nick Sayer <[e-mail]>  N6QQQ @ N0ARY.#NOCAL.CA.USA.NOAM
[phone], log in as 'guest'    PGP 2.1 public key on request

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #3
****************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa03908;
          3 Jan 93 1:59 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA32213
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 2 Jan 1993 23:46:20 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA26423
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 2 Jan 1993 23:45:57 -0600
Date: Sat, 2 Jan 1993 23:45:57 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #4

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 2 Jan 93 23:46:00 CST      Volume 13 : Issue 4

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: The Recent East Coast Storm (Dave Niebuhr)
    Re: X.25 Switch Vendor Info Please (Tom Benham)
    Re: Loaned Phones/Courtesy Phones (Was AOS Payphones @#$%%%$#) (S. Howard)
    Re: Loaned Phones/Courtesy Phones (Was AOS Payphones @#$%%%$#) (Pelliccio)
    Re: No Link Between Location and CO? (David Tamkin)
    Re: DID as Replacement For Caller ID? (John Higdon)
    Re: It's Not a Bug, it's a Feature ... (Martin McCormick)
    Re: Looking For Small-Handset Cordless Phone (Will Martin)
    Re: SNET Rate Request (Seng-Poh Lee)
    Re: New Call Feature (was Sad to Say, Telemarketing Works) (A. Siegman)
    Re: What Are the Prefix "Codes" For Tone Dialing? (Gordon Burditt)
    Re: PRO-34 Wanted (Craig R. Watkins)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sat, 2 Jan 93 07:57:03 EST
From: [e-mail] (Dave Niebuhr)
Subject: Re: The Recent East Coast Storm


In TELECOM Digest Volume 12 : Issue 928 [e-mail]
(Jeffrey Jonas) writes:

[ report about storm damage in NYC deleted ]

> [Moderator's Note: You are correct. Not a word was mentioned here. I
> did not see it personally, and no one bothered to write about it. :(
> Thanks for bringing it up.   PAT]

Long Island took a *major* hit.  Places like Bayville, located on a
peninsula jutting into Long Island Sound, were cut off completely from
the mainland of the island for days.  The damage there was
unbelievable; houses destroyed, roads washed out, electricity out and
variable telco service.  Ditto Eaton's Neck and Asharoken.

Downtown Port Jefferson, located directly on the Sound, was under
several feet of water.  Docks were washed out and the ferry terminal
was severely damaged from the wind and waves.

A friend of ours who lives in Nassau County and right on the ocean
spent the night on the top floor of her apartment building.  Her car
had water up to the top of the tires.

Downtown Riverhead, located on a small river (anyone who has seen a
major river wouldn't call this one a river), had flood waters up to
the tops of cars.  My wife works there and had to find an alternate
route home.

Orient Point was cut off from the Island when a causeway became
damaged after a barge (whatever that was doing there) hit a bridge on
the causeway.  Damage: No electricity or telco service (really bad
since the only way to get water there is by wells with electric
pumps).

Orient Point is on the easternmost tip of the North Fork of Long
Island.

Fire Island, which protects the mainland was breached in two places:
One was a 500 foot gap which looks like a new inlet; the other is 100
feet wide.  Both are pouring sand and water into the south shore bays
and upsetting the salinity levels.  This can wipe out what is left of
the clamming and fishing industry there.

Robert Moses State Park, located on Fire Island, saw the near
undercutting of a road in front of a lighthouse which used to have
about 100 feet of beach in front of it.

Almost 50 homes on Fire Island washed out to sea or were destroyed in
place.  Some are so cut off that one local township has said: "No more
road rebuilding to them.  We (the taxpayers) can't afford it."

There were one or two lives lost due directly to the storm.  Other
than that injuries were minimal if at all.

During the course of the storm, the winds seemed like they were of
hurricane force and probably were in some places.

Nassau and Suffolk Counties were declared disaster areas last week
thus clearing the way for federal aid.  On a sad note, the Nassau
County of the American Red Cross has gone broke.  It had spent a lot
of money last August when Hurricane Andrew struck Florida and the Gulf
states.  This was money and supplies that they contributed to the
relief effort.

Red Cross officials said that this storm will take $500,000 (US) of
their 1.5 million budget which has nearly been exhausted by this time
of the year.

How did the storm affect me personally?  Not much.  I lost electricity
for 2 1/2 hours.  Telco service was available all of the time.  I live
1.5 miles from the Great South Bay to the south and east and never had
to worry about flood damage.  Some of my wife's colleagues were,
though and they had to evacuate.

There were a lot of complaints about electricity service from the Long
Island Lighting Company for outages.  LILCO's way of doing things is
to restore service to the greatest area first and then go after the
smaller ones.  One problem was that just when one area was restored,
another would go out.  Some days, no one can win.

To their credit, I will congratulate LILCO and NYTel for their
efficiency and dedication in restoring their respective services.
Neither of these utilities is on my Christmas Card list, nor will they
ever be.  However credit must be given where it is due.

I apologize to PAT and others for not reporting in sooner but the
holidays got in the way and the storm came just before they did.  What
an ufortunate occurrance.


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


[Moderator's Note: Thanks for passing along your very sad note. I
guess the storm in Florida late in the summer occupied so much
attention and took so many resources the events in California (big
fire which went on for a long time destroying many things) and New
York early in December were given a short-shrift in the media as well
as relief agencies whose funds were dangerously low as a result of the
Florida horror. 1992 was a very bad year disaster-wise in the USA with
the various events both of nature and the total social breakdown
which occurred in Los Angeles in April. Here in Chicago, 1992 was the
second most murderous year in our city's history with over 900 murders
committed in the city alone. Saddest of all, about 200 of the persons
killed were under age 21; about two dozen were small children -- about
two youngsters per month are gunned down in our public schools here,
usually as a result of their gang-affiliations or lack of same.  :(
We here in Chicago are fully expecting a major riot ala Los Angeles in
the next year or two. With luck (see my tongue in cheek), the New
Yorkers and Californians will get their tribulations by fire and flood
out of the way early in the new year and thus get the attention and
relief assistance they deserve before it all runs out.  :(   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Tom Benham)
Subject: Re: X.25 Switch Vendor Info Please
Organization: Cybernet BBS, Boca Raton, Florida
Date: Sun, 03 Jan 1993 03:14:05 GMT


[e-mail] (Rob Warnock) writes:

> [e-mail] writes:

>> A foreign company would like to purchase a few small X.25 switches
>> from an US company. I am collecting information for them.

> Be aware that X.25 packet switches fall under the COCOM export
> controls.  You will need an export license, and can't ship at all to
> some countries.  As Phil Karn said at the time:

I don't know about export controls, but IBM sells software that runs
on PCs that lets you build an X.25 net.  A friend of mine and I were
thinking of selling it in the Carribean, but opted for other greener
pastures.  In addition, you can also build a very expensive X.25 net
on an SNA backbone.  I know no one in his right mind would want to do
this, but it is possible.


Tom

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

Date: Sat, 02 Jan 93 9:28:24 MST
From: Steve Howard <breck1![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Loaned Phones/Courtesy Phones (Was AOS Payphones @#$%%%$#)


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

>> COCOTs have.  People who rent out their homes or condos have similar
>> issues with loaning their phones to others.

> Things you can currently do:

> 1) Ask for a toll restriction. In one place I had to pay a one time
>    charge. In another there was a monthly charge. (Not altogether
>    sure about which was which but I think the monthly charger was
>    Illinois Bell, the other one Southwestern Bell.  Other differences
>    were being able to reach Operator.

> Of course a toll restricted phone is of somewhat limited utility but a
> lot better than having driving to a payphone for even local calls.
> Incoming long-distance calls are of course not restricted.  And if you
> happen to have a calling card you can even get direct dial rates (from
> AT&T at least) if you tell the LD operator (800 numbers can be
> dialed) that you are at a toll-restricted phone.

A solution that I recommend to some of my clients is to: (1) order
selective class of call screening from the LEC (this is toll
restriction with 0+ and no 10XXX), (2) Contact an IXC that offers
toll-restriction, forced authorization code validation, and commission
on 0+ calls, (3) have your line PICed to the carrier found in step 2,
and (4) order collect and third party block.

Under this scenario, your transient guests can place calls (on which
you make commission), you are protected from toll charges, and the
owner/authorized persons can make calls at direct dial rates by using
their authorization code.


Steve Howard         Breckenridge Ski Resort      [e-mail]
Disclaimer = The opinions above do not necessarily represent those of
my employer.

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

Date: Sat, 02 Jan 93 18:38:20 EST
From: Tony Pelliccio <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Loaned Phones/Courtesy Phones (Was AOS Payphones @#$%%%$#)


In regards to loaned telephones and blocking access to tolls and
900/976 number, I believe Radio Shack sells a unit for under 100 bucks
that completely restricts toll calling. Just allows you to dial
straight seven digits, not much else.


Tony Pelliccio   pjj125 @ uriacc.uri.edu

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

Date: Sat, 02 Jan 93 13:20 CST
From: [e-mail] (David Tamkin)
Subject: Re: No Link Between Location and CO?
Organization: Contributor Account at ddsw1, Chicago, Illinois  60657


Randy Gellens wrote in <[e-mail]>:

> When I called to find out what prefixes I could be on and which
> switch types, I received some conflicting information.  It seems that
> I could be served by any of three COs, with 19 prefixes, and a mix of
> 1, 1A and 5 ESS switches.  Even though the total area served by the
> COs is rather large, it appears as though any location within the
> total area could be served by any of the three.  Anywhere else I've
> been, each CO has a defined area it serves.

> Is this the case?  Why does PacBell do it this way?

In Chicago two Illinois Bell CO's are in the same building at 10 S.
Canal Street.  Although some prefixes are wired from Canal East and
some from Canal West, they can appear anywhere in the service area.
One company I used to deal with had, in the same office, voice lines
on the Canal West 312-648 prefix and data lines on the Canal East
312-715 prefix.  The matter of voice vs. data wasn't the issue either,
because virtually every voice phone line in Sears Tower is wired from
Canal East (312-993 or 312-876, mostly), and AT&T's original Redi-
Access node for downtown Chicago was out of Canal West (312-454).

Are the three CO's at three different locations?


David W. Tamkin   Box 59297   Northtown Station, Illinois  60659-0297
[e-mail]    CompuServe: 73720,1570    MCI Mail: 426-1818

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

Date: Sat, 2 Jan 93 00:49 PST
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: DID as Replacement For Caller ID?


[e-mail] writes:

> It's still *very* expensive except for people who have the kind of
> money that they are willing to spend upwards of three grand to put PBX
> capability in their multi-million dollar houses.

I never claimed that CNID workarounds would be cheap or even only
moderately expensive. Actually, the most practical workaround is an
800 number delivered via direct trunk from a long distance carrier.
This is universal, unblockable, and works from anywhere in the
country. There are no pending actions before any regulatory body to
change the ability of end users from receiving callers' numbers in
real time. All it takes is money, something available to businesses
and individuals with means.

My hat is off to the activists. Once again, they have managed to keep
a useful technology out of the hands of the average person, while
businesses (you know, those nasty types who will abuse the knowledge
of your phone number when you call for inquiry) are using 800 numbers
in ever-increasingly creative ways.

It sure is a good thing that the activists pay good lip service to the
cause by disliking ANI delivery a whole lot!


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

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

Subject: Re: It's Not a Bug, it's a Feature ...
Date: Sun, 03 Jan 93 04:52:22 -0600
From: [e-mail]


The talk about static on AM radios being useful is only the tip of the
iceberg.  Let's suppose you are blind and you have given your PC
something monumental to do such as sort a large amount of data or
search for a key word in a huge document.  Two things can happen which
can drive someone to strong drink.  The software may print a running
status message, telling you that all is well each time it does
something right.  Who wants to be told 5,000 times that everything is
OK?  Some program setups may do their work silently, but one wonders
if the machine is sleeping or working.  If it takes 30 minutes, for
instance to search a huge document for a key word, one doesn't expect
to hear anything for a while.  If something terrible happens like a
crash, the effect sounds the same until 45 minutes, 50 minutes, etc
have gone by and you realize that the whole time has been a waste.

    Hear's the fix.  Take a portable AM or FM radio and place it
near the computer.  Tune around until you find a whine or buzz that
suits your ears.  It should be possible to find a signal which varies
when the computer is doing something and stays relatively monotonous
when it is hung up or idling.

    One doesn't have to have golden ears to be able to tell when
it sounds like things have gone sour.  This trick has also proved
useful when doing long file transfers as it is possible to hear
disturbances in the noise from the machine when data are coming in.
By using a little common reasoning, one can even get some idea of
whether or not there might be a problem with the data stream by
listening to the cadence of packets and noting whether they seem to be
steady and not halting or ragged.  Try it, sometime.


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

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

Date: Sat, 2 Jan 93 10:30:02 CST
From: Will Martin <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Looking For Small-Handset Cordless Phone


Thanks to all who responded to my query!

Several people suggested answering machines, but I fear these elderly
people are anti-answering-machine. (My wife is like that -- she never
will leave a message on anybody else's answering machine, either,
except my voicemail at work, even though three of our closest friends
have answering machines. When she calls them and they do not pick up,
I have to take the phone from her and leave the message ... :-) I agree
that it is a viable solution, but I don't think its worth trying to
force them to change their attitudes at this late date.

I did receive valuable pointers to a couple specific models from
Panasonic and Motorola which I will follow-up on. The suggestion to
modify an ordinary cordless with a handle my aunt can hold sounds good
 -- that might be the most cost-effective route.

Thanks again, and Happy New Year to Telecom'ers worldwide!


Regards, Will

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

From: [e-mail] (Seng-Poh Lee, Speedy)
Subject: Re: SNET Rate Request
Date: Sat, 2 Jan 1993 15:20:44 -0500 (EST)


> Needless to say, overall rates are up.  To take my home town of
> Stamford (in exchange class II) as an example, current residence rates
> are: Flat $11.19, Message $7.59, and Select-a-Call $6.00.  New rates
> (now exchange class III) will be: HCA $15.00, ECA $25.65, and Per Call
> $10.00.

> It's unclear how the current Flat Rate area (which generally includes
> your own town and physically adjacent ones) compares to the new HCA's
> and ECA's, though SNET claims that for "most customers" the new ECA is
> larger than the current Flat Rate area.

Based on the flyer SNET sent me with my bill, it appears that people
who need Flat Rate Calling to adjoining exchanges are going to have
their bills doubled. HCA appears to only cover your own local
exchange, in my case, Cheshire. That means you have to subscribe to
ECA to get at least the Flat Calling area you used to have. This means
my Flat rate would go from $11.19 to $25.65, just so I can maintain
Flat Rate to the adjoining town. Thats more than DOUBLE! While its
true that ECA is supposed to give you a wider Flat Rate calling area,
SNET has not been to public about just how far an ECA each exchange
will get.


Seng-Poh Lee    <[e-mail]>

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

Date: Sat, 2 Jan 93 13:40:12 PST
From: Anthony E. Siegman <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: New Call Feature (was Sad to Say, Telemarketing Works)
Organization: Stanford University


[e-mail] (Richard Nash) writes:

> Sorry, but telemarketeers are a virus that require radical steps to
> rid ourselves of them.

That may be putting it a bit harshly (in a free country, even
telemarketers have some rights), but yes, telemarketing requires some
legal and social controls; and we (the targets of telemarketing) will
just have to keep pushing until we get them.

> My proposal is that all telemarketeers are required by law to identify
> their intent to the called party's CO which would determine if the
> called party wishes to receive solicitation.

YES! YES! YES!  This would be technically easy and inexpensive to do
(just require that any telemarketing call come from a special
designated prefix, like 600 or 700, or whatever); it's _all_ that's
needed; it's a trivial restraint on the telemarketer's freedom; it
gives the recipient full choice, to block or not.

We have got to work to get this basic idea recognized and implemented.

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

From: [e-mail] (Gordon Burditt)
Subject: Re: What Are the Prefix "Codes" For Tone Dialing?
Organization: Gordon Burditt
Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1993 00:00:39 GMT


> *65 turn on delivery of caller id (if you are subscribed)
> *85 turn off delivery of caller id (why would anyone want to do this?)

Because some phone companies charge for Caller-ID on a per-number-
delivered basis?


Gordon L. Burditt    sneaky.lonestar.org!gordon


[Moderator's Note: IBT used to do that, but starting a few months ago
they no longer charge for delivery over a certain number. One monthly
fee pays for it all.  Another oddity IMHO here is that call screening
can be turned on with *60 and turned off with *80. This is despite the
fact that while within the *60 menu of things to do, one can both add
and remove numbers from the repertoire. If you can add or delete
whatever you want there, why bother to have a command to turn it off?
Perhaps it is because IBT is not marketing Call Screening as a
permanent way to get rid of troublesome callers, but merely as a way
to avoid certain people at certain times of day; although I cannot
imagine be willing to chat with certain numbers on my list regardless
of the time of day or occassion. Ditto the feature where you can list
certain callers to get the red carpet with special ringing on your
end; that too can be turned off, although if your boss is an important
person to hear from at 3 PM, why wouldn't he be important at 3 AM?  PAT]

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

From: Craig R. Watkins <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: PRO-34 Wanted
Date: 2 Jan 93 10:42:11 EST
Organization: HRB Systems, Inc.


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

> I can't find any Radio Shack PRO-34 Scanners left around here ... if
> any one can find one for me I would be gald to pay the $39 + shipping
> + misc to receive one.

Yesterday I was in Radio Shack for some parts (just let those Radio
Shack bashers tell me where else I can get parts on New Year's Day
during halftime in the middle of nowhere in Pennsylvania!) and I asked
about the PRO-34.  It was really $39 -- I saw it on the computer
screen.  However, the guys behind the counter said it was discontinued
about a year ago and anything at a price like that gets snapped up by
employees.  They claimed that regional folks even get together
every-so-often to swap discontinued items between stores (and often
they are for employee purchase).  They wished me good luck finding one
(well, actually, I already have one), so I will wish the same to you.


[Moderator's Note: Well I must say it is the finest scanner radio I
have ever owned, and I've had several over the years, beginning with
the old crystal units twenty or so years ago; and before that I had a
tunable VHF receiver which I bought from Radio Shack's predecessor
company Allied Radio, circa 1960-65. Allied's HQ was right here in
Chicago at Western and Washington Aves. What a grand store that was,
and located right across the street from Olson Electronics just in
case you needed to stop in there also on the way home.  One complaint
I have about Radio Shack is how often the staff changes in the store
three blocks from my house. All new people there twice around since I
bought my CT-301 phone, and three times around since I bought the
PRO-34. I've purchased video cameras there also.  Thousands of dollars
spent in that one store alone; the current bunch of employees has no
idea who I am; the people there three years ago used to drop everything
to wait on me. I have my PRO-34 earphone jack wired out to a larger
communications style speaker pulled from an old speaker-phone. It
really sounds great that way. I still use my old Regency H-604 crystal
scanner from years ago sometimes also.  PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #4
****************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa08956;
          3 Jan 93 4:12 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA27808
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 3 Jan 1993 02:13:43 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA28116
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 3 Jan 1993 02:13:18 -0600
Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1993 02:13:18 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #5

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 3 Jan 93 02:13:00 CST      Volume 13 : Issue 5

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Mission Impossible: IBT Getting My Order Correct (TELECOM Moderator)
    Re: Panasonic KXT-123211 Software (Craig R. Watkins)
    Re: Email to Genie (Fred Ennis)
    Re: About a Second Line in My Home (Dave Levenson)
    Re: ZyXEL Modem Review (Bill Fenner)
    Re: Sprint 800 Residential (Ray Normandeau)
    Re: Good Opportunity For Fraud (David Ash)
    Re: Good Opportunity For Fraud (Sean Donelan)
    Re: Bell Canada Calling Card Fraud (Tony Harminc)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1993 00:45:38 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Subject: Mission Impossible: IBT Getting My Order Correct


The past week has been a barrel of laughs where IBT is concerned with an
order to change some service for me.

On December 23, IBT was given the following instructions regarding
some lines I manage:

(There were):

Two hunt groups: one beginning xxx-2700 with four lines following.
                 one beginning xxx-7200 with a second line following.

Two phones independent of the hunt groups, xxx-7347  and xxx-7296.

On 7347, there were various features such as call waiting, three way
calling, caller-id, etc.

The request:

Drop the 2700 hunt group entirely.

Add one additional line to the 7200 hunt group making three lines in
total there, with the two back lines hunted from 7200.

Change the number on the line 7347 to 2700 and retain all the features
that 7347 had on it, plus add voicemail from IBT.

So I was dropping four of the eight lines and re-arranging the
remaining four lines.

I was promised the order would be done on Monday, December 28, the day
the billing is cut off each month. When I went to check on the work
Monday evening, here is what I found:

The 7200 hunt group was done correctly. There were now three lines in
the group.

The numbers following 2700 in that hunt group had been turned off, but
with an intercept saying 'being tested for trouble ... try again later.'
That intercept recording is still on those lines, now a week later.

7347 had been replaced by 2700, but with none of the features on it
(just a straight line; if in use caller got busy signal, etc). No
forwarding, no call waiting, etc.)

I called Monday night and complained; was told to call the Business
Office on Tuesday since 'the order had been written up wrong ...'.

Tuesday morning I called the Business Office. There was nothing wrong
with the order said the rep; the people who work in the CO have to
learn to read better. She assured me it would all be corrected that
day.

Tuesday night I check the (newly numbered) 2700 line. Still no
features on it. I call Repair again as the Business Office suggested,
and am told they can do nothing ... call the Business Office on
Wednesday morning.

Wednesday morning I wake up early and very cranky. I am on the line to
the Business Office the minute it opens. I am put on hold, and the rep
comes back to assure me, 'they are working on it right now, as we
speak ... give them about an hour, call me back if problems.'

Somehow I got distracted and did not get a chance to look at those
phones or lines Wednesday night. Late Thursday afternoon, New Year's
Eve, I go to that location.

Now 2700 has all the features -- including call waiting, as witnessed
by the fact that *70 responded with the tone bursts -- but they had
somehow decided to make 2700 also hunt into 7200 when it was busy!!
That I did not want, and I called Repair, 6 PM New Year's Eve. The
clerk said no one would be around that evening, but Friday (New Year's
Day) there would be someone working in the CO ... again I am assured
it will be fixed.

New Year's Day, about 10 AM I called Repair. 'Colleen' took my call,
put me on hold, and came back to say that 'Arlene' was in the CO
working on it ... wait a few minutes and see if it is okay ...'.

Sure enough, about fifteen minutes later, 2700 (which is supposed to
be stand alone, no hunt group but with lots of features, remember)
gives a little ding-ding on the bell.  I lift the receiver and hear
static on the line ... no dial tone ever comes on, but there is
battery present.  Well, I figure, I guess it is being worked on.

I test the line several minutes later by using it to dial itself,
expecting to get a busy signal ... instead it rings, and instead of
hunting to the 7200 line as it had been doing, now it hunts to the
*second line* in the 7200 hunt group!

I call back Repair, bellow loudly and the clerk puts me on hold. She
comes back to say 'Arlene' will call me in a few minutes when she
finishes talking to another customer.

I leave the little office where these phones are located and go
downstairs to (a) relieve myself and (b) get hot water for my coffee
in that order ... I am on the way back upstairs and hear the phone
ringing, but it stops before I get to it.

Well, that's no problem, after all, what is Caller-ID for? The display
screen shows a number, 312-509-something, and figuring it might be the
person in the CO wanting to talk to me, I press the 'Call Back' button
on the display unit.  It rings and someone answers, 'Repair, Colleen
speaking.' I ask did she call me, and she asks 'how did you get my
direct number?' ....!!!   From here on, it goes downhill ...

A few minutes later, another call comes from a woman named 'Debbie'
who states she is a repair supervisor in the Irving CO. Her complaint
is thus:  someone has 'been calling' repair on 'unauthorized numbers'
and it had better stop. If I want Repair Service, the number to call
is 611 and none other.

I told her all I did was press the 'call back' button on the display
unit and if she did not want calls on that line then the thing to do
would be to block her ID; that would prevent me from calling. After
all, what did she think Caller-ID was for? Furthermore, I noted, in
the Centel phone book (Centel is another phone company which has a few
exchanges on the northwest side of Chicago; they operate from the
Chicago-Newcastle CO) it plainly says people using Centel phones who
need Illinois Bell repair *cannot* dial 611 (they'll get Centel
repair) and *must* dial 509-something to get IBT. Finally, I noted,
instead of talking about my calls on 'unauthorized lines' maybe we
should talk about how her tech staff on New Year's Day could not get
their act together, and whether an appeal to the Chairman's Office on
Monday would be in order ...

I am put on hold ... a minute or so later, "Colleen" picks up the line
to tell me I need to call the Business Office on Monday, since the
order 'plainly says' that 2700 is to hunt to the second line in the
7200 hunt group ....

I defied her to find me something specific in the order which said
that and told her if she could, I'd come over to the CO and buy lunch
for her.

Back on hold I go ...

I am told 'Arlene' will call now if I will hang up.  So I hang up.
The phone rings a second or two later, again with a number 907-something
clearly displayed on the Caller-ID.  It is 'Arlene' who wishes to
argue with me about whether or not the order called for hunting (as
opposed to call-waiting) and where it was to hunt.

I told her if it is supposed to hunt, as you claim the order reads,
then how come *70 works?  The line has call-waiting alright, it just
never gets a chance to reach that point since you have it hunting. She
finally decides maybe someone transposed the digits 2700 and 7200
somehow and that is how the hunting got installed on 2700. After
trying to gain some sympathy from me by telling me how she is there
working on New Year's Day on overtime trying to get some jobs finished
(and I try to gain her sympathy by telling her some stories from the
olden-golden pre-divestiture days of telecom) she agrees to look into
it and 'see what can be done'.

Finally about 4 PM New Year's Day, after several calls to Repair
Service and about an hour in aggregate wasted on the matter, the line
is fixed, voicemail works and all the features are present.  Four days
after the job was due, with numerous calls, the work gets finished.

Almost that is ... the xxx-7347 number (and the other discontinued
numbers in the original hunt group) still have the 'being tested for
trouble' intercept on the line. Obviously, someone did not close out
the order.  But I could care less about those numbers; they were
merely being disconnected with no referral on them anyway.

And 'Arlene' claims she still is unable to put a default carrier on
the line ... the Business Office will have to write that part of the
order all over again.   I won't worry about it for now.

For now, I'll be content if the software to be used on the computer
associated with those lines arrives soon, gets installed and works
okay.


PAT

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

From: [e-mail] (Craig R. Watkins)
Subject: Re: Panasonic KXT-123211 Software
Date: 2 Jan 93 15:30:05 EST
Organization: HRB Systems, Inc.


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail].
arizona.edu (William Petrisko) writes:

> Does anyone know of PC software available as a front-end to
> programming the Panasonic phone system?

I would also be interested.

> Also (just an annoyance factor) when dialing, it seems that the
> touchtone echo is *delayed* until you get to the third or fourth
> digit.

I believe if you decrease your CO line "Pause Time" (default: 3.5 sec)
this may help your problem.  I believe the PBX is delaying your tones
from your CO line in order to give the CO time to provide dial tone.


Craig R. Watkins    [e-mail]
HRB Systems, Inc.   [phone]

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

Subject: Re: Email to Genie
From: [e-mail] (Fred Ennis)
Date: Sat, 02 Jan 1993 15:40:31 -0500
Organization: Page 6, Ottawa, Ontario [phone]


> it -- with a cover note saying, "Mike, I thought this was some very
> interesting stuff and hope you enjoy reading it as much as I did ..."

That reminds me of a rather clever practical joke played by Stuart
MacLeod, columnist at Thompson News Services in Ottawa. The victim was
Geoff Scott, M.P.

Members of the press gallery had been sent a book that was the story
of the Portugese immigrating to Canada.  The book was part English,
part Portugese.  There was no index, which forms the basis for the
gag.

Stuart sent the book to Geoff, along with a note supposedly from the
author saying "I hope I quoted you correctly each time." This, of
course, forced Geoff to read the entire book.

Nothing to do with Telecom, but a great practial joke.

All the best for the holidays.


Fred Ennis, [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: Fred's message is like the late-arriving Christmas
card. He sent it December 15; it got here Saturday afternoon!  Happy
holidays to you too, Fre ... what there is left of them. How I will
hate my office more than ever when I have to go in Monday morning!  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Dave Levenson)
Subject: Re: About a Second Line in My Home
Organization: Westmark, Inc.
Date: Sat, 2 Jan 1993 20:17:23 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, Ben Black <76672.2564@Compu
Serve.COM> writes:

> I've ordered a second line in my home for computer use. There is
> standard four wire cable in the wall (red/green/yellow/black.)

> Can I use the unused pair (yellow/black) for the second line, saving
> me the trouble of running a new pair all the way to the network
> interface?

You can use the second pair in a length of quad station wire for a
second line, BUT: expect to find crosstalk between the first and
second line.  How much crosstalk will depend upon how many feet of
quad you use.  Voice users probably won't interfere with each other.
Modem sounds will probably be faintly audible to voice users of the
other line.  Ringing will be the most noticable noise that bleeds
through.  A ring of your voice phone will likely cause a few dropped
bits on your modems.

I recommend, if at all possible, that you either use a separate piece
of cable, or use cable with two or more twisted pairs for multi-line
service.


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] (Bill Fenner)
Subject: Re: ZyXEL Modem Review
Organization: Penn State Computer Science
Date: Sat, 2 Jan 1993 18:02:51 -0500


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Ken Levitt) writes:

> Two types of security features.  One does dial back, the other works
> only with another XyXEL modem.

This is wrong.  There are two types of security, one which asks for a
password, and the other which only works with ZyXELs, which checks
against the other modem's supervisory password.

Either mode can allow dialback, either to one of 10 numbers based on
which password matched, or the "enter-password" mode can also request
a number to dial back on.

The security is completely transparent to the host connected to the
modem, except for the amount of time for the CONNECT message to come
back.  For example:

 Remote        ZyXEL        Host
 --------    ---------    ----------
        RING    ->
            <-    ATA
 (negotiate connection)
    <-    PassWord =
mypass    ->
    <-    Correct
        CONNECT 38400 ->

i.e. the host doesn't see the fact that the connection occurred until
the correct password has been entered.


Bill

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

Subject: Re: Sprint 800 Residential
From: [e-mail] (Ray Normandeau)
Date: 2 Jan 93 20:30:00 GMT
Organization: Invention Factory's BBS - New York City, NY - 212-274-8298v.32bis
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Ray Normandeau)


> I'll give it the full six months, but I'm concerned about the number
> of wrong numbers. It could be more trouble than it's worth.

I know of a business that had AT&T 800 service and discontinued it due
to too many wrong numbers.  They were getting billed for calls to the
number after business hourts when no one ws in the office and there
was no modem fax TAD or human to pick up the phone.

This is a company with the President and ONE worker.

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

From: [e-mail] (David Ash)
Subject: Re: Good Opportunity For Fraud
Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University.
Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1993 05:43:29 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(John R. Levine) writes:

> The only use to date that I have found for the mag stripe on a calling
> card is in the card reader phones found mostly at airports, which read
> the whole calling card number and stuff it down the line at the
> appropriate time as you're making a phone call.

On this topic, has anyone ever found any use at all for the mag strips
on the calling cards issued by MCI and Sprint?  As far as I know, even
the card readers which allowing billing to these carriers won't allow
the physical use of the card?


David W. Ash    [e-mail]
HOME: [phone]  WORK: [phone]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Good Opportunity For Fraud
Date: 3 Jan 93 00:34:25 CST
Organization: Data Research Associates, Inc.


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(gordon hlavenka) writes:

> I've been working on a credit card / phone project, and discovered
> something that is probably known to many but was news to me: My PIN is
> _on_ my calling card!  Recorded on Track 2, offset 23 characters after
> the SS.  In the clear.

If you are working on a credit card/phone project a good introduction
is "Credit Card Validation and Security" by David Jordan (MCI
Corporate Systems Integrity Organization), Telecommunication Journal,
Vol.59 (April 1992).

Mr. Jordan wrote:

   "In the United States, several administrations utilize 14-digit
card numbers, with the last four digits referred to as the customer
PIN.  For customer convenience the PIN is printed on these cards.  The
fraud deterrent capability associated with the use of the PIN in these
implementations is negated."


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

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

Date: Sun, 03 Jan 93 00:52:37 EST
From: Tony Harminc <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Bell Canada Calling Card Fraud


[e-mail] (Dave Leibold) wrote:

[quoting from a leaflet distributed with recent phone bills]

> Calling cards can no longer be used as a billing option when placing
> long distance calls from payphones in Bell territory to certain
> destinations:

> + locations in 809 area code(*) (as of October 30, 1992);

> + overseas (as of April 13, 1992) unless you call from a Millenium
> payphone;

> In spite of these restrictions, there are still a number of ways you
> can place overseas or 809 calls from payphones:

> + use your American Express, Visa, Mastercard or EnRoute card in
> Millenium phones (these are the "card swipe" phones);

> + place a person-to-person collect call;

> + bill your call to a validated third number in Canada or the United
> States, or

> + place a cash call from a regular payphone.

This is getting bizarre.  I never carry my calling card because,
unlike the various other cards in my wallet, its number is valuable on
its own -- without the physical card.  This, of course, is because the
PIN is printed right on the card, and the number (with PIN) is
accepted without the card itself.  Now Bell is saying I must carry the
card in order to make these calls (a good start), but the PIN is still
printed on the card and stored unencrypted on the magstripe.

In a previous job I had access to credit card embossing and encoding
equipment, and I was tempted to make copies of my calling card on
credit card stock with a fake number embossed, but with the correct
one on the magstripe.  This solves some of the problem, but I
concluded that, even though it wouldn't be illegal, I would probably
spend a lot of time "helping the police with their enquiries" if I was
ever found with such a card.

> [Moderator's Note:  Well here we go again with the telcos claiming
> that 'fraud is everyone's problem ... '  it is NOT everyone's problem;
> it is telco's problem. They won't install the technology to eliminate
> or help reduce fraud; it is simply easier to discriminate against
> large numbers of citizens whose national origin is that of an affected
> country. I must say Bell Canada seems to be more open about admitting
> what they do; you'll never see AT&T ever put anything in writing about
> their illegal and discriminatory practices. Of course I don't know the
> law in Canada; maybe Bell Canada is breaking no laws by blocking calls
> in this manner. AT&T needs to have the screws turned to them harder
> than ever on this issue.    PAT]

But note that Bell Canada is disallowing such calls to all foreign
countries except the United States.  They are not picking a small (and
troublesome) subset as AT&T seems to have done.  I think it would be
pretty hard to make a case of discrimination against everyone except
American immigrants.


Tony Harminc


[Moderator's Note: Are you *positive* that if you try to use a Bell
Canada card on a call to the UK, Australia or New Zealand it won't go
through?  Forget what their literature says for a moment and try it.
If it does go through on the card, then the very same situation exists
in Canada as here: discrimination against what you term a 'troublesome
subset' ... although a credit grantor can deny credit to someone who
has defrauded or is attempting to defraud them, the credit grantor
cannot, under the law, approve a line of credit then selectively
refuse to honor that line of credit because there 'might be' fraud
committed. If AT&T would put in writing in their published
literature such as their 'International Calling Guide' that credit
cards cannot be used on international calls to point X, Y and Z then
they would have a stronger case in their favor. But in fact, their
literature says just the opposite. Look in the guidebook at the little
boxes checked off which indicate 'collect/credit card calls accepted
to/from this country'. Nearly every country, and certainly all the
verbotin places show the AT&T card as being accepted as payment.

Nor can the credit grantor deny credit under some scenarios and
approve it under other scenarios when the end result would be that a
class of customers against whom discrimination is illegal would be the
persons primarily or exclusively affected. That is just making an end
run around the law, and the courts would rule as such. If AT&T allows
white people with a European ethnic background living in Winnetka, IL
to call the UK using a calling card as payment, they cannot lawfully
refuse to let a Latino person living in the Humboldt Park area of
Chicago call Puerto Rico on the same pre-approved calling card plan.
AT&T might say they disallow all calls to Puerto Rico on a calling
card, but that misses the point. Wealthy people with European ancestry
living in Winnetka have private phones and don't need to run out to
the corner 7/11 and use the payphone. Poor Latinos and Black people do
need to use the payphone. And from the time I take the receiver off
the hook on a payphone and proffer some method of approved payment to
telco, that phone line is leased to me for my use, just like the phone
in someone's home in Winnetka.

Bottom line: people from 'certain ethnic backgrounds' living in the
inner cities get shafted on credit from (the credit grantor) AT&T.
Any other credit card issuer who arbitrarily ruled out certain areas
of cities or certain types of purchases when the result was a large
class of people was primarily affected would get their knuckles
rapped. AT&T deserves no less. VISA and AMEX know how to deal with
fraud where their cards are concerned without discriminating against
credit worthy customers. Why can't AT&T figure out how it is done?
Hopefully they will get slapped around a little on this until they
begin obeying the law like Ma and Pa's corner store has to do when
they issue credit to their customers.   PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #5
****************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa04383;
          3 Jan 93 12:34 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA14741
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 3 Jan 1993 10:37:28 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA04046
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 3 Jan 1993 10:37:01 -0600
Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1993 10:37:01 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #6

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 3 Jan 93 10:37:00 CST      Volume 13 : Issue 6

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Good Opportunity For Fraud (Paul Robinson)
    Re: Good Opportunity For Fraud (John R. Levine)
    Re: Format of ZIP Code Bars on Envelopes (Shrikumar)
    Re: Format of ZIP Code Bars on Envelopes (Paul Robinson)
    Re: Format of ZIP Code Bars on Envelopes (Craig R. Watkins)
    Re: More Idiocy From GTE (Daniel Burstein)
    Re: SS7 Links Fron CA to NY via AT&T? (John Higdon)
    Re: Internet and Easylink (Paul Robinson)
    Re: Sad to Say, Telemarketing Works (Shrikumar)
    New AnswerCall Features (Joe Bergstein)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
Date: Sun, 03 Jan 1993  05:05:45 EST
Subject: Re: Good Opportunity For Fraud


In TELECOM Digest 12-928, [e-mail] (gordon hlavenka)
writes:

> I've been working on a credit card / phone project, and
> discovered something that is probably known to many but was
> news to me: My PIN is _on_ my calling card!  Recorded on
> Track 2, offset 23 characters after the SS.  In the clear.

[Stuff Deleted]

> I suppose it could be argued that validating PINs on-line
> is a difficult task, but on the other hand my ATM card works
> in London and if the PIN is recorded on this card it's
> encrypted ...

It's not.  The interesting thing is that banks operate almost
identically the way Internet does for handling TELNET or FTP or E-Mail
requests.  One computer calls up another computer through several
intervening computer systems over the backbone.

In the case of Internet, the backbone is supplied by NSF in the U.S.
and by the local PTTs in foreign countries.

If you look at your card, it will identify the 'backbone' supplier; a
name like 'CIRRUS' (owned by Master Card) or 'PLUS' (owned by Visa).
These are the two major international ATM networks.  This backbone
establishes a connection between the bank you are at and the one you
have an account with.  This bank sends across the card number your
card has and sends across the PIN that you type in, along with a
statement of what you want it to do (send money, send your balance,
etc.)  The receiving computer gets this information and then decides
what to do with it just as if you were at one of its own machines.
Then it will either send back some information (account balance) or an
approval (give him the $300) or a denial (sorry, he doesn't have
enough) or in worse case, a rejection (refuse his request and eat the
card).

In short, the local bank simply sends the information you gave it (in
encrypted form) back to the issuing bank; the local bank simply
follows instructions.


Paul Robinson -- [e-mail]
These opinions are mine alone

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

Subject: Re: Good Opportunity For Fraud
Organization: I.E.C.C.
Date: 3 Jan 93 10:55:43 EST (Sun)
From: [e-mail] (John R. Levine)


> Or do the ATMs check with the central computer each time (hope the
> traffic is encrypted.)

Of course they do.  How else could they know whether there was any
money in your account?  Some early ATMs were standalone or
semi-standalone with lists of bad account numbers downloaded into
them, so the cards they used either had the PIN on the magstripe or
computed the PIN from the account number.  These days, all machines
are online (they look to the host like 3278 terminals) so there's no
need to have the PIN on the card.

Whether they encrypt the traffic is a good question.  Banks are big
believers in security through obscurity so they get very touchy
whenever you ask a technical question about their ATMs.  I've even
been asked to move out of the line of sight when I was standing near
an ATM in the bank lobby as they were servicing it.  In fairness, I
suppose they wanted to be sure I didn't see them dial the combination
lock on the ATM's safe.


Regards,

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


[Moderator's Note: But please note there is also something on the card
which provides for a so-called 'overnight limit'. I have a Cash Station
card connected with CIRRUS. I also have a 'Banking Card' from First
National Bank in Chicago which functions as a debit card. It has a
Master Card logo on it and can be used wherever credit cards are used,
except that it makes a direct debit to my checking account. It is
also hooked into CIRRUS.  On occassion -- but it is growing more and
more rare -- the network will be 'down'. When this is the case, a cash
machine will give me up to $100 *because I ask for it*, without any
verification. Once the network is back up, the transaction will be
processed when the tapes are updated that night. If there is not
enough money in the account, and either one party or the other gets
paid, rest assured the bank recovers their money first. A Cash Station
transaction which itself cannot be cleared later from lack of funds is
a Very Bad Thing, and that card will have a hold on it not only until
the money gets deposited to clear it but until 'someone' calls the
bank collection department to plead their case. First offense, okay;
second or third offense (of causing an overdraft because Cash Station
was down when you took the money you didn't have) is Bad News.   PAT]

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

Date: Sun, 3 Jan 93 02:40:13 -0500
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Format of ZIP Code Bars on Envelopes
Organization: UMass, Amherst MA + Temporal Sys & Computer Networks Bombay India


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

> The barcode starts and ends with a tall bar. The check digit is the
> number that would be required so that the sum of all digits plus the

  Curious enough to hunt for another factoid ... does anyone know what
fraction of the entire snail mail in the US is generated by business
and how much by Aunt Agatha ?

  Should give some insight into how much mail the automatic sorters
actually can ever benefit from. And if the dreams of USPS to read
human handwriting are so important? And if the "tele-sorter" (aha ...
that makes it related to TELECOM Digest :-) experiment, where the
sorter machines will project image of letters to a sorter clerk via
telecom and the clerk punches button from miles away to send the
letter to the right bin, is likely to be significant.?

Also, Is there a summary of several bar codes ftp-able somewhere ?


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

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

Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
Date: Sun, 03 Jan 1993  05:09:50 EST
Subject: Re: Format of ZIP Code Bars on Envelopes


In TELECOM Digest 12-928, [e-mail] (say,halim s)
asks:

> I would like to find out the encoding for the ZIP code bars on USPS
> mail envelopes.

Ask the post office for the circular on bar code.  It's a small
pamphlet of about 5 pages, and it explains how all of the codes work,
as there are two codes; one for ZIP code and one for ZIP+4 code.
There is no charge for the pamphlet.  If your local Post Office
doesn't have it, try a main office in a large city.


Paul Robinson -- [e-mail]
These opinions are mine alone

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

From: Craig R. Watkins <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Format of ZIP Code Bars on Envelopes
Date: 3 Jan 93 10:01:29 EST
Organization: HRB Systems, Inc.


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Doug Sewell)
writes:

> (1) Coding can be five digits (rare), nine digits (most common) and
>     more to include house codes/street address numbers (this is not
>     very common yet).

There is an eleven digit code which is called the Advanced Bar Code
(ABC).  It consists of the the ZIP+4 plus the last two digits of the
street address, the theory being that it uniquely identifies the
destination allowing automatic sorting for the order of delivery.


Craig R. Watkins    [e-mail]
HRB Systems, Inc.  [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Daniel Burstein)
Subject: Re: More Idiocy From GTE
Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1993 08:24:57 GMT
Organization: Panix, NYC


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

> On 28 Dec 92 15:07:25 GMT, [e-mail] (Charles
> Mattair) said:

>> As I'm at a friends house, I decide to put the call on calling card.
>> 102880+10D.  <boing> GTE.  Huh ...?  I know this is intralata but I
>> told them to use AT&T.  They can't override my choice of carrier can
>> they?  Try it again except as 102880 + 7D (713 has gone 1/0 + 10D on
>> all LD calls but who knows what GTE is doing).  <boing> GTE.

> Local exchange carriers look at the whole number before passing it off
> to an IXC, precisely because of what you tried to do.  AT&T is very
> likely not tariffed to carry that call, so the switch knows better
> than you do, and routes it via the LEC.  However, AT&T issued CIID
> card should still be good for a GTE carried call.  AT&T has reciprocal
> card verification and billing agreements with virtually every LEC in
> the country so that your AT&T card is AOS-proof and OCC-proof but not
> LEC-proof.  (That is a feature, not a bug).

There actually is a way around this that usually works.  AT&T does, in
fact, have a 1-800 dial up number which they implemented after a bit
of a fight with the FCC (which is a -very looong- story for another
day).

If you dial "1-800-CALL-ATT" you can access an ATT "Boing" or even an
ATT -human- operator!

(Similar schemes also work for most of the other carriers as well.
you can -usually- make LOCAL LATA calls when you hook into the systems
in this manner.  This is quite helpful if you're calling from a coin
phone, and your carrier is nice enough not to charge a surcharge ...)


[e-mail]

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

Date: Sun, 3 Jan 93 00:04 PST
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: SS7 Links Fron CA to NY via AT&T?


Bob Yazz <[e-mail]> writes:

> You don't seriously believe such a state of affairs will stand, do you
> John?  The PUC will order that numbers not be delivered, period.  I
> can even see the potential for lawsuits against Pac Bell over this.

But the PUC cannot order this, just as it cannot prevent any carrier
from passing realtime ANI to end users. In SS7, the calling number is
ALWAYS transmitted as part of the data packet, although there is a bit
that identifies it as a "blocked" number if such is the case. First,
why would Pac*Bell even care about blocking if it does not trade in
CNID? Second, what the end telco does about the "block bit" is up to
the telco in the destination state. The PUC has no jurisdiction in
this matter whatsoever. And remember, the PUC has not prohibited CNID.
It has just placed what Pac*Bell considers to be unreasonable
conditions on its offering. So Pac*Bell does not offer it. But the PUC
has no authority to tamper with the SS7 protocol, particularly on
interstate calls.

Remember, the phone numbers of Californians are appearing right and
left at locations both within and outside the state via ANI. Just as
the PUC cannot do anything about this it cannot do anything about
similar transmission via SS7. The PUC is only concerned about the
feature known as "Caller-ID" as offered by LECs to customers in
California. All else is outside the PUC's purview. The fact of the
matter is that callers from California will have their phone numbers
displayed wherever CNID is offered in other states, like it or not.

Oddly enough, if a California caller dials *67 before placing a long
distance call, the block bit will be set and there is a good chance
that the display at the called telephone will say "Private Number" or
whatever it is they say for blocked CNID. But most callers will not
know this, and Pac*Bell is under no obligation to educate them.
Pac*Bell is not offering CNID and therefore not required to meet any
of the conditions for that service as mandated by the PUC.

> Sounds like an incentive to switch to a long distance company that
> does not use SS7.  How do you think AT&T might feel about this?

Switching to an IEC that does not use SS7 is a temporary reprieve at
best; within several years calls will be sent no other way. And
remember, there is still ANI. In this area, the Big Three are all
using SS7 to Pac*Bell.


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

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

Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
Date: Sun, 03 Jan 1993  04:41:10 EST
Subject: Re: Internet and Easylink


In last year's TELECOM Digest 12-928, a user named [e-mail].
usm.edu (Donald R. Newcomb) was overheard discussing "EasyLink and
Internet?":

> I have long understood that sending email between EasyLink and
> Internet was out of the question.

It's not; Pat sends us TELECOM Digest to our Easylink Mailbox every
day.  Easylink autoforwards all of our mail to our fax machine at no
charge, so as a result, we get TELECOM Digest delivered to our fax
machine automatically and it costs us nothing except fax paper.  (It's
a plain paper machine, so it's only a couple of cents a page.)

Last week I figured out how to send a message FROM an Easylink
subscriber TO Internet.  I used it in order to subscribe to some
Bitnet lists.  I'll mention both ways for anyone interested.

To send to someone's Easylink address, you must know the *exact*
Easylink number.  This is an eight-digit number which always begins
with 62.  Then you have to know the gateway, which is complicated,
then the splitting scheme, then the addressee.

What you are doing is translating an Internet RFC822 address into a
CCITT X.400 address (or back).

There are two ways to get to someone's Easylink address.  One is via
MCI Mail and the other through AT&T Mail.

To go through MCI Mail, you'd use the following:

 g=firstname%s=lastname%dda.eln=[e-mail]
          or
 s=firstname_lastname%dda.eln=[e-mail]
          or
 g=firstname%s=lastname%dda.eln=[e-mail]

All of these are identical; 4356996 is Western Union's gateway account
on MCI Mail.  This is how Pat sends us the TELECOM Digest.

To go through AT&T Easylink (Western Union is a subsidiary of AT&T),
you'd use the following:

wu/s=firstname_lastname/dda.eln=[e-mail]
         or
mhs!wu/g=firstname/s=lastname/dda.eln=[e-mail]

In all of these, the two things which are mandatory are s=name and
dda.eln=62xxxxxx, and you can optionally use the g= format for first
name.  If you want a blank in the middle of the name, you insert an
underline _ which is why it is there.

To _send_ from Easylink is much harder.  It consists of sending an IPM
(their name for X.400) message to the ATTMAIL ADMD, with an id of:

          ID-!i!n!t!e!r!n!e!t!!hostname!!user

Where an address of user@hostname is translated into the UUCP style
hostname!user.  For example, this account becomes:

          ID-!I!N!T!E!R!N!E!T!!FZC!!CU.NIH.GOV

This is required because the ID of "internet" has to be in {lower
case} in order for AT&T mail to forward to it.


Paul Robinson -- [e-mail]
These opinions are mine alone

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

Date: Sun, 3 Jan 93 02:28:28 -0500
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Sad to Say, Telemarketing Works
Organization: UMass, Amherst MA + Temporal Sys & Computer Networks Bombay India


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

> proposal: Enact legislation requiring that all telemarketing calls
> come with Caller-ID from a uniquely designated area code prefix, like
> 600, 700, whatever.  No freedom of speech issues are involved; the

  Oh yes. That is a good idea. Placing the onus on a business to
identify themselves to the law is very implmentable as well.

  Also with just a tiny modification to the CNID concept (no
additional cost) instead of a number, the company name would be
delivered.

   In most cases an LCD with alphanumeric display with say only the
ITA2 or Baudot char set should not be any more expensive that
currently used digit displays. The modems part etc could remain the
same, and the phone companies can make some money out of delivering a
12 letter alphanumeric ... enough perhaps (is it?) to have them do the
software changes needed to their COs.

 A couple of days back, I caught the tail end of Bob Beckel (sp?)
sitting in for Larry King on CNN. On the show was the small-biz owner
who (guess its her) had filed that suit, and one Ray Kolker introduced
as a Dialler manufacturer. He was pretty forceful in suggesting that
there are better way available in technology today "such as of the
type of Caller-ID", which can deal better.

  I have time and again thought up ideas on similar lines, but each
time I am reminded that all these are going to be a "little difficult"
to do till SS7 reaches all COs and is nationwide.

  Is it not the case that a lion's share of telemarketing is across
state lines to benefit from the lower IXC rates?

  Of course, then telemarketeers would simply call from that small
state near the Bahamas where the tarot readers used to live :-) Might
even be cheaper. (Freely allowing cross talk of ideas between various
threads I read in the past year..) their neutral-accented sale-droids
could be in the safe vicinity of the Air Command, with all calls piped
to the bahamas, and coming in from there right at dinner time, and
your CNID box says "International Call". The Phone Company might even
encourage this with a discount, like apparently they did in when .. Oh
well ...  :-)


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Joe Bergstein)
Date: Sun, 03 Jan 1993 01:58:16 -0500
Subject: New AnswerCall Features


I thought TELECOM Digest readers might be interested in some new
features announced by C&P Telephone for their Answer Call CO based
voicemail service.  As an Answer Call customer, I received an
announcement that there will be a price increase in February from
$5.00/month to $6.50/month.  The letter included news of the following
new features:

Optional Busy Greeting: You can have two separate personal greetings
 -- one to let callers know when you're on the phone, the other to
indicate when you're not available to answer.  The Optional Busy
Greeting will be a standard AnswerCall feature with no additional
charge.

Reminder Service: You can program Answer Call to call your home number
and play a pre-recorded reminder message at a set time that you
choose.  This option will be introduced on a free trial basis, after
which time a small usage charge of $0.15 per activation will apply.

Special Delivery Service: Answer call will call you if you're away
from home when an urgent message arrives in your AnswerCall mailbox.
This service will be free for a limited time after which a $0.35 per
activation charge will apply.

[Note that the announcement does not clarify what an "urgent" message
is, and whether callers will have an option to flag a message as
"urgent"].

Although not mentioned in the letter, the price list includes a Pager
Notification option at a cost of $3.00 per month for up to 65 activa-
tions plus $0.20 per activation over 65.

[Note, too that these prices are for residential users only.  I
believe that these services are available for business users at
slightly higher prices].


[Moderator's Note: Answer Call appears to have some additional
features not being offered by IBT in their voicemail service, such as
the Pager Notification, and reminder service.  It sounds nice.  PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #6
****************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa11576;
          4 Jan 93 1:43 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA28977
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 3 Jan 1993 23:41:35 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA22131
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 3 Jan 1993 23:41:11 -0600
Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1993 23:41:11 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #7

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 3 Jan 93 23:41:00 CST      Volume 13 : Issue 7

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Mission Impossible: IBT Getting My Order Correct (John Higdon)
    Re: Mission Impossible: IBT Getting My Order Correct (Jeff Sicherman)
    Re: Mission Impossible: IBT Getting My Order Correct (Thomas Lapp)
    Re: Additional Phone Charges (Paul Robinson)
    Re: All Circuits Are Busy Now ... (Daniel Burstein)
    Re: Format of ZIP Code Bars on Envelopes (Dr. Math)
    Re: Good Opportunity For Fraud (John R. Levine)
    Re: Problems with Payphones at WPI (NET/AT&T) (Tony Pelliccio)
    Re: Another Payphone Mystery? (Dave Levenson)
    Re: Good Opportunity For Fraud (Ben Cox)
    Re: It's Not a Bug, it's a Feature ... (George Armhold)
    Re: Pocket Auto-Dialer? (Lyle Seaman)
    Re: What Are the Prefix "Codes" For Tone Dialing? (Gordon Burditt)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sun, 3 Jan 93 09:55 PST
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: Mission Impossible: IBT Getting My Order Correct


On Jan 3 at  2:13, TELECOM Moderator writes:

> A few minutes later, another call comes from a woman named 'Debbie'
> who states she is a repair supervisor in the Irving CO. Her complaint
> is thus:  someone has 'been calling' repair on 'unauthorized numbers'
> and it had better stop. If I want Repair Service, the number to call
> is 611 and none other.

Interesting difference in approach. Virtually everytime I call in
trouble to Pac*Bell for my service or for others, a call back comes
from someone who, upon getting my machine, leaves his/her name and
direct telephone number, usually 973-something. When calling this
number either the person leaving the message answers or someone else
does who promptly puts the repair tech on the line.

And then, it is only necessary to give my name, not the number
reported for the repair person to immediately pinpoint the repair
ticket.

All in all, I find Pac*Bell very open about its "internal" numbers. On
only one occasion was I invited to call 611 rather than the number
that I did. It was explained that it was necessary to do that to open
a ticket that could be followed up on by the person to whom I was
speaking at the time.

Sounds as though IBT may still have a touch of the old Ma Bell left in
her.


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

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

Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1993 11:24:34 -0800
From: Jeff Sicherman <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Mission Impossible: IBT Getting My Order Correct
Organization: Cal State Long Beach


In article <[e-mail]> TELECOM Moderator <telecom@
eecs.nwu.edu> writes:

> The past week has been a barrel of laughs where IBT is concerned with an
> order to change some service for me.

  ... Story deleted ...

> For now, I'll be content if the software to be used on the computer
> associated with those lines arrives soon, gets installed and works
> okay.

   Aside from the pleasure of the phone company getting hoisted on
their own caller-id petard (sp?), this story raised an interesting
idea:

   With the phone companies getting rid of intelligent and experienced
(and thus higher paid) people in record numbers (and, if Higdon is to
be believed, GTE well ahead of the industry in this strategy) the
opportunities for confusion over increasingly more complex and
potentially contradictory services with less decreasingly less
competent people at the phone company to deal with them would seem to
loom large.

   Perhaps it's time for them to take the lead of some banks and
provide some limited sort of ON-LINE (via modem and terminal/PC)
access for selected, knowledgeable customers to submit their own
work-orders by interacting with an expert system that has access to a
database of their current configuration, knowlegde of features and how
they interact with each other, and the logic to sort it all out
correctly. It would at least eliminate one source of mis-communication
or mis-interpretation of both clients wishes and the nature of the
modern phone system/network workings.


Jeff Sicherman

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

Date: Sun, 3 Jan 93 13:07:49 EST
From: Thomas Lapp <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Mission Impossible: IBT Getting My Order Correct


> Almost that is ... the xxx-7347 number (and the other discontinued
> numbers in the original hunt group) still have the 'being tested for
> trouble' intercept on the line. Obviously, someone did not close out
> the order.  But I could care less about those numbers; they were
> merely being disconnected with no referral on them anyway.

I know it is 'preaching to the choir' to tell Pat this, but others in
situations like this may also want to watch the billing that comes
over the next billing period or so to make sure that Billing gets
their part right as well.  Disconnected lines have been known to
continue getting billed well after disconnect date ...


[e-mail] (home)   [e-mail] (work)


[Moderator's Note: Oh, absolutely. You can bet I'll review the next
bill very closely before forwarding it on to the person who pays it
every month.  PAT]

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

Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]
Date: Sun, 03 Jan 1993  04:54:32 EST
Subject: Re: Additional Phone Charges


In Telecom Digest 12-928, Jerry Leichter <[e-mail]> says:

> One of my favorites, non-listed phone number (note: NOT
> non-published; non-listed IS available from DA, they just have
> to leave it off the yearly list they send to the printers) goes
> from $1.00/month to $2.00/month.  I'd love to see the salaries
> for the people who must go through and pull the non-listed
> numbers out by hand; nothing else can justify that kind of
> charge.  (Before you say, well, non-listed numbers generate
> more DA calls: DA calls go from 24 to 40 cents, plus they go
> from first 5/3 free for residence/business to 3/0 free.)

I may have mentioned this before, but the simplest way to get the
equivalent of an unlisted number is to ask for the phone to be listed
{without address} under your roommate's name of Zyagur Xeanamux.  When
someone calls asking for him, you know that it's a telemarketer.
What, you mean you don't have a roommate by that name?  Exactly ...


Paul Robinson -- [e-mail]
These opinions are mine alone.

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

From: [e-mail] (Daniel Burstein)
Subject: Re: All Circuits Are Busy Now ...
Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1993 08:13:09 GMT
Organization: Panix, NYC


Some posters have asked what it meant when they tried making a long
distance call and got back the recording "all circuits are busy,
418-25T" (or similar stuff).

Well, in the OLD days, your LD call would get pushed along the route
until it hit a switch or trunk "somewhere out there" which was busy.

BUT, in the new modern age, your call is "held" at the local central
office (or, perhaps, a centralized toll/long distance interface) until
the entire rest of the path can be set up.  Accordingly, if -anything-
is wrong -amnywhere- from the office (either one) to your final
destination, you will get a LOCALLY GENERATED recording. (Again, this
might be at a somewhat distant toll switching station, but it'll be a
LOT closer than it used to be).

I've had this experience far too many times when calling from my area
to places that, for some reason or another, had a partial disruption
in trunk service, or had a sudden increase in traffic.  For example,
after the Florida hurricane, I tried to call some of my co-workers who
had been sent down there, and kept getting "all circuits are busy ...
212-XT" with "212" being the area code UP HERE (NYC).

As others have pointed out, certain long distance carriers are less
likely to be jammed than others, but I'll refer back to them for the
details.

HOWEVER, that does remind me of some trouble I had fifteen or twenty
years ago.  From 11:00 pm till about 11:30, it was almost impossible
tomake outgoing long distance phone calls from my neighborhood.  After
a LOT of arguing with NYTel, and finally tracking down some techies
who understood their network, we figured out what was happening.

The area I lived in was next to a university with lots of residential
students.  Many of whom would either call home, or other distant
locations.  Accordingly, the time vs. number of calls equation in this
area was very different from that in more traditional localities.

College age students, for example, are more likely to be awake at
11:00 pm, are more likely to hold off on making their calls until
then, will tend to talk longer (????), etc., etc., etc.  I'm sure
anyone reading this can easily come up with many other reasons the
standard phone queing formulas didn't work.

Anyway, once they actually looked at blocked calls, they added a few
more outgoing trunk line connections to the toll centers (i.e., they
set it up to allow for more LD calls).


Take care,

[e-mail]

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

Date: Sun, 3 Jan 93 12:31:33 -0500
From: Doctor Math <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Format of ZIP Code Bars on Envelopes


say,halim s ([e-mail]) wrote:

> Does anyone know or could you tell me a reference for this "standard"?
> I am sure some address generator software would have this algorithm.

I have a postscript implementation of the algorithm; I used it to make
a label generator for Avery 5262 label stock. It's a little hacked -
for some reason it won't work with the zip code for my grandparents'
house ... if there's interest I can submit it to the Digest.

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

Subject: Re: Good Opportunity For Fraud
Organization: I.E.C.C.
Date: 3 Jan 93 14:01:32 EST (Sun)
From: [e-mail] (John R. Levine)


Hey, I'm following up my own note.  Isn't there a physical law or
something to prevent this?

> [Moderator's Note: But please note there is also something on the card
> which provides for a so-called 'overnight limit'.

The $100 when the network is down is a nice feature, but not one that
is widely available.  Around here, when the network goes down,
machines put up the CLOSED sign.  That's one of the reasons I have six
ATM cards in my wallet from four different banks.

Citibank machines in New York City at least used to have a similar
feature.  For a long time, over a year, someone who clearly had inside
information was using an old invalid Citicard to make $100 withdrawals
from machines all over the city when the machines were offline while
their network nodes were down for maintenance.  The maintenance
schedule was deliberately erratic and quite secret.  Had the guy used
the card even once in an on-line machine the card would have been
eaten and that would have been that.  I never heard whether they
managed to catch him.  I'd think that it would have been
straightforward to set up a sting to catch him in the act.


Regards,

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


[Moderator's Note: I think the banks here which give money on trust
when the network is down do have something called a 'negative listing'
of cards which should not be honored in that way. Here in the Chicago
area, the First National Bank operates the Cash Station computer (as
well as their own, of course), so using one of their cards at one of
their own machines is a bit different than using their card at a
machine which is only on line occassionally, etc. Some machines here
seem to only contact the main system once a day during the night.
Those machines have a record of whatever the system told them from the
night before, and they go by those figures all day. I know when I
asked the Devon Bank about this, they specifically stated their cash
station was NOT on line all the time. They can deal with their own
customers records at all times; they get the rest of the records
whenever they do. Clever people have found ways to get some float out
of the cash machines over holiday periods, etc, knowing they won't
actually see the transaction on their own account for two or three
days in the event of a three day weekend.  PAT]

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

Date: Sun, 03 Jan 93 15:20:23 EST
From: Tony Pelliccio <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Problems with Payphones at WPI (NET/AT&T)


I think if you read the card on the phone it says that all COIN calls
are handled by AT&T and all credit card calls are handled by another
company.  That really baffles me, I mean, if it's a New England
Telephone payphone, with access to AT&T on coin calls, then why use
someone else to handle credit card calls?

Theory: NET wants to make some bucks ... sooo ... I'll bet if you
traced down the company that handles those cc calls it'd come right
back to NET.


[Moderator's Note: Not so. Payphones do get randomly assigned to
various LD carriers, but AT&T is the only LD carrier in a position to
collect coins, due to their prior relationship with the Bells. I am
told no one else wants the coin business; thus it stays with AT&T.
None of the other carriers seem to think it is worth thier time to
develop and install the needed equipment.  That is the reason you
always see AT&T handling the call where coins are concerned even if
the default carrier for all other types (credit card, etc) is some
other LC company.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Dave Levenson)
Subject: Re: Another Payphone Mystery?
Organization: Westmark, Inc.
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1993 02:49:29 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, JOHN SCHMIDT <schmidt@auvax1.
adelphi.edu> writes:

[about a payphone that requested $2.00 in coin for an intra-state
toll call, and then allowed the same call to be placed using a
calling card for 85 cents.]

> I thought charged calls were generally more expensive than cash
> payphone calls, but then I rarely make long ...

The coin rate is the operator-assisted rate.  The calling-card rate is
usually less than the operator-assisted rate.  Intra-state calls
usually cost far more (per mile) than inter-state calls.  I'm not sure
what carrier you were using, or whether your call crossed a LATA
boundary.  All of these affect the price.


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

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

Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1993 17:02:33 -0600
Subject: Re: Good Opportunity For Fraud
From: [e-mail] (Ben Cox)
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Ben Cox)
Organization: Ancient Illuminated Sears of Bavaria


[e-mail] (John R. Levine) writes:

> I think you will find that historically with telco calling cards there
> hasn't been a distinction made between a "non-secret" part, the first
> ten digits, and a "secret" part, the last four.

On my AT&T card, the entire number (including PIN) is stamped on the
card in raised digits.


Ben Cox     [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (George Armhold)
Subject: Re: It's Not a Bug, it's a Feature ...
Date: 3 Jan 93 23:08:10 GMT
Organization: DIMACS @ Rutgers University


[e-mail] writes:

> Hear's the fix.  Take a portable AM or FM radio and place it
> near the computer.  Tune around until you find a whine or buzz that
> suits your ears.  It should be possible to find a signal which varies
> when the computer is doing something and stays relatively monotonous
> when it is hung up or idling.

I've often been able to "hear" a computer transfer data.  While logged
in from home I like to listen to a particular FM radio station that
comes in very weakly.  When I transfer a screenfull of data (eg ^L in
emacs) I can hear a very noticable disturbance in the already weak FM
signal.  Sounds kind of like driving under a bridge w/ AM radio.  This
is with an (old) Amiga 1000 and ZyXEL 14.4 modem.  Strangely, I never
noticed this before with my old Avatex 1200 bps modem (same serial
cable.)  Hmm, I wonder if the baud rate is the variable here, or if
the ZyXEL is not up to spec ...

At RU, I worked with Sun 4/110s.  They were networked via thin-net
coax.  I have pretty sensitive ears, and could always hear a
high-pitched whine when lots of data went through the wire (opening an
xterm, for example.)  One thing that was neat about this is that
whenever someone logged in to the workstation I was working on I could
actually *hear* them log in.  Nobody believed me of course.  Whenever
I tried to show it to someone they thought I was nuts. :-)


George

         Internet: [e-mail]
           UUCP: {backbone}!rutgers!dimacs!armhold
            BITNET: [e-mail]

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

Date: Sun,  3 Jan 1993 18:18:11 -0500 (EST)
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Pocket Auto-Dialer?


I too have been waiting for a "pocket databank" which incorporates an
auto-dialer.  The closest thing to it that I have yet seen is the
Psion Series 3 "palmtop", but at $400 it's a bit too functional for my
needs.  Not too much, though, and the price will probably drop.

One notch down from that is the Sharp EL-6260 Dialmaster Pocket Auto Dialer.
According to the advertising text it:

- Stores up to 450 names [short ones, probably - lws] and numbers
- Features 12-character X 2-line display
- Tone generator dials numbers
- 2 search keys
- Secret function
- Calling card function
- Back-up battery.

Listed by J&R Music World at $55.

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

From: [e-mail] (Gordon Burditt)
Subject: Re: What Are the Prefix "Codes" For Tone Dialing?
Organization: Gordon Burditt
Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1993 18:50:53 GMT


>>> *65 turn on delivery of caller id (if you are subscribed)
>>> *85 turn off delivery of caller id (why would anyone want to do this?)

>> Because some phone companies charge for Caller-ID on a per-number-
>> delivered basis?

>> [Moderator's Note: IBT used to do that, but starting a few months ago
>> they no longer charge for delivery over a certain number. One monthly

So someone might want to turn it off if they don't normally exceed
that number, or they're going on vacation for a good portion of a
month and won't exceed the "certain number".  (My incoming VOICE calls
probably wouldn't exceed that number in a month, whatever it is.)

>> fee pays for it all.  Another oddity IMHO here is that call screening
>> can be turned on with *60 and turned off with *80. This is despite the
>> fact that while within the *60 menu of things to do, one can both add
>> and remove numbers from the repertoire. If you can add or delete
>> whatever you want there, why bother to have a command to turn it off?

Individually adding and deleting 10 or 20 numbers takes a lot of time.
(I still claim that for this service to replace Caller-ID in getting
rid of telemarketers, the list needs to be able to hold 10 or 20
thousand numbers).  Can you delete all the numbers and add them back
later?  This implies an ability to list all the numbers, including
ones added with "screen out last caller".  Can you do that?  If so,
the anti-Caller-ID folks will scream about that one.

By the way, can you reliably load up your list with a modem or
autodialer?  In spite of certain modems with voice mail capability,
you're not easily going to have voice recognition capability, and
you'll have to put up with using blind pauses, "wait for bong", "wait
for dial tone", "wait for quiet answer" and such which most modern
modems have.  Is there some way to load your list starting from an
unknown state, again with a modem or autodialer?  You can't if the
menu items change numbers depending on whether you have numbers in the
list, or if the tone sequence varies depending on whether you have
numbers programmed (conditional "are you sure" prompts, for example).

>> Perhaps it is because IBT is not marketing Call Screening as a
>> permanent way to get rid of troublesome callers, but merely as a way
>> to avoid certain people at certain times of day; although I cannot
>> imagine be willing to chat with certain numbers on my list regardless
>> of the time of day or occassion. Ditto the feature where you can list

One way it could be used is to screen out somewhat over-enthusiastic
callers from, say, your spouse's family except when your spouse is there.
Or except when you have time to talk after the kids are asleep.
These callers might even like it if it saves them LD charges on
"sorry, s/he's not home yet" calls.  You don't have to use Call
Screening to get rid of telemarketers and other pests; it may not be
very effective anyway if they have lots of lines.  And not everyone
has obscene callers bothering them.

>> certain callers to get the red carpet with special ringing on your
>> end; that too can be turned off, although if your boss is an important
>> person to hear from at 3 PM, why wouldn't he be important at 3 AM?  PAT]

If you're using the distinctive ring pattern to ring the phone in your
workshop (where you don't want to be disturbed except in emergencies),
it's not going to be very effective to route calls there unless you're
IN your workshop (which you probably won't be at 3AM).  So you turn it
on and off depending on where you are.

By the way, who said the treatment you give callers on the list has to
be "red carpet"?  It could be just the opposite, as in asking certain
deadbeats to pay their bills or contact your lawyer.  You could also
use a pre-arranged setup that calls from certain people during the day
get voice, and calls after hours get the fax machine or modem.  This
may not be very good for businesses, but it might be for
work-in-the-field or work-at-home employees.


Gordon L. Burditt    sneaky.lonestar.org!gordon

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #7
****************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa26055;
          5 Jan 93 3:36 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA09593
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 5 Jan 1993 01:39:14 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA23979
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 5 Jan 1993 01:38:46 -0600
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 01:38:46 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #8

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 5 Jan 93 01:38:30 CST      Volume 13 : Issue 8

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    V&H Report January 1993 (David Esan)
    Worries About Privacy Could Tone Down Success of Caller ID (Boston Globe)
    Colorado Gets Caller ID (Richard Lucas)
    CNID on Answering Machines? (David H. Close)
    Need History/Stories re: Rotary Mechanism (Ken Blackney)
    Baby Bell Breakups (Paul Gatker)
    Spread Spectrum Regulations in Europe (Lester Baskin)
    Voice Mail Options (John Pettitt)
    Why Does Phone Bell 'Ping' on a Regular Basis? (Glenn F. Leavell)
    Operator Breaking Cellular Connection (Thomas K. Hinders)
    SS7 Links Fron CA to NY (Tim Gorman)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (David Esan)
Subject: V&H Report January 1993
Date: 4 Jan 93 20:26:34 GMT
Organization: Moscom Corporation, Pittsford NY


Once a quarter I receive the BellCore V&H tape.  Using this
information I can total the number of exchanges in each area code.
The twenty most populous area codes are listed below.  After the
written text of this article I have included the count for each of the
area codes, one sorted by NPA, the other sorted (in reverse) of the
number of exchanges in a given NPA.

The tape is dated 15 January 1993.  I am not responsible for the
information supplied in this tape.  Yes, the date is several weeks
out.  The information will be current as of that date.  It is
distributed early so that it can loaded by that date.

I have not included the following in my counts of exchanges:

  - NXX's that are not dialable by a standard user (ie nxx's that begin
    with a 1 or 0).

  - Mexican exchanges in the 52? series of area codes.  I've got them,
    you can dial them with 011, but they're not really NPAs.

  - Exchanges that are non-dialable in the 88? series of area codes.  I've
    got those also, but you can't dial them, so I'm not including them.

This tape includes information for the new NPA's 909 and 210.  905 in
Toronto, and 810 in Detroit have not appeared yet.

The fields are:
                        ------------ rank last in October, 1992
          213: 736 (1, 7)
  area code --^^^  ^^^     ^------- number of new exchanges
                    |-------------- total number of exchanges

301: 751 ( 1,  7)   416: 678 ( 6,  4)   206: 642 (11,  7)   604: 582 (20, 13)
512: 703 ( 3,  2)   919: 672 ( 8, 12)   708: 634 (14, 25)   216: 579 (19,  8)
212: 700 ( 4,  3)   215: 660 (10, 11)   713: 627 (13, 10)   503: 574 (18,  3)
313: 680 ( 7, 12)   714: 656 ( 9,  2)   703: 610 (16,  7)   803: 564 (11, xx)
205: 680 ( 5,  4)   602: 644 (12,  9)   403: 605 (15,  1)   303: 563 (11, xx)

Of the top 20 we know:

1. 301 - split in progress.  Number should be reduced by split.
2. 512 - split in progress.  Number should be reduced by split.
3. 212 - split in progress.  Number should be reduced by split, and the
     movement of the Bronx to 718.
4. 313 - split in progress.  Number should be reduced by split.
6. 416 - split soon to be in progress.  Number should be reduced by split.
9. 714 - split in progress.  Number should be reduced by split.

Given all of that, the NPA that is largest and is not splitting nor
has plans (at this time) to split, is 205 in Alabama.  Other NPAs that
are candidates for a split include eastern North Carolina (714),
Philadelphia (215), and 602 (Arizona).

The 3 smallest NPA's were and remain :

906: 117 - Michigan's Upper Peninsula  (+1 new exchange)
807: 105 - Western Ontario (No change)
917: 104 - The new NYC NPA (+40 new exchanges)


A new statistic that I have added to this report is percentage growth.  I have
taken the difference between the number of exchanges in January and October,
and divided by the number in January and multiplied by 100.  In math notation
that would be:

      ((October # - January #)/January #)*100

The top ten are:

917 62.50 (Growth of new NYC NPA)
210 6.47 (Growth of new Texas NPA)
909 5.03 (Growth of new California NPA)
305 4.37 (Western Florida, rapid growth area)
708 4.10 (Chicago Suburbs, rapid growth)
704 3.42 (Western North Carolina)
312 3.41 (Chicago City)
702 3.16 (Nevada)
310 3.05 (Growth of new Los Angeles NPA)
809 2.97 (Growth of the Caribbean)

The only NPAs to be in last reports top ten and this reports top ten are:
    310, 708

All the NPAs and the number of nxx's in each are listed below:

301: 751    501: 553    201: 442    502: 365    715: 321    814: 268
512: 703    314: 547    412: 441    914: 362    819: 314    315: 266
212: 700    404: 543    614: 432    704: 362    815: 313    806: 264
313: 680    813: 537    515: 431    406: 361    915: 312    309: 263
205: 680    405: 534    407: 420    701: 357    805: 300    709: 261
416: 678    904: 532    402: 418    801: 356    208: 299    608: 254
919: 672    619: 531    601: 417    605: 356    613: 298    509: 251
215: 660    305: 525    415: 414    519: 355    609: 298    603: 243
714: 656    817: 523    410: 414    504: 354    918: 296    901: 232
602: 644    203: 515    818: 411    204: 352    218: 296    308: 210
206: 642    804: 505    210: 411    207: 348    409: 295    417: 206
708: 634    514: 497    617: 408    912: 347    706: 294    707: 197
713: 627    718: 495    907: 401    908: 347    812: 286    802: 181
703: 610    414: 494    616: 400    510: 346    712: 286    506: 179
403: 605    717: 493    716: 398    419: 344    202: 284    607: 176
604: 582    312: 485    516: 394    304: 344    903: 282    719: 174
216: 579    513: 474    508: 389    318: 343    606: 275    307: 169
503: 574    310: 473    316: 376    319: 339    808: 274    401: 139
803: 564    816: 469    219: 373    517: 338    507: 273    413: 133
303: 563    317: 460    213: 373    618: 335    705: 272    302: 127
612: 561    306: 453    217: 370    408: 334    909: 271    906: 117
615: 560    916: 450    418: 367    505: 329    902: 271    807: 105
214: 554    913: 445    209: 367    702: 326    518: 270    917: 104
809: 553


David Esan      [e-mail]

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

Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 00:25:25 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <[e-mail]>
Subject: Worries About Privacy Could Tone Down Success of CID


 From the 1/4/93 {Boston Globe}

Worries about privacy could tone down success of Caller ID
        Jonathan Yenkin
        Associated Press

Boston - Caller ID, a phone service touted as an electronic peephole
to let customers see who's calling, is making its way around the
country.  But it may not become a ringing success because of privacy
worries.

The service, which displays the number and sometimes even the name of
the caller, is available in more than 20 states and has won praise for
deterring obscene and annoying phone calls.

But because of privacy concerns, many states have slapped on
restrictions that phone companies fear will undercut the service's
value.

"At what point does the subscriber say, 'It's not worth it anymore?' I
don't know," said Clifton Metcalf, a spokesman for Southern Bell in
North Carolina.  "We're going to find out."

The restrictions imposed by utility regulators allow callers to block
their numbers from appearing on a display unit by the phone.  This can
be done by pressing certain keys when making each call, or, in some
states, by having the line blocked off entirely from being decoded by
Caller ID.

After the state imposed such restrictions in Massachusetts, New
England Telephone officials found them so onerous that they initially
withdrew their plans to offer the service.

Susan Butta, a spokeswoman for New England Telephone, said executives
worried the restrictions might make the service harder to sell.  They
eventually changed their minds and decided to try it.

U.S. West Communications, which serves more than a dozen states,
decided to include the blocking options in its proposals to utility
regulators, not waiting for officials to order them, said Gwen Law, a
company project manager.  Consumer advocates and civil liberties
groups say such restrictions are necessary.  In Pennsylvania, the
state Supreme Court ruled this year [sic] that Caller ID - without the
blocking options - violated the state wiretap law.

Critics often point to battered women or undercover police officers as
examples of people who need to keep their phone numbers secret.

"There are some people for whom the risk of forgetting to block is
very great," said Mark Cooper, research director for the Consumer
Federation of America.

But New Jersey Bell, which pioneered Caller ID in the late 1980s,
doesn't offer any blocking, and fewer than 1 percent of customers have
complained about phone numbers leaking out, said company spokesman
James W. Carrigan.

On the other hand, Carrigan said the service has helped deter nuisance
calls.

About 200,000 New Jersey Bell customers, or 4.6 percent, subscribe to
Caller ID.  That compares with a 28 percent acceptance rate for Call
Waiting, which allows customers to receive more than one call at the
same time.

But Carrigan insisted customers in his state who don't have Caller ID
still benefit, "because the other people don't know whether you have
the service, so they won't make that (harassing) call."

In some places, phone companies say they are succeeding with the
service despite the restrictions.

Centel Corp. in Las Vegas, which serves southern Nevada, offers the
blocking options and still has more than 10 percent of its customers
subscribing.

Dianna Fyke, a marketing manager for Centel, said there were some
initial fears, but once people get accustomed to the service it
becomes "a matter of fact thing."

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

From: Richard Lucas <[e-mail]>
Subject: Colorado Gets Caller ID
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 93 21:23:42 MST


     Caller ID is officially available in Colorado today.  My wife
finally got through to the business office this evening to order it
for us, after busy signals on attempts during the day.  While we are
normally served by the Loveland business office, our call ended up
being answered by the Colorado Springs business office (different area
code and LATA).  The rep said that calls had been non-stop all day,
with virtually every other call involving an order for the Caller ID
service.

     The best gauge of consumer opinion is how they vote with their
dollars, not with their words.  If Colorado's first-day results can be
generalized to other areas, then John Higdon is quite correct that the
PUC decision in California gives the voices of a few more weight than
the desires of the majority.


Rick Lucas ([e-mail])
Debate Coach, Fairview HS, Boulder, CO


[Moderator's Note: When Caller-ID officially started here in Chicago a
couple years ago, telco had a huge number of orders the first few
days. It is still one of the more popular services offered by IBT.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (David H. Close)
Subject: CNID on Answering Machines?
Date: 5 Jan 1993 05:09:00 GMT
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena


I find the current discussion of CNID features on modems very
interesting.  But, being in the market for a new answering machine, I
want to know if there are any which store CNID, if received, and play
it back when messages are retrieved.  Or are there other techniques
available?  Anybody?


Dave Close, [e-mail], BS'66 Ec

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

From: [e-mail] (Ken Blackney)
Subject: Need History/Stories re: Rotary Mechanism
Date: 4 Jan 93 21:05:28 GMT
Organization: Drexel Univ -- Telecom & Networking


I am publishing the 93 edition of Drexel University's telephone
directory.  The cover artwork shows a rotary phone dial and a handset.

I would like some stories (more on the fun side than the technical
side) of the dial (when it started, how it worked, how many still
used, etc) to include in an "About the cover art" section inside the
directory.


Thanks much,

Ken

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

From: [e-mail] (Paul Gatker)
Subject: Baby Bell Breakups
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1993 19:44:06 GMT
Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix, NYC


I heard an interesting theory regarding investing in the Baby Bells.
The theory was that they could be breaking up ala AT&T, and in so
doing, the parts would be much more valuable than the present whole
companies. This due to the rapidly exploding telecom revolution.

The theory sounds very reasonable to me. Any other info, data, on
this?


[e-mail]          COMPULITE GRAPHICS
Brooklyn NY usa      Design & Consultation

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

Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1993 12:43:11 +0200 (IST)
From: baskin lester <[e-mail]>
Subject: Spread Spectrum Regulations in Europe


As part of a study at the Graduate School of Business Administration,
Tel Aviv University we need information regarding SPREAD SPECTRUM
REGULATIONS in EUROPE.  Can anyone on this list speak to this subject
or point to sources of information or point to an expert in this
field?  Any assistance in this matter would be much appreciated.
Thank you in advance.

Please respond directly to me as I am not a member of this list.


Lester Baskin   Internet:  [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (John Pettitt)
Subject: Voice Mail Options
Date: Mon, 04 Jan 93 16:12:47 PST


With my startup moving along, I now have an office and since I can't
afford or justify a receptionist I am going to get voice mail (horrid
as it is I don't have a lot of option).

So the question is: Should I get a voice mail card for a PC (Nat Semi
has an interesting looking card that does voice/data/fax ($229 in the
local Comp USA) or do I go with the Pac Bell offering?  Comments
suggestions etc, either way most welcome.

BTW If you know anybody who has 500K to invest in a software startup
let me know :-) (for the legal freaks this is not an offer to sell
securities :-)


John Pettitt        Mail: [e-mail]
CEO, Dolmus Inc.    Voice: +1 415 967 UNIX
            Fax: [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Glenn F. Leavell)
Subject: Why Does Phone Bell 'Ping' on a Regular Basis?
Organization: University of Georgia, Athens
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1993 19:20:49 GMT


It seems that I've seen discussion on the following topic in the
TELECOM Digest before, but I can't remember the answer or find
anything relevant in the archive index.

My parents live in Mississippi and get their local phone service from
South Central Bell.  According to my parents, the bells in their
phones make a 'ping' every evening around 10:15PM.  They say that the
ping almost always occurs around the same time, but that on certain
nights it may not occur until close to midnight.  They've called South
Central Bell about this, and they were told that the ping was NOT
occuring due to anything that the phone company was doing.

By calling my parents number, I have not been able to find a way to
duplicate the ping myself -- I always end up creating at least one
full ring.

What is the likely cause of this ping?  Is it possible that some
individual is doing it as an annoyance, or is it more likely a problem
from within the phone system?

Thank you.


Glenn Leavell  University of Georgia  [e-mail]  706-542-5110
University Computing and Networking Services, Athens, GA 30602-1911

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

Date: 4 Jan 93 07:40:15-0800
From: /PN=Thomas.K.Hinders/OU=CCMAIL/O=CHAN.IS/PRMD=MMC/ADMD=TELEMAIL/C=US/@sprint.com
Subject: Operator Breaking Cellular Connection


I was watching the movie Patriot Games this past week.  In it our hero
Harrison Ford (aka Dr Ryan), on his cellular phone, asks the operator
to break into his wife's cellular phone connection.  The operator
tells him this is not possible, he has to wait till she hangs up.

Although the cellular connections are not "static" like land-lines it
seems to me that SOMEONE could have broken in.

Happy New Year to all the Telecom readers.

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


[Moderator's Note: Most likely some person on the technical staff at
the cellular company could have done it by going in on the desired
line at the switch, but the telco operator could not do so. It is much
like asking the telco operator to cut in on a conversation between two
PBX stations. The local PBX operator is the one to ask.  PAT]

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

Date: 04 Jan 93 10:32:07 EST
From: tim gorman <[e-mail]>
Subject: SS7 Links Fron CA to NY


John Higdon <[e-mail]> writes:

> Bob Yazz <[e-mail]> writes:

>> You don't seriously believe such a state of affairs will stand, do you
>> John?  The PUC will order that numbers not be delivered, period.  I
>> can even see the potential for lawsuits against Pac Bell over this.

> But the PUC cannot order this, just as it cannot prevent any carrier
> from passing realtime ANI to end users. In SS7, the calling number is
> ALWAYS transmitted as part of the data packet, although there is a bit
> that identifies it as a "blocked" number if such is the case.

Actually the PUC could order this and make it stand. The Network
Interconnect package needed to allow SS7 interconection between the
LEC and the IXC's makes provision for the calling number to be deleted
from any IAM message sent to the IXC. This is true in every central
office switch type I am aware of. This includes NTI, AT&T, and
Ericsson.

SWBT policy is that this feature is invoked in all central offices
with SS7 interconnection to IXC's until calling number delivery is
tariffed and sold in that CO and all subscribers have been fully
informed (through bill inserts, etc.) of the impacts they will see.

So the PUC could order this be done in PB-land and also require that
PB negotiate with the switch vendors to insure the capability is
retained from this day forward.


Tim Gorman - SWBT
*opinions are mine, any resemblance to official policy is coincidence*

------------------------------
End of TELECOM Digest V13 #8
****************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa03854;
          5 Jan 93 6:15 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA21486
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 5 Jan 1993 03:20:47 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA00519
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 5 Jan 1993 03:20:09 -0600
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 03:20:09 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #9

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 5 Jan 93 03:20:00 CST      Volume 13 : Issue 9

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Cellular Modems (was Cellular RJ-11 Jacks) (Steve Pershing)
    Motorola Flip Fone Won't Reprogram (Jason Rogers)
    Part 68 - Just the FAQs (Rob Bailey)
    [TDR] DISA Yaks to FCC on PCS (Paul Robinson)
    Cellular One Off-Peak vs SWBMS Off Peak (Mark Earle)
    AC 215/610 Split (Bob Kupiec)
    Prepaid Card Phones vs. COCOTs (Peter Capek)
    Car (*not* Personal) Cell Phone Rcommendations? (Andrew Klossner)
    Prodigy <> Internet ([e-mail])
    USA to UK Clear Calls (Richard Spence)
    Automated Sales Calls (Ray Normandeau)
    Alternate to AT&T Mail Delivery (Tom Lahey)
    Residential vs Business LD (was All Circuits Are Busy ...) (Peng Hwa)
    1A ESS Master Scanner Correction (Alan L. Varney)
    Reference for "Tragedy of the Commons" Article (Jim Haynes)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Cellular Modems (was Cellular RJ-11 Jacks)
From: [e-mail] (Steve Pershing)
Date: Mon, 04 Jan 93 23:17:40 PST
Organization: Questor|Free Usenet News|Vancouver, BC: [phone]


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Dwight
Johns) writes:

> Many of the newer cellular phones out there have (oh, what's a good
> politicaly correct term) less than fully functioning RJ-11 jack on
> Now my only complaint is that I can't go over 1200 baud on a
> cellular connection and that I drop carrier whenever I handoff.

ZyXEL's modems are capable of working on a cellular connexion.  They
have a proprietary "cellular mode" which handles cell hand-offs
easily.

If you are looking for data on these modems, we have most of their
spec sheets scanned in as 300x300dpi TIFF images, which are
ZOO-compressed.

If you send a message to:     [e-mail]
with the first lines in the
body of text being:           help
                              dir
                              files

you should get enough info back to get you started.  (We also have
data sheets on Telebits, and a neat little PC-based EPROM programmer.)

Best regards from snowy Vancouver, B.C.   (yes!  ...SNOWY!)


    Steve Pershing, SysAdmin  <[e-mail]>    The QUESTOR Project
  FREE access to Environ, Sci, Med, & AIDS news, and more.  [also UUCP]
        on a ZyXEL-1496S v.42bis, v.32bis, v.33, up to 16,800bps.
                 -=-         -=-         -=-         -=-
   Fones: (+1 604)  Data: 681-0670  Telefax: 682-6160  Voice: 682-6659

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

Subject: Motorola Flip Fone Won't Reprogram
From: [e-mail] (Jason Rogers)
Date: Mon, 04 Jan 93 23:02:08 PST
Organization: Questor|Free Usenet News|Vancouver, BC: [phone]


Well, I bit the bullet and bought a nice little Beige Motorola
flip-fone from a shady fellow at a low price.  I wanted one just to be
able to take it apart and see the works inside, and to be able to use
it for 911 in case of emergencies.

It took me about 20 minutes to figure out the lock code, and I was in
luck as the factory six-digit security code was still the default.

This particular phone seems to be the cheapest flip-fone of the
Motorola line.  It is gray in color, has a seven-digit green,
seven-segment LED display, and has "In Use", "No Svc" and "Roam"
indicators.

The Touch pad is the usual 12 buttons, with two rows of four control
buttons each, labelled:

        Rcl   Sto   Clr   Snd
        Pwr   Vol   Lock  End

I have had it apart.  Nice construction ... all surface mount
components, lots of RF ground fingers, etc.

I managed to re-program the unit a couple of times by entering the
initial programming sequence (STO, #, Security Code entered 2x, RCL).

Well, it seems to have stopped there, and won't reprogram any more.

Manuals for such phones seem to indicate that there is a finite limit
on the reprogramming, and after a number of tries it will have to be
reset by a service person.

Can anyone tell me how to re-enable reprogramming??

Many thanks in advance.  (A tech manual would probably be an asset!)   :-)


Jason Rogers ([e-mail])
 | QUESTOR:  Free Dial-in Public Access to Usenet Health, Medical News |
 | & AIDS forums, and Info on Global Environment at  [phone]. |


[Moderator's Note: By setting a finite number of times the phone can be
re-programmed, Motorola is trying to discourage people like yourself
from buying phones from other shady characters (did I mean to insert
the word 'other' back there?). When you run out of attempts, then you
have to take the phone to a dealer, where it shows up on his hot list
of stolen phones and he whispers to the guy at the counter to try and
stall you while he calls the police from the back room. :) But, as
they say, knowledge is power: you can be your own service technician
and save yourself the potential for embarassment when the clerks at
the cell phone dealership snicker as the police lead you away.

If your Motorola phone has a 25 pin connector to the battery, then it
is likely that pin 21 is what they call the 'manual test line'. By
tying pin 21 low, the phone goes into 'local test mode' and some
additional reprogramming can be done, including the resetting of that
register which keeps track of how often you have hacked at or tried to
phreak with the instrument. As luck would have it, pin 21's neighbor,
pin 20 happens to be ground. *Carefully* solder a little wire with a
micro-mini push off/on switch in the middle between pins 20-21 (be
sure the pins are the same on your unit, of course). Install the
battery and clicking the switch on or off should take you in and out
of test mode. You'll get a screen display something like this: #??#.
You fill in the ?? part. I think register 32 re-initializes the
non-volatile memory (sets everything to zeros). DO NOT turn off the
phone until the normal display returns. The phone may sit there and do
nothing for upwards a minute ... just wait it out. You should be back
in business for a few more hacking and phreaking attempts.   PAT]

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

Date: 05 Jan 93 01:38:59 EST
From: Rob Bailey, WM8S <[e-mail]>
Subject: Part 68 - Just the FAQs


This has got to be a FAQ, but I can't find it anywhere. I know I've
seen it asked before, but I've never seen an authoritative reply:

What certification is REQUIRED before a company can sell a device that
is intended to be attached to the public switched service network?
I.e., if I was going to build and sell a touch-tone interface or a
modem of some sort, would I have to get Part 68 type acceptance
certification? Could I just make the device according to part 68
requirements, of do I actually need to pay somebody to prove to the
FCC that the device meets those specifications? Do I need to register
the device with the FCC? Attach an REN to the device? Who performs
such certification (if it's required)? How much is it? How long does
it take?  Ad nauseum ... isn't there a book somewhere called "How to
get a device Part 68 approved" or something?

Finally, another question I've seen asked thousands of times: it's
completely unreasonable to expect me to pay the fortune the federal
government wants for a printed copy of Part 68; is it on-line
somewhere free?

Has anyone gone through this process that can shed some light? Toby?


Rob      [e-mail]

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

Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 04 Jan 1993  18:41:26 EST
Subject: [TDR] DISA Yaks to FCC on PCS


"DISA yaks to FCC on PCS"

(Gee, I've always wanted to do a 'Variety' style headline.  :) )

Article Summary
Government Computer News, January 4, 1993, Page 38

This is a summary of an article about a technology you've probably
never seen, complained about by an agency you've probably never heard
of.

In an article titled "Defense agency wants PCS voice services in
public domain", author S. A. Marud tells how the Defense Information
Systems Agency (DISA) has jumped into the Federal Communications
Commission (FCC) inquiry into the standards to be set on the operation
of the startup Personal Communications Services (PCS) industry.

PCS is a wireless digital technology which operates at 2 gigahertz.
Cellular is analog.  Also, one advantage of the service is that a
number can be assigned to a person, not to a telephone.

Two groups in DISA, the Federal Wireless Services User Forum (FWSUF)
and the Interagency Cellular Radio Working Group (ICRWG) were the
impetus for filing comments.  They want to be certain that PCS
supports at least Group 3 / Group 4 Fax, paging, images, and voice and
data encrypted with an STU-III device.  i.e. that a group 3 fax modem
should work the same whether it's plugged into a wall jack or a PCS
phone.  PCS should also support dialing "0" for Operator and 911 for
Emergency.  ICRWG wants there to be two nationwide carriers for PCS,
or in the alternative, at least one frequency block reserved
nationally to one carrier and the rest awarded to local carriers.

DISA's concerns on National Security and Emergency Preparedness makes
it want certain basic services (Such as area code 710?) to be part of
the new system, and that at least voice services to be available
through the public switched (read local telco, AT&T, FTS-2000, MCI
etc.) network.  The systems should be made to be interoperable
(meaning the phone you use in Dallas should also work in Kansas City,
Chicago, New York and Los Angeles), either from the start or soon
after some industry standards can be developed.  DISA would also
prefer that PCS licenses be issued for large areas if no nationwide
carrier(s) are authorized.

DISA is worried that PCS may be declared to be "private carriers"
which means that the government cannot mandate that they be part of
the Telecommunications Priority System (TSP) which allows the
government to sieze telephone lines.  TSP was invoked by the federal
government for more than 4000 circuits and services during Hurricane
Andrew.

Certain industry groups are watching the rulemaking process on PCS,
including the Wireless Information Network Forum (which represents
computer and communications companies including Apple, AT&T & IBM),
Cellular Telecommunications Industry Association (CTIA) (guess who
they represent).  CTIA is worried that the FCC might decide that PCS
license won't be issued to a cellular operator in the same area.

A decision on how the PCS industry is to be structured is expected
from the FCC sometime in Fall 1993.


Paul Robinson -- [e-mail]
These opinions are mine alone.

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

Date: Mon, 4 Jan 93 21:00:45 -0600
From: [e-mail] (Mark Earle)
Subject: Cellular One Off-Peak vs SWBMS Off Peak


Southwestern Bell Mobile Systems, the 'B' carrier for cellular phones
in most of Texas, offeres a variety of monthly plans and costs. These
seem to be market taylored. For instance, in DFW there isn't a readily
accessable off peak plan with zero cents per air minute. In many
smaller markets, including Corpus Christi, there is such a plan
available.

I pay $40/month (plus taxes, $5 for voicemail on 3rd ring/no ans).

Cellular One announced via a full page ad, radio spots, and a TV
spot, their version of off peak.

$40/month 240 minutes "free" additional off peak minutes 9 cents
includes 15 "free" peak minutes, additional peak minutes 15 cents.

[SWBMS with the above is 40 cents / min peak, no "free" minutes].

Off peak is 8 p.m. local through 7 a.m., plus all day Saturday /
Sunday, and four holidays (Easter, 4th July, Thanksgiving, Christmas,
and this year, they included New Year's Day.)

In some ways the C1 plan looks better, as the peak minutes are
cheaper, and really, 240 "free" off peak minutes is a lot of talking.
I rarely run up more than 60 or so off peak minutes, and many of those
are because at 0.00/min, who cares?

I probably won't change carriers now (although I could next month)
mainly because of the hassles of changing the number people use to get
me.

As yet, I'm unsure if the C1 plan includes "features". SWBMS includes
CW, CF, 3W, and detailed billing in the above plan.

* In DFW and other large market cities, SWBMS offers the zero - peak
"Advantage" plan, but only to corporate or group buyers. Sometimes
individuals can "push" and get this plan. In Corpus, we can get it
simply by agreeing to a 1 year service commitment.


[e-mail]   [e-mail]   Mark Earle 1:160/50

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

From: beyonet!olwejo![e-mail] (Bob Kupiec)
Subject: AC 215/610 Split
Reply-To: olwejo![e-mail]
Organization: Olwejo - Private UNIX System
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 04:35:13 GMT


I just heard on the news today that Bell of Pennsylvania will announce
an Area Code split in AC 215.  Supposedly, in 1994 there will be a
split to AC 610 that will separate Philadelphia with its suburbs.
Most of Philadelphia will continue with 215 while the suburbs will
pick up 610.

I knew this would happen soon.  Seems like it's here right now!


Bob Kupiec, N3MML    Internet: [e-mail]

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

Date: Tue, 5 Jan 93 01:40:09 EST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Prepaid Card Phones vs. COCOTs


Reading the discussion here recently about COCOTs and the cost to a
premises owner of a LEC coin phone, I wonder if these economics will
change when prepaid card access phones become common.  I would guess
that such phones (common in Europe for years, but only just starting
to be available in New York, and nowhere else in the US that I know
of) would make it possible for an LEC to provide a card phone which is
less subject to vandalism (due to the lack of a coin box) and requires
less service (again, no coin box to empty).  Does anyone have any
facts about this?


Peter Capek

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

From: [e-mail] (Andrew Klossner)
Date: Mon,  4 Jan 93 13:39:40 PST
Subject: Car (*not* Personal) Cell Phone Recommendations?
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Tektronix Color Printers, Wilsonville, Oregon


There was a time when the only cell phones were hard-wired into a car.
My wife wants one of these for the car she's buying: she never wants
to take it away from the car, and she wants it to turn on whenever the
car is started.  She doesn't want to mount a hand-held or drop in a
transportable bag phone.

Any recommendations?


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

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

Date: Mon, 4 Jan 93 15:48:56 EST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Prodigy <> Internet


About a month or so ago, someone posted that a gateway for Email from
Internet to/from Prodigy would probably be in business by Christmas.
Anyone have the latest status on that "activation"?

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

Date: Mon, 4 Jan 93 19:34 GMT
From: Richard Spence <[e-mail]>
Subject: USA to UK Clear Calls
Reply-To: [e-mail]


I know that it is possible to get a 'digital line' to the USA by using
a different dialing code from the UK.  This results in a full 64kbps
line being made available for ISDN terminal to ISDN terminal calls.

It must be possible to do the same operation from the USA, but I don't
know the code.  Does anybody out there know?

Just for interest the code from the UK would be 0101 aaa nnnnnn for a
'normal' line and 01001 aaa nnnnnnn for an ISDN line.


Thanks,

Richard Spence   [e-mail]    CompuServe: 100112,304
>>>MATRIX version  1.21e

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

Subject: Automated Sales Calls
From: [e-mail] (Ray Normandeau)
Date: 3 Jan 93 14:18:00 GMT
Organization: Invention Factory's BBS - New York City, NY - 212-274-8298v.32bis
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Ray Normandeau)


                                  Contact Ray Normandeau 718 392-1267
      Download this and other "off-beat" items by computer modem from
            Normandeau Newswire on Invention Factory BBS 212-274-8110


Updated January 3, 1993

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-nnnn 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 540-0100, 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 Forest Hills answering
service for 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. We know, we
tried!

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: 3 Jan 93 21:46:32 GMT
Subject: Alternate to AT&T Mail Delivery


I've recently started getting telecom off the Internet via AT&T mail.
(currently my only access to the Internet). I just did a quick
calculation and each issue costs me in the range of $2.05!!! While
I've found the content to be very educational and worth far in excess
of the $2.05 per issue, I'm afraid that my e-mail budget is about to
go bust!

Does anyone know how I can get an Internet feed via dial-up? (with
something less than a $0.95 for the first 3000 characters and .05 per
1000 after that?)

I'll keep watching for a couple of more days!

Thanks in advance,

Tom Lahey - toml![e-mail]  (for now!)

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

Date: Mon, 04 Jan 93 11:04:34 SST
From: Ang Peng Hwa <[e-mail]>
Subject: Residential vs Business LD (was All Circuits Are Busy...)


Dave Ptasnik wrote:

> With a higher percentage of business usage,  most OCCs have very
> litte traffic on their switches at nights, on weekends, and
> holidays. The trunks that are busily full during the day sit idle.

> We used periodically to get directives from our switch manager
> to  sell more residential accounts, and try to busy up the lines
> at night a little more.

I am trying to develop a theory around the facts provided above to
argue that there are limits to competition in the long-distance
market. (Ok, I know I'm treading on sacred grounds here.)

One of my arguments is that for true long-distance competition --
along the line of the USA model -- vs phony LD competition as in UK,
there must be a diversity of users: both residential and business.

As Dave noted, the residential users typically call in the evenings,
when trunks are idle.

While Dave notes the difficulty of finding residential users with more
than $50 in LD charges, I am finding difficulty obtaining the relevant
data to prove the point.

I'm still developing the idea so inputs sans flames are welcome.

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

Date: Mon,  4 Jan 93 16:23:18 CST
From: [e-mail] (Alan L Varney)
Subject: 1A ESS Master Scanner Correction
Organization: AT&T Network Systems, Lisle, IL


In response to an article from [e-mail] (John Boteler), I
wrote:

> If you are MOST curious (i.e., willing to spend money), you
> should know that almost all the hardware (and some software, tools,
> testing details, etc.) associated with 1/1A ESS(tm) switches is
> described at a high level in two special issues of the Bell Labs
> Technical Journal (BSTJ), one on the 1 ESS switch, and a later one that
> describes the 1A Processor (used in both 1A ESS and 4ESS(tm) switches).

> "No. 1 Electronic Switching System", BSTJ, Vol. 43 No. 5,
>        September 1964, Parts 1 & 2.
> "The 1A Processor", BSTJ, Vol. 43 No. 5, February 1977.

   Terry Kennedy has (rightly) questioned the Volume numbers ... the
second reference should be:

    "The 1A Processor", BSTJ, Vol. 56 No. 2, February 1977.


Al Varney -- just MY mistake

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

From: [e-mail] (Jim Haynes)
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 93 23:07:06 -0800
Subject: Reference for "Tragedy of the Commons" Article


Several people have asked for the reference for the Garret Hardin
"Tragedy of the Commons" article that I mentioned in connection with
telemarketing.  The reference is:

   {Science Magazine} (Amer Assn for the Advancement of Science)
   vol 162, p 1243, 13 December 1968

The axe Hardin was grinding in writing the article was population
control; but the argument is widely applicable.  It goes roughly like
this.

Suppose there is a meadow which produces enough grass to feed 1000
cows.  Suppose it is used in common by 100 farmers, each with 10 cows.
Now if a farmer acquires an extra cow he has increased his wealth by
10%, while each of the 1001 cows is affected by a food shortage of
only 0.1%.  Hence the temptation is overwhelming to stick in an extra
cow or two.  If only one farmer did this the effect would be
practically insignificant; but when all the farmers give in to this
temptation all the cows suffer from malnutrition as the meadow becomes
seriously overgrazed.


[Moderator's Note: This is the essence of what many people tried to
explain years ago regards so-called 'victimless crimes'. In some
situations the process of victimization is very slow -- so slow as to
be almost indiscernable; in fact we see no immediate victim and claim
therefore there must not be one. Instead of the personal discipline
in our lives needed to make society as a whole function well, each of
us says, 'well, this one little thing won't hurt, there are no victims.'
After a few months, years or decades, these little (I like to call
them termites in our conciousness) pecadillos each of us practice in
our lives have eaten away enough of our society that there is a
serious erosion we are unable to stop. Bit by bit, piece by piece
until it all collapses like a rotting beach house on the ocean hit by
the tides day after day.  The USA in the 1990's is proof of this. The
termites have been feasting for years, and the foundation is almost
gone. Yes, I am guilty of this same sloth also.  Old I grew too soon
and wise too late. :(  PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #9
****************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa12238;
          6 Jan 93 18:36 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA21459
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 6 Jan 1993 16:30:50 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA09661
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 6 Jan 1993 16:30:02 -0600
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 16:30:02 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #10

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 6 Jan 93 16:30:00 CST     Volume 13 : Issue 10

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    North Carolina Area Code 919 to Split Into 919 and 910 (Bob Goudreau)
    800 Number Troubles (Mike McNally)
    976 Fraud in Toronto (Tony Harminc)
    Asia-Pacific Engineering Journal - Call For Papers (Chua Kee Chaing)
    Out of Town Businesses on Local Numbers? (lunatix![e-mail])
    UUCP Through Multiple Carriers (Michael Hamilton)
    Hunt Groups (Rob Boudrie)
    Does a CNID Device List Exist? (Don Wegeng)
    A Minor Nit With the Telecom FAQ (Pat Turner)
    Colorado Gets Caller ID (Tim Gorman)
    Do-It-Yourself Caller ID (Thomas K. Hinders)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 11:55:48 -0500
From: [e-mail] (Bob Goudreau)
Subject: North Carolina Area Code 919 to Split Into 919 and 910


David Esan, in the January V&H report, notes:

> Other NPAs that are candidates for a split include eastern North
> Carolina (714) [sic], Philadelphia (215), and 602 (Arizona).

Someone else recently posted an article describing 215's split into 215
and 610.  Well, we can now add 919 (which is what Dave *meant* to say
above when describing the crowded area code that covers all of eastern
and northern North Carolina; 704 covers just the southwestern portion of
the state) to the list of splitters.

Today's _News_&_Observer_ (Raleigh's daily) announces that a new area
code 910 will be created out of 919 later this year.  The new area will
encompass the northwestern and north-central areas of the state
(including the "Triad" area of Greensboro, Winston Salem and High Point),
and will cut a diagonal corridor through the middle of the state on its
way to the coast, where it will also pick up the entire southeastern
portion (including Wilmington and Fayetteville).  The 919 code will be
reduced to the central and northeastern parts of North Carolina,
starting at Sanford and stretching north and east to include the Resarch
Triangle (Raleigh/Durham/Chapel Hill) area all the way to the Outer
Banks and the eastern part of the Virginia border.

The "permissive dialing" phase (when 910 is first activated, but when
919 will still also work for 910 numbers) will begin November 14th of
this year.  The cutover will be complete on February 13, 1994, when 910
will be required for all numbers in the new area.

The newspaper article notes that "... it is expected that the 910 area
code will cause some confusion because it is so similar to 919".
(Incidentally, has any area code split ever used a new code so similar
to the old one?)  Of course, we TELECOM Digest readers know the reason
for this, and so does the article, which mentions that "... the 910 area
code was the only one available to North Carolina."

So that's it folks:  all the N10 area codes have now been exhausted,
given that the US government is apparently not going to relinquish its
secretive 710 code.  If there are any other splits within the NANP
before the NXX era begins next year, they'll have to burn one of the
N11 or N00 codes.


Bob Goudreau            Data General Corporation
[e-mail]        62 Alexander Drive
[phone]            Research Triangle Park, NC  27709, USA

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

From: [e-mail] (Mike McNally)
Subject: 800 Number Troubles
Date: 6 Jan 93 19:16:15 GMT
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation Palo Alto, CA


Here's something a little strange, to me anyway.  I've been trying all
morning to call Equifax and find out how to get a copy of my credit
information.  I got through once to their robo-phone system, and after
about five minutes of menu navigation it just dropped me in the middle
of a recorded message.  Fine.  I tried to call back, however, and got
the message "Due to technical difficulties, we cannot complete your
call.  Please try again later."  Hmm.  I repeatedly dialed and got the
same result.

The AT&T operators told me that the number is an MCI number, and they
directed me to MCI 800 service (888-1800).  There, I was told that the
number was indeed working, but that the customer (Equifax) had set up
the account such that only 45% of the calls originating rom my area
code (415) would succeed.  The rest get the "technical difficulties"
message.  Two separate MCI people told me this same thing.

Well gee, I'm a little miffed at this setup; why don't I just get a
busy signal?  MCI would save themselves a lot of time if they'd do
that instead of the clearly bogus message; if I got a busy signal, I
would interpret that to mean that my call couldn't get through because
the capacity had been exhausted.  Alternatively, the message could
tell me exactly what's going on: "We're sorry, but you lose; we only
accept 45% of the calls from area code 415, and you're in the unlucky
55%."


   Mike +   Software +   Digital Equipment +   Western Software +      mcnally@
McNally +    Laborer +         Corporation +         Laboratory +   wsl.dec.com

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

Date: Wed, 06 Jan 93 00:56:39 EST
From: Tony Harminc <[e-mail]>
Subject: 976 Fraud in Toronto


This past November, a company I consult for had three unauthorized
calls to [phone] made on one of its lines.  Each call was one
minute long and was billed at $24.  Thinking back, we remember the
likely perpetrator -- a man claiming to be serving legal papers on
someone who supposedly used to work at the office address.  There were
several small discrepancies to his story, but he seemed just as
puzzled as we were.  He asked to use the phone, and I remember that he
did a lot of dialing, but when challenged he showed a pager with
display and claimed he was calling his voicemail.

Bell Canada has agreed to remove the charges, but will not tell us the
name of the owner of this number.  We are not eager to pursue it with
the police, because of the small amount of the fraud, but we are
concerned that this may be part of an organized scam (else how would
the 'process server' benefit?) and others may also have been hit.  The
$24 charge is quite a bit higher than the usual sex and sleaze lines
which -- according to the ads -- are mostly $10.

We have cleaned up our act for handling of future visitors who want to
use the phone (for now we dial it, and toll restrictors are coming
soon), but I would like 1) suggestions for how to pursue this, and
2) to hear from anyone else in 416 who has been hit with calls to this
number.  Perhaps someone in an adjacent NPA could dial it and let me
know who answers.


Many thanks.

Tony Harminc

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

From: [e-mail] (Chua Kee Chaing (Dr))
Subject: Asia-Pacific Engineering Journal - Call For Papers
Organization: National University of Singapore
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 02:11:13 GMT


ASIA-PACIFIC ENGINEERING JOURNAL PART A - ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING

December 1993 Issue on Communications Engineering

CALL FOR PAPERS

The Asia-Pacific Engineering Journal (APEJ) provides within the
rapidly changing Asia-Pacific region a unique source of information on
current international research activities and trends in technology. It
aims to keep its readers fully briefed with major papers, reports and
reviews on state-of-the-art technologies and products. The journal is
published in separate parts that cover the disciplines of Electrical,
Mechanical, Civil, Chemical and Industrial Engineering. Part A is
devoted to Electrical Engineering, and covers the four main areas of
Communications Engineering, Computer Engineering, Control and
Automation, and Microelectronics.

The December 1993 issue of Part A of the APEJ is devoted to
Communications Engineering. The issue will be a special issue
concentrating on the field of High-Speed Networking, and original
contributions in all aspects of this field of research are now
solicited. In particular, relevant topics of interest include, but are
not limited to, the following:

* Broadband ISDN and ATM networks
* Gigabit/s networking
* Lightwave networks
* High-speed transport protocols
* Management of high-speed networks
* Flow and congestion control in high-speed networks

Prospective authors are requested to submit four (4) copies of their
manuscripts, written in English, and including a 100-word abstract, to
the following by 1 April 1993.

    Dr. Kee C. Chua
    Department of Electrical Engineering
    National University of Singapore
    10 Kent Ridge Crescent
    Singapore 0511
    Fax.: [phone]
    Email.: [e-mail]

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

Subject: Out of Town Businesses on Local Numbers?
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 93 0:32:59 EST
From: lunatix![e-mail]


The other day, I saw the number for a business located in a nearby
town (which is not normally in the local calling area), however, the
prefix was a local one.  I tried calling the number, but could not get
through.  I tried the operator and she connected me, and after asking
why the 'number' was in my town, and the 'business' was in another,
she only said, 'It's in the computer, but it is connected to a
different town.'

Any ideas as to what's happening here?


[Moderator's Note: Businesses (actually, anyone, but it is mostly
businesses) can have a 'foreign exchange' line -- commonly known as an
FX. When they use that phone, or receive calls on it, it is as though
they were in the place where the phone exchange is located. There are
various reasons one might do this. One reason is the company makes a
large volume of calls to that town, and the cost of the FX line plus
local calling charges, if any, are less than the cost of the same
number of calls dialed as long distance. Other times an FX line is
intended to give a company a 'presence' in the town where it is
located. They wish to make a convenient way for their customers in
that town to reach them, and find the call volume is sufficient to
warrant a dedicated FX line rather than hundreds (or thousands) of
calls on 800 lines. Whether or not an FX line makes better sense than
(for example) a IN-WATS line is an applications problem. With the cost
of long distance and/or 800 calls being less than ever before, FX
lines are not nearly as common as they used to be.  PAT]

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

From: pacific![e-mail] (michael hamilton)
Subject: UUCP Through Multiple Carriers
Organization: Jet Propulsion Laboratory
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 18:13:34 GMT


I am currently taking a newsfeed through a university (which shall
remain nameless, but Thank God John Robinson is back) in Los Angeles.
To do this, I must go through my local carrier GTE, and through the
carrier that services the university area, Pac-Bell.  Further, the
University has an Instanet Data PABX port selector that I have to
navigate through, before I finally reach the system I want.  To do
this, I'm using a Telebit T2500, and going through what I believe is a
Micom modem on the university side.

    My question: is all this routing through various switches causing
my horrible throughput?  I should be getting on the order of 1200 cps,
and I get more like 400, if and when I don't time out waiting for the
other end.  I have tried every combination of register settings,
disabling V.42, MNP, etc., but nothing improves this performance.  I
know it's not the modem, because talking to another T2500 (in the same
GTE area) I got >4X what I'm getting now.

    Thanks for any thoughts on this.  Responses through e-mail are
preferred, but if you post here I'll eventually see it.


michael hamilton   [e-mail] / oceanography from space

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

From: [e-mail] (Rob Boudrie)
Subject: Hunt Groups
Organization: Center For High Perf. Computing of WPI; Marlboro Ma
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 11:10:33 GMT


Is it possible for two numbers serviced by the same physical CO to be
placed on a hunt group even though they has different exchange
prefixes?

I don't want to have either of my numbers changed since one is my old
number everyone knows, and the other is a xxx-xx00 number (had to pull
some strings to get it).  When I ordered service and made various
inquiries, I run into folks who don't know what terms like "POTS line"
and "demarc" mean, and offered me services excluded by tariff (the
sales rep initially told me they could offer me a metered line, though
this is prohibited if you have an unmetered line in the same house).

[ After answering his questions about the various telco terms, he
asked if there was anything else he should know about the fone system,
saying that they had obviously not trained enough.  I told him he
should learn all about area code 710, and to keep asking until he
finds someone who can explain what it is for. (Wish I could be there
for that :) :) ) ].


rob boudrie     [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: I've never heard of a hunt group including lines on
different prefixes, even if they were in the same CO.  Anyone?   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Don Wegeng)
Subject: Does a CNID Device List Exist?
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Xerox Corp., Henrietta, NY
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 11:55:10 GMT


With all of the requests for information about CNID devices, it
occured to me that it would be useful if someone or some publication
had assembled a list of the devices that are currently available.  I
appreciate that it may be very difficult to keep track of all of the
products that are being introduced, but perhaps one of the consumer
magazines has published a summary.  Does anyone know of such a list?


Thanks,

Don   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 93 10:27 EST
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: A Minor Nit With the Telecom FAQ


I think Dave did an excellent job with the faq, but I would like to
make a minor nit.

> Q: What do "tip" and "ring" mean?

> A: The conductors of a wire pair to a telephone set are referred to
>    as tip (T) and ring (R). Tip (T) is usually the more positively
>    charged of the two while Ring (R) tends to be more of a ground.

This seems to be a common misconception.  CO battery is -48, rather
then +48 with respect to (WRT) ground.  Thus tip is positive WRT ring,
but is actually at ground, if current isn't flowing.  Ring is then at
-48 V, again assuming no voltage losses.  The reasons for doing is
galvonic corrosion protection.  A conductor with a - charge will repel
chlorine ions, as Cl ions are negative also.  If the line were to have
a posative charge, Cl ions would be attracted.

This form of corrosion protection is called cathodic protection.  It
is often used for pipelines, bridges, etc.  I don't know how important
it is now, but it was very important in the days of open wire
transmission lines.

CO battery does not have to be 48 V.  24 V is often used for PBX and
Key systems, long loops may have a higher battery voltage.

>    However, two wires normally suffice to complete a connection
>    between a telephone and the central office; any extra wiring
>    would be for purposes such as grounding or for party line ringing.

Also to supply dial light for the Princess phones.


Pat Turner KB4GRZ   [e-mail]

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

Date: 06 Jan 93 10:04:04 EST
From: tim gorman <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Colorado Gets Caller ID


In TELECOM Digest V13, #8 I read the following concerning Caller ID
penetration.

Colorado (Richard Lucas):    Heavy Demand at initial offering.
Nevada   (Centel)       :    10% penetration
IBT      (Moderator)    :    Very popular service long term
New Jersey (NJ Bell)    :    4.6% penetration (no blocking available)

Colorada has PUC mandated restrictions about blocking availability
and, as I remember, so does IBT. I am unsure about Nevada -- does
anyone know if blocking availablity is mandated there?

I realize that initial demand in Colorado doesn't necessarily
translate into similar long term demand, but for the sake of argument,
assume it does.  Let's also assume that Nevada has mandated blocking
availability.

That would mean that Caller ID penetration is higher in those areas
with mandated blocking than in the area that doesn't have any blocking
at all available. By more than double in the case of Nevada!

Perhaps PacBell is making a marketing mistake by not offering caller
id even though mandated blocking restrictions would apply? Perhaps
their total revenues would be higher than if no blocking at all was
available?


Tim Gorman - SWBT
*opinions are mine, any resemblance to official policy is coincidence*

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

Date: 5 Jan 93 11:25:11-0800
From: /PN=Thomas.K.Hinders/OU=CCMAIL/O=CHAN.IS/PRMD=MMC/ADMD=TELEMAIL/C=US/@sprint.com
Subject: Do-It-Yourself Caller ID


 From the Dec 1992 {Telecommunications} magazine in the Technology Watch
   Page 14:

Do-It-Yourself Caller ID

"Caller ID hits the computer marketplace.  While the Telcos roll out
Caller ID systems and regulators wrestle with privacy issues, the
consumer marketplace is offering its own form of call screening.  One
such product is offered through KES Communications Inc., which has
released Friends Only, a device that picks up calls before the
telephone rings.  With it, users can dodge unwanted calls via a
three-digit security access code."

"When a caller initially gets through, an operator-like voice says:

'Thank you for calling; please enter your access code.'  Callers who
do not enter the code within ten seconds are disconnected.  The device
is FCC compliant, but users may encounter some procedural difficulties
prior to using the product. KES notes that changes in telco
facilities, equipment, or operation of the product.  In addition, the
local exchange carrier must be notified prior to connection in order
to comply with state tariffs; and in some states, PUCs must approve
use prior to connection.  The device uses RJ-11C connectors which plug
into telephone and wall receptacles.  It is compatable with special
features such as call waiting, call forwarding, and three-way calling.
The price is $99.95."

No address or phone number was supplied. Wonder if you need a access
code to get them to answer the phone?


                       Thomas K Hinder
              Martin Marietta Computing Standards
                    4795 Meadow Wood Lane
                     Chantilly, VA 22021
              703.802.5593 (v) 703.802.5218 (f)


[Moderator's Note: This is just the old 'Priv-Code' device. It first
came out in the middle 1970's and was manufactured then by the
International Mobile Machines Corp. of Bala Cynwyd, PA. It sits on the
line and grabs all incoming calls. Unless the person enters the proper
code, your phone never rings. Certain codes are allocated to send
calls direct to an answering machine you attach to the line. I had one
about fifteen years ago; they are fun, but can be a nuisance for
people trying to legitimatly reach you who do not have a code number.
I think someone wrote me once to say IMM no longer was making the
thing; someone else is doing it now.   PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #10
*****************************

Due to a transmission error, issue 11 appears in this file following
issue 14. In addition, some other issues between here and the end of
the  file arrived out of order as well.











Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa20352;
          7 Jan 93 17:00 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA10241
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 7 Jan 1993 14:55:17 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA03882
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 7 Jan 1993 14:54:53 -0600
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 14:54:53 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #12

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 7 Jan 93 14:54:50 CST     Volume 13 : Issue 12

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Calling Canada From Italy - Answers (Wm Randolph Franklin)
    Canadian Competition Full Steam Ahead; Bell Canada Loses (David Leibold)
    Bell Canada Proposes Extended 911 Service (For a Price) (David Leibold)
    Calling 1-800 Can Cost You a Fortune (Udi Manber)
    16550 UART Request (Randy Zagar)
    FAQ Update on the Way (David Leibold)
    Equivalence Charges (Tony Harminc)
    Bellcore Documents Phone Number Wanted (Daniel Drucker)
    TSR Comm. S/W (Dave Dunwoodie)
    Cellular Phones: CLI, VOICE & SHORT (Rudolf Usselmann)
    What is Junk Fax? (Ron Herff)
    What Should I Know if I'm Buying a Cellular Phone? (Joel M. Hoffman)
    Possibility of Interstate Closed-User-Group of Dial-up Modems? (Mike Brown)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Wm Randolph Franklin)
Subject: Calling Canada From Italy - answers
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy NY
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 00:52:21 GMT


In December I asked how to call Canada from Italy since AT&T and MCI
didn't do it (with US cards).

Several people said that there is a "Canada Direct" number from Italy,
172 1001.  It charges, roughly, $6 for 3 minutes, then $1 per minute,
and say that they take AT&T calling cards.  Thanks to:

   [e-mail] (John R. Levine)
   Tony Harminc <[e-mail]>
   Samuel Ho <[e-mail]>

The Italian PTT prints a wallet card giving direct numbers like this
for many countries.  It's available at some visitor centers and
international airports.

I mentioned about using MCI to call from Italy to Germany.  That's a
real example, they have large ads for the service.  They charge
$2/minute, which suggests that the call is routed via the USA.
Calling Germany directly from Italy is only (!!) $1/min.  Italy is
apparently one of the more expensive European countries for
international calling.

International directory assistance from Italy can be complicated.
They try to use their own copies of the foreign directories instead of
connecting you to a foreign operator.  When I tried to get a number in
Zurich, the Italian operator who could talk to me in English could not
easily read the German phonebook to look up the really obscure number
I wanted, that of the Swiss Post Office.

On the plus side, the newer pay phones have an LCD display for
messages, and the messages are available in four languages.

Italy has variable length phone numbers, even within one city, such as
Genoa.  Area codes are also variable.

I'm available for questions about phones in Italy since I just came
back from three months over there.


Wm. Randolph Franklin,  [e-mail], [phone]; Fax: -6261
ECSE Dept., 6026 JEC, Rensselaer Polytechnic Inst, Troy NY, 12180 USA

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

Date: Thu, 07 Jan 93 00:02:45 EST
From: David Leibold <[e-mail]>
Subject: Canadian Competition Full Steam Ahead; Bell Canada Loses


CFRB Radio in Toronto reported today that Bell Canada will not pursue
any further appeals with respect to the decision last June which
opened up public long distance competition in Canada. Bell appealed
portions of that decision relating to the level of compensation that
competitors to Bell would have to pay to gain trunk-side access to
Bell's local network.  That is, while Unitel was able to offer a local
number port service (Feature Group A type service), the enhanced
services such as equal access, 10xxx+ dialing, 950 access and 800
services were on hold while the appeal was being processed.

In December, the appeal court found that the CRTC did not overstep its
authority in issuing the long distance decision, and that the CRTC's
decision could stand. At that time, Bell could have made another,
final appeal to the Supreme Court of Ca nada but as of today's
announcement, such an appeal is not proceeding.

Some time will elapse as preparations for full trunk-side access are
made.  The prevalence of Bell Canada DMS digital switches should make
the switch to equal access relatively straightforward on a software
scale (those DMS switches have to work in the U.S. environment in any
event). The costs seem to be in the hardware and trunks necessary to
connect to the carriers.

At least we're not getting any COCOTs ... yet :-)


[e-mail]

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

Date: Thu, 07 Jan 93 00:15:05 EST
From: David Leibold <[e-mail]>
Subject: Bell Canada Proposes Extended 911 Service (For a Price)


{The Toronto Star} reports that Bell Canada has applied to bring 911
service throughout Ontario (and not just certain municipalities that
elect to have the service, as is currently the case). Bell proposes
that customers be charged 30 cents per month as part of the local
monthly service, though.

70% of residences in Ontario have access to 911 at present, paid for
by municipalities involved. If approved, the extended 911 service
would be installed within five years. Municipalities would still have
to staff response centres and connections to emergency services, if
they join the 911 service.

There are occasional cases outside of 911-serviced territory where
calls to 911 are attempted, but fail. In those areas, the operator is
normally able to handle emergency calls, but the lack of universal 911
service can be dangerous for the unwary.


[e-mail]

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

Date: Thu, 7 Jan 93 00:57:37 -0800
From: [e-mail] (Udi Manber)
Subject: Calling 1-800 Can Cost You a Fortune


If you always thought that 1-800 numbers (in the US) are toll free,
think again. With new technology and the lack of regulations, people
are finding new ways to make money.

I learned this the hard way after being charged for (apparently)
dialing the wrong 800 number.

It took me a month and a half and probably 20 phone calls to find out
this story.  I'll try to make it short.

It is possible, and apparently perfectly legal, to set an 800 number
such that when you call you hear a recording that tells you that there
will be charges for the call.

The call is then transferred to a "station to station" call (quote
from someone I talked to, but probably the wrong term) with arbitrary
charges.  That domain was reserved until recently to 900 numbers but
through call forwarding (or some other mechanism) it can be done from
any number!  (If you haven't already guessed, most of these numbers
are adult phone lines.)  The idea (if there ever was one) is that you
will have a fair warning and can hang up, but this is not enforced and
is not always done.  There are such numbers out there that will charge
you whatever they feel like when you happen to dial them, and they are
regular 800 numbers, and maybe even regular local numbers (not 976 or
other special prefixes).

The possibilities for scams are endless (I list some below for your
reading pleasure), and the most scary thing is that it is so difficult
to do anything about it.  I talked to the billing company (INTEGRETEL
which is an umbrella billing company for lots of outfits), US West
(more on that later), ATT (who really has nothing to do with that and
hate it just as much as I do), and the Washington state utilities
commission.

Everyone essentially said "just pay it, nothing we can do about it."
Only after several conversations with the commission, and calls from
them to US West (initially US West would not even take my complaint),
I was told that US West now has a policy of removing such charges
(coming from INTEGRETEL) for anyone who complains.  When the next bill
came, I found that they didn't.  I called again, and no one knew
anything about that policy.  After more calls I was finally put in
touch with someone probably higher up at US West who seemed to know
what he was talking about.  According to him (and two people at the
commission), there is nothing really they can or going to do (besides
handling complaints).  They will remove the charges -- and he
apologized for the operators and supervisors who did not know about
that policy -- but will not prevent this from continuing.  (He also
told me that he got hold of some of those 800 numbers and indeed some
charge you from the first second no matter what you do.)

Washington State has a recent law regulating 900 numbers, but there is
nothing about 800 numbers (they're free, right?).  I don't know if
this is a local idea or whether it is all over the place.  I was told
several times that there are no rules anywhere that say that 800
numbers are toll free.  It's just something that everyone "knows".  US
West feels that they cannot discriminate against businesses that use
their lines, and cannot prevent that use without a specific law.
Since in this case the 800 number led to an out of state call, the
utilities commission can't do anything.  Everyone agreed that this is
probably a great scam, but ...

The beauty of this scam is that you are so far away from the people
who are making it (you can't even find out who they are).  They get
your local phone company to bill you and the phone company feels they
have to do it.  Complaining is so hard, most people would prefer to
pay the charges (I definitely spent more time than it was worth), not
to mention that it is part of the phone bill and many people wouldn't
notice (it appears as a long-distance call).  And in the worst case
they will not get your money.

So here are some scam ideas (these are all fiction; do not try it at
home):

You can get an 800 number that is one digit away from a widely used
800 number and rip off anyone who makes a mistake (maybe that's what
happened to me, they would not tell me the number).  How about setting
your own 900 number so that you can forward calls to it by all those
who try to sell you something.  Wouldn't that be great?  They: "How
are you doing this evening Mr. Manber?"  Me: push a button and voila
"You have reached the toll line explaining why unsolicited calls are
bothering me. You will be charged $15 per minute starting 15 seconds
ago. Please stay on the line..."  (I think, by the way, that this is
possible...)  I was told that there were cases where people's calls
got transferred *out of the country* after making local calls.  You
can put ads for information on how to make $10 a minute - just call
1-800-747-6337.  That's 1-800-rip-offs!  [This is an imaginary number
- don't call please!].  How about tricking modems into calling those
"local" numbers?  Or going into lots of public places and asking "can
I use your phone for a local call?"  (You wouldn't block 800 numbers
or local calls!)

I have never seen this mentioned anywhere.

I am really curious to know how this forwarding is physically done and
whether anyone knows of any discussion on that at the FCC (who is
probably the only agency that can do anything about it).  Since I
spent quite a bit of time already, I'd like to know any additional
information anyone can give me about this (and similar) scams.


Udi Manber ([e-mail])


[Moderator's Note: We have discussed this here on many occassions in
the past. Integretel will give you the name of the client they are
billing for if you are persistent enough. The bad thing about outfits
like Integretel and their clients are they make it hard on the honest
operators of information and (yes, even phone sex) services. They
don't seem to care that the public paints all such services with the
same brush.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Randy [Java Man] Zagar)
Subject: 16550 UART Request
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Marine Studies, University of Delaware
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 17:51:10 GMT


Okay folks ... if you'll e-mail me the names of vendors that sell
computers with the 16550 UART on the motherboard, I'll summarize and
re-post to the net.


Thanks,

Randy Zagar   Internet: [e-mail]  Bell-net: 302/831-1139

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

Date: Thu, 07 Jan 93 22:04:20 EST
From: David Leibold <[e-mail]>
Subject: FAQ Update on The Way


Some corrections and comments have arrived with respect to the FAQ
which was re-posted to start the year off. Since the FAQ hasn't been
touched in a year, I am about to get an update out of the way. This is
the last chance to send in any corrections or other ideas for the
version 4 FAQ which is expected to be available by the end of January.

so ... send those cards and letters to:

[e-mail] or ... [e-mail]

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

Date: Thu, 04 Jan 93 01:36:49 EST
From: Tony Harminc <[e-mail]>
Subject: Equivalence Charges


I was reviewing the phone bill for a company where I am consulting,
and realized that Bell Canada is charging for one more equivalence
feature than I would expect, e.g. there is a hunt group of three lines
- the one published number hunts to the second if busy, which hunts to
the third if second is busy, and that's the end - busy signal.  Bell
charges for three equivalence features for this.

The droid in the business office insists that there is an 'ending
feature' that must be installed on the third line to make it all work.
I believe this is complete nonsense, but just before I open my mouth
wide, could someone confirm that technically there is no 'feature'
that need be installed on the last line of a hunt group?

It would seem that this scheme of charging penalizes small business
and residential users who have only a few lines.  Large users will
barely notice the 'n+1' charge distributed over many lines.


Tony Harminc


[Moderator's Note: When I worked at the UC phone room about 1960,
there was one group of incoming trunks with *97* lines in a rotary
hunt. MUseum 4-6100 hunted 6101 which hunted 6102 and on up the line
to 6196. Outgoing calls from the switchboard started the other way
around, with the first outgoing call on 6196 then backward one at a
time. In actual practice the incoming calls met the outgoing calls
around 6150. I thought that many lines in a hunt group was pretty
outrageous.  One time I tried busying out all the lines from 6100
through 6195, then placed a call to 6100 ... it took maybe two seconds
longer than usual to hunt that far before sure enough, it rang in on
6196. (This was about four in the morning.)  PAT]

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

Subject: Bellcore Documents Phone Number Wanted
From: mertwig![e-mail] (Daniel Drucker)
Reply-To: Daniel Drucker <uunet![e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 07 Jan 93 11:09:41 EST
Organization: Abnormalities of Reality


I was just reading _The Hacker Crackdown_ (Bruce Sterling). It
mentions an 800 number and a catalog from Bellsouth where you can
order various telco documents. (For instance E911.) Does anyone know
the number?

Please reply by mail as I do not recieve this newsgroup.


Daniel Drucker     [e-mail]

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

From: Dave Dunwoodie 6042 <[e-mail]>
Subject: TSR Comm. S/W
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 93 06:38:25 MST


I need a TSR that will write to the CRT anything received from the
modem.  My modem has caller ID, but I'm not in the mood to leave the
PC in terminal mode on the off chance that the phone might ring!
Ideas?

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

From: [e-mail] (Rudolf Usselmann)
Subject: Cellular Phones: CLI, VOICE & SHORT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 19:12:39 GMT


I have a Motorola MicroTAC Lite pocket phone.  It has three features
which I still don't quite understend: CLI, VOICE & SHORT CLI - seems
to be something like Caller ID, it will store the phone number of the
last caller.

VOICE - Some sort of mailbox support?
SHORT - Some sort of mailbox for short messages?

None of these feature are supported yet (at least according to the
company I have my service with).

Does anybody have more info on these features? When will they beocme
available?  I'm in the SF Bay Area. The two major cellular providers
are Cellular One and GTE Mobilnet. BTW: Which is "better" GTE or C1?

Thanks a bunch !


rudi  [e-mail]
Phone: [phone] x236 work;  [phone] home

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

Subject: What is Junk Fax?
From: [e-mail] (Ron Herff)
Date: 7 Jan 93 14:00:00 GMT
Organization: Datamax/Satalink Connection * Ivyland, PA [phone]
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Ron Herff)


The FCC has passed some new regulations regarding junk telephone calls
and "junk FAXes."  Does anyone have the text of these new regulations?
I am particularly interested in what makes a FAX a "junk FAX."  Are
all unsolicited FAXes "junk FAXes?"  Is an unsolicited FAX directly
addressed to a person "junk?" and illegal?


Ron Herff


[Moderator's Note: An unsolicited fax sent to someone is not automat-
icaly 'junk' any more than an unsolicited phone call is 'junk',
despite what a lot of companies may claim about 'unauthorized' fax
messages or 'unauthorized' email, etc. If a large company can call me
on the phone and try to sell me something, I can send them a fax
message telling them what I think.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Joel M. Hoffman)
Subject: What Should I Know if I'm Buying a Cellular Phone?
Organization: University of Maryland, College Park
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 15:32:34 GMT


I'd like to purchase a portable phone -- one that I can take with me
and use in the car, but don't know anything about them.  Is there
somewhere I can look for info?  Or, would some kind soul like to tell
me what I should know?

The phone will mostly be used in the New York City area (in the city
and in the suburbs), if that makes any difference.

Many thanks!


Joel


[Moderator's Note: You might want to get the back issues of the Digest
from the Telecom Archives (anonymous ftp lcs.mit.edu) and read over
the numerous discussions we have had on this in the past. It is really
an applications problem: how do you intend to use the phone, how
often, etc. There are far too many deals in the market place at any
given time to cover them all here.  PAT]

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

Subject: Possibility of Interstate Closed-User-Group of Dial-up Modems
Date: Thu 7 Jan 93 02:46:24 CST
From: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]


I have an application where I want to deploy about 200 dial up modems
across several states that are only accessible from a few originating
phone numbers.

Is this possible with off the shelf services and equipment?

Using dedicated lines to PADs on an X.25 network and configuring the
ports as a closed-user-group will work; but I am searching for a
cheaper solution.


Regards,

Mike Brown    Communications Support / Wide Area Networks
        Information Services

us-mail:    Southwestern Bell Telephone Co.
        One Bell Center, Rm. 24-V-5
        St. Louis, MO  63101

voice:  314-235-7863
fax:    [phone]
e-mail: [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #12
*****************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa22338;
          7 Jan 93 17:46 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA31527
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 7 Jan 1993 15:33:27 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA24461
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 7 Jan 1993 15:33:03 -0600
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 15:33:03 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #13

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 7 Jan 93 15:33:05 CST     Volume 13 : Issue 13

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    GTE Billing - Another Profit Center? (Jack Decker)
    ACD Equipment Suggestions (Justin Leavens)
    Telecom Archives Dial Up Update (Mark Earle)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: GTE Billing - Another Profit Center?
Date: 7 Jan 93 02:41:57
From: [e-mail]


Now I know what you all mean about GTE.  I am now convinced that they
are totally incompetent.

I've already detailed my problems with the obsolete subscriber carrier
units.  Basically, as it stands now, I am still on the carrier.  My
connections are clear, but low in volume on my end.  After their first
couple of bungled attempts at repair, I have not had any problems
getting dial tone.  My 2400 bps modem works, and I have used a FAX
machine on this line with apparent success.  Were it not for the low
receive volume, and the fact that every time a CB radio user drives by
while transmitting I can hear the signal on the phone, and the low
on-hook voltage (15 volts) that won't drive some line-powered
equipment, I would have no complaint about the service.  The GTE
supervisor says they can install a filter to cut the RF interference,
but it happens infrequently and I'm afraid it might degrade my modem
connections.

Actually, I was prepared to let it go because they told me that next
summer they were going to put a remote unit out here with a
fiber-optic link to the central office.  When they do that, I will be
getting dial tone from less than half a mile away, rather than the
seven or eight miles of old cable that are doubtless serving us now.
However, a GTE repairman let it slip that due to budget cutbacks, that
project has probably been put on hold for now.  I wonder if there is
any way to get it back on track?  I suppose I could escalate my
complaints to the PUC, but as I say, I'm afraid that GTE might try a
"quick fix" that will really screw up my line (and, as the GTE man
said, I'm only paying for voice grade service so I have to expect "a
little" interference).  In the meantime, I dug out an old rotary dial
phone with a volume control handset, so I have at least ONE phone that
I can hear fairly well on.

But all of this pales in comparison to my recent experience with their
billing department.  Our first GTE bill was a shocker.  Now, to put
things in perspective, I have to admit that our income level was on
the low side last year (this was one reason we moved) ... so low, in
fact, that we now qualify for "lifeline" service, which gives you a
discount on the initial installation charges as well as a $4.10/month
credit on the monthly service charge (which is a good thing, since the
normal monthly rate for flat rate service is $16.09, not including
taxes ... considerably higher than what we paid on Michigan Bell.  At
least the flat rate service here really IS flat rate [no 400 call cap
as in Ma Bell territory], so I'm not complaining too much about the
higher rate, although it gave me considerable pause when I first
learned how high it was).

Now, we had paid the $19.50 installation charge in advance (that's the
only way they'd install our service) so it was quite a shock when our
first month's bill came to $55.50!  Here's how they came up with that
amount:

Private telephone line              $12.59   (these are in advance for
Interstate access charge              3.50   the period Jan 1 to Feb 1)
Michigan Lifeline service credit   CR 4.10   (note this is a credit)

Service order processing              9.13
"Line connect charges/NRC"           10.38

[Note the above comes to $19.51.  I won't quibble over the penny, but I
*did* have a problem with the fact that I had already paid this and it
wasn't credited!]

Local service-38 days from Nov 23   $20.38   (NOTE no lifeline credit!)

Federal excise tax (3% of $32.37)      .97
State tax (4% of $51.88)              2.08
911 operational charge                 .50   (MI Bell didn't charge this!)
Emergency telephone service            .07

[I wonder why is there a separate charge for 911 and emergency
telephone service?]

Now, I had problems with two things on this bill: First, the lack of
credit for the $19.50 prepayment of the "service order processing" and
"line connect charges/NRC", and second, the lack of any lifeline
credit for the 38 days of initial service.  Not that the latter would
break me, but if they are supposed to be taking it off, they should do
so.

Anyway, yesterday (Monday, January 4) I went to the local GTE Phone
Mart in Muskegon, Michigan (where I had paid the initial $19.50) in
the hope of getting the matter settled.  Fat chance!  A GTE employee
led me to a bank of four memory-dial telephones that had buttons on
them preprogrammed to connect callers to various departments (e.g.
billing, new service orders, repair, etc.) and told me that I would
have to call the billing department from there.  I could have done the
same thing from home.  But the worst of it was that there were already
others there trying to do the same thing, and ALL of us were getting
busy signals.  That's right, not even the normal eternal wait on hold
with occasional recorded announcements that you usually get when
calling from home, just a constant busy signal.  The GTE employee said
we should just keep redialing.

In addition, the phones themselves apparently went through some sort
of private PBX and were equipped with three-way calling, so if you
didn't hang up long enough to release the line, you'd dial out on the
second leg of a three-way call.  Then when you tried to hang up the
second time, you'd get your original busy back, or if you hung up for
too long, the phone would ring.  This caused no end of confusion for
the hapless folks trying to reach various GTE departments.  The woman
next to me was at her wit's end trying to deal with the phone and the
busy signals, and all she was trying to find out was where she could
pay her phone bill besides at the phone mart.  Why would she want to
know that?  Because there must have been at least fifty people already
in line trying to get to the ONE payment window (or at least it seemed
like it; I honestly didn't count but it was a LONG line).  Naturally,
the GTE employees who worked inside the phone mart couldn't take
payments, and couldn't tell her where else she could make payments
either.

After about 15 minutes of redialing, I finally got through and spoke
to someone in the business office.  After being transferred once (to
"collections"), I spoke to another representative who agreed that the
$19.50 should be credited to my account, but who said that it might
take three or four months(!) for the credit to appear on my bill, and
in the meantime I could just deduct the $19.50 each month from the
billed amount, until the credit appeared.  But the lifeline was
another matter.  She at first agreed that I had a credit coming, but
couldn't tell me how much.  She said she'd have to call me back later
at home with the amount!  I had wanted to pay my bill while at the
phone mart (in spite of the long line) but at this point I decided to
forget it and wait until I was in town again.

Well, just after 3 P.M. I got home and the GTE rep phoned me shortly
thereafter.  Now get this: She said that I had received a lifeline
discount on my installation ($19.50 instead of the normal charge,
which was "normally more like $40"), and that this was in lieu of a
lifeline credit on my initial service period.  I said that just didn't
sound right to me, because folks would wind up paying different
amounts depending on where their initial billing fell in the billing
cycle.  In my case it would have been 38 days without the credit, for
someone else it could be 15 or 45 or whatever.  I asked if this was
allowed in the tariffs and she confidently proclaimed that indeed,
this was in their tariffs that were on file with the M.P.S.C. (I had
already mentioned the possibility of a complaint if we couldn't
resolve this matter, since I am really losing patience with GTE, but I
tried not to be too hard on the rep ... after all, she can't help it
that she works for that kind of employer)!

I said that while I was not calling her a liar, I would like to see a
copy of the tariff section that authorized them to bill in that
manner, and asked if she would send me a copy.  She said she would
talk to a supervisor and that they would either send a copy to me, or
else she would have the supervisor call me.

Well ... today she called back and said that they would NOT be sending
me a copy of the tariff because, and I quote, "the information I
received yesterday was in error".  She went on to say that I was
indeed entitled to a credit of $5.53, and explained how she arrived at
that figure (it included a credit for taxes collected on the amount,
which is something I would have asked about had she not mentioned it).
And then she said something that struck me as strange ... she said
something to the effect of "Since you're getting the credit, you don't
need a copy of the tariff, right?"  I said no, I didn't, but the tone
in her voice almost led me to believe that for some reason they
REALLY, REALLY DIDN'T WANT me to have a copy of that tariff!  It makes
me wonder what they're hiding in there (or if they just plain couldn't
find a copy in any convenient place!).

She assured me that the $5.53 credit would be on my next bill, and
that I could deduct it from my current bill.  "What about the
$19.50?", I asked ... would that be credited on my next bill?
Probably not, she explained, but maybe in another month or two.  But,
she had said that I could also deduct that amount from my payment,
right?  Well, yes, if I really wanted to ... (Nah, I think I'll let
GTE have another $19.50 to play with until they get around to giving
me the credit ... NOT!)

Now surely GTE has computers, so why should it take them three or four
months to issue a credit for a prepayment?  Even if mine had gotten
"lost", as was claimed, I had the receipt in hand and could have shown
it to any phone mart employee, had anyone there been deemed competent
enough to handle billing adjustments.  I wonder how much slack they
would cut ME if I were four months late paying a $19.50 phone bill?

GTE is now the largest telephone company in the United States, and
they are the perfect example of a monopoly gone bad.  You folks who
want to go into competition with a local telco for dial tone should
really consider doing it in GTE territory first.  You'd probably be
able to get 90% of their customer base overnight (the other 10% would
be GTE employees and their families, folks who are on vacation, and
the EXTREME few who've never had any beef with GTE).  And if the
regulators tried to stifle the competition, the local folks would
probably mutiny!

Keep in mind that:

1) A lot of folks in this situation probably don't realize they're
being overcharged.  They probably expect a high initial bill, so
they'd pay the extra $25 or so without question.  Nevertheless, it's
money that GTE is not LEGALLY entitled to collect.  I wonder how much
additional revenue they take in this way?  Even assuming that the
$19.50 would have eventually been credited had I not complained (and I
certainly have no reason to believe that would have happened), there's
still the other $5.53 that I would almost certainly not have received
had I not demanded to see the tariff authorizing the charge.  How many
"lifeline" customers even know what a tariff is?

2) A lot of folks who did question the bill would have accepted the
first explanation given.  I almost did, until I thought about the fact
that it would be inequitable depending on when the billing cycle
kicked in for various customers.  In one way, you could say they lied
to me at first ... maybe not deliberately, but the first explanation
certainly wasn't truthful.  How many customers would realize that?

3) What other company do you know that, when a customer appears to
inquire about a bill, herds the customer into a room and hands them a
phone without so much as a hint of apology, even though the lines are
consistently busy?  How many other companies do you know that can make
customers stand in line for half an hour or more to pay a bill?  This
sort of thing may be common in other countries, but only the
government and monopolies can get away with it here (well, some
entertainment-related industries can too, but those are usually cases
where demand exceeds supply).

Sorry this is so long, but I am now prepared to believe just about
every rotten report that's ever been posted about GTE.  They sure
haven't impressed ME any!  I know I'm not one of their prime customers
(no optional features on my line, and not even any intraLATA toll
revenue for them this month) but when you are a monopoly, you have to
serve the small customers and the big ones alike.  I say let's give
'em some competition so they don't have to put up with insignificant
customers like me!  ;-) Of course, I gather their big customers don't
get much better treatment, from what I read here in comp.dcom.telecom!


Jack Decker --- 1:154/8.0 FidoNet, [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Justin Leavens)
Subject: ACD Equipment Suggestions
Date: 7 Jan 1993 12:29:45 -0800
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA


I'm about to start looking for equipment for one of our offices to do
automatic call distribution and some other items. Not being sure what
kinds of things are available, let me list some things we want to
accomplish:

1. Must be ISDN compatible (does this throw me out right there?). Our
   campus runs on a 5ESS.
2. We'd like to automate our switchboard operatations as much as
   possible, so touchtone menus are needed.
3. Some of our offices want a recorded message to play to each caller
   before the call is transferred to the office.
4. Some of the offices would like recorded messages to play while callers
   are on hold in queue. How many callers can typical systems queue up?

Any comments or information on what kind of equipment could be
purchased/leased to do these things would be very helpful. Please
e-mail responses, as I have a hard time keeping up with the volume of
messages here these days.  Thank you in advance.


Justin Leavens / Microcomputer Specialist / University of Southern California

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

Date: Thu, 7 Jan 93 14:47:43 -0600
From: [e-mail] (Mark Earle)
Subject: Telecom Archives Dial Up Update


Patrick et all,

     My FidoNet dial up system has been repaired, and some upgrades
will be occuring in the next few weeks. I'm re-organizing files into
smaller logical groupings, etc.

     The system will NOT answer the line if it is unavailable (i.e.,
if I am working on it) so anyone should be able to try accessing
without a toll call, if it is temporarily down. Some BBS's use the
auto answer feature of the modem, and the modem will answer when the
computer is down. My software decodes the word "ring" from the modem,
and then issues the answer command. So when the softwaer is turned
off, no answer.

     I have some more storage available. While I don't think there is
enough to mirror all of the archives, certainly the more recent stuff
would fit; I'll report on that, assuming Pat has no problem with it
being available.

     Also to save connect time, the files will all be compressed with
pkzip. Those who might need non-compressed (other non msdos systems,
etc) may make arrangements with me to get the files non-compressed.
I've found the majority prefer compressed as this saves connect / toll
charges.

     Anyhow, the system is available at [phone], and uses a US
Robotics HST modem, which has MNP5 available. NON-HST callers with
modern modems (v32/42) should get reasonable transfer rates, although
the base connection will be 2400 baud.


      [e-mail]    Mark Earle fidonet 1:160/50

     Note: Fidonet system operators or point operators may do
automated file requests. Ask for 'files' to get the current list.


[Moderator's Note: Thanks for your help in making the Telecom Archives
(or at least a subset of the archives) available via dialup phone for
our many readers without Internet FTP arrangements. Readers, if you
use this service to retrieve back issues of the Digest or other
telecom files, be certain to leave a note of thanks to Mark.   PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #13
*****************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa24788;
          7 Jan 93 18:42 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA02510
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 7 Jan 1993 16:16:32 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA02761
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 7 Jan 1993 16:16:02 -0600
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 16:16:02 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #14

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 7 Jan 93 16:16:00 CST     Volume 13 : Issue 14

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Hunt Groups (Steve Forrette)
    Re: Hunt Groups (Marc T. Kaufman)
    Re: Hunt Groups (Daniel Burstein)
    Re: Hunt Groups (Terry Kennedy)
    Re: Hunt Groups (Jeff Wasilko)
    Re: Hunt Groups (Arthur Coston)
    Re: Hunt Groups (Brian Perry)
    Re: Hunt Groups (Tom Lahey)
    Re: It's Not a Bug, it's a Feature ... (Ken Stox)
    Re: It's Not a Bug, it's a Feature ... (Martin Harriss)
    Re: It's Not a Bug, it's a Feature ... (Kenneth Crudup)
    Re: Alternate to AT&T Mail Delivery (Paul Robinson)
    Re: Alternate to AT&T Mail Delivery (Rob Knauerhase)
    Re: Alternate to AT&T Mail Delivery (Alan Toscano)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: Hunt Groups
Date: 7 Jan 1993 01:49:34 GMT
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Rob
Boudrie) writes:

> Is it possible for two numbers serviced by the same physical CO to be
> placed on a hunt group even though they has different exchange
> prefixes?

I had a similar setup recently, but strictly speaking, it was
busy-transfer rather than hunting.  It was on a 5ESS switch.  The fact
that I wanted the busy-transfer was known at the time I placed the
order for the two lines, and the computer happened to select numbers
on two different prefixes.  I would imagine that on a modern SPC
switch, the prefix difference would not matter.


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Marc T. Kaufman)
Subject: Re: Hunt Groups
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: CS Department, Stanford University, California, USA
Date:  7 Jan 93 01:56:30 GMT


[e-mail] (Rob Boudrie) writes:

> Is it possible for two numbers serviced by the same physical CO to be
> placed on a hunt group even though they has different exchange
> prefixes?

> I don't want to have either of my numbers changed since one is my old
> number everyone knows, and the other is a xxx-xx00 number (had to pull
> some strings to get it).  When I ordered service and made various
> inquiries, I run into folks who don't know what terms like "POTS line"
> and "demarc" mean, and offered me services excluded by tariff (the
> sales rep initially told me they could offer me a metered line, though
> this is prohibited if you have an unmetered line in the same house).

You can get the effect you want by ordering Remote Call Forwarding
from the old number to the new.  The old number becomes a bookkeeping
entry in the old central office that just forwards calls to your new
number.  I use it because there are lots of folks who just know my old
number (clients I haven't seen in a few years).  Not cheap ($15/mo +
message unit charges for the forwarded calls - PacBell), but if you
need it, you need it.


Marc Kaufman ([e-mail])

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

From: [e-mail] (Daniel Burstein)
Subject: Re: Hunt Groups
Organization: Panix, NYC
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 02:43:29 GMT


In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Rob Boudrie) writes:

> Is it possible for two numbers serviced by the same physical CO to be
> placed on a hunt group even though they has different exchange
> prefixes?

<reasons for request deleted>

> [Moderator's Note: I've never heard of a hunt group including lines on
> different prefixes, even if they were in the same CO.  Anyone?   PAT]

Yes, indeed it IS possible, but whether they'll provide it or not is
aanother story.

I initially had a single line in the NYC 212-874 exchange, and
upgraded (?) to have a total of six lines.  There were two hunt
sequences in it, and yes, they crossed over from the "old" exchange
(874) to the other ("491" I think ...) and back.

And, to have even more fun, the lines were all "intellidialed" (tm
nyt) which is a version of centrex. This allowed pick up from any line
(helpful) as well as the ability to three way a call, hang up, leave
the other two folk connected, and get back to dial tone. (VERY helpful
if someone calls and you say, oh, John is the one you want, hold while
I transfer you).


danny burstein    [e-mail]

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

From: Terry Kennedy <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Hunt Groups
Organization: St. Peter's College, US
Date: 7 Jan 93 02:50:29 EST
Organization: St. Peter's College, US


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

> [Moderator's Note: I've never heard of a hunt group including lines on
> different prefixes, even if they were in the same CO.  Anyone?   PAT]

  It's certainly possible, but I don't know if the current releases of
the switch software will do it.

  However, the various call forward functions will work across
prefixes, or across switches if desired. So the subscriber could order
call forward on busy (or on busy/no answer) and then set whatever form
of hunt group up that he wanted. This could be done either with
customer-selected for- warding (the kind usually explained in the
phone book, where the customer sets the forwarding, or with fixed
forwarding, where it is set up in the switch and the customer can't
change it).

  Note that your local telco may not know how to sell you these
services, so you may have to be persistent. One tack that supposedly
works is that they sell fixed call forwarding as part of "Answer
Call". Also, if your phone service is measured, you may be able to
have fixed forwarding at no per-message charge.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Jeff Wasilko)
Subject: Re: Hunt Groups
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 93 02:58:16 EST
Organization: Univ of Fnord; Roslyn's Cafe Div.
Reply-To: [e-mail]


We have a 12 line hunt group with numbers in three prefixs (834-, 762-
and something else) in a hunt group without any problem. They are all
served off the same 2B switch ...


Jeff
Jeff's Oasis at Home.   Jeff can also be reached at work at:
                                         [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Hunt Groups
Date: 7 Jan 93 21:05:19 GMT
Organization: Applied Information Systems, Chapel Hill, NC


Our company has hunt groups composed of lines that have different
prefixes.  For example, one group of ten lines has four different
prefixes.  It doesn't seem to matter.  Local service is from Southern
Bell in Chapel Hill, NC.  I believe we had a similar situation with
another group from GTE on Durham, NC local service.  (We have
experience with both carriers.  Both have given us quite good service
the last few years, including solving some interactions between the
two locals.)


Arthur Coston    Applied Information Systems   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Brian Perry)
Subject: Re: Hunt Groups
Organization: Vertex Pharmaceuticals Incorporated
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 15:14:14 GMT


I have a setup similar to this on both a 1AESS and a 5ESS switch here
in the Boston area.  In both cases there are multiple exchanges in the
hunt groups.  The only criteria is that all the exchanges in the group
must terminate on the same switch.


Brian K. Perry, Systems Manager         Tel:   [phone] (office)
Vertex Pharmaceuticals Incorporated            617-576-3111 (main #)

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

Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 08:05:00 -0500
From: [e-mail] (Tom Lahey)
Subject: Re: Hunt Groups


We have had this done several times. Over the past two years we have
had several additions to our incomming local lines and in each of the
cases we were issued numbers with a different prefix (889-xxxx,
880-xxxx, 883-xxxx), and have had them added, to our existing hunt
groups. NYNEX (New England Telephone) issued the numbers when we asked
for extra trunks on the hunt groups.  Currently of our two hunt
groups, one has two different prefixes and the other covers all three.

I don't know it this has any bearing however we are serviced by a
"SLICK 96", which may be doing some of the translation that allows
this?


Tom Lahey   batfish![e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: Uh, no ... the SLC-96 (subscriber line carrier) has
nothing to do with the hunt groups. It is a way of providing additional
phone service in areas where wire pairs are in short supply.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Ken Stox)
Subject: Re: It's Not a Bug, it's a Feature ...
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Ken Stox)
Organization: AC Nielsen Co.
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 93 19:25:26 GMT


Back in the "old" days, we used to leave an AM radio next to an IBM
1130, you could actually pick up the CPU activity. One clever
programmer started writing some very interesting compositions. Of
course, with the advent of modern synthesizers, it would be totally
unimpressive.


#include <std_disclaimer.h>
Ken Stox     Consultant to A.C. Nielsen    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Martin Harriss)
Subject: Re: It's Not a Bug, it's a Feature ...
Reply-To: bdsgate![e-mail] (Martin Harriss)
Organization: Beechwood Data Systems
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 93 14:50:23 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(George Armhold) writes:

> At RU, I worked with Sun 4/110s.  They were networked via thin-net
> coax.  I have pretty sensitive ears, and could always hear a
> high-pitched whine when lots of data went through the wire (opening an
> xterm, for example.)  One thing that was neat about this is that
> whenever someone logged in to the workstation I was working on I could
> actually *hear* them log in.  Nobody believed me of course.  Whenever
> I tried to show it to someone they thought I was nuts. :-)

Ethernet tranceivers have a DC-DC converter on them that isolates the
electronics that interface with the network and the electronics in
your computer.  Said DC-DC converter probably operates at 10-20kHz.
When the tranceiver electronics sends or receives data, it may draw
more current and in doing so change the frequency that the converter
operates at.  This may be the whine that you hear.

So you're probably not nuts after all!


Martin Harriss    uunet!bdsgate!martin

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

From: [e-mail] (Kenneth Crudup)
Subject: Re: It's Not a Bug, it's a Feature ...
Organization: Open Software Foundation
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 20:02:25 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(George Armhold) writes:

> At RU, I worked with Sun 4/110s. I have pretty sensitive ears, and could
> always hear a high-pitched whine when lots of data went through the wire
> One thing that was neat about this is that whenever someone logged in to
> the workstation I was working on I could actually *hear* them log in.
> Nobody believed me of course.  Whenever I tried to show it to someone they
> thought I was nuts. :-)

I believe you. Sun's power supplies seem to be just adequate enough so
that during periods of heavy CPU-intensive computations (like
interrupt-based devices like network chips causing context switches),
when the machine is drawing more current, the regulator in the
switcher supply (which is a high-frequency oscillator so that there's
less ripple when the AC it produces gets rectified and filtered, and
more efficient because of smaller cores to burn up good electricity as
heat) causes the oscillator to increase the duty cycle of the primary
winding pulses to compensate for the increased requirements. This
period of additional supply registers in the cores of the transformers
as a slight "bleep", and a bunch of them together produce the "music"
you hear. I used to troubleshoot Sun-2's aurally as well.


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]
Date: 7 Jan 93 16:48:28 GMT
Subject: Re: Alternate to AT&T Mail Delivery


In TELECOM Digest 13-9, Tom Lahey - toml![e-mail] says:

> I've recently started getting telecom off the Internet via AT&T
> mail. (currently my only access to the Internet).

To quote one of their own ads, "You're not dealing with AT&T."  Your
message is coming through some X.400 server (BATFISH) that is
connected to AT&T Mail.  You are probably being charged by the X.400
provider whoever that is.  If you were a direct AT&T Mail customer you
would have an account like [e-mail] just as much as this one
is [e-mail].

Neither AT&T Mail nor MCI Mail charges anything to receive messages.
You should take the service directly from them, as AT&T Mail will only
charge you (1) if you send a message (2) if you compose the message on
line, there is a surcharge.  (MCI does not charge extra for messages
composed while on-line.)

> Does anyone know how I can get an Internet feed via dial-up? (with
> something less than a $0.95 for the first 3000 characters and .05 per
> 1000 after that?)

I have accounts on both AT&T Mail and MCI Mail.  It's no coincidence
that I have the account name (TDARCOS) as the same on both systems.  I
would have tried an account on Sprintmail, but I came across the same
thing as you are complaining about: they *CHARGE* to *RECEIVE* mail,
at 5c/K, at the same rate as I pay to *send* messages!

MCI Mail charges $35 a year to subscribe.  AT&T Charges $3 a month and
you can use their terminals at airports free.  The only cost on either
should be a one-time charge of 50c to send a message to
"[e-mail]" to start the subscription.  If
you want to send messages, they will cost you 50c for the first 500
bytes, then 10c for each 1K up to 10K, then 5c/K above 10K.  MCI
offers a plan which gives you the first 40 message units (of 5K each)
for $10 a month, or the first 250 message units for $25 a month.
Message units also include 1/2 page domestic facsimile transmissions.

MCI Mail and AT&T Mail are accessible through direct 800 numbers which
do not charge you for connect time.  AT&T Mail is also accessible via
950-1ATT (950-1288) in many areas.  AT&T is only accessible at 2400
baud via their regular 800 number; MCI has 1200, 2400 and 9600 baud
800 numbers.  Neither makes any charge to receive mail (AT&T will
charge you if you accept a message from another AT&T subscriber that
was sent to you /COD).  AT&T Mail allows messages to be downloaded
using cheapo xmodem7.  MCI Mail allows messages to be downloaded using
ZMODEM or KERMIT.  AT&T does a *much* better job of keeping Internet
RFC841 headers on incoming messages, especially those from BITNET
Listservers where the originator is often eradicated by MCI Mail and
other services.  MCI Mail provides a better interface for sending
messages.  Your account number on MCI Mail is also a free incoming
telex number; AT&T charges $25 a month for an incoming telex number.

AT&T Mail can be reached by voice at 1-800-MAIL-672 (624-5672)
                         MCI Mail at 1-800-444-MAIL (444-6245)


Paul Robinson    [e-mail]   {and}   [e-mail]

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

Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 15:03:35 -0600
From: Rob Knauerhase <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Alternate to AT&T Mail Delivery


> Does anyone know how I can get an Internet feed via dial-up? (with
> something less than a $0.95 for the first 3000 characters and .05 per
> 1000 after that?)

You might not want to trade per-char fees for per-minute fees,
depending on how fast your modem is.  However, for the price of the
call there is the Cleveland Free-Net, [phone] which provides
both Internet mail and Usenet newsgroups (so you can read the TELECOM
Digest either way) at no cost to you.  There are also Free-Net systems
in Youngstown OH and Peoria IL if those are closer or otherwise
preferable to you.

    Combined with PC-Pursuit (30 off-peak hours of data LD for $30 --
see the Digest archives) that might be an even better solution for
you.


Rob Knauerhase, University of Illinois @ Urbana, Dept. of Computer Science


[Moderator's Note: There are numerous other services available as well
that while not free, are reasonably priced. Here in Chicago, both
chinet and gagme accept public subscribers. There is also the Portal
Communications Company in San Jose, and the nice thing about Portal is
their direct connection to Sprintnet; if you subscribe to PC Pursuit
then you can make an easy connection to Portal (@C PORTAL) at regular
PC rates.  And don't forget the Well as another possibility.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: 7 Jan 93 14:51:40 GMT
Subject: Re: Alternate to AT&T Mail Delivery


In TELECOM Digest V13, #9, Tom Lahey <[e-mail]> asks
about alternatives to AT&T Mail, believing he will pay an average
$2.05/issue to receive the Digest via AT&T Mail.

In actuality, there is *no* usage charge to *receive* messages on AT&T
Mail -- *unless* they are sent "COD." ("COD" messages must originate
within AT&T Mail. If the recipient doesn't wish to pay for the message
(s)he may DELETE it without reading it, in which case the sender is
billed for its cost. An on-line mailbox may also be flagged to reject
"COD" messages at the time they are submitted by the sender. Messages
from the Internet, such as the Digest, may *not* be sent "COD.")

Aside from any applicable recurring monthly and annual charges, AT&T
Mail's only *usage* charges are for *sending* messages, receiving
"COD" messages, and accessing "shared folders." This can be confirmed
by calling the AT&T Mail billing office in Atlanta: 800 MAIL672
(option 2).

BTW, AT&T Mail now expects to finally implement its previously
announced, but as yet unimplemented, Minimum Usage Billing requirement
of $25/month/invoice, sometime next year (1994). That is when they
expect to convert to a new billing system. Before anyone panics,
remember that several mailboxes may be billed together in a single
invoice.


A Alan Toscano
Internet: [e-mail] or [e-mail]
P O Box 741982  AT&T Mail: !atoscano AT&T Enhanced FAX: !0200607
Houston, TX     CIS: 73300,217   AT&T TELEX: 406232556 UI
772741982 USA Work: [phone] Work-FAX: [phone]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #14
*****************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa26093;
          7 Jan 93 19:13 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA01261
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 7 Jan 1993 13:19:38 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA20700
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 7 Jan 1993 13:19:14 -0600
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 13:19:14 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #11

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 7 Jan 93 13:19:00 CST     Volume 13 : Issue 11

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Motorola 'Secure-Clear' Cordless Telephones (Tim Tyler via Monty Solomon)
    Sci.electronics Phone Fraud! (Larry Ching via Monty Solomon)
    CRTC Review of Telecom Regs (Dave Leibold)
    Cell Phone SID in US / My Friend, Nynex Mobile ... (Phydeaux)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 03:29:17 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <[e-mail]>
Subject: Motorola 'Secure-Clear' Cordless Telephones


[Moderator's Note: Monty passed this along to the group.  PAT]

 Newsgroups: sci.crypt
 From: [e-mail] (Tim Tyler)
 Subject: Motorola 'Secure-Clear' Cordless Telephones
 Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
 Organization: UMCC
 Date: Fri, 1 Jan 1993 01:39:56 GMT


          "Why A Motorola Cordless Phone?"

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

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

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

          Why Motorola Cordless Phones?

     Q. What is meant by Secure Clear?

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

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

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

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

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

     Q. Describe the basic difference between Secure Clear and

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

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

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

                       ----------


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

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

     For those of you not familiar with speech inversion, it simply
flip-flops the voice spectrum so that high pitched sounds are low, and
vice versa.  It sounds a lot like Single Side Band (SSB)
transmissions, although an SSB receiver will not decode speech-
inversion scrambling.  Prior to 1986, several companies -- Don Nobles,
Capri Electronics, etc. sold inexpensive kits or scanner add-ons which
could be used to decode speech inversion.  Several electronics
magazines also published schematics for making your own from scratch,
at a cost of about $5.

     After the Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986, it
became illegal to decode or decipher encrypted communications which
you weren't a legitimate party to, so the standard practice of selling
these quasi-legal products as 'experimental kits' or 'for educational
purposes only' became common.  Today, some companies will not
specifically sell a 'speech-inversion descrambler,' but instead market
a 'speech inversion scrambling system' which means the kit will encode
as well as decode speech inversion, although most people buy them
simply to hook up to their scanners and monitor the few public safety
agencies and business that (still) use speech-inversion scrambling.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


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

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

Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 03:34:36 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <[e-mail]>
Subject: Sci.electronics Phone Fraud!


[Moderator's Note: Monty also passed this along for us today.  PAT]

 From: [e-mail] (Larry WB Ching)
 Newsgroups: sci.electronics
 Subject: SCI.ELECTRONICS Phone fraud !!!
 Summary: A recent attempt to rip-off sci.electronics correspondents.
 Keywords: fraud, con artists, phone numbers
 Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
 Date: 1 Jan 93 23:16:23 GMT
 Sender: [e-mail]
 Organization: Portal Communications  -- 408/973-9111 (voice) 408/973-8091


 At about 6PM Thursday evening, I got a phone call. The operator said
that he had a collect call to me from Charles Pooley in New York. The
name was familiar, but I didn't remember exactly why. I said I would
accept the call, but then the "operator" said the call couldn't get
through because I had the call collect option blocked. He then said he
could pass the call through if I gave him my calling card number. I
said that I'd rather call Mr. Pooley myself, and could the "operator"
give me Mr. Pooley's number.  There was a pause, then a phone number
with a San Jose area code! It didn't occur to me until later that , if
the call was from New York, why was the call-from number (408) !??!

 I remembered that Charles and I had been corresponding on a topic
from sci.electronics. I was lucky enough to have an old message from
him lying around, and emailed him a message about my mysterious phone
call.

 Charles Pooley replyed to me today -- turns out the guy tried the
same scam on him too! But this time, the bogus operator said the
collect call was from me to Charles! Charles was also wary, and didn't
give the crook his calling card number.

 So - WATCH OUT! How this con artist chose my name and Charles' to try
is beyond me. As far as public postings in sci.electronics, I don't
think Charles and I had exchanged more than four public postings. Most
of our correspondence has been via "private" email.

 This has definitely raised my paranoia level. If, out of the millions
of public postings during 1992, someone should choose two
correspondents who have exchange only a slight amount of messages ....
I mean, why us?  Or, is there a "boilerroom" operation going on, with
a bunch of phony operators, armed with USENET listings -- calling
people with this con?

 OH! - I may have put my phone number in one of my public
sci.electronics postings - that's probably how the scamsters make
their selection. Makes sense ...

CHILDREN BEWARE!!!


[e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: I note the public access site you use for Usenet
(Portal Com) is located in area 408 (San Jose, CA).   PAT]

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

Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 23:49:48 -0500
From: [e-mail] (Dave Leibold)
Subject: CRTC Review of Telecom Regs

[from Canadian Radio-Television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC)
press release]

December 16, 1992

CRTC TO REVIEW TELECOMMUNICATIONS REGULATORY FRAMEWORK

OTTAWA/HULL - The CRTC today announced that it intends to review the
approach it takes to regulating telephone companies that provide basic
local telephone service in order to ensure that the manner in which it
regulates is efficient, effective and in the public interest (Telecom
Public Notice CRTC 92-78).

In recent years, technological change and increasing competition have
significantly altered the nature of the telephone industry. The
Commission wants to examine whether or not there are more efficient
and effective ways to regulate or to streamline regulation, without
compromising basic regulatory goals such as affordable local service
and prevention of anti-competitive behaviour.

"Canadians currently enjoy the benefits of a first-class
telecommunications industry," said CRTC Chairman Keith Spicer. "By
undertaking a review of our regulatory procedures we are trying to
ensure that the Canadian telecommunications industry remains at the
forefront of international communications and continues to provide
top-quality service, local as well as long distance, to meet the
growing information requirements of residential and business users."

Since telephone companies have evolved into multi-dimensional service
providers subject to increasing competition, questions arise about the
continued appropriateness of traditional monopoly-style regulation.
However, the Commission considers that regulatory streamlining will
depend in part on the degree of effective competition in the markets
served by the telephone companies. While some markets may be
increasingly competitive, Canada's telephone companies continue to
exercise considerable market power due to their control over access to
local telephone systems and their dominance in the long distance
telephone market. Where telephone companies exercise market power,
regulation will be required to protect subscribers and industry
competitors from any abuse of that power.

"While the Commission is committed to considering changes to the
current framework, in pursuit of regulation that is more effective and
more efficient, the resulting framework must ensure that subscribers
and competitors are adequately protected," said Louis (Bud) Sherman,
CRTC Vice-Chairman for Telecommunications. "Changes must take account
of any monopoly or dominant power the telephone companies could
exercise."

Having raised these general issues, the Commission invites the
telephone companies and other interested parties to submit comments
and specific proposals for changing the existing regulatory framework.
Submissions should bee aimed at achieving the following goals:

* reduction of the regulatory burden where there is already effective
competition in place;

* encouragement of the development of new technology and innovative
services to serve the expanding information requirements of
residential and business customers;

* protection of subscribers and competitors from abuse of market power;

* equitable treatment of subscribers in terms of service and prices;

* the opportunity for telephone companies to earn a reasonable rate
of return; and,

* a recognition that the telephone companies and other telecommunica-
tion carriers must be permitted to equip themselves to meet increasing
competition at home and abroad.

During the course of the review proceeding, the Commission anticipates
receiving proposals to:

* streamline or eliminate regulatory requirements in light of changes
in industry structure;

* reduce the size of local service subsidies by, among other things,
new types of local services to generate increases in local service
revenues and encouraging investment to reduce costs;

* change the current system of allocating the subsidy to ensure that it is
equitably distributed among subscribers; and,

* examine alternatives to the Commission's existing rate base rate of
return approach to regulation of the telephone companies that may
better balance the interests of subscribers and competitors, while
maximizing the operating efficiency of the companies.

Parties wishing to participate in this proceeding must notify the
Commission of their intention to do so by writing to the Secretary
General, CRTC, Ottawa,Ontario, K1A 0N2, by March 15, 1993. Submissions
to this proceeding must be filed with the Commission by April 12,
1993. The Commission will convene and oral public hearing, scheduled
to commence on November 1, 1993, in connection with this proceeding.

                          - 30 -

Contact:  Bill Allen, Director
          CRTC Public Affairs, Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0N2
          [phone] - TDD [phone] - Fax [phone]

or one of our regional offices listed below:
          Halifax, Nova Scotia - [phone] - TDD [phone]
          Montreal, Quebec - [phone] - TDD [phone]
          Winnipeg, Manitoba - [phone] - TDD [phone]
          Vancouver, British Columbia - [phone] - TDD [phone]

or from the Department of Communications Regional Office:
          Toronto, Ontario - [phone]


Dave Leibold - via FidoNet node 1:250/98
INTERNET: [e-mail]

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

Date: Thu, 7 Jan 93 11:10:14 PST
From: [e-mail] (Phydeaux)
Subject: Cell Phone SID in US / My Friend, Nynex Mobile ...


Hi!

I have the SID chart from the telecom archives, but it's quite old.
Has anyone managed to get a list of SIDs for US cellular service
providers?  My carrier (Nynex mobile in NJ) tells me to just 'dial
*611' to find out what system you are on.  "We do not have that
information."  My phone displays SID, and I've noticed that there are
many new ones I've wandered into that are not on the list.

It is difficult to get *any* information out of Nynex.  They tell me
they have call delivery into Philadelphia.  I try it and it doesn't
work.  I call them when I'm in Philly, and ask them to call me back on
my mobile number and it *still* doesn't work.  What do they conclude?
Of course, everything is working fine.

Finally, I attempted to get roaming rates and information from Nynex.
They sent me a booklet from 1990 with a few roamer ports listed.  What
I really wanted was the rates. When I lived in Chicago, Cell/One in
Chicago had a nice handy booklet with all of this.  But Nynex told me
they could and would give the information out only for cities/systems
I specifically requested.  That is, in order to find out the rates
for, say, California I would have to name each city and have them read
the information to me over the phone.

How the rates that the customer pays are a confidential item, to be
specifically kept *from* the customer I'll never know. After a lot of
complaining and threatening to cancel my service they finally
photocopied their roamer information -- which is up to date and
includes all systems, roamer ports, daily and per minute charges, etc.

Do many other 'service' providers give customers this much of a hard
time when they want to find out rates?  In the last two years I'd say
my experience with the cellular industry is that the carriers never
have anybody who knows anything answering the phone, and they
absolutely refuse to let you speak with anybody who knows anything.


<sigh>,
reb

-- *-=#= Phydeaux =#=-* [e-mail]  or  [e-mail]
h:861 Washington Avenue Westwood NJ 07675 201-376-5766   ICBM: ??.??N   ??.??W
w: reb  Ingres   Park 80 West Plaza I    Saddle Brook, NJ 07662   201-587-1400



[Moderator's Note: Both Cellular One and Ameritech in Chicago have the
booklet you describe, listing roamer ports in hundreds of cities and
dialing instructios, etc. They send them out as part of the sign up
kit or you can get that information mailed out anytime.   PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #11
*****************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa27108;
          7 Jan 93 19:37 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA23778
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 7 Jan 1993 17:00:07 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA07721
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 7 Jan 1993 16:59:33 -0600
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 16:59:33 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #15

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 7 Jan 93 16:49:30 CST     Volume 13 : Issue 15

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: All Circuits Are Busy Now ... (Brent Capps)
    Re: All Circuits Are Busy Now ... (Richard McCombs)
    Re: Why Does Phone Bell 'Ping' on a Regular Basis? (Bill Huttig)
    Re: Why Does Phone Bell 'Ping' on a Regular Basis? (Joe Malloy)
    Re: Why Does Phone Bell 'Ping' on a Regular Basis? (Brent Capps)
    Re: Why Does Phone Bell 'Ping' on a Regular Basis? (John Rice)
    Re: Why Does Phone Bell 'Ping' on a Regular Basis? (Troy Frericks)
    Re: Why Does Phone Bell 'Ping' on a Regular Basis? (Fred Schimmel)
    Re: 976 Fraud in Toronto (Daniel Burstein)
    Re: 976 Fraud in Toronto (Jan Steinman)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Brent Capps)
Subject: Re: All Circuits Are Busy Now ...
Organization: Atlas Telecom Inc.
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 20:03:49 GMT


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

> On 25 Dec 92 21:26:00 GMT, [e-mail] (John Higdon) said:

>> I would have thought that by now AT&T would have stopped its annoying
>> practice of drastically reducing its capacity on holidays. A number of
>> AT&T employees have told me that for reasons that are not very clear,
>> the company has traditionally blocked off a major amount of the
>> system's capacity on various holidays such as Christmas and Mother's
>> Day. This is the real reason you get the "All Circuits Busy"
>> recording, not because there is an inordinate amount of traffic.

> I can't imagine why they would deliberately turn away business, since
> they make money selling it.  Furthermore, if you go find back issues
> of the {AT&T Technical Journal} in a library, I suspect you will find
> that Mothers' Day is the acid test for new routing algorithms like
> DNHR (Dynamic Non-Hierarchical Routing) and RTNR (Real Time
> Non-Hierarchical Routing).

I strongly suspect that AT&T turned on every traffic throttling tool
in their arsenal.  That's why they're there -- to keep the switch from
being overwhelmed by the number of origination attempts.  Remember,
switches have limited internal resources -- call control buffers,
interprocess communications mechanisms, timing-critical events -- that
start breaking down when the switch gets really, really busy.  If,
say, a given interprocess communications channel gets choked with
messages, internal watchdog processes may conclude that part of the
system is stuck and deliberately swap the switch to the standby CPU,
which of course will quickly get overwhelmed and lock up.  So to
prevent this they turn on a throttling feature like LLC (line load
control) which will only give you dial tone on, say, 1 out of every 10
origination attempts.

> On 27 Dec 92 09:24:00 GMT, [e-mail] (John Higdon) said:

>> How soon we forget. Hours after the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake, I
>> tried at some length to get though to my home from southern
>> California.  All circuits were busy. Then I tried Sprint. The call
>> went right through. Discussions right here on the Digest pointed to
>> the policy of AT&T of purposely restricting incoming access to a
>> disaster area. I, for one, was very grateful for the fact that AT&T's
>> policies are not always imitated by the competitors.

> The choke after the earthquake had a reason behind it.  It was to
> reserve some large fraction of trunk capacity for outgoing calls from
> the disaster area.  That policy and the reason for it was plastered
> all over the media, in hopes that people would wait for the "I'm OK"
> call rather than flooding the network with call attempts to empty
> houses.  I believe that the disaster assistance agencies also liked
> that arrangement, since it improved the chances of their folks on the
> scene being able to call out.

This should hardly have come as a surprise to anyone.  Disaster
planning agencies publicised this fact beforehand, and I made
arrangements with all my loved ones in the state to call a mutual
friend in Texas who would relay messages and act as a kind of
information clearing house.  When the '89 quake hit I was in Los Gatos
not far from the epicenter and was able to communicate with my husband
in San Francisco because we could both call Dallas and leave messages
for each other.  You couldn't get through to San Francisco from Los
Gatos for several hours after the quake.  All in all I thought AT&T
and Pac Tel did a fine job.  After all, the power wasn't back on in
Los Gatos until the next afternoon, but the phones were working within
15 minutes, and I don't know if they ever actually went down.

As an aside, I was working for T1 mux manufacturer DCA/Cohesive at the
time, and literally hundreds of these big (6' tall) mux cabinets were
rolling around the test lab and mfg area like loose cannons.
Engineers were scrambling like mad to keep from being crushed.  We had
a bunch of $5000 Fireberd T1 testers stacked precariously six high on
top of one cabinet, and it's a miracle they didn't fall over.
Ironically our customers were required to bolt their muxes to the
floor instead of standing them on their castors like ours were, but
one customer's mux fell *through* the floor, so bolting it down didn't
do them much good.  Fortunately, nobody got hurt at our site.

I was in Oregon working for Kentrox on T1 CSUs within two months.
That quake was the last straw for living in California.


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

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

Subject: Re: All Circuits Are Busy Now ...
From: [e-mail] (Richard McCombs KB5SNF)
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 93 14:26:18 CST
Organization: The Red Headed League; Lawton, Ok


In comp.dcom.telecom, [e-mail] (and other in similar
words) writes:

> Or, take a lesser used route (MCI or Sprint).  For the future, the

Well I distinctly remember having trouble calling from Lawton, OK to
Fort Worth, TX using MCI, so they get saturated to.


Internet: [e-mail]
If I bounce (the maps have errors that I have no control over) then use
[e-mail]   BITNET: bo836%cleveland.freenet.edu@cunyvm

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

Date: Thu, 7 Jan 93 11:49:04 -0500
From: [e-mail] (Bill Huttig)
Subject: Re: Why Does Phone Bell 'Ping' on a Regular Basis


   The answer -- at least one possible answer -- is that the phone
company runs line tests every day at about the same time ... (The same
thing happed to me but at 6:20 AM and would wake me up) ... I don't
remember why but I ended up buying (about $4 at Radio Shack) a
polarity phone line tester; it should the polarity was reversed. Then
all I had to do was to change the red and green wire around in the
jack and I didn't have anymore pings.


Bill

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

From: Laura G. Malloy <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Why Does Phone Bell 'Ping' on a Regular Basis?
Organization: Bates College, Lewiston, Maine
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 08:14:17 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Glenn F. Leavell) writes:

> It seems that I've seen discussion on the following topic in the
> TELECOM Digest before, but I can't remember the answer or find
> anything relevant in the archive index.

> My parents live in Mississippi and get their local phone service from
> South Central Bell.  According to my parents, the bells in their
> phones make a 'ping' every evening around 10:15PM.  They say that the
> ping almost always occurs around the same time, but that on certain
> nights it may not occur until close to midnight.  They've called South
> Central Bell about this, and they were told that the ping was NOT
> occuring due to anything that the phone company was doing.

[deletia]

Same thing happens to us in Clinton, NY, each evening (sometimes
weekends, too) at just about 11 PM.  I've always assumed some sort of
telco testing was going on, but it would be nice to know exactly what
they are doing!


Joe Malloy/WB2RBA    German Department/Hamilton College/Clinton, NY

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

From: [e-mail] (Brent Capps)
Subject: Re: Why Does Phone Bell 'Ping' on a Regular Basis?
Organization: Atlas Telecom Inc.
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 19:04:22 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Glenn F. Leavell) writes:

> According to my parents, the bells in their phones make a 'ping'
every evening around 10:15PM.

SSB is pulling your leg.  Your CO switch is running automatically
scheduled self-diagnostics.  They start every evening at the same
time, but they're really testing the line cards and not the lines, so
only one line per card gets 'pinged', typically the first one.  I used
to have a line in Dallas that would ping every evening at 8:15 PM.


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

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Why Does Phone Bell 'Ping' on a Regular Basis?
Organization: Teradyne Inc., Telecommunications Division
Date: Thu, 07 Jan 93 21:00:32 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Glenn F. Leavell) writes:

> My parents live in Mississippi and get their local phone service from
> South Central Bell.  According to my parents, the bells in their
> phones make a 'ping' every evening around 10:15PM.  They say that the
> ping almost always occurs around the same time, but that on certain
> nights it may not occur until close to midnight.  They've called South
> Central Bell about this, and they were told that the ping was NOT
> occuring due to anything that the phone company was doing.

This, not uncommon, occurrance is caused by automated line test
equipment. The real clue is the fact that it happens every night at
about the same time.In SCB it's probably MLT or MLT2. This equipment
can be set up to routinely test each line in an office, every night on
a regular schedule.

The phenomena is known as 'bell tap'. When the line is tested, it is
disconnected from the line finder, or line circuit, which provides
dial tone, for the one or two seconds that it takes to perform the
parametric measurements on the line. These tests are usually done at
low voltage (10-20v) and won't usually cause a phone to ring.

When the line is re-connected to the line circuit, -50v is placed back
on the line. The 50v is sometimes enough to cause the ringer magnet to
pull the clapper against the bell, one time. Also in some of the
'cheepie' phones with electronic ringers, the sounder will 'cheep'
once when voltage in initially applied (re-applied).

One solution to the problem is to reverse tip and ring on the phone
(reverse the red and green wires at the connector block.  This causes
the magnet to kick the clapper the opposite direction when voltage is
initially applied.  This will usually work, but if the phone is an
older touch tone phone, this may cause the T.T. Pad not to work (they
were polarity sensitive in older Bell Phones).

Also, it's sometimes possible to mechanically adjust the bell, so that
the -50v pluse isn't quite enough to pull the bell magnet enough to
cause a tap.

With the advent of automated line test equipment in the past 15 years
or so, this has been an on-going problem. It's much more prevalent in
Europe, where telephone instruments are of generally higher impeedance
and it takes much less voltage to ring the phone.

On the other side of the equation, the automated testing allows the
telco to recognize deteriorating outside plant cable in many cases
before the customer even recoginzes that there's a problem, and fix
it. Often out of service lines are reported by the equipment and
repaired with the customer never being aware of a problem.  A
deteriorating cable or cross connect box that could ultimately result
in 20-50 subscriber trouble reports can often be found, diagnosed, and
repaired before any customer reports occur, so that grade of services
is improved overall. (And it's less expensive to do it that way then
respond individually to each and every call as they occur), thus
everybody saves.


John Rice        K9IJ     |  "Did I say that ?" I must have, but It was
                          |   MY opinion only, no one else's...Especially
                          |   Not my Employer's....
[e-mail]     |   Purveyor of Miracles,Magic and Sleight-of-hand

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

From: [e-mail] (Troy Frericks)
Subject: Re: Why Does Phone Bell 'Ping' on a Regular Basis?
Organization: Microware Systems Corp., Des Moines, Iowa
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 20:18:19 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Glenn F. Leavell) writes:

> My parents live in Mississippi and get their local phone service from
> South Central Bell.  According to my parents, the bells in their
> phones make a 'ping' every evening around 10:15PM.  They say that the

Have you tried swapping out the phone?  This would rule out some
things like EMI being picked up from something like a water softner or
a lamp on a timmer.  Some cheap (cherp, cherp) phones tend to be less
tolerant than others.


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: [e-mail] (Fred Schimmel)
Subject: Re: Why Does Phone Bell 'Ping' on a Regular Basis?
Organization: Gandalf Data Ltd.
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 17:42:11 GMT


It used to be that there was something called a line integrity test
(LIT) that occured in the interval just before the ring cycle began.
The circuit was re-arranged to test the line between the CO and the
phone. This is one reason why Customer Premises Equipment (CPE) needs
to identify its Ringer Equivalence Number (REN) because the test had
differing results depending on the number of ringers on the line.
Perhaps you added or removed some phones, modems, answering machines,
etc. Perhaps your local CO routinely at 10:15PM does a maintenance
check of all its lines, and this is when the ping occurs. Try calling
and asking for a test supervisor to see if they do something like
this.  Or count your equipment total REN and inform the phone company.
It could just be a misprogrammed test, or an indicator that the line
is faulty.

Perhaps someone else remembers more about LIT. I believe this was a #5
crossbar feature.


Fred Schimmel    Gandalf Data Ltd.  [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Daniel Burstein)
Subject: Re: 976 Fraud in Toronto
Organization: Panix, NYC
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 02:35:24 GMT


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

> This past November, a company I consult for had three unauthorized
> calls to [phone] made on one of its lines.  Each call was one
> minute long and was billed at $24.  Thinking back, we remember the
> likely perpetrator -- a man claiming to be serving legal papers on
> someone who supposedly used to work at the office address.  There were
> several small discrepancies to his story, but he seemed just as
> puzzled as we were.  He asked to use the phone, and I remember that he
> did a lot of dialing, but when challenged he showed a pager with
> display and claimed he was calling his voicemail.

> Bell Canada has agreed to remove the charges, but will not tell us the
> name of the owner of this number.  We are not eager to pursue it with
> the police, because of the small amount of the fraud, but we are
> concerned that this may be part of an organized scam (else how would
> the 'process server' benefit?) and others may also have been hit.  The
> $24 charge is quite a bit higher than the usual sex and sleaze lines
> which -- according to the ads -- are mostly $10.

A similar scam has been going on in New York City. A messenger will
show up at a company with a package, and when no one there seems to
match the addressee, he asks to use the phone.  Calls a "540" exchange
(one of the extra charge numbers; the others are 550, 970, 976, and
another about to be announced) and the company gets billed for $50 or
so.

When people notice it on the bill and complain, the local telco wipes
the charge.  But how many people don't ...

Which brings up a question or two about this whole concept of
surcharged phone numbers: Aside from all the legal questions (I'd love
someone to push a strong lawsuit about misbilling and all sorts of
other things), I'd like to know the following:

Does anybody out here have any sort of breakdwon as to the users, or
rather, providors, of these services?


Thanks,

danny  <[e-mail]>

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

From: [e-mail] (Jan Steinman)
Subject: Re: 976 Fraud in Toronto
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Ascom Hasler AG
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 12:08:43 GMT


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

> This past November, a company I consult for had three unauthorized
> calls to [phone] made on one of its lines.  Each call was one
> minute long and was billed at $24.  Thinking back, we remember the
> likely perpetrator -- a man claiming to be serving legal papers on
> someone who supposedly used to work at the office address.  There were
> several small discrepancies to his story, but he seemed just as
> puzzled as we were.  He asked to use the phone, and I remember that he
> did a lot of dialing, but when challenged he showed a pager with
> display and claimed he was calling his voicemail.

This sounds like a scam I heard about from a client in New York City.
It is simple to do, given the right information. All you need is a
bunch of numbers of pagers that display a number to call. Call those
pagers, and give the 976 number to call. The process server may have
been an unwitting victim of this hoax.

For whatever reason, my client assigned pagers to virtually all their
staff, and the numbers were sequential. The hoax was discovered one
day when every beeper in the whole joint began ringing, and people
compared numbers and discovered they were the same number. This was
not too long ago -- not everyone recognizes the significance of 976,
especially when it is in the form of a generally important interrupt,
like your pager going off!


Jan Steinman, Bytesmiths            [e-mail]
2002 Parkside Court, West Linn, OR 97068-2767 USA    [phone]
Beundenfeldstrasse 35, CH-3013, Bern, Switzerland    [phone]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #15
*****************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa15828;
          12 Jan 93 0:20 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA15721
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 11 Jan 1993 22:18:06 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA06215
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 11 Jan 1993 22:17:41 -0600
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 22:17:41 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #16


TELECOM Digest     Mon, 11 Jan 93 22:17:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 16

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Weekend Mail Breakdown Here (TELECOM Moderator)
    C&P Enters Electronic Services Market (Paul Robinson)
    Bell Atlantic Cellular Charges (Lyle Seaman)
    Need Help in the Study of Computers and Communications (Michael Hauben)
    Compressed Speech Warbles ... Need Help! (Michael K. Minakami)
    Data Intensive Wan - Need Recommendations (Andy Brager)
    AT&T Buys 20% of Unitel (Dave Leibold)
    Sega Announces VR Peripheral (Washington Post via Paul Robinson)
    AT&T and Novel Form Alliance (Washington Post via Paul Robinson)
    Cheapest LD Company to Call One Interstate Number Four Hours/Week (W Lance)
    Programming Instructions for a Nokia 101 Cellular Phone (Lustig
    Help Needed With Motorola Micro-Tac (Brian Cartmell)
    Looking For DID Information (Roy M. Silvernail)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Subject: Weekend Mail Breakdown Here
Date: January 11, 1993 22:00:00 CST


This is just a short note to say that over the weekend the software
was out of order here at eecs. Some changes were made in the way
things are mounted on the system and corresponding changes were NOT
made to the alias file where the telecom mailing list is referenced.
Thus, attempts by me to mail issues of the Digest resulted in sendmail
looking for my list and not being able to find it. This somehow got
past the sysadmin when the work was being done Saturday morning, so I
was unable to get anything out to the list over the weekend. It got
repaired when he came to work Monday. Sorry about that.


Patrick Townson
TELECOM Moderator

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

Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Date: Sat, 09 Jan 1993  20:05:56 EST
Subject: C&P Enters Electronic Services Market


Article Summary

C&P, Herndon Firm Introduce Interactive 'Scanfone' (Washington Post,
Jan 7, Page D11)

John Burgess tells about Chesapeake & Potomac Telephone Company, in
cooperation with Herndon, VA-based U.S. Order, the company that
created it, a new phone for use with electronic services such as
banking.

The phone appears similar to a kitchen wall-mounted telephone stuck on
the left side of a credit card reader with a swipe slot and a bar-code
wand.

The phone with services rents for $11.95 a month.  You can order
things by using the wand to scan some bar codes, and then select items
from the LED display.  It is called a "Scanfone' and when you order
something you can then swipe your credit card through the reader.

Some companies have agreed to sign up for the service, including
Safeway, which will deliver groceries for a $9.95 service charge
through Grocery Express (who already does the same thing for the same
price by picking up the phone and calling them voice.)

Maryland National Bank is already running a bank-by-phone four-line
display phone.  This type of service has not been very popular because
it has usually been hard to use and overpriced.

The people selling it, naturally, claim that with some practice you
can pay bills easier and faster with this system than with a pen and a
checkbook (which since not everyone you pay bills to will be
subscribed to this, you are still going to need and have to pay with,
anyway.)

One instant disadvantage is if you order something from a merchant
using this method and it's out of stock, you get a notice by U.S.
mail, not on the same call as you would on a voice telephone call.


Paul Robinson -- [e-mail]
These opinions are mine alone.

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

Date: Sat,  9 Jan 1993 20:57:04 -0500 (EST)
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Bell Atlantic Cellular Charges


Someone recently posted some cellular charges for the Austin area, so
here's Bell Atlantic's rates.  There are some discounts if you have
lots of phones.

Bell Atlantic Cellular Price Plans 10/92, one phone:

Activation fee: $50.

                $ /min                free minutes
     $/month  peak/offpeak             peak/offpeak

  2:  28        0.40/0.40               0/  0*
 12:  27        0.37/0.37               0/  0* **
204:  18        0.65/0.15               0/200
214:  70        0.36/0.36              90/ 30**
212: 100        0.35/0.35             150/ 60**
211: 140        0.35/0.35             240/120**

*251-500 min usage => 4% discount, 501-750=>6%, 751+=>8%.  Discounts
apply only to home system minutes.

** these are "annual plans" which are "subject to substantial early
termination fee"

No charge for busy or unanswered calls.  Peak hours 0700-1900 Mon-Fri
except New Year's Day, Memorial Day, July 4th, Labor Day,
Thanksgiving, and Christmas Day.  Off-Peak hours all other times.
Airtime charges on a mobile originated call begin when connection to
the cellular system is established.  Cellular Radio service is capable
of being intercepted without the knowledge or permission of the user
by third parties possessing certain types of devices or equipment.
Each partial minutes of airtime is billed as a full minute.  Monthly
allowance does not apply to roaming.  Airtime and toll charges apply
to Bell Atlantic IQ Services (forwarding, call waiting, 3way calling,
no-answer/busy transfer).

Mobile Messenger: $6/month, free with plans 211 or 212

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

From: [e-mail] (Michael Hauben)
Subject: Need Help in the Study of Computers and Communications
Organization: Columbia University
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1993 05:49:28 GMT


Communications among humans has begun to radically change since the
introduction of computers into the process. I plan to try to work in
the field of computer communications and networks.

I am currently a college sophomore and must declare my major or
concentration by April. Thus, I am trying to design a special
concentration of study to propose to my advisor.  Broadly I would like
to call my concentration "Computers and Society." I would like to
study this field as broadly as possible, incorporating history of
technology, sociology, philosophy, and thinking on future
implications. However, if I must narrow my approach, I might want to
focus on "Computers and Communications."

I am interested in the role computers play in our society.  Recent
technological advances have been advancing society at a faster rate
than ever before possible. I would like to study the computer's place
in society in relation to what advances it has made possible. Also I
would like to study how the technology, that is the computer, can,
has, and will change society.

Currently I am planning to study computers and telecommunications. I
plan to study both the technological foundation, and the social impact
and implications of computers to communication. I need to plan a
program of studies. I need help figuring out what focus to take in my
program of studies, and also suggestions of courses that would form a
solid program in the study of computers and communications. It is
possible to take courses in other divisions of my University, such as
the School of Engineering, if I design my own interdisciplinary major.

Again, I would be interested in hearing from others about what majors
of telecommunications or computers and communications exists in other
schools. Either that or the possible broader major of computers and
society or technology and society would be interesting to hear. Also,
any suggestions of what kinds of courses should be involved in either
majors.


Thank You,

Michael Hauben   [e-mail]  [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Michael K. Minakami)
Subject: Compressed Speech Warbles ... Need Help!
Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University.
Date: Sat, 9 Jan 1993 09:52:23 GMT


Hello all, I'm using a GSM compressor to try to compress some voice
data digitally recorded at a studio. The uncompressed voice sounds
quite good, however once it's compressed there is an annoying warble
in the voice.

Does anyone have any ideas how I could "fix" this? Any pre-filters? I
suspect this is the same warbling experienced by some RELP coders, as
GSM employs LPC followed by long-term-prediction and residue encoding.

Any leads would be greatly appreciated!


Michael Minakami      Computer Science/Psychology    Stanford University

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

Date: 10 Jan 1993 00:23:39 +0000 (GMT)
From: [e-mail] (Andy Brager)
Subject: Data Intensive Wan - Need Recommendations
Organization: Wonder Server - Public Access for SoCal


I need recommendations for a WAN.  The WAN will have a star topology,
as there will be one central site, and many (currently three
envisioned but more to be added) remote sites.  The remote sites may
have a small (three user?) LAN.  The central site will probably have a
larger LAN, type unknown, quite possibly Novell.

The amount of data involved is enormous.  On the order of 500MB every
20 minutes or so.  I believe it will not be a steady stream of data,
but a 500MB chunk every so often.  This may or may not already take
compression into account.  Currently, ten minutes or so to get the
data from the remote sites to the central sites is acceptable, however
this may change in the future.  Eventually real-time may be required.
The remote sites will most likely have the data coming from a HP 9000
HP/UX system.

Currently there is no equipment, no cable, no building (as far as I
know there is no building).  My main question is, what hardware is
needed at each end to support this WAN?  In addition, what facility
and service would be best?  My back of the envelope calculations say
that T1 would take 45 minutes, T3 would be 90 seconds.  Is there a
dial-up T3 option?  Are there other facilities that would work for
this?  What sort of bandwidth can one get using a VSAT and spread
spectrum (if that is a bad question, how fast can 500MB be
transmitted)?

One or two of the sites may be geographically close (a few miles?),
but most will eventually be quite far.  Do I need to worry about the
local phone company, or do I only have to deal with a long distance
carrier?  What other questions should I have asked?  What information
did I leave out?  Thanks in advance!!


Andy    Large Packages (10K+ Total) to: cerritos.edu!swc!wndrsvr!andyb

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

Date: Sat, 9 Jan 1993 11:30:24 -0500
From: [e-mail] (Dave Leibold)
Subject: AT&T Buys 20% of Unitel


AT&T will buy 20% of Canadian carrier Unitel Communications, according
to an announcement issued shortly after Bell Canada and BC Tel
announced that there would be no further appeals to last June's
pro-competition decision.

Before, Rogers Communications had 40% of Unitel while Canadian Pacific
had the other 60%. Now AT&T will get 20% with Rogers stake going down
8% to 32%, and CP's stake down 12% to 48%. The deal is expected to
close 29th January, plus a $200 million equity investment among the
three shareholders to boost capital base.

The U.S. stake in Unitel raises concerns. Rod Hiebert of British
Columbia's chapter of Telecommunications Workers Union said "The U.S.
carriers have enough spare capacity in their systems to serve all of
Canada at the flip of a switch." Thus, foreign-controlled carriers in
Canada may have no incentive to provide facilities in Canada. The AT&T
link does allow for convenient cross-border connections and
opportunities.

Another part of the deal means Unitel will be getting its network
switching equipment from AT&T rather than Northern Telecom.

Unitel reports 38 000 subscribers to its limited public long distance
service so far. Bell Canada revenues last year were $2.2 million,
Unitel's $400 million.


Dave Leibold - via FidoNet node 1:250/98
INTERNET: [e-mail]

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

Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Date: Sat, 09 Jan 1993  19:51:50 EST
Subject: Sega Announces VR Peripheral


>From Page D12 of the January 7, 1993 {Washington Post}:

Sega of America said that Virtus Sega, a full-color "virtual reality"
peripheral for the 16-bit Genesis, will be available in the fall.
Sega plans to release at least four software titles in 1993.  The
games will feature flying, driving and fantasy action.

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

Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Date: Sat, 09 Jan 1993  19:53:27 EST
Subject:  AT&T and Novell Form Alliance


 From the {Washington Post}, Page D12 of Jan 7:

AT&T and Novell, the computer software giant, announced an alliance to
create products that link computer networks and business telephones.

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

Date: Sat, 9 Jan 1993 21:25:36 -0500
From: [e-mail] (W.L. Lance)
Subject: Cheapest LD Company to Call One Interstate Number Four+ Hours/Week


The subject says it all, I am looking for the cheapest way to confer
with someone in CA (I am in NY) four or more hours a week. The number
will always be the same, and the calls will be after 6 or 9pm EST.
Does anyone have any sugg suggestions? I have heard some discussion of
purchasing blocks of time in a advance for better discounts. I also
thought I heard someone mention (along time ago) a set monthly fee
with unlimited calling to one number. Does anyone have any info? The
more the better so please respond!


Thanks,

Lance Ware

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

Date: Sat, 9 Jan 1993 15:18:29 -0800
From: Barry Lustig <[e-mail]>
Subject: Programming Instructions for a Nokia 101 Cellular Phone


The Nokia 101/1000 Series handportable CMT uses an EEPROM NAM that can
be programmed directly from the standard user keypad.  In order to
access the NAM, you must enter the special access code currently
programmed into the phone.  This code can be changed and therefore may
vary from phone to phone.  Once the programming mode is accessed, NAM
parameters are loaded by entering them into the display and "storing"
them to selected memory locations.  Be sure to obtain all parameters
before proceeding.

ACCESS NAM PROGRAMMING MODE:

1.    Turn the phone on.
2.    Enter the NAM access code.  Factory default is *3001#12345
3.    Enter [STO] 00.
4.    Verify that "STORE NOT DONE" appears in the display.  If "NOT ALLOWED"
    appears, check to see of you have entered the access code correctly.
    Note:  If the correct access code is unknown, reprogramming must be
    referred back to the wholesale purchaser of the phone.

ENTER SPECIAL NAM PARAMETERS (Memory Location 01):

5.    Press and hold the [CLR] key until the display clears.
6.    In one long string, enter the special NAM parameters according to the
    format of Example 1 below.  Enter each emergency number (such as 911
    or *911) followed by the pound (#) key, the Language Code followed by
    the asterisk (*) key, and the desired four digit lock code.

    Language codes: 0 = English, 1 = French, 2 = Spanish.

EXAMPLE 1:
         Pound Key__________________       _________ Asterisk Key
                          \         \     /
                     9 1 1 # * 9 1 1 # 0 * 1 2 3 4
                        /        /      \      \_____ Lock Code
         Emergency_____/________/        \___________ Language Code
         Numbers

7.    Enter [STO] 01 [STO].

ENTER MOBILE PHONE NUMBER (Memory Location 02 or 04):

8.    Press and hold the [CLR] key until the display clears.
9    Enter the correct 10 digit phone number.
10.    If desired, press the [ALPHA] key and enter a name of up to 16
    characters.  Note that the zero (0) key can be used to insert
    a blank space.  After the name is entered, press [ALPHA].
11.    (For Primary NAM) Enter [STO] 02 [STO].
    (For Optional NAM) Enter [STO] 04 [STO].

ENTER SYSTEM PARAMETERS (Memory Location 03 or 05):

12.    Press and hold the [CLR] key until the display clears.
13.    In one long string, enter the system parameters according to the
    format of Example 2 below.  Be sure to separate each parameter with an
    asterisk (*).  Do not place an asterisk before or after the string.

EXAMPLE 2:
          System ID________                               _____ Group ID Mark
                            \                            /
                      _ _ _ 3 4 * 1 * 1 * 3 3 4 * 1 5 * 1 5
       Access Method ____________/   /      \       \___ Access Overload Class
       Local Use Mark ______________/        \_________ Initial Paging Channel

VERIFY NAM INFORMATION

15.    Press and hold the [CLR] key until the display clears.
16.    Enter [RCL] followed by one of the memory locations from above (01
    through 05).
17.    Verify that the information for that memory location is correct.
18.    To exit the programming mode, power the phone off then back on.  If
    "NAM ERROR" appears on the display, programming was done incorrectly
    and must be repeated.

Enjoy!


barry

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

From: [e-mail] (Brian Cartmell)
Subject: HELP Needed With Motorola Micro-Tac
Organization: Encryption
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 23:38:40 GMT


Someone was telling how to reset and put a Motorola in test mode by
connecting pin 20-21 but my micro-tac has a eight pin connector with
what looks like a ground. Does anyone have a idea of how to put this
in test mode?


Thanks,

Brian

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

Subject: Looking For DID Information
From: [e-mail] (Roy M. Silvernail)
Date: Sat, 09 Jan 93 17:52:15 CST
Organization: Villa CyberSpace, Minneapolis, MN


Gee, thanks, everybody ... just because I mention TELECOM Digest once
in a while, my friends now think I'm some sort of Telecom Guru! :-)

This little quest is inspired by John Higdon's recent DID discussion.
Can someone provide me a pointer to the DID signalling spec?
Hopefully, it's on an ftp site somewhere, although I didn't see any
mention in the Telecom Archives index PAT posted last week.  Or do I
need to go to Bellcore for this?  (If so, got a document number?)

Thanks in advance, folks!


Roy M. Silvernail |+|  [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #16
*****************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa15866;
          12 Jan 93 0:22 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA16968
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 11 Jan 1993 22:19:25 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA24279
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 11 Jan 1993 22:18:57 -0600
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 22:18:57 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #17


TELECOM Digest     Mon, 11 Jan 93 22:19:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 17

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: SS7 Links Fron CA to NY (David G. Lewis)
    Re: SS7 Links Fron CA to NY via AT&T? (Andy Sherman)
    Re: SS7 Links Fron CA to NY via AT&T? (Gordon Burditt)
    Re: SS7 Links Fron CA to NY (John R. Levine)
    Re: SS7 Links Fron CA to NY (John Higdon)
    Re: Additional Phone Charges (Richard Lucas)
    Re: Additional Phone Charges (Mike Gordon)
    Re: The Future of Wired vs Wireless Services (James Hanlon)
    Re: The Future of Wired vs Wireless Services ([e-mail])
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (david.g.lewis)
Subject: Re: SS7 Links Fron CA to NY
Organization: AT&T
Date: Sat, 9 Jan 1993 19:09:31 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> tim gorman <71336.1270@Compu
Serve.COM> writes:

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

>> Bob Yazz <[e-mail]> writes:

>>>  The PUC will order that numbers not be delivered, period.

>> But the PUC cannot order this, just as it cannot prevent any carrier
>> from passing realtime ANI to end users.

> Actually the PUC could order this and make it stand.

Actually, to my knowledge (the Mother of all Disclaimers), the PUC
could *not* order this, nor make it stand.  The FCC could, but state
PUCs have no jurisdiction over interstate telecommunications, and the
FCC tends to take a dim view of state PUCs attempting to claim
jurisdiction over interstate matters.  The FCC, as far as I know, is
considering this issue even as we speak.

>> In SS7, the calling number is ALWAYS transmitted as part of the
>> data packet, although there is a bit that identifies it as a "blocked"
>> number if such is the case.

> The Network Interconnect package needed to allow SS7 interconection
> between the LEC and the IXC's makes provision for the calling number
> to be deleted from any IAM message sent to the IXC. This is true in
> every central office switch type I am aware of. This includes NTI,
> AT&T, and Ericsson.

I believe Bellcore TRs specify that this must be provisionable on a
per-IXC basis in each CO, FYI.

> SWBT policy is that this feature is invoked in all central offices
> with SS7 interconnection to IXC's until calling number delivery is
> tariffed and sold in that CO and all subscribers have been fully
> informed (through bill inserts, etc.) of the impacts they will see.

> So the PUC could order this be done in PB-land and also require that
> PB negotiate with the switch vendors to insure the capability is
> retained from this day forward.

It's technically feasible, but outside their jurisdiction for
interstate calls.

> *opinions are mine, any resemblance to official policy is coincidence*

Ditto.


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

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

Date: Sat, 09 Jan 93 11:57:20 EST
Subject: Re: SS7 Links Fron CA to NY via AT&T?
From: [e-mail] (Andy Sherman)


John Higdon <[e-mail]> writes:

> But what people do not understand is that those preciously
> private telephone numbers will soon be displayed out of state on
> a wide scale.  It is only other CALIFORNIANS that will not see
> the number displayed.

[e-mail] (Bob Yazz) replied:

> You don't seriously believe such a state of affairs will stand,
> do you John?  The PUC will order that numbers not be delivered,
> period.  I can even see the potential for lawsuits against Pac
> Bell over this.

Californians may *think* they control everything, but in reality NOT.
The California PUC has absolutely no jurisdiction over the carrying of
telephone calls in interstate commerce.  That is the exclusive
jurisdiction of the FCC.  In fact, this genie is already out of the
bottle.  All of the major carriers are right now happily delivering
your billing number to their 800 and 900 customers who subscribe to
ANI.  The PUC is allowing it, one assumes because they know they have
no authority to stop it.  Unless, of course, you mean to imply that
the most egalitarian California PUC would allow number delivery to big
bad business but not to "da people".  :^|

yazz> Sounds like an incentive to switch to a long distance company
yazz> that does not use SS7.  How do you think AT&T might feel about
yazz> this?

Go and find one.  Do you *really* think that AT&T is the only carrier
with SS7 on its mind?  It may be ahead in its deployment, but it is
not alone.  Now I know why John and others have been referring to some
of the arguments in this thread as Luddite.  Do you really think that
LECs and IECs expect to make enough money from CNID and ANI to pay for
the tremendous investment in SS7?  Dream on.  SS7 is being deployed
because it promises to provide *much* faster and more robust call
setup than its predecessors.  I doubt you will get any company to drop
SS7. A more realistic, and less technically ignorant, campaign would
be to persuade one or more IECs to drop calling number delivery over
SS7.  (A campaign which I would oppose, but one that at least is not
just plain stupid).

Since you want to kill SS7 to stop CNID and ANI, may I assume you
intend to deprive the rest of us of ISDN as well?  You can't do that
either witout SS7.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Gordon Burditt)
Subject: Re: SS7 Links Fron CA to NY via AT&T?
Organization: Gordon Burditt
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1993 07:20:27 GMT


>> You don't seriously believe such a state of affairs will stand, do you
>> John?  The PUC will order that numbers not be delivered, period.  I
>> can even see the potential for lawsuits against Pac Bell over this.

> But the PUC cannot order this, just as it cannot prevent any carrier
> from passing realtime ANI to end users.

Why?  Federal law?  What's so special about SS7?  Has it been enacted
into law by Congress or the FCC?

I don't see anything prohibiting a sufficiently provoked PUC (or the
state legislature backing the PUC) from doing any of the following
(except perhaps common sense on the part of the PUC?  Naaaah.  Not if
the voters are out for blood.) downright silly things:

- Prohibiting the inclusion of any equipment that uses SS7 in the rate base,
  or otherwise fiddling with the formulas so the only profitable
  thing to do with it is decommission and destroy it.
- Prohibiting the use of SS7, especially for in-state calls, with anything
  but the phone company's own customer service number in any
  "originating number" or "billing information" field.
- Requiring a new tariff for every SS7 packet transmitted.
- Making all phone service flat-rate and prohibiting charges for
  individual calls, thereby eliminating the need for per-call
  "billing information" except for one billing number for each
  in-state phone company.  Local phone companies eat charges from
  MCI, Sprint, AT&T, etc.
- Abolishing phone numbers (in-state) and using names and addresses.
- Threatening the phone companies that if they don't quit sending
  phone numbers out of state, the PUC will set the rate for local
  calls at negative five dollars a minute.  Customers will then figure
  out that two more lines with a call permanently connected between
  them is better than a welfare check, and that pretty soon they can
  work up to thousands of lines.


Gordon L. Burditt    sneaky.lonestar.org!gordon

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

Subject: Re: SS7 Links Fron CA to NY
Organization: I.E.C.C.
Date: 9 Jan 93 11:23:05 EST (Tue)
From: [e-mail] (John R. Levine)


[The question is whether Pac Bell will ship CLID data via SS7 links to
LD carriers for out of state delivery.]

I doubt it.  The biggest obstacle to long distance CLID delivery isn't
technical.  It's money.  The local telcos claim on the one hand that
the CLID data they can provide to LD carriers on their originating
calls is valuable and proprietary stuff and the LD carriers should pay
them for it.  On the other hand, the CLID data passed from an LD
carrier to a terminating telco is just part of the standard set of SS7
features and should be passed along for free.  I imagine the LD
carriers have a somewhat different view.

So this means that you're not likely to get CLID any time soon on
calls that aren't carried end-to-end by your local telco.  Within the
US, I haven't heard of any reports of CLID being delivered across a
LATA boundary.  (Note that LATA boundaries are largely unrelated to
area code boundaries.  In particular, 201 and 908 are the same LATA.)


Regards,

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

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

Date: Sat, 9 Jan 93 09:44 PST
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: SS7 Links Fron CA to NY


tim gorman <[e-mail]> writes:

> So the PUC could order this be done in PB-land and also require that
> PB negotiate with the switch vendors to insure the capability is
> retained from this day forward.

Boy, are you giving the CPUC an order of magnitude credit more than it
deserves! You have to understand that the CPUC is absolutely brain
dead. I could give you a list of things that are wrong with CA
utilities as long as your arm that the CPUC shrugs off routinely.
Fortunately, the marketplace provides a modicum of inherent
regulation, even in monopolies.

In any event, I can guarantee you that the California
excuse-for-a-regulatory board has not a clue regarding the switch
features, technological ramifications, or in fact anything more
complex than dialing a call. Check that -- the commissioners have
secretaries place calls.

Example: Remember the matter that I brought up a couple of years ago
about the fact that all cellular prefixes in the Bay Area should carry
no toll and be available for $.20 from utility phones? I checked and
this is indeed the tariff. Six months of griping to Pac*Bell and the
PUC has never resolved the problem of inconsistent charging from PB
payphones. Our PUC at work.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Richard Lucas)
Subject: Re: Additional Phone Charges
Organization: Boulder Valley School District
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1993 02:02:14 GMT


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

> I may have mentioned this before, but the simplest way to get the
> equivalent of an unlisted number is to ask for the phone to be listed
> {without address} under your roommate's name of Zyagur Xeanamux.  When
> someone calls asking for him, you know that it's a telemarketer.
> What, you mean you don't have a roommate by that name?  Exactly ...

     In an earlier message in this issue of TELECOM Digest, John
Higdon (I think) mentions Pat's problems with repair and comments
about IBT having a touch of Ma Bell still with them.  Having worked a
few years ago on the class action lawsuit against what is now US WEST,
I was astonished in my research to discover just how much of Ma Bell
was still present in the business office practices of different Baby
Bells.  With that experience in mind I hope that the following
comments on Paul Robinson's message will apply in most parts of the
country.  These comments are made as a former service rep.

     Your basic account record/service order is likely to carry two
distinct sets of information - listing and billing.  They do NOT have
to match each other, which provides the method of avoiding the non-pub
charge.  Request that the LN (Listed Name) be some made-up name (I've
seen listings in people's dog's name, and one employee had hers
entered as Raggety, A.), and the billing lines to read:

BN1     John Smith for
BN2     A. Raggety

     The key question to the company when I worked for them was
billing responsibility.  As long as the first line of the billing info
(the BN1) was the responsible party, we really didn't care too much
about the LN.  The CI (Credit/Contact Information portion of the
order/record) was tied to the responsible party.  The closer to a
`real' name your LN request is, the less trouble you'll have getting
it by the service rep; more unusual combinations may simply involve
more haggling if the rep is in his/her God mode.

     It's your phone line and you don't want to be listed, but your
roommate does?  Avoid the additional listing charge by giving them the
LN/BN2, and you take the BN1 responsibility.  Works great!

     Other codes to consider: Our listing has the (OAD) and (OCLS)
codes in the listing line -- the first translates to Out Address
Directory and keeps us out of the listings by address book the company
produces, and the second translates to Out Customer Listing Service
and keeps us off the customer listings lists that they sell to other
companies.  For an address we simply list our community name
(Boulder); our service record shows that for the LA (Listed Address -
which can also be completely blank) and then has a SA (Service
Address) for the actual physical location.  There's all sorts of
listing tricks available, but the ones that don't generate revenue are
rarely mentioned.  Pressing the service reps for additional details is
completely legitimate, and even serves as a reasonable test of whether
or not the rep knows what they're doing.

     As a footnote to the listings question, I audited the service
records of the individuals specifically named in the class action
lawsuit's initial filing.  One of them, a doctor, had both a non-pub
listing (his name) AND an additional listing (roommate's name), with
the corresponding monthly charges (almost $3/month total).  Besides
being a stupid way of doing it (give her the LN/BN2 and him the BN1,
for NO monthly charge), it was against the tariff rules in place at
the time.  While the subsequent lawsuit settlement returned to him the
overcharge for the inside wire maintenance agreement, that overcharge
was only a tiny fraction of the listings overcharge.  I did notify one
of the telco's attorneys about the listings problem, but didn't have a
current letter of authorization to follow up on the matter.  I
wouldn't be surprised to find the charges still in place today,
particularly since a number of service reps had probably accessed his
records between the lawsuit filing and my audit without ever
mentioning (much less correcting) the listings problem.

     Footnote 2: Linebacker is an ENHANCED wire maintenance agreement,
NOT the basic agreement. One poster a few months ago mentioned getting
service in the northern midwest, with Linebacker mentioned in a way
that indicated that it was presented as the basic maintenance
agreement. It isn't in Colorado, and I doubt it is elsewhere either.


Rick Lucas ([e-mail])
Debate Coach, Fairview HS, Boulder, CO

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

From: [e-mail] (Mike Gordon)
Subject: Re: Additional Phone Charges
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix at U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 93 08:07:50 GMT


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

> I may have mentioned this before, but the simplest way to get the
> equivalent of an unlisted number is to ask for the phone to be listed
> {without address} under your roommate's name of Zyagur Xeanamux.  When
> someone calls asking for him, you know that it's a telemarketer.
> What, you mean you don't have a roommate by that name?  Exactly ...

    Good luck trying to get the number listed under a name that's
different than the billing name!  Our local telco won't do it, which
can be quite annoying when you have a few people sharing a house.
(Another college town telecom woe :( ) And forget about being billed
under a different name!

    I've heard that you can get your name trademarked (or something
like that) as it refers to you.  This supposedly is what stars use to
keep their names from being used by unethical retailers, etc.  (For
example, the Mel Gibson line of sportswear at Sammy W's Superstores.)

    Now, couldn't a Joe Regular do the same sort of thing?  Something
like "All businesses are forbidden to use the name Joe Regular (when
refering to Joe Regular of 123 Average St. blah blah) in any
advertisments or publicatio without the express written permission of
Joe Regular."  Then write the telco a certified letter saying that
they are expressly forbidden from using your name in their
publication.  Of course you would include a copy of the "trademark"
document.  The same tactic could be used for those nasty (and
brain-dead) junk mailers that love to fill our mailboxes and trash
cans.

    I know it is expensive to get any sort of legal documents created,
but maybe some of our readers are lawyers (or have friends or family
members who are) and thus can get a free opinion on this.

    Any opinions about this out there?

   By the way, I feel that being charged monthly to protect (in one
small way) our right to privacy is extortion!  What real cost is there
associated with being left off of a list?


Mike Gordon   N9LOI  [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (James Hanlon)
Subject: Re: The Future of Wired vs Wireless Services
Date: Sat, 9 Jan 1993 20:04:07 GMT
Organization: ddsw1.MCS.COM Contributor, Chicago, IL


[e-mail] (adams,john) writes:

> I suspect that outside sociological, economic, and political pressures
> will do more to answer the posed question than mere technology alone.

After much experience, both painful and rewarding, I have to agree.

> other "softer" sciences.  At least from my perspective, the softer
> sciences are indeed *MUCH* harder to master than those we use daily.

And are applicable far more often than we'd care to admit. Just what
is the ratio? I have my own judgments -- any other opinions?

> Will the current industry infrastructure (Don't you just love the way
> we can beat this politicisms to death :-) ) remain viable by 2010?

US, yes; the LECs and the Inter-LATA carriers make money with zero
incremental thought on their parts. Such an easy life will be
perpetuated by all sorts of rationalizations -- after all, there's
still a Western Union!  The international picture will reflect a more
entrepreneurial orientation, as formerly nationalized administrations
get, first, privatized, then, overlaid with only nominally national
wide-band high-connectivity networks. I base my reasoning on the fact
that non-US administrations have fewer intrinsic constraints upon them
 -- they largely limit themselves. It only takes one executive of
vision to get the ball rolling, once freed from bureaucratic concerns,
and enjoying the support of the Prime Minister/President/King.

Network architecture is no longer mysterious these days, and
comm/compute hardware is notoriously commoditized. There are numerous
non-US telco administrations with the know-how to pull off e.g. a
wide-band wireless point-to-point variable bandwidth overlay network
for large geographic areas, that considers the PSTN a relatively small
component.

I am disposed to wireless because, in the foregoing scenario, it
permits the subversion of any existing wired network without directly
confronting any entrenched (sorry) bureaucracy. Wireless for the first
hop is a viable strategy as long as reasonably cheap broadband rf
modems are available, and spread-spectrum technology can make the
above-10 GHz area sharable. I am assuming that this will happen.

> venture.  Profit is not a dirty word!  I am convinced that rate of
> return regulation will die a natural death before the year 2000.
> While price cap regulation seems to be in vogue with our lawyer
> friends(?), I'm almost positive that zero regulation (price/cost only)
> will be in effect by 2010.

I predict that individuals in 2010 will have the option to contract
with global bandwidth/connectivity providers for any sort of frame
transfer, with various guarantees of delivery, ordering, delay, and
BER. And AT&T, and FCC, will have very little to say about it.


Jim Hanlon     [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Mark)
Subject: Re: The Future of Wired vs Wireless Services
Date: 10 Jan 93 00:29:55 GMT
Organization: Australian National University


Hi,

I was chewing the fat and heard about an idea I thought was cute.

Telecom Australia is working on a radio phone system that has a lot of
potential IMHO. The idea is you have slim compact handsets that are
basically a smart radio with a short range. Spread over the CBD at
first and then the suburbs are base stations that each phone user can
log into with the same handset.

When the user is at work they can log into their office station and
their calls are charged to their work or when they go home they are
charged to their home number. You have the ability of having a single
handset you can use at work and home, without having to reprogram it.
The idea of the short ranges of the base stations is to enable a high
density per area. The system doesn't allow one to roam from zone to
zone as such and keep the call going, you have to sit still or at
least stay in radio range. If you want to roam, get a hands free car
phone or a more sophisticated (and expensive) mobile phone.

One bonus for business is your facility phone can be transported
around the building with only a power lead needed wherever you set up
shop again. No reprogramming or rewiring needed. A business can have
their own station to save on call costs.

It was mentioned the possibility of the use of smart cards to automate
the logging onto the zone station. It would also authenticate the
caller if used with PIN numbers etc. Encryption is expected to be
encompassed in the system for added security.

What I like is you can remove your smartcard or switch off the unit
and then can't be tracked. If you want to recieve calls then you log
into a zone to let it know you're willing to be contacted. There will be
packages offered with these phones and pagers so you can save the
phone battery until someone pages you.

One problem is the listening in capability that is always there. At
work or home your on a radio link, most likely plain voice. It makes
taps easier, even with the different frequency assigned to you for
each call.

This system brings closer the concept of Personal Communication
Numbers (PCNs) so you can one day be contacted anywhere in the world,
just by anyone dialling your permanent number. The only problems I can
see immediately are those involved with the amount of frequencies, RFI
and the ease of monitoring.

Sounds like a nice system.


Mark     [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #17
*****************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa17060;
          12 Jan 93 1:18 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA03715
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 11 Jan 1993 23:03:36 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA09413
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 11 Jan 1993 23:03:09 -0600
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 23:03:09 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #18

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 11 Jan 93 23:03:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 18

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Interesting Statistic on Calls From Prisons (Larry Cipriani)
    Cordless Key Systems? (Jonathan Edwards)
    Updating Survey of E-Mail Services - Need Help. (Donald R. Newcomb)
    PC Software for ATTmail (Donald R. Newcomb)
    Panasonic KX-Txxxx Mailing List (Bill Cerny)
    Opinions on PBX - Toshiba Strata DK-56 (Raul Rathmann)
    Audiovox Cellular Phone MVX-500 (ie Minivox) (Steve Wachtel)
    Hooking up a US modem in Czechoslovakia (Raul Rathmann)
    Modem Won't Hang Up (Richard Budd)
    Area Code 610 (Carl Moore)
    FAQ About 900 Numbers? (Stephan Meyers)
    Will a UK Telephone Work in the US (Will it Ring?) (Richard Lamb)
    Phoneline Simulator to Test Modems - How? (George Planansky)
    About C&P's "Swipe Reader" Phones (Paul Robinson)
    Info Wanted: Telecom in Holland? (Bryan Petty)
    Internet / UUCP / Compuserve / Anything in Belize? (Larry Krone)
    Need Help Dealing With PacBell and Harrasing Calls (J. Eric Townsend)
    Cellular One Offers FREE Weekends in NC (Alan M. Gallatin)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 11 Jan 93 15:43:34 EST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Interesting Statistic on Calls From Prisons
Organization: Ideology Busters, Inc.


I work on a small part of the AT&T Automated Alternate Billing System,
i.e., the speaker independent voice recognition call processing
product that is being trialed in Seattle, WA, Jacksonville, FL,
Phoenix, AZ and probalby a few other places by now.

One of the customers of AABS is an RBOC; they connected telephones in
prisons to the AABS.  In this situation, the caller can only make a
collect call, and the caller cannot reach an operator except if by
some fluke a network failure occurs.  One statistic which was
suprising is the number of abandoned calls, i.e., the caller hung up
on the system before their call was completed.  80% of all collect
calls were abandonded, and 97% of those were from a prison.  I'm
guessing the large number of abandonded calls from prisons is due to
prisoners trying to beat this system.

The motivation for this feature was to (a) eliminate the abuse
operators received from prisoners -- operators like this feature quite
a lot by the way, and (b) prisoners have been known to have their
friends get jobs as operators who can give them free calls.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Jonathan Edwards)
Subject: Cordless Key Systems?
Organization: IntraNet, Inc.
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 15:53:33 GMT


I am thinking of putting a "key" phone system into my home. The main
reason for this is to gain paging capability.  But I also want to be
able to use cordless phones.  I presume that if this is possible at
all I would lose the paging function at the cordless phones.  Is there
any solution to this, or should I just install a separate intercom?
Thanks


Jonathan Edwards    [e-mail]
IntraNet, Inc        617-527-7020

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

From: [e-mail] (Donald R. Newcomb)
Subject: Updating Survey of E-Mail Services - Need Help
Organization: University of Southern Mississippi
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 23:37:59 GMT


A year and a half ago I did a survey of e-mail providers which one
might use for his personal e-mail. I noticed recently that this was
put in the telecom archives under the name "e-mail.systems.survey" and
is beginning to need an update. I will undertake to update this survey
but need some help. I tried to include those systems that had some
sort of inbound communications system (e.g. Telnet, PSN, 800 number,
etc) that would provide access from, at least, the continental US. A
word or two were included about Fidonet and DASnet.

The systems surveyed were:

MCImail, ATTmail, EasyLink, GEnie, Pinet, Telemail (Omnet), World,
Portal, Netcom, Compuserve, Fidonet and DASnet.

I will not have room to include every public-access site and BBS in
the country but would like to include pointers to where this
information can be found.

If you are interested and have experience as a user of these or other
systems which should be included, please review the report in the
archives and respond to me by email regarding updates, changes,
additions or corrections. Thank you.


Donald R. Newcomb      [e-mail]    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Donald R. Newcomb)
Subject: PC Software For ATTmail
Organization: University of Southern Mississippi
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 23:50:15 GMT


I would like to know the experiences of anyone using an inexpensive
non-ATT software package for the PC to interface to ATTmail. ATTmail
imposes a stiff fee for "online composition" of messages but this can
be avoided by composing messages off-line and up-loading via various
mail transfer packages. Most of the PC packages marketed by AT&T are
more expensive than I feel is necessary.

I understand that a UUCP protocol can be used. How do addresses such
as TELEX and X.400 work in various packages? How are they formatted.
I would appreciate specific experiences and recommendations.  Thank
you.


Donald R. Newcomb   [e-mail]  [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Panasonic KX-Txxxx Mailing List
Organization: Sun, Surf 'n Sushi, San Diego, CA
Date: 11 Jan 93 03:06:56 GMT


Due to the popularity of the Panasonic KX-Txxx series of key systems,
there's a new mailing list starting up to discuss features, bugs and
other work-arounds for this wonderful family of electronic key
systems.

To subscribe, mail to:  [e-mail]

To post an article, mail to:  [e-mail].


Bill Cerny  <[e-mail]>  10288-0-700-FON-BILL

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

From: [e-mail] (Raul Rathmann)
Subject: Opinions on PBX - Toshiba Strata DK-56
Date: 11 Jan 1993 07:58:47 GMT
Organization: CERFnet Dial n' CERF Customer Group


Hi folks:

I am considering picking up a Toshiba Strata DK-56 PBX with various
handsets.  Does anyone have any opinions on this unit, good or bad?

Also important, I will be hooking up a PC based voice mail system to
this PBX, probably with Dialogic equipment.  Anyone know of any
gotchas?  I understand that some systems don't signal a disconnect
correctly or at all.  Does this unit have this problem?


Thanks - Raul    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Wachtel)
Subject: Audiovox Cellular Phone MVX-500 (ie Minivox)
Date: 11 Jan 93 08:13:50 GMT
Organization: CERL/EE, Georgia Tech, Atlanta


I just recently got a Minivox portable phone.  I found out after I had
paid for the phone that there are phone options that are not user
configurable.  These require the service provider (ie my authorized
agent of PacTel) to set these options.

One option which I consider important is the assignment of the
security code.  My agent told me that it was customary for them to set
my security code to the last digets of the telephone number.  Is this
right?  After much complaining I was able to get them to change the
security code.  But I want to learn the procedure so that I don't have
to rely on them.

Please, if anyone has the programmer's manual for this phone or some
information on how I might obtain one, or just the code sequences
necessary to do this and other phone options, please post a response
or send me email.

Thanks.


Stephen Wachtel                     [e-mail]
Georgia Institute of Technology     [phone]
400 Tenth St. NW, CRB 376           Atlanta, GA  30332-0540

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

From: [e-mail] (Raul Rathmann)
Subject: Hooking up a US Modem in Czechoslovakia
Date: 11 Jan 1993 08:22:52 GMT
Organization: CERFnet Dial n' CERF Customer Group


Hi,

I have a friend of a friend that is teaching at university in
Czechoslovakia.  He wants to hook up a modem to the university phone
system.  I'm assuming that he can use the extension line coming in to
his office to dial out, then with his modem hooked up, he can get the
modem to grab the connection with an AT command and he's on his way.
Problems I can forsee will be mainly with the phone system and wiring.
Could he splice into the phone system and expect the modem (and phone)
to work?  I'm sure the power situation will be a concern.  Does anyone
have any good ideas here?  By the way, he has said that there is no
way to get this info from the university, they're in the dark ages and
information is not readily shared.


Thanks,

Raul     [e-mail]

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

Date: Mon, 11 Jan 93 10:16:03 EDT
From: Richard Budd <[e-mail]>
Subject: Modem Won't Hang Up
Organization: CSAV UTIA


We are experiencing difficulty with our modem connecting with an IBM
Control Unit Model 7171.  There are 16 lines here at the Czech Academy
of Sciences Informatics Institute connected to an IBM 4361 host.
Because of the poor quality of phone lines in Eastern Europe, our
external connections through modems and the CU are frequently dropped,
but the modem remains on-hook and we have to manually power off and
reset.  This is especially a problem over the weekend when the system
is running without operators.  Do you know of any software that could
automatically take the modem off-hook when the connection is dropped?
We use Gandalf ACCESS Series 24A and Hyundai HMD 2404M external
modems.  All modems on the host side use MNP5 because it is the only
way to establish reliable connections for more than five minutes
given, again, the quality of the lines.  The Czech government is
working on improving phone quality, we may have digital fiber optic
lines in Prague by the end of 1993.


Richard Budd  | USA  [e-mail]    | CR    [e-mail]
              |      139 S. Hamilton St.    |       Kolackova 8
              |      Poughkeepsie, NY 12601 |       18200 Praha 8

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

Date: Mon, 11 Jan 93 14:39:13 EST
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject: Area Code 610


Last Octwober, the Digest had a message (repeated below) about the 610
area code.  I have lost track of which digest it was in.  Because 610
has just been announced for a split of 215, I am re-sending the
message.


 >Date: Wed, 21 Oct 92 09:08:32 +0200
 >From: [e-mail] (Spyros Bartsocas)
 >Subject: Area Code 610

 >Recently the Greek newspapers are filled with ads of '900' type of
 >services located in Australia and North America.  Examples of prefixes
 >used are 609-490, and 609-426.  Are these local 976 type prefixes?  A
 >lot of these are 610-204-xxxx numbers.  Where is 610 located?

 >Spyros Bartsocas    [e-mail]

[609-426 & 490 are in Hightstown, NJ; a Moderator's Note, omitted
here, followed.]


[Moderator's Note: I wonder what will become of the +1-610 premium
services once 610 gets used legitimatly here in the USA?  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Stephan Meyers)
Subject: FAQ About 900 Numbers?
Organization: University of Illinois at Chicago
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 21:36:25 GMT


I am interested in getting a 900 or a 976 number in the Chicago area.
The information about starting something like this up seems to be
pretty hard to get -- most of the "customer service" people have been
really rude, treating me as a crank caller.  I'm just curious, about
how it works, costs, etc, and maybe I'd start up a line.

    I have found out the basic startup and monthly charge (AT&T
wants $2300 install + $750/month + 30 cents/minute + 10% of whats left
after 30 cents/minute -- breakeven on a $1/minute call would be around
1200 minutes per month, or 40 minutes per day, without counting
startup).

    Of course, what I would really want is a service who has the
equipment, can help me set up a line, and would operate based on a
percent of the money (if they take 50% of the money, say, instead of
hefty startup costs, that's fine by me).

    It's strange, in fact, how hard this is to find out.  You'd
think one or two phone calls would do the trick, and that the phone
companies would be dying to sell you the service, but everyone is so
rude!

me:  Hi, I'm interested in finding out how to start a 900 line

them:  What sort of information would you be providing
    [as in "Are you another phone sex jerk?"]

me:  Ummmm, well, I'm kicking around some ideas, but I was thinking about
    something about the art scene in Chicago.

them:  You want customers in all 50 states to call you and find out
       about art.
    ["you really think ANYONE would be interested in what you
        have to say?"]

me:  Well, really just Chicago, but who knows?

them:  Well you'll have to call Illinois Bell about 976 number service.
    [she almost hung up on me]

me:  Well, I'd still like to know about the nationwide service, I'm
     just trying to figure out what it costs, etc

    And then I finally got her to tell me how much it costs, and
after a little more prodding, she gave me a number for AT&T's
equipment leasing for 900 service.

    Arrgh!  It's a multi-billion dollar industry, and I want to
(maybe) buy something from you!  Give me a little respect, please!!!

    Anyway, as in the subject line, if anyone has an FAQ with
everything you ever needed to know about 900 services, please email
to:

[e-mail]

Thanks!


Stephan Meyers | [e-mail]
(Art)^n Laboratories, inventors of the Stealth Negative PHSCologram
[phone]


[Moderator's Note: The main reason they start the conversation by
asking what kind of service you wish to operate is because if you plan
on some sort of phone sex thing, they will  immediatly tell you they
no longer will bill for phone sex. They will give you the lines, but
you have to figure out how to do the billing, via some service bureau
or otherwise on your own. That little 'gotcha' discourages many
would-be sex line operators from beginning. None of the carriers will
bill for sex these days ... too much hassle and fraud.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Richard Lamb)
Subject: Will a UK Telephone Work in the US (Will it Ring?)
Organization: XtcN Ltd
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 93 21:28:38 GMT


I bought a phone in the UK and am using it in the US.  The DTMF stuff
works fine, but I cant seem to make it ring.  Should I be able to ?


Rick
XtcN Ltd, [e-mail], Tel:[phone], FAX:[phone], Telex:6504829720
11 Roxbury Ave.,Natick MA 01760,4425 Butterworth Pl.N.W.,Washington D.C. 20016

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

From: [e-mail] (George Planansky)
Subject: Phoneline Simulator to Test Modems - How ?
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: HMass, Boston MA
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 01:32:17 GMT


To test modem/terminal-server settings I would like to connect connect
the modems directly via a phoneline simulator.

I gather that just a modular four-wire flat cable won't work, since
the modems, for one, want to see a carrier.

Is this something simple to coble together (or not simple and
expensive to buy)?

Please reply by email, thanks.


George    [e-mail]

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

Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993  21:39:37 EST
Subject: About C&P's "Swipe Reader" Phones


The number to call to get information about C&P's "Swipe Reader"
telephone is 1-800-999-9699.  If this call is not accessible from your
area, let me know.

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

From: [e-mail] (Bryan Petty)
Subject: Info Wanted: Telecom in Holland?
Date: 12 Jan 93 04:12:51 GMT
Organization: University of Pittsburgh


I am doing some research on the Telecommunications infrastructure in
Holland. If anyone can recommend any references or contacts for
information it would be greatly appreciated. If there is any interest
I will post a summary.


Thanks!

Bryan Petty    University of Pittsburgh   Graduate Telecom Student/Slave

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

Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 11:20:16 -0800
From: Larry Krone <[e-mail]>
Subject: Internet / UUCP / Compuserve / Anything in Belize


Is there any type of Net access available from Belize (Central
America?)

Please Email responses to:   [e-mail]


Thanks,

Larry Krone

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

From: [e-mail] (J. Eric Townsend)
Subject: Need Help Dealing With PacBell and Harrasing Calls
Organization: Numerical Aerodynamic Simulation, NASA Ames
Date: 11 Jan 93 16:09:39

Sometime during the night of 6 Jan 93, some individual(s) with a fax
decided that my home voice number was also a fax and started dialing.

Since then, I've received a *lot* of calls from this fax machine,
often on regular intervals (10min before the hour being common).  I
suspect it's on the east coast, since things started up around 5am
this morning.

PacBell is being less than helpful. "Hope they notice that the fax
isn't getting through."  "There's no way for us to figure out where
the call is originating from."

So I started dropping computer-words. :-)

Me: "Can't they set up a line trap?"

Them: "Uh... yes..  but, uh, that might not work."

Me: "Well, can PacBell at least determine if it's coming in LD or if
it's originating from a local exchange?"

Them: "uhm, probably."

Repair Service just took a call on it, they think that maybe they "can
figure out who's calling you and get them to stop".

Anybody know the "right" questions/requests to make of PacBell so that
they do this sort of thing a bit more quickly?


J. Eric Townsend --  [e-mail] -- 415.604.4311 (DoD# 0378)


[Moderator's Note: Can you temporarily call forward your phone to a
line with a fax machine and recieve a transmission from the idiots? If
so, then I presume once their identity is discovered, you could call
them yourself and give them a piece of your mind.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Alan M. Gallatin)
Subject: Cellular One Offers FREE Weekends in NC
Date: 11 Jan 93 23:27:30 GMT
Organization: Duke University; Durham, N.C.


Cellular One in the Raleigh-Durham area of North Carolina is offering
a new feature on most of their calling plans.

In addition to whatever monthly charge you are currently paying, for
an extra $10 they will give you unlimited airtime on the weekends
(defined as 11:59pm Friday to 12:01am Monday) for all calls made (or
received) while in your local calling area.  The only charges incurred
would be for directory assistance or long distance land charges.

Off-peak minutes with C1 go as low as $.20/minute with some plans (and
are often more than that) so the break-even point is 50 minutes (or
less).

Any ideas why they'd just open the floodgates like this?

As an aside, Centel (the only competitor in this market) is not
matching the program or even coming up with something remotely close.


Alan M. Gallatin <[e-mail]>

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #18
*****************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa17955;
          12 Jan 93 1:54 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA19951
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 11 Jan 1993 23:47:40 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA07194
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 11 Jan 1993 23:47:11 -0600
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 23:47:11 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #19

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 11 Jan 93 23:47:10 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 19

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Rutgers Exchange-Changing Mayhem ([e-mail])
    Want Info on Ringing Voltages/Cadences Around the World (Steve Pershing)
    US Losing Lead in Telecom - USC Report (UPI via Ang Peng Hwa)
    Call for Volunteers at INTEROP 93 Spring (Ole J. Jacobsen)
    Bellcore NPA/NXX Information (Al Varney)
    Use a Phone, Go to Jail (Paul S. Sawyer)
    Canadian Competition Full Steam Ahead; Enter AT&T (Andrew M. Dunn)
    Visual "Bell" For a POTS Line (Kristobal Pedregal Martin)
    Re: Colorado Gets Caller ID (John Higdon)
    Re: Colorado Gets Caller ID (Conrad Kimball)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Shag)
Subject: Rutgers Exchange-Changing Mayhem
Date: 11 Jan 93 22:16:32 GMT
Organization: Screaming in Digital, the Queensryche Digest


Rutgers University has an outlying campus in Camden, NJ.  The campus
is in exchange 609-757, with some businesses.  Since that exchange has
become full, the campus is being moved to a new exchange, 609-225,
which went into service on Friday (1/8/93).

Banners to this effect were placed on the campus dialins early this
week.

Within a day, several users of a public system at Rutgers had left
posts saying that they would no longer be able to call in for free,
because NJ Bell had told them the new exchange wasn't local to them.

Naturally, since the "localness" of a call is based on the distance
between CO's (at least in NJ), and the CO's were quite obviously right
where they'd always been, this caused a lot of confusion for the rest
of us, who were quite certain it would be a free call, as always.

It turned out that a scenario like this was being repeatedly carried
out:

    User calls the operator to ask about 225.
    Operator keys 225 into the computer.
    Since 609-225 doesn't _exist_ yet, the computer decides that
    they must (of course) mean 908-225, which is some 60 miles
    away (and, coincidentally, a local call from a _different_
    Rutgers campus).
    Operator tells user that it's not local.
    User panics.

When I called NJ Bell, and explained to the operator that it was a
Rutgers campus changing exchanges, the operator's response was, "Oh, I
remember when they did that up here in New Brunswick, it'll still be
local."

Convincing all the users who had been told by NJ Bell that it _wasn't_
local was a bit of a challenge, though!

When I mentioned this to a friend in Rutgers Telecom (T.P. Brisco), he
pointed out another bit of trivia:

  "I understand when we split from 908-932 to 908-932 and 908-445,
  that originally NJB proposed that we take the newly available
  809 exchange (instead of 445).  We rescinded that proposal on
  the grounds that a phone number like 908-809-xxxx would lead to
  too many typographical errors, and confusion with the newly
  minted 908 area code.  Maybe we should've asked for 923 instead
  of 445?"

T.P. also posted a followup message mentioning that people had better
specify 609-225 when they called the operator.

I think all the users have caught onto the idea now, but there's bound
to be a few who stop calling in (particularly people from outside
Rutgers who just dial in to use the public system).  Of course, those
few who continue believing it's a toll call after all our explaining
are probably modem-incompetent anyway.


Shag
[e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail]
  Operator of ShagNet - Rutgers/NJIN dialup access for Burlington County, NJ
     Happy and informative user of a PPI 14400 FaxModem and GeoWorks Pro
       Editor of the Queensryche E-mail Digest - "Screaming in Digital"

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

Subject: Want Info on Ringing Voltages/Cadences Around the World
From: [e-mail] (Steve Pershing)
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 93 15:08:01 PST
Organization: Questor|Free Usenet News|Vancouver, BC: [phone]


I have sold a good few ZyXEL modems to various happy clients around
the world via our mail-server.

In one instance (and I suspect there are many more) the modems worked
fine, but would not answer when a call was incoming.  This particular
instance was in Japan.

After a call to ZyXEL's tech support, they had a hidden register which
had to be set, and voil`a, everything worked just fine.

Recently, I noticed a posting in comp.dcom.modems in which a Swedish
ZyXEL user seemed to be having similar problems.

Is there such a great diversity in ringing current and ringing
cadences, other than the ringing in country code 1 and country code
44?

If there is a FAQ describing this, please let me know about it and I
will get hold of it.  Thanks!


    Steve Pershing, SysAdmin  <[e-mail]>    The QUESTOR Project
  FREE access to Environ, Sci, Med, & AIDS news, and more.  [also UUCP]
    on a ZyXEL-U1496S+  =>  v.42bis, v.32bis, v.33, up to 16,800bps.
                 -=-         -=-         -=-         -=-
   Fones: (+1 604)  Data: 681-0670  Telefax: 682-6160  Voice: 682-6659

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

Date: Mon, 11 Jan 93 10:38:51 SST
From: Ang Peng Hwa <[e-mail]>
Subject: US Losing Lead in Telecom - USC Report


This report is from UPI:

Los Angeles -- America's traditional lead in telecommunications is
eroding very rapidly as other nations promote new technologies,
according to a study released Wednesday.

"The potential of new information communication technologies and
services is widely appreciated around the world and many nations are
making aggressive steps to promote their deployment," said the
University of Southern California study.

The study, produced by the USC's Center for Telecommunications
Management and covering 24 nations, found that the US lagged in a
number of key technologies compared with other nations, such as
converting analog networks to more efficient digital networks and
investment.

It said digitalization of the US network stood at just over 50 percent
at the end of 1991, which ranks ninth of 18 reporting countries, while
US investment in public network infrastructure was 12th among the 18
countries. It also said other nations were retiring used equipment
much faster than the US.

"While a number of other nations have dramatically increased their
capital investment in infrastructure, US investment is flat or
declining," it said. "Furthermore, depreciation trends in the US show
a shocking pattern."

The study added: "During this remarkable period of rapid technological
progress and obsolescence, asset lives for public network equipment of
local exchange companies have actually increased in the US. Nations
like Japan, the United Kingdom, Singapore and others write off and
replace equipment twice as fast as most US carriers."

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

Date: Mon, 11 Jan 93 18:52:32 PST
From: Ole J. Jacobsen <[e-mail]>
Subject: Call for Volunteers at INTEROP 93 Spring


Please distribute as widely as possible:

                        Call for Volunteers:

           The INTEROP Conference Assessment Team (CAT)

Interop Company is seeking student volunteers to serve as quality
control monitors for INTEROP 93 Spring, to be held in Washington, DC,
March 8-12, 1993.  This is a unique opportunity for students to attend
the industry's premier networking conference and tradeshow, while
helping us improve the quality and consistency of the conference.

As a CAT member you will receive:

* Complimentary conference registration for all three conference days;

* Complimentary conference notes;

* Complimentary registration for an INTEROP tutorial on Monday/Tuesday [NEW!]
  (You may be assigned to a tutorial that is not your "first choice",
  but we will make every effort to acommodate your requests.)

* Complimentary lunch all three days;

* Special INTEROP CAT T-shirts;

* A complimentary copy of the book "Exploring the Internet";

As a CAT member you will be asked to:

* Monitor preassigned conference sessions on one of the three conference
  days, by submitting written reports and acting as the "eyes and ears"
  of the conference organizers. We will provide you with a basic
  evaluation form to aid the preparation of the reports.

(You will be free to attend any conference session and the INTEROP
exhibition on your "days off.")

* Provide an accurate count of the number of people attending the
  sessions you are assigned to. ("Clickers" will be provided!)

Successful CAT candidates will be students currently enrolled in a
computer science or electrical engineering course at undergraduate,
graduate or post-graduate level. Applicants should have some
understanding of (and interest in) computer networking issues. All
applications must be received by February 15, 1993. Please note that
Interop Company cannot cover any travel or accommodation costs
associated with the CAT program, however as a CAT member you will be
elligible for the standard conference discount rate at a number of
Washington, DC hotels.

To apply, send e-mail to: [e-mail] with a brief biography and
relevant contact information. Don't forget to send a POSTAL address as
we will need to send you some hardcopy material.

*** PLEASE: Do not include my message in your reply. If you must
include it, please do so AFTER your reply rather than before it. Thank
you very much.***


Ole J Jacobsen, Editor & Publisher ConneXions--The Interoperability Report
Interop Company, 480 San Antonio Road, Suite 100, Mountain View, CA 94040,
Phone: [phone]  FAX: [phone]  Email: [e-mail]

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

Date: Mon, 11 Jan 93 08:31:03 CST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Bellcore NPA/NXX Information
Reply-To: Al Varney <[e-mail]>
Organization: AT&T


Patrick,

  Several folks have asked for information available in some form from
Bellcore -- and my e-mail to them failed.  Perhaps you could post this
AND include it in FAQ or archive.  Thanks.

To Bob Larribeau at <[e-mail]>, asking for NPA/NXX information:

   Information about which LEC "owns" an NPA/NXX, and lots of other
   data you might want, is in several Bellcore "products".  For example,
   the NPA-NXX V&H Coordinates Tape (primarily for billing) contains the
   OCN (Operating Company Number) for each NXX -- you can translate that
   to an LEC (or equivalent in Canada/Caribbean).

To Richard Cox, who asked for information on the NPA/NXX activity guide:

   I tried to reply, but both <[e-mail]> and
<att!compulink.co.uk!cix.comp> didn't work; SMTP says 'compulink.co.uk'
is unknown.

      -----

   So, I've attached a canned response I use for questions about
Bellcore, but the telephone numbers correspond to the normal TR/TA
document center.  The NPA/NXX information is maintained by the
(somewhat) separate Traffic Routing Administration (TRA) group, at +1
201 829 3071.

   To complicate matters, there are three PUBLIC documents published
by Bellcore's document center, but maintained by the TRA.  These are
available by contacting the document center as described in the
attachment.

 - FA20: "Telephone Area Code Directory (TACD) Microfiche"
   Contains all customer-dialable points in the North American Numbering
   Plan with the corresponding NPA.  Issued monthly.   $50

 - TR-EOP-000093: "TACD Paper Report"  As above, issued annually around
   September.  Ordered by State and Locality.  Carrier Identification
   Codes are included.

 - TR-OPT-001843: 800/900 List on Paper, giving company name and telephone
   contact for each NXX assigned with the 800 and 900 codes.  Issued
   quarterly.

  [Call the document HOTLINE in the attachment for prices of paper
  documents.]

   For all other TRA "products", or information about on-line access
to a database of routing data, contact the TRA Hotline at +1 201 829
3071, or write to:

   Traffic Routing Administration
   Bell Communications Research, Inc.
   435 South Street, Room 1J321
   Morristown, NJ  07962-1961

  These non-public documents and on-line access require signing a
"Terms and Conditions Agreement" before purchase.  You should ask for
a complete list of products and prices.  Some of the documents do not
include Canada.

   Some of the more "common-use" TRA documents are:

 - NPA-NXX Vertical and Horizontal Coordinates Tape (the "V&H Tape")
   is primarily for billing purposes, and lists (for each NXX) the type
   of NXX, major/minor V&H coordinates, LATA Code, the ROA, Time Zone,
   Place Name, OCN (TELCO) and indicators for IDDD and "Non-Dialable".

 - NPA/NXX Activity Guide lists all NPA/NXX codes schedules to be added,
   removed or "modified" (monthly).  There's also an Active Code List
   that lists all NPA/NXX codes that aren't planned to be removed or
   "modified" for the next 6 months.

 - Local Exchange Routing Guide (LERG)
   contains information on all USA/Caribbean destinations, switching
   entities, Rate Centers and Localities, Tandem Homing information,
   operator service codes, 800/900 NXX assignments, etc.
   (3 1600 BPI tapes!!!)  Mostly useful to IXCs and other TELCos.


  Good Luck,
  Al Varney     [e-mail]

 ------ (canned response follows:) -------------------

   Bellcore TAs and other preliminary "advisories" are only available
   by writing:
     Bellcore
     Document Registrar
     445 South Street - Room 2J-125
     P. O. Box 1910
     Morristown, NJ 07962-1910

 TRs and other "standard" documents can be ordered from:
     Bellcore Customer Service
     60 New England Avenue
     Piscataway, NJ 08854-4196

  or by calling the document HOTLINE (menu-monster) at

      1-800-521-CORE  (1-800-521-2673).

 They take AMEX, VISA and MasterCharge, International Money Orders,
 and Checks on US Banks.  If you don't have a document number handy,
 they can send you a catalog of technical documents.

 International calls are on [phone].

 (If you want to order a document, press 2 at the automated greeting.
 If you want to talk to a person about availability, prices, etc,
 press 4 at the automated greeting)

 FAX on [phone].

  If you want to talk to the "pub" folks, or a technical person, the
numbers/addresses are in the front of any TR (and the "Catalog").


Al Varney - the above represents my opinion, and not AT&T's....
  (And I do wish Bellcore paid commissions for these referrals!)

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

Subject: Use a Phone, Go to Jail
Date: 11 Jan 93 10:02:32 EST (Mon)
From: [e-mail] (Paul S. Sawyer)


Recently here (Strafford County, NH) a man was sentenced to four
months in jail for telephone harrasment for making two "hang up"
calls.

With this type of precedent, couldn't we give telemarketers at least
30 days (first offense...) and 800- number billing converters 5-10
years?  :-) :-)


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Andrew M. Dunn)
Subject: Canadian Competition Full Steam Ahead; Enter AT&T
Organization: A. Dunn Systems Corporation, Kitchener, Ontario, Canada
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 93 14:46:36 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (David
Leibold) writes:

> At least we're not getting any COCOTs ... yet :-)

No, but AT&T announced yesterday that they're entering the Canadian
market via a modified partnership/investment arrangement with Unitel.

Unitel is presently a joint venture of Canadian Pacific and Rogers
Communications.  Each will reduce their stake to 40% to give AT&T 20%
of Unitel in exchange for investment, market development, technical
expertise, and access to AT&T's American network.

Unitel President George Harvey commented that it was the right move to
make at the right time, that AT&T was a strong player in the world
telecommunications market, and that the arrangement would benefit all
parties.

He particularly stressed that the move would lead to faster, cheaper
communications throughout Canada, and that he expected rates to fall
quickly as new arrangements were made.

Unitel offers communications services in competition with Bell Canada
in the long-distance market, as well as private circuit facilities to
businesses (which has been their mainstay up until the present time).

It will be interesting to see what this venture brings.  It will, at
the very least, be a significant change to the Canadian telecommun-
ications marketplace.

I don't work for Unitel, Rogers, CP, or AT&T.  Nor am I a customer
(yet).  But I did once work for Unitel's predecessor...


Andy Dunn     <[e-mail]> or <[e-mail]>

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Visual "Bell" For a POTS Line
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 93 11:51:05 EST
Reply-To: [e-mail]


Greetings.  I have a couple of applications for a device that flashes
a light (maybe even a strobe) when a plain phone line rings.  Such a
thing must exist, but I can't find sources. Please email to me and
I'll summarize.  Thanks!


Cristobal Pedregal Martin     [e-mail]
Computer Science Department   UMass / Amherst, MA 01003


[Moderator's Note: The easiest way to do this is get a neon test thing
from Radio Shack (or anywhere else ...). Just wire it parallel to the
phone line. It does not draw enough current to take the phone off hook
but will flash in sync with the ringing of the phone. I have an
appliation here where there are several lines going into a computer
which is used for voicemail. No one wants to sit and listen to those
bells on the incoming phone lines ring all the time, yet it is very
important to know if for some reason the computer is not answering the
line ... with no bell it would never be noticed if something had gone
wrong. So, I have several 'beehive lamps' (the little plastic things
with a dome on top and a neon bulb mounted within) mounted on the wall
with double-sided tape. Wires run to each from the associated phone
line. They flash on for a couple seconds each time a call comes in on
that line. The only line with an actual bell on it is the final line
in the hunt group -- when it rings, it serves notice that the computer
has a full house, at least for the time being. I also have a little
counter installed on that line which increments by one each time that
line rings ... by viewing the register, one can see how often a full
house occurred since the last time the register was reset.   PAT]

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

Date: Mon, 11 Jan 93 18:25 PST
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: Colorado Gets Caller ID


tim gorman <[e-mail]> writes:

> Perhaps PacBell is making a marketing mistake by not offering caller
> id even though mandated blocking restrictions would apply? Perhaps
> their total revenues would be higher than if no blocking at all was
> available?

Maybe so. I, for one, would buy Caller-ID even if blocking applied to
99% of the state's telephones on a per-line basis. For me, the
telephone is an instrument whose purpose is to communicate with
friends, business associates, and customers -- plus people who could
potentially become one of these. ALL OTHERS are of no interest to me
whatsoever.  Those who fit into the desired category of callers would
never block CNID to me; those in the undesired category can block all
they like.

I look at CNID as sort of a "wired PL". Just as there are many users
on some commercial two-way radio bands who stay out of each others'
hair by the use of "private line" encoding, CNID allows a similar
enhancement when using the public telephone network. You know that
when the phone rings, it is a "desirable" rather than a wrong-number-
idiot, a mysterious one-ringer pest, a hangup-when-you-answer creep, a
telesales slime, or even a former customer whom you wish never to hear
 from again.

Now if I could just convince Pac*Bell that there are others like me
out there. Perhaps I could show them my e-mail ...


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Conrad Kimball)
Subject: Re: Colorado Gets Caller ID
Date: 11 Jan 93 22:17:39 GMT
Organization: Boeing Computer Services, Seattle, WA


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Richard
Lucas) writes:

> The best gauge of consumer opinion is how they vote with their
> dollars, not with their words.  If Colorado's first-day results can be
> generalized to other areas, then John Higdon is quite correct that the
> PUC decision in California gives the voices of a few more weight than
> the desires of the majority.

Sometimes that is quite proper.  Tyranny of the majority, and all
that.  And that's assuming "the majority" is _fully_ informed of the
issues, which I doubt is the case in this particular situation.


Conrad Kimball       | Client Server Tech Services, Boeing Computer Services
[e-mail]   | P.O. Box 24346, MS 7A-35
[phone]       | Seattle, WA  98124-0346

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #19
*****************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa20998;
          12 Jan 93 3:50 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA27863
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 12 Jan 1993 01:37:30 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA23203
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 12 Jan 1993 01:37:01 -0600
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 01:37:01 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #20

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 12 Jan 93 01:37:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 20

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Calling 1-800 Can Cost You a Fortune (Steve Forrette)
    Re: Calling 1-800 Can Cost You a Fortune (Mickey Ferguson)
    Re: Calling 1-800 Can Cost You a Fortune (John Sullivan)
    Re: Calling 1-800 Can Cost You a Fortune (Liron Lightwood)
    Re: Calling 1-800 Can Cost You a Fortune (Curtis Sanford)
    Re: Calling 1-800 Can Cost You a Fortune (Dave Levenson)
    Re: Calling 1-800 Can Cost You a Fortune (Lou Taff)
    1-800-RIP-OFFS (was Calling 1-800 Can Cost a Fortune) (Paul Robinson)
    Re: 976 Fraud in Toronto (Troy Frericks)
    Re: 976 Fraud in Toronto (John David Galt)
    Re: 976 Fraud in Toronto (Brian Onn)
    Re: Good Opportunity For Fraud (Rob Boudrie)
    Re: Good Opportunity For Fraud (Anthony E. Siegman)
    Re: Good Opportunity For Fraud (Ed Oliveri)
    Re: It's Not a Bug, it's a Feature ... (Ben Cox)
    Re: It's Not a Bug, it's a Feature ... (Paul Robinson)
    Re: It's Not a Bug, it's a Feature ... (Barry Mishkind)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: Calling 1-800 Can Cost You a Fortune
Date: 11 Jan 1993 22:33:27 GMT
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Udi
Manber) writes:

> I learned this the hard way after being charged for (apparently)
> dialing the wrong 800 number.

How did this charge appear on your bill? Was it a call to a 900
number, or perhaps a collect call?


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

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

Date: Mon, 11 Jan 93 16:41:12 PST
From: [e-mail] (Mickey Ferguson)
Subject: Re: Calling 1-800 Can Cost You a Fortune
Reply-To: [e-mail]


> If you always thought that 1-800 numbers (in the US) are toll free,
> think again. With new technology and the lack of regulations, people
> are finding new ways to make money.

         [stuff deleted]

> It is possible, and apparently perfectly legal, to set an 800 number
> such that when you call you hear a recording that tells you that there
> will be charges for the call.

         [more stuff deleted]

> So here are some scam ideas (these are all fiction; do not try it at
> home):

         [more stuff deleted]

How long will it be before the COCOTs jump into the calling card
fraud?  How difficult would it be to program a pay phone to look for
when a caller dials the 800 number which is associated with one of the
long distance providers, and then just capture the calling card
digits, but pass on the digits and complete the call?  Then the COCOT
software just writes the calling card digits and the long distance
provider into its private database, which is then dumped and sold off
to the drug dealers, etc.  The more I think about this, the more I get
terrified at just how easy such a scam would be.  Hmmmm, maybe I'll
just go out and buy a pay phone and modify the software ...  NOT!

Maybe one idea to regulate COCOTs without too much difficulty or
paperwork would be to require them to be bonded, just like a home
contractor is.  Since the possibilities are just sitting there, this
would at least help to pay for any fraud that could result.  Or am I
being too paranoid?


Mickey Ferguson -- PhoneMail Development -- ROLMfax and Eclipse

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

Date: Mon, 11 Jan 93 18:37:11 CST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Calling 1-800 Can Cost You a Fortune


I'm now confused.  I don't always read TELECOM Digest, so I may have
missed something, but I have seen previous posts about INTEGRETEL,
etc., and I always got the impression that people trying to bill you
for 1-800 calls would get your number from their ANI, and send you a
separate bill for whatever they wanted.  I hadn't heard of getting
actual phone charges from calling 1-800.  If I forward calls to some
other number _I_ pay the charges on the resulting call, not the person
who called my first number.  Why would any telephone company agree to
provide billing services to anyone like INTEGRETEL anyway?

The other thing that has always confused me is why alternative
long-distance companies (AOSs?) can charge things to an AT&T calling
card.  I realize that Ma and the Baby Bells have some sort of
agreement to allow charges to each others' calling cards.  And I
gather that this all has something to do with the fact that there is
some standard way to determine if a calling card number is valid.  But
again, why does AT&T agree to provide billing service for these
people?  I can't imagine if Sears suddenly decided to accept payments
by JCPenny credit cards that JCPenny would actually let them collect
on the bills.

Sorry if this is all old hat, but I haven't seen good answers to these
questions here or elsewhere ...


John Sullivan     [e-mail]

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

Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 14:24:24 +1100
From: Liron Lightwood <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Calling 1-800 Can Cost You a Fortune


So, what happens when you call one of these costly 1-800 numbers from
a payphone?  Do the phone company pick up the bill?  Do you get asked
to insert money?  Or do you get a recorded message saying the number
cannot be dialed?

I understand that 1-900 numbers cannot be called from US payphones,
but 1-800 numbers can.  Does this apply for all 1-800 numbers
available in the area where the call is made from?


[Moderator's Note: What happened in the past was that the information
providers resorting to this sleazy tactic (of issuing a bill to the
caller after the caller dialed the 800 number) did attempt to send a
bill to the owner of the payphone ... and of course, the 'owner' of
the payphone (in effect, the subscriber) was telco itself ... telco
would not pay the IP's, and the IP's quickly learned to consult a data
base which lists payphone numbers, then refuse to do business with the
folks calling from them. The IP's still get tripped up occasionally by
COCOTS, (or actually, the COCOT owner gets the bill, he squeals like a
pig and the IP has to eat the charges) so when these numbers get iden-
tified, they also get added to the list of numbers not to be dealt
with. I think the IP's have begun to circulate the 'untouchables' list
among themselves as a mutual protection kind of thing. But in the
early days of the 800-converted-to-900-or-worse racket, it sure was
fun seeing how many charge-backs could be shoved up Mystic Marketing's
corporate waste eliminator at one time. Calls went through to those
astrologers, Tarot practitioners and 'counseling services' from every
payphone in Chicago, I suspect, and probably from other cities as
well. So how come the astrologers could not detect this little
shortcoming in their scam from the beginning?  :)    PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Curtis Sanford)
Subject: Re: Calling 1-800 Can Cost You a Fortune
Date: 11 Jan 93 16:36:11 GMT
Organization: Ascend Communications, Alameda CA


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Udi
Manber) writes:

> If you always thought that 1-800 numbers (in the US) are toll free,
> think again. With new technology and the lack of regulations, people
> are finding new ways to make money.

> It is possible, and apparently perfectly legal, to set an 800 number
> such that when you call you hear a recording that tells you that there
> will be charges for the call.

Typically 800 numbers are not blocked from pay phones.  What happens
if you call such a number from a pay phone?  Is this a way to have
sweet revenge on the COCOT industry?


[Moderator's Note: See my comments in an earlier message in this
issue. The IP's have begun keeping a data base of payphones, and they
refused to service callers from those places.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Dave Levenson)
Subject: Re: Calling 1-800 Can Cost You a Fortune
Organization: Westmark, Inc.
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 19:20:19 GMT


I think that the public, or at least, the readers of this Digest, can
help correct this problem ... for every non-toll-free 800 number you
can find, share it with as many friends as you can.  Then, whenever
you have some time to kill and you're near a public telephone, place
lots of calls to these numbers.  When the telco or other public
telephone provider starts getting these bills, they'll probably use
their clout with regulatory agencies to suppress such use of the 800
service access code.

Any thoughts on this?


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


[Moderator's Note: And you also are invited to read my comments on
this in an earlier message in this issue. It just won't work any
longer; the astrologers and Tarot practitioners don't want any more BS
 from the deadbeats of the world (like all good TELECOM Digest
Moderators) ... Mystic Marketing says cut it out, now!  To be sure you
do, they've got the number of the payphones at the local 7/11 or bus
station, or wherever you are when you get the urge.  :)  By all means
though, keep trying; let's be sure they get their data base as complete
as possible.  :)  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 93 13:20 EST
Subject: Re: Calling 1-800 Can Cost You a Fortune


Pat:

With reference to a recent article in comp.dcom.telecom, I wonder if
you could refer me to (or send me a copy of) a telecom discussion
detailing just how calls to 800 numbers are charged for and end up on
someone's bill.  I'm having a hard time understanding it.  Thanks for
any help.


Lou Taff, AT&T Bell Laboratories
185 Monmouth Parkway   West Long Branch, NJ 07764
[phone]    [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: I'll do better than that, Lou. I'll print another
whole issue on the topic -- you are reading it now. Perhaps some of
the people who have raised the topic in the past will share their
wisdom with you.   PAT]

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

Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993  19:02:51 EST
Subject: 1-800-RIP-OFFS (Was Calling 1-800 Can Cost a Fortune)


In TELECOM Digest Vol 13 #12, Udi Manber <[e-mail]>
suggested:

> You can get an 800 number that is one digit away from
> a widely used 800 number and rip off anyone who makes
> a mistake...You can put ads for information on how to
> make $10 a minute - just call 1-800-747-6337.  That's
> 1-800-Rip-Offs...

 From a Government Centrex number in Maryland that is authorized to
dial 1-800 numbers, I got the message:

  "Recording C2.  We're sorry, the number you've dialed is not
authorized from this location.  C2."

And this repeats several times.  So it looks like some of us are
protected from RIP-OFFS!  :)


Paul Robinson -- [e-mail]
"If I or anyone else is caught making opinions, the Secretary will
disavow any knowledge of our actions..."

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

From: [e-mail] (Troy Frericks)
Subject: Re: 976 Fraud in Toronto
Organization: Microware Systems Corp., Des Moines, Iowa
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 16:16:28 GMT


> A similar scam has been going on in New York City. A messenger will
> show up at a company with a package, and when no one there seems to
> match the addressee, he asks to use the phone.  Calls a "540" exchange
> (one of the extra charge numbers; the others are 550, 970, 976, and
> another about to be announced) and the company gets billed for $50 or
> so.

Please explain.  I thought that 1-976-xxx-xxxx and 1-900-xxx-xxxx were
the only way for the called party to gain $$$ from the call.  What
other ways are there?  Do the above reference calls area code 212:
1-212-540-xxxx, 550-xxxx, 970-xxxx, and 976-xxxx?  If so, how am I
going to know that an extra charge applies (being from Iowa)?


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: Being from Iowa you don't have to worry about it,
as your telco will not connect you to a 212-540/550/etc number. In
that sense, they (540 numbers) are like 976; since the host telco has
no way to legitimatly collect for these numbers from interstate
callers (one could question the legitimacy of the whole concept, but
that is another issue), telcos simply do not put them through to each
other.  In the case of 900, specific tariffs apply for interstate
calls; for 976 and its kin, they do not. Many of the IP's from a few
years ago can tell you how they begged and pleaded with telco to not
allow calls to their 976 numbers from out of state: callers from
Chicago and elsewhere would dial into (as an example) 415-976-GAYS --
a gay bridge operating in SFCA at 13 cents per minute interstate night
rates -- and tie up all the ports so none of the locals could get
through at two dollar or more per minute rates. If you are not in NY
Tel's territory, you will not connect with 212-540 et al; if you are
not in Illinois Bell's territory you will not connect with 312-976.
Ditto PacTel and their premium lines. That's why whenever I see these
'urgent memos' from security personnel at various corporations warning
their employees against 'a scam originating in New York where they
call your beeper number and you call back, getting charged X dollars'
I always get a big laugh. It WILL NOT work (to the benefit of the
scammer) unless the victim is in the 212/718/914/516 area codes.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: 976 Fraud in Toronto
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 93 10:18:02 PST


I have an idea that would make us more secure against this type of
fraud.  I wonder if any of the telcos would be willing to implement
it.

What I'd like to do is get my phone blocked so that direct-dialed
calls to a 900, 976, ... number won't go through, but calling-card
calls will.  That way if I really want to try one of these services, I
can get through, but a visitor can't (unless he uses his own card, and
then he pays).


John David Galt

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

From: [e-mail] (Brian Onn - OpCom Staff)
Subject: Re: 976 Fraud in Toronto
Organization: Sun Microsystems of Canada, Inc.
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 23:28:32 GMT


On Wed, 06 Jan 93 00:56:39 EST, Tony Harminc <[e-mail]> said:

> This past November, a company I consult for had three
> unauthorized calls to [phone] made on one of its lines.

[...]

> Bell Canada has agreed to remove the charges, but will not tell
> us the name of the owner of this number.

In Toronto, you can call the Bell Canada Customer Listing Bureau at
[phone], between 1100 and 1400 EST, and if you give them the
phone number, the operator will tell you who the number is registered
to.  The rules for 976 numbers may be different, however.  The process
works for most "normal" numbers.  Give it a try.


Brian Onn.                  Internet : [e-mail]
Operation Commitment,            Uucp : uunet!sun!suncan!brian
Product Support Specialist.    Voice : [phone].


[Moderator's Note: I just now tried it for 312-976-WAKE, our local
wake-up service (if their bill doesn't cause you to jump out of bed, I
don't know what would).  IBT-CNA (312-796-9600) would only say it is a
"Public Announcement Service"; no record as to owner, etc.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Rob Boudrie)
Subject: Re: Good Opportunity For Fraud
Organization: Center For High Perf. Computing of WPI; Marlboro Ma
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 05:59:39 GMT


> I believe the bankcard passwords are also often in the clear in the
> ISO mag stripe. Shudder! Remember having read something to that
> effect on the net. Could some please deny ... please .. please!

Denied.  (You're welcome!)

Bank card passwords are stored in encrypted form (one way encryption
using the DES algorithm on a combination of the account number, user
selected PIN and a few other things) which allows for local
verification of passwords but only by your own bank.  There are two
different standards by which this is done, but each has a
bank-specific encryption key (often refered to as the Pin Verification
Key, or PVK).  This key is kept highly confidential -- anyone with the
key could generate the hashed pin for each possible password (only
10,000 in the typical four digit password) , compare each to the
hashed value on the card, and decode the PIN that way.

Your own back can verify the password within the ATM; other bank's ATM's
must query your bank via the network.


rob boudrie

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

Date: Mon, 11 Jan 93 14:08:00 PST
From: Anthony E. Siegman <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Good Opportunity For Fraud
Organization: Stanford University


> [Moderator's Note: I think the banks here which give money on trust
> when the network is down do have something called a 'negative listing'
                                                       ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> of cards which should not be honored in that way. Here in the Chicago

   I believe another more generic term for this kind of list, made
available in any form, is "derog list" (with obvious interpretation).

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

From: [e-mail] (Ed Oliveri)
Subject: Re: Good Opportunity For Fraud
Organization: AT&T
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 17:00:48 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(John R. Levine) writes:

> Citibank machines in New York City at least used to have a similar
> feature.  For a long time, over a year, someone who clearly had inside
> information was using an old invalid Citicard to make $100 withdrawals
> from machines all over the city when the machines were offline while
> their network nodes were down for maintenance.  The maintenance
> schedule was deliberately erratic and quite secret.  Had the guy used
> the card even once in an on-line machine the card would have been
> eaten and that would have been that.  I never heard whether they
> managed to catch him.  I'd think that it would have been
> straightforward to set up a sting to catch him in the act.

Are you sure this was Citibank?  Every Citibank ATM I've seen CANNOT
eat a card since the card is dipped into the card reader, never
leaving the user's fingers.


Ed Oliveri, [e-mail]     OR     att!cbnewsb!eo


[Moderator's Note: The Citibank ATM's in Chicago eat the card for a
minute and spit it out when finished with it.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Ben Cox)
Subject: Re: It's Not a Bug, it's a Feature ...
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Ben Cox)
Organization: Ancient Illuminated Sears of Bavaria
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 01:05:40 GMT


[e-mail] (Kenneth Crudup) writes:

> winding pulses to compensate for the increased requirements. This
> period of additional supply registers in the cores of the transformers
> as a slight "bleep", and a bunch of them together produce the "music"
> you hear. I used to troubleshoot Sun-2's aurally as well.

If you don't configure the device driver for the /dev/audio device on
a SPARCstation 10, you can hear interesting music on SpeakerBox,
too ... :-)


Ben Cox   [e-mail]

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

Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993  22:32:27 EST
Subject: Re: It's Not a Bug, It's a Feature ...


[e-mail] writes in TELECOM Digest 13 #14 about how
someone programmed the IBM 1130 to generate tones on an AM radio.

I've got one better than that.  I was in the computer center at Orange
Coast College in Costa Mesa, Ca., when someone got the *line printer*
to play the five tones from "Close Encounters of the Third Kind"!

I was there, I heard it.  Slick; it used exactly ONE piece of paper to
do this.  Do not ask me how.

Try *that*, Hewlett Packard!


Paul Robinson -- [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Barry Mishkind)
Subject: Re: It's Not a Bug, it's a Feature ...
Organization: Datalog Consulting, Tucson, AZ
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 93 01:50:24 GMT


[e-mail] (Ken Stox) writes:

> Back in the "old" days, we used to leave an AM radio next to an IBM
> 1130, you could actually pick up the CPU activity. One clever
> programmer started writing some very interesting compositions. Of
> course, with the advent of modern synthesizers, it would be totally
> unimpressive.

Radio Shack actually sold several tunes that played on the TRS-80 and
made noise on a radio held near. This was late '70s


Regards,

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

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #20
*****************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa22555;
          12 Jan 93 4:42 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA31841
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 12 Jan 1993 02:32:48 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA22792
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 12 Jan 1993 02:32:22 -0600
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 02:32:22 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #21

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 12 Jan 93 02:32:20 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 21

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Format of ZIP Code Bars on Envelopes (Sean Case)
    Re: Format of ZIP Code Bars on Envelopes (Steve Hutzley)
    Re: Format of ZIP Code Bars on Envelopes (Sean Malloy)
    Re: Format of ZIP Code Bars on Envelopes (Zealand R. Hatch)
    Re: Format of ZIP Code Bars on Envelopes (Michael Rosen)
    Database of Area Codes, NPA-s and Zipcodes Wanted (John Villalovos)
    Re: Hunt Groups (John Rice)
    Re: Hunt Groups (Bill Huttig)
    Re: Hunt Groups (Barton F. Bruce)
    Re: Hunt Groups (Steve Forrette)
    Re: Hunt Groups (Stephen Diercouff)
    Re: Hunt Groups (Dave Levenson)
    Re: Hunt Groups (Jim Knight)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Sean Case)
Subject: Re: Format of ZIP Code Bars on Envelopes
Date: 12 Jan 93 00:08:56 GMT
Organization: Australian National University


[e-mail] writes:

> Curious enough to hunt for another factoid ... does anyone know what
> fraction of the entire snail mail in the US is generated by business
> and how much by Aunt Agatha ?

> Should give some insight into how much mail the automatic sorters
> actually can ever benefit from. And if the dreams of USPS to read
> human handwriting are so important?

Here in Australia, most envelopes are sold with preprinted boxes for
the (four-digit) postcode. Australia Post claim that their equipment
can read hand-scrawled postcodes so long as they're in the boxes.
Typescript addresses don't have to use the boxes, but pushing the
postcode out to the right of the address is supposed to help.  They
don't say what sort of error rate they have, though.

I heard a story some time back that the good ol' USSR had envelopes
with a mark sense area for the postcode (possibly using a
seven-segment layout). Mail with unreadable postcodes was discarded.
That's certainly one approach ... is this just obsolete propaganda?


Sean Case   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Hutzley)
Subject: Re: Format of ZIP Code Bars on Envelopes
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 23:22:33 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail].
com (say,halim s) writes ...

> I would like to find out the encoding for the ZIP code bars on USPS
> mail envelopes.

> I could figure out this much:

> Ones are long bars, zeros are short bars.  Start and end with a one.
> Each digit has five characters.  I could figure out what zero through
> nine correspond to.

> The only remaining part is the check digit at the end.  Only one check
> digit is used both for five digit regular ZIP code and nine digit
> extended code.

> Now my question is: What is the encoding/decoding rule for this single
> check digit?

> Does anyone know or could you tell me a reference for this "standard"?
> I am sure some address generator software would have this algorithm.

See {PC Magazine} a few months ago (November/December), they had the
whole scheme in there. Its kind of an inverted BCD where the LONG ONES
are 0 and the SHORT ONES are 1 (I think), and there were CLOCK pulses
in there to compensate for the speed variances of the reading machines.


Steve

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

From: [e-mail] (Sean Malloy)
Subject: Re: Format of ZIP Code Bars on Envelopes
Date: 12 Jan 1993 04:30:42 -0600
Organization: Texas A&M University, College Station, TX


> Also, Is there a summary of several bar codes ftp-able somewhere ?

As an aside: On wuarchive.wustl.edu in /mirrors/win3/fonts/truetype
are two fonts that might relate to this topic:

usps_bar.zip and barcod39.zip

I make no claims about their accuracy, but if you're running MS
Windows 3.1 then they might help.


Sean C. Malloy  -  Texas A&M University  -  [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Zealand R. Hatch)
Subject: Re: Format of ZIP Code Bars on Envelopes
Date: 11 Jan 93 19:28:57 GMT
Organization: Amdahl Corporation, Sunnyvale CA


I'm not sure what this has to do with telecom but having recently
investigated this I'll share what I know.

There is a group of publications available from the Post Office.

Publication 25: Designing Business Letter Mail (Aug 1992)

  This publication replaced the previous Pub. 25 "A Guide to Business Mail
  Preparation".  The major sections from the index are.

  1.0  Introduction
  2.0  Basics of OCR and Barcode reading
  3.0  Physical Characteristics of Automation Compatible Letter Mail
       ("Machinability")
  4.0  Addressing for Automation
  5.0  Postnet Barcode
  6.0  Facing Identification Mark (FIM) Patterns
  7.0  Preparing Reply Mail for Postal Automation

  It's well writen and has all of the information you need to "produce" a
  barcode and put it where it needs to go on the envelope.

Publication 28:  Postal Addressing Standards

  The major sections from the index are.

  I    Introduction
    A  Background
    B  Overview
  II   Postal Addressing Standards
    A  General
    B  Last Line of the Address
    C  Delivery Address Line
    D  Rural Route Addresses
    E  Highway Contract Route Addresses
    F  General Delivery
    G  Postmaster Addresses
    H  Post Office Box Addresses
    I  Puerto Rico Addresses

  This publication is "a comprehensive guide to all styles of addressing".
  Not required reading if what you're interested in is barcodes.

Publication 67:  Automation Plan For Business Mailers

  This publication outlines the Post Office's plans for business mail.
  Interesting as a general overview.


Your local Postmaster should be able to obtain these publications for
you without cost.

As to the question of how does this help with the hand written
address, the SORTING of letters is being converted to barcodes and a
letter is sorted a bunch of times before it is put in your mail box.
So the plan is when a letter initially comes into the post office it's
first checked for a barcode. If it is there the letter goes off to the
sorters. If not, the address is checked to see if the City, State and
ZIP Code are machine readable. If they are the barcode is applied to
the envelope and its off to the sorters. If not the letter is queued
for manual reading. Again the barcode would be applied and then its
time for the sorter.  Not all post offices have all of the equipment
needed for all of these steps yet.  And it will be 1995 before all
letter mail will be automated.


I hope this helps; Happy Mailing,

Zealand Hatch    - 408 746-8720 -   {where_ever}!amdahl!zrh
Amdahl Corporation  -or-  [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Michael Rosen)
Subject: Re: Format of ZIP Code Bars on Envelopes
Organization: University of Denver, Dept. of Math & Comp. Sci.
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 93 04:59:38 GMT


[e-mail] writes:

> In TELECOM Digest 12-928, [e-mail] (say,halim s)
> asks:

>> I would like to find out the encoding for the ZIP code bars on USPS
>> mail envelopes.

> Ask the post office for the circular on bar code.  It's a small
> pamphlet of about 5 pages, and it explains how all of the codes work,
> as there are two codes; one for ZIP code and one for ZIP+4 code.
> There is no charge for the pamphlet.  If your local Post Office
> doesn't have it, try a main office in a large city.

I have that booklet.  The title is "A Guide to Business Mail
Preparation," Publication 25.  Here is the address for comments or
suggestions and I believe this is where I ordered it from:

Marketing Dept
Regular Mail Services Div
U S Postal Service HQ
475 L Enfant Plz SW Rm 5541
Washington DC 20260-6336

They describe the specs for the Postnet bar code and the FIM patterns.
As for the algorithm, I'll have to find my {2600} issue with the article
(where I found the address for the publication originally).  There's
52 bars in a ZIP + 4 Postnet bar code, with two long bars on either
end.  I can't remember the exact methodology for the bars in the
middle at the moment, I'll repost when I find the {2600} issue with the
article.

Also, I have a program I ftp'd at one time called envlj.  Scan for it
via archie, etc.  It will print both FIM patterns and Postnet bar
codes when you supply a complete ZIP + 4 and only a Postnet bar code
when using a five-digit ZIP.


Michael Rosen    Tau Epsilon Phi - George Washington University
[e-mail]    [e-mail] or @lambada.oit.unc.edu

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

From: [e-mail] (John Villalovos)
Subject: Database of Area Codes, NPA-s and Zipcodes Wanted
Date: 12 Jan 93 07:13:58 GMT
Organization: Oregon State University


I was wondering if anyone could point me in a current or fairly
current list of Area Codes, NPA's and Zipcodes.  I wanted to be able
to set up an application where people could tell me their Zipcode and
I could figure out their Area code and possibly some of the NPA's for
the Zipcode.  I once had a program like this but I don't anymore.  It
was put out by AT&T and the data was somewhat out of date.


Thanks,

John Villalovos   Certified Netware Engineer
[e-mail]   [phone]


[Moderator's Note: I'll tell you who keeps a great data base on this:
our reader Carl Moore has lots of files on this. I'm sure when he sees
this he will contact you directly.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Hunt Groups
Organization: Teradyne Inc., Telecommunications Division
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 93 23:14:45 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Rob
Boudrie) writes:

> Is it possible for two numbers serviced by the same physical CO to be
> placed on a hunt group even though they has different exchange
> prefixes?

> [Moderator's Note: I've never heard of a hunt group including lines on
> different prefixes, even if they were in the same CO.  Anyone?   PAT]

Not a hunt group, but 'forward on busy' should work if the lines are
in the same switch. It accomplishes the same end.


John Rice        K9IJ    [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: But John, the big difference between the two at
least where Illinois Bell is concerned is that 'forward on busy' is
handled like any call-forwarding, with a unit (or more) charged on
each call. On the other hand, IBT gives 'hunt' for free. Same
identical feature, but the one is charged for call after call after
call, making it quite expensive if you get several thousand calls each
day with 99 percent or more of them going somewhere other than the
lead number. IBT tried to get *me* to take that feature on a voicemail
system I look after instead of traditional hunting. I said nuts to
that and insisted on regular hunting (and checked the bill the next
month to be sure they obeyed!)   PAT]

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

Date: Mon, 11 Jan 93 21:57:38 -0500
From: [e-mail] ( Bill Huttig)
Subject: Re: Hunt Groups


In SouthernBell land there are rotaries on two or more exchange ... I
would recomend (if you can get it from your carrier) that you get call
forward on busy between the lines ... line 1 on busy forwards to line
2 line 2 on busy forwards to line 1 ... I have my lines set up that
way and I only have to pay $1 for each forward on busy ... a rotary
would have made be pay about $16 more per line ... and call forward
busy does the same thing.


[Moderator's Note: Well this seems to be an applications thing based
on the volume of calls received. IBT does *not* charge any special
fees for hunting. It is free as lomg as all the lines are on the same
exchange. You can pay $1 per call forwarded on busy if you wish, but I
thought it was too expensive when IBT said each forwarded call would
cost one 'unit' -- about 3.5 cents here. Even at three cents per call
forwarded, I'd wind up paying several hundred dollars per month for
this service, which is useless considering the same thing is free from
IBT if you ask for 'hunting' instead.  PAT]

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

Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 01:19:12 -0500 (EST)
From: Barton F. Bruce <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Hunt Groups
Organization: Cambridge Computer Associates, Inc.


[e-mail] (Rob Boudrie) wrote:

> Is it possible for two numbers serviced by the same physical CO to be
> placed on a hunt group even though they has different exchange
> prefixes?

Sure is! but depends on local CO equipment. Or there are tricks you
can play.

Most CO switches cover several exchange codes. Telco may bitch and
scream, but often will hunt between exchanges on their own just to
make their life easier or to get out of some messup they caused. You
may also get number in a hunt group that are 'theoreticals' that have
NO exchange mere customers can dial (can YOU dial 017-9325? I thought
not!).

If you can't get them to do it or it is IMPOSSIBLE (may be on
different CO switches, not just exchanges), then, if you have NO
message unit implications and NO problems paying for a phone line that
only is a number, get call forwarding on the isolated single one and
set it to forward and GROUND both Tip and Ring to PERMANENTLY busy it.
If they bitch, tell repair you are having some equipment problems and
you DID busy it, but if they could DO IT FOR YOU while you get your
equipment straightened out, and that you will CALL THEM when you need
it restored, they probably will leave it that way for ten years.

All calls to that number will then forward to the other numbers were
you can have several lines.

If you can get few line centrex service, you may be able to get line
in use forwarding - more a secretarial feature than hunting.

> [Moderator's Note: I've never heard of a hunt group including lines on
> different prefixes, even if they were in the same CO.  Anyone?   PAT]

Many times. No problem.

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: Hunt Groups
Date: 12 Jan 1993 02:15:55 GMT
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Terry
Kennedy) writes:

> However, the various call forward functions will work across
> prefixes, or across switches if desired. So the subscriber could order
> call forward on busy (or on busy/no answer) and then set whatever form
> of hunt group up that he wanted. This could be done either with
> customer-selected for- warding (the kind usually explained in the
> phone book, where the customer sets the forwarding, or with fixed
> forwarding, where it is set up in the switch and the customer can't
> change it).

One problem with using call-forward-on-busy as a creative way to
create hunt groups of more than two lines is that many telcos restrict
it to handle no more than one forwarded call at a time.  This
restriction may also be placed on Remote Call Forwarding numbers and
regular (immediate) call forwarding.

With US West in Washington State, RCF costs around $18 per month plus
message units, and can handle only one call at a time.  You can
purchase additional "circuits" for $18 per month each.  But, if you
can find somewhere to terminate a loop, you can get an unmeasured
business line for around $32 per month, add call forwarding for around
$4.  Then, for $36, you get up to 20 concurrent calls forwarded with
no message units.  The 20 call maximum was what call forwarding was
configured for on my switch - the person at the business office had to
check this out when I asked, and I got the impression that different
switches had it set to different values.  Pacific Bell on the other
hand, sets all of their switches to the same value: they only allow
one concurrent call for regular call forwarding.

Also, if you want to have a busy or no-answer forwarding go to a
number that's on a different switch, it is technically a different
feature: "busy call forwarding extended."  It was not widely available
until a couple of years ago.  Since this feature is a necessary part
of the telco's own voicemail offering, it is now magically available
most everywhere now.  But some switches may not yet support it, so
busy-forwarding may be restricted to the local switch.


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Stephen Diercouff)
Subject: Re: Hunt Groups
Organization: tfm Associates, Ltd.
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 03:32:39 GMT


[e-mail] (Steve Forrette) writes:

> In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Rob
> Boudrie) writes:

>> Is it possible for two numbers serviced by the same physical CO to be
>> placed on a hunt group even though they has different exchange
>> prefixes?

> I had a similar setup recently, but strictly speaking, it was
> busy-transfer rather than hunting.  It was on a 5ESS switch.  The fact
> that I wanted the busy-transfer was known at the time I placed the
> order for the two lines, and the computer happened to select numbers
> on two different prefixes.  I would imagine that on a modern SPC
> switch, the prefix difference would not matter.

I have three numbers, with three different prefixes, in a rotary hunt
group. The latter two were assigned at the time I ordered the hunt
group. If it makes any difference, the switch is a 5ESS, and the
territory is USWest.


Stephen Diercouff, tfm Associates, Ltd., Bellingham WA  voice: [phone]
Internet:  [e-mail]                                    fax: [phone]
UUCP    :  uunet!nwnexus!tfm!sgd
Snail   :  P.O. Box 5084/Bellingham WA 98227-5084

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

From: [e-mail] (Dave Levenson)
Subject: Re: Hunt Groups
Organization: Westmark, Inc.
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 18:52:42 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> by [e-mail], Pat
adds:

> [Moderator's Note: I've never heard of a hunt group including lines on
> different prefixes, even if they were in the same CO.  Anyone?   PAT]

In Brooklyn, NY, I have a customer with a 12-line hunt-group (which is
used by callers to access a voice-response banking system).  Most of
the lines in this hunt group are 718-388-xxxx numbers, but three of
them are in another prefix.  When New York Telephone was installing
them, I asked the installer if there was a mistake in the line
numbering, and if he would verify that hunting worked correctly
throughout the 12-line group.  He verified the directory number of
each of the lines, and he and I worked together to verify that hunting
worked as ordered.

The serving central office is a Northern Telecom DMS-100 which was cut
into service less than three years ago.  The two prefixes are served
by the same switch.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Jim Knight)
Subject: Re: Hunt Groups
Organization: UMCC
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 04:06:15 GMT


M-Net A Public Access Unix System here in Ann Arbor has two different
prefixes in it's trunk hunt.  We had no trouble getting the phone
company to add two numbers from another site into our trunk hunt.  We
are in the 313 area code, and have both 994 and 996 prefixes in our
trunk hunt.


Jim

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #21
*****************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa07525;
          13 Jan 93 2:42 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA26437
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 13 Jan 1993 00:24:54 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA00611
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 13 Jan 1993 00:24:32 -0600
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1993 00:24:32 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #22

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 13 Jan 93 00:24:30 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 22

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    History.of.Area.Splits (Carl Moore)
    Has Anybody Tried the AmeriVOX Card? (Steve Tomlin)
    Can Paging Software Detect Alphanumerics? (Brad S. Hicks)
    Only in LA ... (Los Angeles Times via Rich Greenberg)
    These Phone Systems Are Great! (National Lampoon via Dan Danz)
    Looking at Voicemail (Michael J. Logsdon)
    Bawling Out Congress by Computer (Dave Niebuhr)
    Catalogs of Phone Equipment/Systems: Is There a List? (Bill Blum)
    MF Signaling Test Gear (Bob Turner)
    Experiences Wanted With Munich-32 (Craig Twardy)
    Multiline Phone Recommendations (Steve Elias)
    Phonejak Transmission System? (David Morgenstern)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Tue, 12 Jan 93 18:44:40 EST
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject: History.of.Area.Splits


Just mailed off to the archives with these additions:

Comment that all calls should be makeable as 1 + NPA +7D.

Notes about 215/610 and 919/910 splits.

Note that 714 now has N0X/N1X prefixes (and that it has become
714/909).

Note that 503 will be programming for N0X/N1X prefixes.

Note that all New England areas (except Connecticut) will be
programming to allow for the NXX area codes (same changes also allow
for N0X/N1X prefixes).


[Moderator's Note: Here is the most recent version of Carl's work.
This will be available in the archives later this week when I get a
chance to go there and install it.  PAT]

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

Generalizing prefixes from NNX to NXX (i.e., allowing N0X/N1X) is an
alternative to splitting an area which has had only NNX up to this
point.  When an area has NXX (not NNX) prefixes, its long distance
dialing instructions usually are:

  7D or 1 + NPA + 7D within area (can no longer use 1 + 7D);
  1 + NPA + 7D to other areas (can no longer use NPA + 7D);
  for 0+ calls, try 0 + NPA + 7D (some 0 + 7D would require timeout).

In other words, the leading 1 (or 0) means that what follows is an
area code.  These instructions can, without further revision,
accommodate area codes of form NXX, not just of form N0X/N1X, and thus
I believe they will become universal when area codes must generalize
to NXX, for which the deadline is January 1, 1995 (had been July 1,
1995).  But since the first batch of NNX area codes will be of NN0
form, some areas might be able to keep 1 + 7D for intra-NPA long
distance by disallowing prefixes of NN0 form; I do not know if this
will be affected by use of 52x codes (x not necessarily 0) for Mexico.
It is unclear how generalizing area codes to NXX would affect the
policy of not using N0X/N1X prefixes until NNX starts running short.

An exception to the above dialing instructions was discovered in Feb
1992 for 215-267 (Denver) and 215-484 (Adamstown) in Pennsylvania.
These exchanges are served by Denver & Ephrata Telephone & Telegraph,
which also serves a part of the 717 area, and which is keeping the old
instructions (1 + 7D and 0 + 7D within area code), even though this
will necessitate timeout resolution for some calls from the 215
portion of their service area.  This will change only when it is about
time for the NXX area codes.

Ideally, all calls should be makeable as 1+NPA+7D (this does not
necessarily mean that shorter forms would be forbidden).

These areas have N0X/N1X prefixes:

213, California, July 1973
 (7D on all calls within it)
 (later 213/818, now 213/310/818)
 (this area continued to publish 0+7D instruction for
  within-NPA 0+ calls)
212, New York, some days after 24 Nov 1980
 (7D on all calls within it)
 (later 212/718, now 212/917/718)
312, Illinois, Oct 1982--but got 1st N0X/N1X spring 1983?
 (7D on all calls within it)
 (now 312/708)
201, New Jersey
 (7D on all calls within it; also applies to 609)
 (now 201/908)
214, Texas, 1986 or 1987 (by July 1987)
 (1+NPA+7D on all toll calls; also applies to 817,
  at least in Fort Worth area)
 (now 214/903)
301/202/703, Maryland/DC/Virginia, 1987, due to DC area growth
 (1+NPA+7D on all toll calls)
 (301 now 301/410)
415, California, Feb 1989?
 (7D on all calls within it)
 (now 415/510)
404, Georgia, Oct 1989?
 (1+NPA+7D on all toll calls; also applies to 912)
 (now 404/706)
919, North Carolina, 2 Mar 1990
 (1+NPA+7D on all toll calls; also applies to 704)
 (to become 919/910)
416, Ontario, 3 Mar 1990
 (1+NPA+7D on all toll calls)
 (to become 416/905)
602, Arizona, 1 July 1990
 (1+NPA+7D on all toll calls)
313, Michigan, 1990?
 (1+NPA+7D on all toll calls)
 (to become 313/810)
512, Texas, 9 Sept 1990
 (1+NPA+7D on all toll calls)
 (now 512/210)
205, Alabama, Dec 1990
 (1+NPA+7D on all toll calls)
215, Pennsylvania, 20 May 1991
 (7D on all calls within it; exception noted above, but the new
  instructions were also applied to:
  717-354,355 New Holland
  717-656,661 Leola
  717-768 Intercourse)
 (to become 215/610)
206, Washington, 12 Jan 1992
 (1+NPA+7D on all toll calls)
813, Florida, 7 Mar 1992
 (1+NPA+7D on all toll calls; also applies to 305,407,904)
713, Texas, 8 Mar 1992 (permissive dialing 8 Dec 1991)
 (1+NPA+7D on all toll calls)
714, California, 1992?
 (7D on all calls within it)
 (now 714/909)
503, Oregon, 10 July 1993
 (1+NPA+7D on all toll calls)

No note about N0X/N1X prefixes, but instructions are being changed to
accommodate the coming of NXX area codes:

207, Maine; 413,508,617, Massachusetts; 603, New Hampshire;
 401, Rhode Island; 802, Vermont (all New England areas
 except Connecticut); 1993-1994
 (7D on all calls within area code)

Areacode splits:

If no date appears, the split may not have been announced publicly due
to lack of direct-dial facility at the time, or may never have
occurred.  Early splits can only be guessed at with the following
guidelines: If an areacode is of form N1X, it is in a state or
province with more than one areacode. (The reverse, if it was ever
true, is now obsolete.)  If an areacode is in a state or province with
only one areacode, it is of form N0X.  (The reverse, if it was ever
true, is now obsolete.)

what?/209 California
what?/707 California
what?/805 California
305/813 Florida
404/912 Georgia, 1953 or 1954
    December 1991 Greater Atlanta call guide, in discussing 404/706
    split, said "It's been 38 years since Georgia added an Area Code."
what?/309 Illinois
502/606 Kentucky
504/318 Louisiana
616/906 Michigan, sometime after Nov 1960
612/507 Minnesota
402/308 Nebraska
what?/607 New York
704/919 North Carolina
405/918 Oklahoma
901/615 Tennessee
what?/806 Texas
206/509 Washington
what?/608 Wisconsin
what?/705 Ontario
what?/807 Ontario
201/609 New Jersey, late 1950s
415/408 California, 1960
305/904 Florida, July 1965
703/804 Virginia, 24 June 1973 at 2:01 AM
714/619 California, Nov 1982
713/409 Texas, Mar 1983 (full cutover 90 days later)
213/818 California, Jan 1984
212/718 New York, 2 Sept 1984 (full cutover 31 Dec 1984)
    Brooklyn, Queens, Staten Island became 718;
    Manhattan & Bronx stayed in 212;
    Bronx switched from 212 to 718, 1 July 1992 (full cutover
    16 May 1993, but until then, calls from Bronx to Brooklyn/
    Queens/Staten Island must still be dialed 1+718+7D)
303/719 Colorado, 5 Mar 1988
305/407 Florida, 16 Apr 1988
617/508 Massachusetts, 16 July 1988
312/708 Illinois, Nov 1989 (full cutover 9 Feb 1990)
202 District of Columbia & vicinity, 1 Oct 1990
    This behaved somewhat like a split despite no new area code.
    202 area code, previously useable for all but the outermost
    Maryland and Virginia suburbs, was restricted to DC proper.
    (Use 301 or 703, as the case may be, to reach the suburbs.)
    As a result, government offices (now including the Pentagon)
    using zipcodes starting with 200,202,203,204,205 and located
    in Md. or Va. can no longer be listed in area 202.  Prefixes
    in the Pentagon, which is in Virginia, were previously in area
    202 (not 703), and in 1990 were moved to area 703.  (Local
    calls across area code border changed from 7D to NPA+7D.)
214/903 Texas, 4 Nov 1990 (full cutover 4 May 1991)
201/908 New Jersey, 1 Jan 1991 (full cutover 8 June 1991)
415/510 California, 2 Sept 1991 (full cutover 27 Jan 1992)
301/410 Maryland, 1 Nov 1991 (full cutover 1 Nov 1992)
213/310 California, 2 Nov 1991 (full cutover 16 May 1992; was
     to be 2 May 1992, but was postponed indefinitely because
     of riots just before then)
    (all GTE plus some PacBell went into 310)
212/718/917 New York, 1 Jan 1992 (917, to be overlaid on
     212 & 718, is to be used for cellular & pagers)
404/706 Georgia, 3 May 1992 (full cutover 3 Aug 1992)
512/210 Texas, 1 Nov 1992 (full cutover 1 May 1993)
714/909 California, 14 Nov 1992 (full cutover 14 Aug 1993)
    (Riverside and San Bernardino counties go into 909;
     Orange County remains in 714)
416/905 Ontario, 4 Oct 1993 (full cutover 10 Jan 1994)
919/910 North Carolina, 14 Nov 1993 (full cutover 13 Feb 1994)
313/810 Michigan, 10 Aug 1994
215/610 Pennsylvania, 1994

On Feb 1, 1991, area codes 706 and 905, which had been used in the
U.S. for calling parts of Mexico, were discontinued.  Country code 52,
already available for such calls, was to be used.  706 and 905 thus
became available for use elsewhere, and were later announced for use
in Georgia and Ontario respectively.

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

Date: Tue, 12 Jan 93 16:39:14 PST
From: [e-mail] (Steve Tomlin)
Subject: Has Anybody Tried the AmeriVOX Card?


I read the recent article on the AmeriVOX card and it seemed to be a
good way to give family members long distance capability without
having to worry about a credit card balance.

Does anyone use the AmeriVOX card regularly? If so, how does the
service compare to the standard credit cards?

Does anyone have more information on the history of the company?

Thanks for the info.  I'll summarize the responses for the net.

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

From: mc/G=Brad/S=Hicks/OU=[e-mail]
Date: 12 Jan 93 17:17:26 GMT
Subject: Can Paging Software Detect Alphanumerics?


Is it possible under the IXO/TAP protocol, or any companies'
interpretations of it, to detect whether or not a particular pager
number can receive text pages?

If memory serves, when you send a pager message using IXO, you send
<STX> pagerID <return> message <return><checksum><ETX>, and then it
sends you back either an <ACK>, a <NAK>, or another signal (I think
<ESC><EOT>) that means "<NAK> and we're hanging up on you now."  So
from that, you'd think not.  But the paging computer I call also sends
an error message, I think it's <CR><NAK><CR> error message <CR>.  This
is fine by the spec, which says that after you transmit, you're
supposed to ignore anything other than the ACK, NAK, or ESC-EOT.

But sometimes those error messages are helpful.  For example, if it's
an invalid pager ID, you get a message that says so, so I search the
return strings for "INVALID PAGER" and if I find it, don't bother
retrying.

Now what I'd really like, is for the paging computer to detect that
I'm trying to send an alphabetic page to a numeric-only pager and give
me a <NAK> with an error message that says so.  Does anybody do this?
Would this be a reasonable thing to ask the folks at Cybertel and/or
Skytel to support?


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

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

Date: Tue, 12 Jan 93 17:07:48 PST
From: [e-mail] (Rich Greenberg)
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Only in LA ...


 From the {LA Times} Business pages, 1/12/93:

Off The Ticker     by Carla Lazzareschi

Cellular Phone,  Hold the Mayo:

Los Angeles - indeed the world - gets its first drive through cellular
telephone store today with the opening of Cellular Specialists on
North La Brea in West Los Angeles {ed note: near Beverly Hills}.

The store, brainchild of Bob Neman, offers on-the-go cellular shoppers
one stop service for their portable telephone needs without, as Neman
says, time-consuming delays or high pressure sales tactics.  It is
modeled after a fast-food restaurant and sends waitress like order
takers to the parking lot with menus listing daily specials.  Shoppers
select a model and wait during a credit check for a mobil telephone
number from PacTel Cellular.  Prices, while comparable to those
charged by the large electronics emporiums across Soutjhern
California, run somewhat higher.  What else do they get?  While they
wait for their phones, customers are offerred a cup of steaming
cappuccino.  This is, after all, L. A.


Rich Greenberg      Work: [e-mail]   310-417-8999
N6LRT               Play: [e-mail]       310-649-0238
What?   Me speak for Amdahl?  Surely you jest....

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

Date: Tue, 12 Jan 93 18:00 EST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: These Phone Systems Are Great!


Hi Pat ...

I thought the list might get a kick out of this ...


 Date:    Tue, 12 Jan 93 17:45 EST
 From:    [e-mail]
 To:      John_Daleske, Dan_Danz
 Subject: These phone systems are great!

Nat'l Lampoon               True Facts        12 Jan 1993


   According to the {Houston Chronicle}, Suzanne Handerson offhandedly
answered a ringing pay phone at a Waco, Texas shopping mall.

   A voice asked, "Hello. Mrs. Henderson?"

  Henderson looked around to see if she was on Candid Camera, or a
program of that sort. On the phone was the man who tends her yard,
calling with a question about the garden. It turned out that the mall
pay phone had almost the same number as her home phone.

   Said Henderson, "It was a question of dialing the wrong number and
getting the right person.  I was speechless."

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

Date: Tue, 12 Jan 93 18:47:28 -0500
From: [e-mail] (Michael J. Logsdon)
Subject: Looking at Voicemail
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Michael J. Logsdon)


Any suggestions for a PC-based voice mail system for a two campus, 150
phone system will be appreciated.  I'm system administrator and I'm
looking at Microlog Callstar 1000 sized with four ports and four hours
of memory.  Can I assemble my own?


Mike Logsdon   University School, Cleveland
[e-mail]

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

Date: Tue, 12 Jan 93 14:53:31 EST
From: [e-mail] (Dave Niebuhr)
Subject: Bawling Out Congress by Computer


Today's {Newsday Jan 12, 1993} had an article about how by April of
this year, all members of the House of Representatives, their staffs,
their committees and even standing committees will be reachable via
the Internet.

Connections to them will be through Compuserve, Genie, MCIMail and
ATTMail (other connections would probably be available also).  There
are no plans for the Senate to go online as yet.

Jack Belcher, overseer of the House Information Services, a
congressional computer networking department says: "For starters, it's
up to the individual member to decide if he even wants Internet
access."  If so, the member may opt to set up a "public" mailbox,
where unsolicited correspondence could be mailed.  Or the member of
Congress could make a personal mailbox publicly known.  Some of the
more technophobic members of the House could even opt to have all
e-mail messages printed out upon receipt, Belcher said.

Though a computer sits in virtually every office, only a handful of
representatives and 2,000 of 12,000 staff members currently have
Internet access.

I can just see it.  Our esteemed Moderator states once in a while that
MCIMail just out and out dumps the DIGEST if so much as one address is
wrong.  Think of what MCI can do with this group if one congress-critter's
name is misspelled.

Well, there goes more of our tax dollars down the drain.  I'll stick
to good old fashioned letter writing and phone calls.


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


[Moderator's Note: I'll be interested in seeing how many of them get
uptight and start complaining about 'unauthorized email' sent to that
address, etc. That has happened with email to executives of large
corporations, you know ... they are frightened to death of public
contact with their customers ... I should not be surprised to see some
of our public servants react the same way.  PAT]

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

Date: Tue, 12 Jan 93 09:19:21 EDT
From: Bill Blum <[e-mail]>
Subject: Catalogs of Phone Equipment/Systems: Is There a List?


I would like to know if any list subscriber has a list of companies
that offer catalogs of their equipment.  I occasionally get flyers
from companies like Hello Direct and Hi Hello, but little else.  Do
any of you have specific companies (with 800 phone numbers,
preferably) that you have dealt with, and why?  Predominantly I'm
looking for phone sets at present, but I'm interested in a couple of
companies that offer complete lines of phone equipment, as well.


ADthanksVANCE


[Moderator's Note: 1-800-HI-HELLO is the phone number for the Hello
Direct people.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Bob Turner)
Subject: MF Signaling Test Gear
Organization: Univ. of Dayton, School of Engineering
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 14:37:50 GMT


Does anyone know of test gear available to test CPE that uses MF (NOT
DTMF) signalling? It can be for two or four wire circuits.  I know
such a device exists, I just don't know who manufactures it.

Primarily it will be used to test ANI delivery on customers CPE
equipment.


Thanks.

Bob Turner                                    Senior System Engineer
513-434-2738                           [e-mail]
CommSys, Inc.     77 West Elmwood Drive, Suite 101, Dayton, OH 45459

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

From: [e-mail] (Craig Twardy)
Subject: Experiences Wanted With Munich-32
Organization: Gandalf Data Ltd.
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 14:59:37 GMT


I am investigating using the Munich-32 device in a design.  Does any
one have any experience or comments on it?

The real name is the peb20320 and it is manufactored by Siemens.  It
is a 32 channel hdlc controller.

Please respond by email.

Thanks in advance.


Craig Twardy                                   CAnet: [e-mail]
Gandalf Data Ltd., 130 Colonnade Road          Voice: [phone]
Nepean, Ontario, Canada   K2E 7M4                Fax: [phone]

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

Subject: Multiline Phone Recommendations
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 93 08:44:26 PST
From: Steve Elias <[e-mail]>


Does anyone have any recommendations for a pair of multiline
telephones with intercom, auto-redial.  For a residence, Radio Shack
has a $179 phone that meets this description, but please send along
any other pointers.  {Teleconnect} magazine had an article about a
really nice one about a year ago, but I don't have that issue now.


eli    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (David Morgenstern)
Subject: Phonejak Transmission System?
Organization: California State University, Sacramento
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 16:47:48 GMT


I saw the ad for the Phonejak Telephone extension system in the
Compuserve rag. So did my teenage daughter. She wants better quality
than our current cordless phone is giving us in our apartment. Has
anyone used this system?

It's a device that has a transmitter and receivers that plug into wall
power outlets. The company says that it will support 2400 kbaud data
transmission, so I could get some use out of my old Supra upstairs (I
recently bought a v.32bis modem) with my creaky Mac Plus.

Has anyone used this device for phones? Has anyone used this system
for data? Any and all help appreciated!

Please reply to my mail address:  [e-mail].


Thanks,

David Morgenstern, BMUG CheerLeader   [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #22
*****************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa11952;
          13 Jan 93 4:40 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA02634
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 13 Jan 1993 01:45:24 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA16110
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 13 Jan 1993 01:45:00 -0600
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1993 01:45:00 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #22

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 13 Jan 93 01:45:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 23

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Sprint 800 Residential (Gary Morris)
    Re: Sprint 800 Residential (Steve Elias)
    Re: 800 Numbers and Live ANI Advice Sought (Pat Turner)
    Re: New Call Feature (was Sad to Say, Telemarketing Works) (Steve Forrette)
    Re: Mission Impossible: IBT Getting My Order Correct (Dave Niebuhr)
    Re: More Idiocy From GTE (Charles Mattair)
    Re: Intra-lata LD and COCOTs (Matt Healy)
    Re: Wanted: List of Active & Proposed Undersea Cables Worldwide (S. Loftus)
    Re: Sad to Say, Telemarketing Works (Matt Healy)
    Re: Bell Canada Calling Card Fraud (Eric R. Skinner)
    Re: Another Payphone Mystery? (David Esan)
    Re: Panasonic KXT-123211 Software (Phil Wherry)
    Re: Baby Bell Breakups (John Higdon)
    Re: Frequently Asked Questions re Telecom Stuff (Don McKillican)
    Re: Suggestions Wanted For Phone Device to Restrict Toll Charges (Klossner)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Gary Morris @pulsar)
Subject: Re: Sprint 800 Residential
Organization: Alsys Group, San Diego, CA, USA
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1993 00:40:32 GMT


In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Ken Jongsma)
writes:

> About a month ago, a Sprint rep called and asked if I wanted to try
> Sprint's Residential 800 service...  They offered to waive the installation
> charge as well as the monthly service charge for the first six months...

> I'm confused about the monthly service charge. I thought the rep said
> it was $5 a month, ...

I also signed up to try this out.  I was told the monthly charge would
be $5, and that after the 6 month free trial (except for usage), that
if we had at least $45 per quarter in usage charges then we would not
be charged the monthly $5 charge after that, just usage charges.  I
haven't had any wrong numbers yet but have only had it for about two
weeks.


Gary Morris                Internet: [e-mail]
Ada Software Development   UUCP:     uunet!telesoft!garym
Alsys West (TeleSoft)      Phone:    [phone]
San Diego, CA, USA         Fax:      [phone]

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

Subject: Re: Sprint 800 Residential
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 93 07:52:48 PST
From: Steve Elias <[e-mail]>


I used Sprint 800, a few years before this "Sprint residential" thang
became available.  The wrong numbers were quite annoying, Get ready
for lots more.  Some telemarketers are slimy enough to demon dial 800
numbers trying to sell fax toner paper, etc.

I now use MCI residential 800.  Their security code feature is a Good
Thing for residential use.


eli

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 93 00:05 EST
Subject: Re: 800 Numbers and Live ANI Advice Sought
Reply-To: [e-mail]


The Moderator wrote a good comment, but I thought I would add a few
things.  Since mail to Greg seems to bounce, I'll reply to the Digest.

As Pat stated 800 service with Real Time ANI is available from the big
three.  As far as I know this always involves a dedicated trunk to
their POP.  AT&T is the least flexible, offering to deliver it only
out of band with PRI ISDN.  At one time this required a AT&T switch,
now I suspect their are other peices of CPE equipiment that will
handle it.  Coastcom makes a channel bank just for 800 service, though
I don't know if it will dump the ANI data out a RS-232/V.35 port or
not.  I would imagine that as AT&T complies with the newer ISDN-1
standards, most any PBX could handle it.

The AT&T service is called INFO-2 and is part of their Megacom
service.  The ANI delivery adds $.02/call up to a limit, past which it
is $.01/call.

Sprint will deliver ANI with in band MF and MCI will deliver it with
your choice of MF or DTMF.  If you can't deal with a T span, any dumb
channel bank will do.  The extra DS0's can be used to taste to joys of
LEC bypass.


Pat Turner KB4GRZ   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: New Call Feature (was Sad to Say, Telemarketing Works)
Date: 13 Jan 1993 09:32:06 GMT
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA


With the upcoming introduction of Caller ID in Washington State, I've
been evaluating how I will put it to use to screen calls at home.
Since the WA implementation will include calling name delivery, as
well as calling number, I've thought of what I think is a clever way
to differentiate business callers from residential callers.  Any
number that's not in my local database can have each word of the
calling name run against an English dictionary.  Business names are
quite likely to have one or more words of the directory listing in the
dictionary, whereas residential listings are likely to have no parts
in the dictionary.  While not perfect, this in combination with
rejecting private calls, as well as a local database of known numbers,
should work quite well at filtering out the junk.  To get fancy, I
could always allow calls from names that contain "police", "fire",
etc.


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

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

Date: Tue, 12 Jan 93 09:01:22 EST
From: [e-mail] (Dave Niebuhr)
Subject: Re: Mission Impossible: IBT Getting My Order Correct


My latest NYTel bill showed a number 890-6611 that I could call for
repair service in addition to 611 (I think that's the way it goes).

Quite by accident a few months ago, I found that 890-XXXX is a NYTel
exchange in each area code.  The XXXX varies by area code for the same
office.  An example is 890-1100 for the billing office in area code
516, but not in area code 212.


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

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

Date: Tue, 12 Jan 93 09:58:30 CST
From: [e-mail] (Charles Mattair)
Subject: Re: More Idiocy From GTE
Organization: Synercom Technology, Inc., Houston, TX


On 28 Dec 92 15:07:25 GMT, [e-mail] (Charles
Mattair) said:

> As I'm at a friend's house, I decide to put the call on calling
> card.  102880+10D.  <boing> GTE.  Huh...?  I know this is intralata
> but I told them to use AT&T.  They can't override my choice of carrier
> can they?  Try it again except as 102880+7D (713 has gone 1/0+10D on
> all LD calls but who knows what GTE is doing).  <boing> GTE.

> Call the operator to see whats going on - it should work, you must be
> misdialing, etc.

> Finally, in disgust, 1028800.  <boing>  AT&T.  Placed the call and nobody
> answered :-(

Several people sent me Email suggesting this is proper and expected
behaviour on the part of GTE.  After doing some checking, I think is
more a case of permissible (sp?) behaviour.

SWB appears to always hand off -- I have started using 102881+ on all
intralata calls from my house; an examinination of my last three phone
bills shows 0 LD routed thru SWB.

SWB will even hand off within the Houston EMS.  A call from my house
to 713 288 -- both ends within the EMS (288 is a non-EMS exchange)
routes thru AT&T which curiously enough is tariffed for the call.

Calls to AT&T indicated they see both types of behaviour: the LEC
reserving LD service for intralata (GTE) and the other as I see with
SWB.

Indicentally, this whole mess started when I found out SWB charges 35
cents versus AT&Ts 22 cents for an intralata call I make a lot.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Matt Healy)
Subject: Re: Intra-lata LD and COCOTs
Organization: Yale U. - Genetics
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 19:15:31 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, Jay.Ashworth@f8649.
n3603.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Jay Ashworth) wrote:

> Since these phones automagically route LD calls to the phone owner's
> preferred AOS/IXC, (which I'm told is no longer illegal), _all_ calls
> go there.  Even calls that would normally go through the LEC.

> Is there an equal access code that routes calls through whatever LEC
> owns the line?  Or specific ones for each LEC -- although I suspect that
> would be impossible to administer.

I also would like to know if there's any such code!  Recently I was in
an airport whose LD carrier was not AT&T.  I wanted to make a short
(about 100 km) toll call.  When I tried 10-ATT-0 I got a recording
saying this call cannot be carried by AT&T, I suppose because they are
not allowed to handle intra-LATA calls. The phone would not accept my
AT&T card when I dialed 0-xxx-xxx-xxxx or 0-xxx-xxxx.  I had to dial
0-0 and tell a human operator the number I was calling and my AT&T
card number.


Matt Healy    [e-mail]

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

From: George Loftus <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Wanted: List of Active and Proposed Undersea Cables Worldwide
Date: 12 Jan 1993 19:16:36 GMT
Organization: Brown University - CIS


In article <[e-mail]> Frank Vance, airgun!fvance@
uunet.UU.NET writes:

> I am looking for a list of all the intercontenental undersea cables,
> both active and proposed.  I would like to know such things as
> capacity, ownership, and where the cable terminates.

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

From: [e-mail] (Matt Healy)
Subject: Re: Sad to Say, Telemarketing Works
Organization: Yale University--Genetics
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 23:19:33 GMT


> BTW, Some mail carriers will not deliver 4th class junk if you ask
> them, but it is illegal for them to not deliver it.

In my apartment building, there's a bin next to the mailboxes where
the carrier puts all "extremely obvious" junk mail (ie, 27 identical
envelopes arriving bulk rate to various apartments).  Every couple of
days it gets emptied of anything nobody has claimed.  May not be
technically legal, but it sure is handy.

How I wish junk phone calls were so easily screened!


Matt Healy      [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Eric R. Skinner)
Subject: Re: Bell Canada Calling Card Fraud
Organization: Exoterica Corporation
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 18:07:16 -0500


In article <[e-mail]> Tony Harminc <[e-mail].
CA> writes:

> But note that Bell Canada is disallowing such calls to all foreign
> countries except the United States.  They are not picking a small (and
> troublesome) subset as AT&T seems to have done.  I think it would be
> pretty hard to make a case of discrimination against everyone except
> American immigrants.

> [Moderator's Note: Are you *positive* that if you try to use a Bell
> Canada card on a call to the UK, Australia or New Zealand it won't go
> through?  Forget what their literature says for a moment and try it.
> If it does go through on the card, then the very same situation exists
> in Canada as here: discrimination against what you term a 'troublesome
> subset'

Just two weeks ago I tried calling Australia from a payphone in
downtown Toronto; I got the familiar "bong", and punched in my card
number.  After a few seconds, an operator came on the line, asked me
for my number again, then told me that I was unable to make a call to
Australia using my card.  I tried a few minutes later from a business
line at a nearby office and it went through fine.

On Bell Canada's new "Millenium" phones which have a card swipe slot,
the LED display has been running a message lately to the effect that
International calling card calls should be prefixed with "011" instead
of the usual "01".  I don't know why ...


Eric R. Skinner                [e-mail]
Exoterica Corporation   Tel [phone]
Ottawa, Canada          Fax [phone]


[Moderator's Note: '011' is for direct-dial international calls and
'01' is for operator-assisted international calls, i.e. collect,
credit card, third-number billing, etc. Anyway, if calls to other
countries are disallowed using calling cards from payphones, why did
the operator bother asking you to repeat the number? What difference
would it have made if she understood it correctly the first time or
not since the call would not be allowed anyway?   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (David Esan)
Subject: Re: Another Payphone Mystery?
Date: 12 Jan 93 19:40:13 GMT
Organization: Moscom Corporation, Pittsford NY


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(JOHN SCHMIDT) writes:

> I recently visited my Alma Mater, WPI in Worcester, Mass. (A/C 508).
> When I got there, I wanted to call my mother in Ahmerst Mass.
> (413-253****).

< And further tales of woe about the request of $2.00 to complete this call >

Just ran this through my database.  The distance from Worcester to
Amherst is 38 miles.  They are in two different LATAs.

The expected cost by ATT should be: $.18 per minute, with an $.86
surcharge.

Where did $2 come from?  Why didn't you get ATT?

Good questions.


David Esan      [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Phil Wherry)
Subject: Re: Panasonic KXT-123211 Software
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Phil Wherry)
Organization: The MITRE Corporation, McLean, Va
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 15:40:28 GMT


[e-mail] (William Petrisko) writes:

> We recently purchased a Panasonic KXT-1232-11D hybrid key telephone
> system.  One feature that attracted us to it was the availablity to
> program it over the RS-232 port.  This, however, leaves A LOT to be
> desired ... in fact, it seems it is actually easier to program from a
> display set, because it actually tells you what you are programming
> instead of having to use the program book to reference the cryptic
> codes.  Does anyone know of PC software available as a front-end to
> programming the Panasonic phone system?

I have one of these switches, and finally settled on a fairly low-tech
solution: I dumped the switch parameters to an ASCII file, then used a
text editor to annotate them heavily. I'd be happy to supply you (or
any other interested readers) with a sample copy; just drop me an
email note.


Phillip Wherry   Member of the Technical Staff
The MITRE Corporation, McLean, VA   [e-mail]

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

Date: Tue, 12 Jan 93 09:57 PST
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: Baby Bell Breakups


[e-mail] (Paul Gatker) writes:

> I heard an interesting theory regarding investing in the Baby Bells.
> The theory was that they could be breaking up ala AT&T, and in so
> doing, the parts would be much more valuable than the present whole
> companies. This due to the rapidly exploding telecom revolution.

More than theory, my friend. Pacific Telesis has already applied to
break the now-very-lucrative PacTel wireless services off from Pacific
Bell. A new holding company would be created and the two companies
would have no connection whatsoever.

What has happened is that the non-regulated wireless ventures have
finally taken off and capital that has heretofore been siphoned off
from the regulated utilities is no longer needed. The split
accomplishes two things (three if you include the stated, public
reason). First, it looks good. Pacific Telesis can now say without
lying that there is no connection between the two companies. Second,
it prevents any dreaded backflow of funds. While Pacific Telesis never
had any problem with having your regulated dollars fund the wireless
ventures, it sure as hell does not want the reverse to happen and piss
off the investors that it has finally attracted.

The stated reason for the split is that it frees the unregulated side
of stifling rules imposed by PUCs. Given the fecklessness of the CPUC,
I find this laughable at best. I have never seen a utility "suffer" at
the hands of the California Pretty Useless Club. Remember, this is the
same body that allows PG&E (our excuse for an electric utility in
northern California) to charge the highest rates in the country for
electricity while at the same time providing service that rivals that
in the worst third-world country for unreliability.

But you will see the LECs breaking up. While Pacific Telesis has never
been at the forefront of technology, it has always been a pioneer in
separating people from their money. Once again it is a trendsetter.


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

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

Date: Tue, 12 Jan 93 13:52:24 EST
From: [e-mail] (Don McKillican)
Subject: Re: Frequently Asked Questions re Telecom Stuff


The question on getting specifications for the Caller ID service lists
a Bell Canada contact at 220 Laurier in Ottawa.  That address is no
longer valid (in fact I don't think we still have facilities there).
The correct address is:

    160 Elgin St. Room 790
    Ottawa, Ont. K2P 2C4

Incidentally, as of this week, that position (Director - Switched
Network Services), has been transferred from Bell Canada to SRCI
(Stentor Resource Centre Inc.)  So the title may be changing before
long too!

Plus ca change... (the more things change...)


Don McKillican                 Internet: [e-mail]
Analyst -- Systems Planning    Envoy:    [id=DMCKILLI]Bell
Bell Canada, Montreal          Tel:      [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Andrew Klossner)
Date: Tue,  12 Jan 93 13:26:17 PST
Subject: Re: Suggestions Wanted For Phone Device to Restrict Toll Charges
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Tektronix Color Printers, Wilsonville, Oregon


> "There are mechanical locks that can be used to physically lock
> the dial pad."

Even in the 1960s, many of us got around such locks by pulsing the
hook at the right frequency.  Today, a hand-held touch-tone (not-R)
generator is all you need.  Even lines for which touch-tone isn't
"enabled" often respond to the tones.

(not-R) Touch Tone is no longer a trademark of AT&T or anybody else.

> "USOC DH2 - Screening to deny 1+ and 411. ( 1 + 800 allowed.)"

How does this prevent you from placing a toll charge through 1 800
CALL-ATT?


Andrew Klossner  ([e-mail])

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #23
*****************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa13386;
          13 Jan 93 5:02 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA08911
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 13 Jan 1993 02:42:40 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA23302
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 13 Jan 1993 02:42:16 -0600
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1993 02:42:16 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #24

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 13 Jan 93 02:42:15 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 24

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: CNID on Answering Machines? (Toby Nixon)
    Re: CNID on Answering Machines? (Lance Neustaeter)
    Re: Legality of City Ordinances Against Junk Calls? (Paul Buder)
    Re: AC 215/610 Split (Rudolph T. Maceyko)
    Re: New AnswerCall Features (Rudolph T. Maceyko)
    Re: A Minor Nit With the Telecom FAQ (Matt Healy)
    Re: Cell Phone SID in US / My Friend, Nynex Mobile ... (Steve Forrette)
    Re: Equivalence Charges (Steve Forrette)
    Re: Why Does Phone Bell 'Ping' on a Regular Basis? (Timothy Hu)
    Re: Why Does Phone Bell 'Ping' on a Regular Basis? (Steve Hutzley)
    Re: Mission Impossible: IBT Getting My Order Correct (Michael Rosen)
    Re: Prodigy <> Internet (Tom Benham)
    Re: Additional Phone Charges (Chuck Munro)
    Re: Out of Town Businesses on Local Numbers? (Joe Bergstein)
    Re: Out of Town Businesses on Local Numbers? (Barton F. Bruce)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Toby Nixon <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: CNID on Answering Machines?
Date: 12 Jan 93 17:47:39 EDT
Organization: Hayes Microcomputer Products, Norcross, GA


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(David H. Close) writes:

> I find the current discussion of CNID features on modems very
> interesting.  But, being in the market for a new answering machine, I
> want to know if there are any which store CNID, if received, and play
> it back when messages are retrieved.  Or are there other techniques
> available?  Anybody?

I don't know of any answering machines that store Caller ID info along
with the message, but the system we have here at home provides almost
the same level of functionality.  We have an answering machine that
stores the date and time of the call, and a separate caller ID box
that also stores date and time along with the number (almost all boxes
do that).  It's easy to match up the message time with the info in the
caller ID box.  I'll bet that you can buy a machine with date and time
stamping and a separate caller ID box for less than the combination of
the two, and without doing much searching.


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]

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

Date: Tue, 12 Jan 93 20:21:53 PST
From: [e-mail] (Lance Neustaeter)
Subject: Re: CNID on Answering Machines?


David H. Close Had some good questions regarding CNID and answering
machines.  I've also wondered about the same possibilities and would
also note that it would also be very handy for a (digital, of course)
answering machine to be able to play a number of different personal
outgoing messages depending on which number is calling ("Hi, Joe. I'm
not in right now...").  This would also be very useful if you had a
message you wanted to get to someone but you haven't been able to get
ahold of.  You could leave the message on the machine waiting for that
person in case they call you -- and you can go about your business
without having to keep trying to call them.

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

From: [e-mail] (Paul Buder)
Subject: Re: Legality of City Ordinances Against Junk Calls?
Organization: TECHbooks --- Public Access UNIX --- [phone]
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 14:02:51 GMT


[e-mail] (Lawrence V Cipriani) writes:

> Some Ohio cities [e.g., Bedford] have ordinances against telephone
> solicitations.  What is the legality of such an ordinance?  Does

> [Moderator's Note: Well, it is a lot like the soon-to-be and ex-cons
> in the Chicago City Council passing an ordinance saying Chicago is a
> 'nuclear free zone ...'  .. about as stupid as they come. We can no
> more keep bombs from landing here than Bedford, OH can keep people out
> of their jurisdiction from ringing their telephones or citizens in CA
> or PA can keep people out of state from seeing their phone numbers.
> Maybe the Bedford authorities had nothing better to work on that day.  PAT]

Here in Oregon it is illegal to do computer telemarketing, that is, a
machines recording, no human.  It seems to work.  I haven't gotten any
machine based sales pitches.


[e-mail]  Not affiliated with TECHbooks  Paul Buder
Public Access UNIX at [phone] (1200/2400, N81)

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

From: [e-mail] (Rudolph T Maceyko)
Subject: Re: AC 215/610 Split
Date: 12 Jan 93 17:28:06 GMT
Organization: University of Pittsburgh


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

> I just heard on the news today that Bell of Pennsylvania will announce
> an Area Code split in AC 215.

I just read this on clari.tw.telecom.  I'm sure others will notice
that this seems to conflict with "TWX" use ...

 ... or has that been abandoned by everyone (including Canada)?


Rudy Maceyko <[e-mail]>      Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania USA

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

From: [e-mail] (Rudolph T Maceyko)
Subject: Re: New AnswerCall Features
Date: 12 Jan 93 17:38:55 GMT
Organization: University of Pittsburgh


In article <[e-mail]> Joe.Bergstein@p501.f544.n
109.z1.fidonet.org (Joe Bergstein) writes:

> [Note that the announcement does not clarify what an "urgent" message
> is, and whether callers will have an option to flag a message as
> "urgent"].

For the uninitiated, we're discussing Answer Call and its call-me-
when-I- get-a-message feature.

Callers may mark a message as "urgent" by pressing "#" to end the
recording of their message, then pressing "9" for options, "1" for
marking the message urgent, then "1" to send the message.

Interestingly, callers aren't *told* that they can press "9"; it's
absent from the menu (for me anyway, 412-441 in Bell of PA land).

When I first tried the service, it called me whenever *any* message
was left, not just urgent ones.  After a few repair calls (with the
repeated response from them of "perhaps your touch-tone pad is sending
the wrong tones ..."), someone finally found out what was really wrong
and fixed it.

A limitation of the service that's described in the "brochure" is that
the number you define to have the service call you at must be within
your regional calling area.  It will accept any number but will
silently ignore "long-distance" numbers.


Rudy Maceyko <[e-mail]>    Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania USA

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

From: [e-mail] (Matt Healy)
Subject: Re: A Minor Nit With the Telecom FAQ
Organization: Yale University--Genetics
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 15:07:45 GMT


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

>> However, two wires normally suffice to complete a connection
>> between a telephone and the central office; any extra wiring
>> would be for purposes such as grounding or for party line ringing.

> Also to supply dial light for the Princess phones.

A few years ago, I got a notice from SW BELL in Texas about old
dial-light transformers that presented a fire hazard.  The letter
included templates to hold over any transformers located near phones
to check if they were the suspect models, with an 800 number printed
to call if I had any.

Since there were no transformers in my apartment, I put the letter in
file 13.


Matt Healy     [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: Cell Phone SID in US / My Friend, Nynex Mobile ...
Date: 12 Jan 1993 20:25:42 GMT
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA


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

> I have the SID chart from the telecom archives, but it's quite old.
> Has anyone managed to get a list of SIDs for US cellular service
> providers?

There is a company in Florida whose name escapes me at the moment that
publishes a varity of material about cellular roaming.  They make the
popular "Official Cellular Roaming Handbook" that lists every cellular
system in the country, along with coverage maps, local and roaming
rates, roam port numbers, customer service numbers, and System ID's.
It costs around $16, and is very helpful for frequent roamers.

They also make higher-end publications, and you can purchase data on
magnetic media if you wish.  Perhaps another Digest reader can
contribute their name and phone number.


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: Equivalence Charges
Date: 12 Jan 1993 22:28:11 GMT
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA


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

> I was reviewing the phone bill for a company where I am consulting,
> and realized that Bell Canada is charging for one more equivalence
> feature than I would expect, e.g. there is a hunt group of three lines
> - the one published number hunts to the second if busy, which hunts to
> the third if second is busy, and that's the end - busy signal.  Bell
> charges for three equivalence features for this.

> The droid in the business office insists that there is an 'ending
> feature' that must be installed on the third line to make it all work.
> I believe this is complete nonsense, but just before I open my mouth
> wide, could someone confirm that technically there is no 'feature'
> that need be installed on the last line of a hunt group?

This is the way hunt groups are tariffed by US West in Washington
State, and Pacific Bell in California.  It's not for technical
reasons, but that is indeed the correct price.  When I've only wanted
a two-line hunt group, I've found that busy-transfer is a better deal.
The monthly cost is a bit more, but you pay for it only on one line,
and the installation cost is often a lot less than hunting.


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Timothy Hu)
Subject: Re: Why Does Phone Bell 'Ping' on a Regular Basis?
Organization: Interactive Systems Corp., Boulder CO
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 23:40:14 GMT


> Same thing happens to us in Clinton, NY, each evening (sometimes
> weekends, too) at just about 11 PM.  I've always assumed some sort of
> telco testing was going on, but it would be nice to know exactly what
> they are doing!

It happens to us in Cheyenne, Wyoming, too.


Timothy Hu [e-mail]     | The intelligence (or lack of) expressed
Interactive Systems Corporation  | above does not necessarily reflect the
Resource Solutions International | that of anyone else.

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Hutzley)
Subject: Re: Why Does Phone Bell 'Ping' on a Regular Basis?
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 23:16:15 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Fred
Schimmel) writes ...

> It used to be that there was something called a line integrity test
> (LIT) that occured in the interval just before the ring cycle began.
> The circuit was re-arranged to test the line between the CO and the
> phone. This is one reason why Customer Premises Equipment (CPE) needs
> to identify its Ringer Equivalence Number (REN) because the test had
> differing results depending on the number of ringers on the line.
> Perhaps you added or removed some phones, modems, answering machines,
> etc. Perhaps your local CO routinely at 10:15PM does a maintenance
> check of all its lines, and this is when the ping occurs. Try calling
> and asking for a test supervisor to see if they do something like
> this.  Or count your equipment total REN and inform the phone company.
> It could just be a misprogrammed test, or an indicator that the line
> is faulty.

> Perhaps someone else remembers more about LIT. I believe this was a #5
> crossbar feature.

Just a note on RENs, When I got my first, 1200 baud (wow!) modem, I
called New England Telephone, told them about the modem, and the REN,
basically, they said "YEAH, SO!"... so maybe they have some equipment
than can compensate for this, or the DROID I talked to got him/her out
of a situation he/she didn't understand ...

Comments?


Steve

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

From: [e-mail] (Michael Rosen)
Subject: Re: Mission Impossible: IBT Getting My Order Correct
Organization: University of Denver, Dept. of Math & Comp. Sci.
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 93 05:13:09 GMT


Wow, what incompetence.  Next time, I'd suggest putting your request
in writing and faxing the damn thing.  That way they can't
misunderstand or claim to have different orders, etc.



Michael Rosen    Tau Epsilon Phi - George Washington University
[e-mail]  [e-mail]  or  @lambada.oit.unc.edu

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

From: [e-mail] (Tom Benham)
Subject: Re: Prodigy <> Internet
Organization: Cybernet BBS, Boca Raton, Florida
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1993 01:52:27 GMT


[e-mail] writes:

> About a month or so ago, someone posted that a gateway for Email from
> Internet to/from Prodigy would probably be in business by Christmas.
> Anyone have the latest status on that "activation"?

I just got a note from Prodigy that advised me to look for Internet
mail access in January, but I haven't seen it yet.


Tom

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

From: [e-mail] (Chuck Munro)
Subject: Re: Additional Phone Charges
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 19:02:58 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Canada Ltd, Dartmouth, N.S.


And what about the charge made to keep your number from popping up on
those new Caller-ID telephones!  I'm miffed!

A one-time charge I could understand (after all, somebody has to enter
a few keystrokes into the switch software), but a *monthly* charge
that goes on and on like the Energizer Bunny ???


Chuck

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

From: [e-mail] (Joe Bergstein)
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 23:32:42 -0500
Subject: Re: Out of Town Businesses on Local Numbers?


On Jan. 6 in a message from lunatix![e-mail], a TELECOM Digest
reader inquired about an apparent local telephone number for a
business outside the local calling area.

Our Esteemed Moderator, Pat, provided an explanation of FX service.

I wonder if this reader really encountered remote call forwarding
(RCF), a switched inbound service, rather than FX, which is quite
costly and requires a substantial amount of usage for cost justification.

For our reader(s), RCF establishes a local calling number, that when
dialed, forwards the call to a predesignated number.  In this case,
the predesignated number would be a toll call to the distant business.
The business picks up the toll charges for these calls.  Why would a
business do this?  Just as in this reader's case, to maintain what
appears to be a local presence by providing a local calling number for
the customers.

In the Washington D.C. metro area, there are many firms located just
beyond the metro calling area.  They can be reached from a portion of
the metro area adjacent to theirs, but not from the entire metro area.
Many of these firms establish RCF numbers which are accesible from the
entire Washington D.C. metro area to ensure that the large number of
potential customers can reach them via a local call.

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

Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1993 01:04:34 -0500 (EST)
From: Barton F. Bruce <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Out of Town Businesses on Local Numbers?
Organization: Cambridge Computer Associates, Inc.


lunatix![e-mail] wrote:

> The other day, I saw the number for a business located in a nearby
> town (which is not normally in the local calling area), however, the

> [Moderator's Note: Businesses (actually, anyone, but it is mostly
> businesses) can have a 'foreign exchange' line -- commonly known as an
> FX. When they use that phone, or receive calls on it, it is as though

FX lines are ONLY one of many ways to do this. An FX line makes sense
if there is a LOT of traffic or sometimes if it is also needed to be
able to dial back out into the foreign area.

Very often, folks will have the phone line delivered to some business
there (friend, lawyer, answering service, or whatever) and then simply
order call forwarding on the line and set it to forwward to the remote
location. Paying for that service, and some modest amount of toll
calls is often FAR cheaper than a leased FX line.

Some folks instead get that same line and BUY some call forwarding box
and simply plug it into a second line they pay for at into the same
location.  Connection quality may suffer, but you don't need telco to
be running the latest generic on their stepper for it to work :-)

And just sometimes telco offers 'REMOTE CALL FORWARDING' where NO line
goes anywhere. When a local call is dialed, it gets forwarded to the
remote site. The toll charges go to the number with this service on
it. Often there is a FULL service order write charge and other
bullcrap just to change the foward to number. If you have a
trustworthy site you can have the first flavor above line delivered
to, that is best and someone can plug a phone in and reset the number
as needed.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #24
*****************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa18532;
          15 Jan 93 2:36 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA01145
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 15 Jan 1993 00:16:09 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA29495
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 15 Jan 1993 00:15:46 -0600
Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1993 00:15:46 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #25

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 15 Jan 93 00:15:45 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 25

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    What's the Best Cordless Phone? (Mohit K. Goval)
    AT&T Extended Range Cordless Telephone 9530 (AT&T message via Ken Jongsma)
    Even Egghead Has Trouble Understanding E-Mail (Paul Robinson)
    Quantitatively, How Much Will LEC Competition Affect Rates? (H. Shrikumar)
    Correction to NY/Philly Post (Douglas Scott Reuben)
    Prodigy Update Report in Newsbytes (Newsbytes via [e-mail])
    What is Teleport? (Johan Vounckx)
    What is Tariff 12 (or is it 11)? (Paul Robinson)
    Cellular Accessories (J. Philip Miller)
    TransTalk Experience? (Eric Pearce)
    Want to Buy! (Ron Martin)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (MOHIT K GOYAL)
Subject: What's the Best Cordless Phone?
Organization: Univ. of Texas at Dallas
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1993 20:19:07 GMT


Can anyone tell me their opinions on what the best cordless phone is?

I'm looking for one that lets the user dial and answer from the base,
as well as from the actual unit.

So far, I'm strongly considering the new AT&T 5515.

It's about $160 w/o tax.

Thanks.


[Moderator's Note: Maybe you will want to wait for the new AT&T 9530
which is due to be released in a few months. It is digital and uses
the 900 megs range. I've included an announcement sent recently to all
AT&T employees in this issue which describes it in detail.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Ken Jongsma)
Subject: AT&T Extended Range Cordless Telephone 9530
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1993 16:43:16 -0500 (EST)


I was sent this from a broadcast to AT&T employees.  I thought you
might be interested ...

*** AT&T today announced a high-power, all-digital cordless phone
with four times the range of today's conventional cordless
telephones.  The AT&T Extended Range Cordless Telephone 9530
operates in the 900-MHz frequency, providing virtually
interference-free conversations with consistent sound quality up
to one mile from the base.  The AT&T 9530 uses full digital
transmission to encode speech onto a radio signal, much like music
is encoded onto a CD, and to provide clearer sound over a longer
range than cordless phones operating in the 46/49-MHz frequency.
AT&T's spread-spectrum, frequency-hopping architecture, which is
patent-pending, actually avoids interference by "hopping" the
radio signal among 50 of the available 173 channels during a
conversation.

If any of the channels experience interference, the 9530 automatically
swaps it for a new, clearer channel.  Because it operates over a
different frequency, the AT&T 9530 is unaffected by forms of
interference common to 46/49-MHz cordless phones, such as garage door
openers, baby monitors and radio intercoms.  It also performs well in
environments typically difficult for conventional cordless, such as
high-rise apartment and multilevel buildings.  The random selection of
50 of 173 channels, along with digital speech encoding, makes it
nearly impossible to eavesdrop on conversations.

The AT&T 9530 was designed and developed by AT&T Bell Laboratories,
employing advanced integrated circuit technology developed jointly
with AT&T Microelectronics.  The AT&T Extended Range Cordless
Telephone 9530 will be available in late spring at AT&T Phone Centers
nationwide for $449.99.  For more information, call 800-222-3111.

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

Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1993  17:47:47 EST
Subject: Even Egghead Has Trouble Understanding E-Mail


In a catalog from Egghead Software, they are selling an E-Mail package
for Microsloth Windoze called "The Wire", which, according to the
blurb for it:

All messages are routed through MCI mail, a centralized electronic
mail service maintained by MCI Communications ... a $15.00 per month
account fee includes 1-800 access and up to 60 messages of 5,000
characters or less in length delivered via e-mail, fax, telex, U.S.
Postal Service, or via gateways to CompuServe, PRODIGY, Internet, and
other on-line information services.

I *know* that CompuServe and Internet have gateways on MCI Mail.  I
know Prodigy is considering getting an Internet gateway, but I was
unaware that they had a gateway on MCI Mail.  So I decided to look and
see.  A gateway on MCI Mail is called an "EMS":

 -- Transcript follows --

Pad ID: P3 - Port: 17.
Please enter your user name:  tdarcos
Password:
Connection initiated. . . Opened.

Welcome to MCI Mail!

Reach up to 1,000 worldwide recipients
quickly through MCI fax Broadcast.
For more information, call Operator 6
at 1-800-999-2096.

Today's Headlines At 4 pm EST:

 --News Of Strikes Against Iraq
    Boosts Defense Sector Stock
 --Intel Shares Soar On News Profit
    Even Stronger Than Expected

Type //BUSINESS on Dow Jones for details.


MCI Mail Version V11.2.C

    Your INBOX has 43 messages

Command: find ems internet


MCI Mail Directory Information

           MCI ID   Name                       Organization    Location
    EMS    376-5414 INTERNET                   NRI             Reston

Command: find ems compuserve


MCI Mail Directory Information

           MCI ID   Name                       Organization    Location
    EMS    281-6320 COMPUSERVE                                 Columbus, OH

Command: find ems western union


MCI Mail Directory Information

           MCI ID   Name                       Organization    Location
    EMS    435-6996 WESTERN UNION              AT&T            USA

Command: find ems att

att is not listed as an Electronic Mail System.

Command: find ems at&t

at&t is not listed as an Electronic Mail System.

Command: find ems attmail


MCI Mail Directory Information

           MCI ID   Name                       Organization    Location
    EMS    414-0940 ATTMail                    AT&T            USA

Command: find ems prodigy

prodigy is not listed as an Electronic Mail System.

Command: find name prodigy


MCI Mail Subscriber Information

           MCI ID   Name                       Organization    Location
                    User has unlisted name in MCI Mail Directory

 - Transcript Ends --

What this indicates is that there is no gateway on MCI to Prodigy
(except maybe via Internet), except that someone (who wishes not to be
known) has an ordinary account.

Also, I discovered other errors: MCI Mail only gives you E-Mail,
Gateway Mail (Like Internet), and Fax messages as part of your "free"
allocation.  Telex and Paper Mail messages are charged.

The moral of this story is that often the advertisement writers don't
even understand the technology.


Paul Robinson -- [e-mail]
These opinions are mine alone.

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

Date: Thu, 14 Jan 93 23:36:53 -0500
From: [e-mail] (H.Shrikumar)
Subject: Quantitatively, How Much Will LEC Competition Affect Rates?
Organization: University of Massachusetts, Amherst


Hi,

  I (again) have a question .....

  I was thinking of scenarios of telecom development, deregulation and
de-monoplisation, comparing with the history as seen in the US
industry. The following question came up:

  If LEC competetion were the norm, what changes can one expect?

  With open competetion in the LD business, we've seen a fall of LD
rates, and an improvement of service. (Is there some place I can see
quantitatively this fall over the decade or more?)

  Now, if LECs also were to be opened up, how much (if at all) would
the local phone rates change by?

  Would there be a net change in LEC revenues per line ? What about
total LEC revenues? Will it also result in growth of number of
subscriptions due to the competition?

  Or would the rates merely get readjsuted, with different plans, some
with lower entry cost, and many restrictions (limited calls per month,
per peak hour), other more expensive, but with greater facilities? In
general, what would be the fixed cost, and variable cost per call?
(The bottom line, how much of the current rates is "water"?)

  In other words, if the conjecture that a monopoly tends to be
relatively inefficient, and increased competition would force them to
drive down costs, either by better management or with better
techology, is correct ... then by how much can one expect the local
dial-tone rates to change ?

  I look forward to the wisdom on this list. Many thanks!

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

            +==========================================

PS: Re: PHONE RESTRICTED FOR TOLL ETC. ...

BTW ... I'd be travelling a while, so it turns out its my turn to
worry about others using my phone now. The recent discussions on this
list has left me better prepared.

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

>> "USOC DH2 - Screening to deny 1+ and 411. ( 1 + 800 allowed.)"

> How does this prevent you from placing a toll charge through 1 800
> CALL-ATT?

  No, but it can still prevent billing to the number.

  I have little faith in any add on device, or blocker, for what I add
anyone can delete.  So I am looking for what New England telephone can
provide me, implemented *at* the switch, and they taking the
responsibility.

  Turns out that they have two kinds of "1 block", and opting for both
would prevent all direct dial toll calls, all premium calls and also
alert the operator (called via 0) to not transfer manually to a IXC
for a LD call. (I can further be mean, and ask for 0 Operator block as
well ... but if they assure me their operator will be alerted, thats
fine with me.) These blocks will also imply screening of any collect
or third party calls.

  They'd allow a 1-800 call to go thru. But CALL_ATT can then bill to
a calling card, but not to my number since, as per above, the
screening will not allow that. I further quizzed them, mentioning the
infamous name heard so often in this forum (I think I percieved a hint
of recognition from the representative) ... but then she assured me
that that will not occur too. Her word is NET's word.

  I am just going to get them to reiterate three times (a holy number)
that no further charges than a fixed monthly bill will apply. I will
then order these blocks, and mail then a letter thanking them for the
assurances I had heard from them that day, carefully listing my
concerns and their assurances, and preserve a copy of the letter. I
suppose if still someone slaps me ... its a NET problem, and that
should be insurance enough. (Hope so!).

  So no Dial-1, no Operator assisted calls, no premium calls, no
collect calls in, no third party calls. No scam calls. Local call OK,
1-800 OK (and free), Calling card OK (charge his card).

  Your LEC should have similar blocks too, perhaps in a different
combination, and tarriffs. I think this is quite conclusive.


Good Luck!

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

Date: 14-JAN-1993 18:16:02.57
From: Douglas Scott Reuben <[e-mail]>
Subject: Correction to NY/Philly Posting


Recently I noted that Cell One/NY has initiated automatic call
delivery to Philadelphia (00029).

I also incorrectly noted that you need to use the "Do Not Disturb"
feature to have your calls sent to voicemail, as you need to do in
Connecitcut (00119) and the the ComCast areas of New Jersey (00173,
00575, 01487). (And on all of the NACN as well.).

Philly is connected to NY via IS-41 RevA, and NOT the "Protocol
Translators" which NY uses to connect to CT and NJ. IS-41 RevA *can*
apparently hand the call back to NY if no one answers in Philly, so if
you let the call go unanswered it will eventually bounce back to your
voicemail with Cell One/NY.

(The Protocol Translator can handle calls like this FROM CT and NJ,
ie, CT and NJ customers roaming in NY will have their calls go back to
their home systems if they are not available, but for some reason the
PT can't handle a call from NY to CT/NJ so that it will bounce back to
NY upon "no answer".)

Also, Wilmington is not YET officially connected -- if you go active
in Philly and drive down to Wilmington (00123) you will get calls, but
you can't go active in Wilmington and have calls delivered. This will
change in about a week when IS-41 RevA is set in place to Wilmington
as well.

Overall, then, a definite improvement, although IS-41 RevA does seem
to have one annoying flaw (in my opinion): If someone places a call to
you while you are roaming in an IS-41 RevA "networked" area, and
either abandons the call, talks to you, or gets a busy, a SECOND call
within two minutes will AUTOMATICALLY go to voicemail or and "out of
vehicle" recording.  IS-41 RevA will not pass a second call along for
two minutes after the first!

So if someone calls you, and notices that it is taking a while for
ringing to start (while you are being located in the roaming market),
thinks he may have misdialed and tries you again, if the second
attempt is in under two minutes, he will get your voicemail or an "out
of vehicle" recording. This occurs regardless of whether you have
"Call-Waiting" or not -- you will only get Call Waiting calls AFTER
the first two minutes, before that callers will still be dumped to
voicemail.

Hopefully, someone at Cell One or the people writing IS-41 stuff can
reset this to be something like 15 seconds instead of the unreasonably
long period of two minutes.

As I said, though, overall, not having to use *35/*350 is certainly an
improvement!


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

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

Organization: The American University - University Computing Center
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1993 20:09:24 EST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Prodigy Update Report in Newsbytes


WHITE PLAINS, NEW YORK, U.S.A., 1993 JAN 13 (NB) -- Recent layoffs
will not impact the ability of Prodigy to meet its announced goal of
establishing an Internet connection, a top company executive has told
{Newsbytes}. He adds that the staff reductions will not stop Prodigy
from implementing publicly announced system improvements.

George Perry, vice president and chief counsel of Prodigy Services,
discussed the January 11th firing by Prodigy of 250 of its 1,100
employees, citing the need to reduce costs and improve efficiency.
Perry told Newsbytes, "This was a painful and difficult move.  We
felt, however, that the reorganization is a better plan for the future
and will greatly aid us in reaching profitability."

Perry said, "By sheer coincidence, we passed the one million household
mark last week and we have two million individuals as members. We feel
that we have contributed greatly to the communications explosion."

The Internet connection will allow electronic mail to be sent between
Prodigy subscribers and the approximately 20,000,000 users of the many
networks that collectively make up what is known as the Internet.
Among Prodigy's commercial competition, GEnie has recently added this
feature joining America OnLine, CompuServe, Delphi, AppleLink, MCI
Mail, AT&T Mail and the WELL as systems which provide this access.

In announcing the layoffs, Prodigy President Ross S. Glatzner was
quoted as saying, "This is a tough day. But in the end, it was the
necessary thing to do. We became very layered over the years and the
decision making wasn't as crisp as it needed to be."

As part of the reorganization, Prodigy also will turn over the
functions of its membership services division to an outside firm, SPS
Payment Systems of Layton, Utah. SPS will offer jobs to 65 of the 100
workers in the membership services division, currently located in
Yorktown Heights, NY.

It has also been speculated in the press that the reorganization will
mean less emphasis on programming and systems organization.  This view
is based on the recent departure of several top programming executives
including senior vice president, Henry Heilbrunn, who left the company
in the week before the staff cuts.

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

From: [e-mail] (Johan Vounckx)
Subject: What is Teleport?
Organization: Catholic University of Leuven, Belgium
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1993 08:28:09 GMT


Hi,

I've recently heard the word "teleport".  It seems to be a place where
companies can make use of lots of communication services, like
videoconferences, ...

Can anyone give me more information on that?  Are there some teleports
existing?  (It seems that in Torino, Italy, there is one.)


Thanks,

Johan Vounckx     K.U.Leuven-ESAT Laboratory
Kard. Mercierlaan 94   B-3001 Heverlee, Belgium


[Moderator's Note: A company in the USA headquartered in New York City
called 'Teleport' provides local telco bypass service to a few large
companies both in that city and a few other places such as Chicago.  PAT]

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

Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1993  19:15:51 EST
Subject: What is Tariff 12 (or is it 11)?


I have a question which came up once because of something an article
someone mentioned.

AT&T has a special schedule for some customers, which apparently the
customers love and AT&T's competitors hate.  I was wondering what it
was.

The name of the schedule is either the infamous "Tariff 11" or "Tariff
12".

As the last time I looked the AT&T general dial tariffs were numbered
200 or more, this sounds odd.

Does anyone know anything about either a "Tariff 11" or "Tariff 12"?


Paul Robinson -- [e-mail]
These opinions are mine alone.

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

From: [e-mail] (J. Philip Miller)
Subject: Cellular Accessories
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1993 20:40:32 -0600 (CST)


Having finally broken down and picked up a bag phone to lug around in
my car, I started looking around for accessories.  I was quite
suprised that I have been uable to find any discount, mail order type
suppliers.  While Hello Direct is frequently recommended here, they
are neither generally inexpensive, nor do they carry a wide variety of
brand name products.  In my particular case, I am looking for a
battery for a Uniden CP 1900A but suspect that there must be folks who
sell stuff for many brands.  Any recommendations?


     J. Philip Miller, Professor, Division of Biostatistics, Box 8067
     Washington University Medical School, St. Louis MO 63110
     [e-mail] - Internet  [phone] [362-2694(FAX)]

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

Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1993 20:25:05 -0800
From: [e-mail] (Eric Pearce)
Subject: TransTalk Experience?


I'm looking at the TransTalk router from International Transware.  It
is supposed to allow me to initiate a switched 56k connection from a
Mac, i.e.

 Mac <-- LocalTalk --> TransTalk <-- V.35? --> CSU/DSU --> SW56k-land

Does anybody have experience with this product?  What is a good, low
cost CSU/DSU that will work with it?  Someone mentioned Adtran.

The primary use would be transfering large files to a print shop (we
are a book publisher).  The 14.4 modems I'm using now are not fast
enough.  We are in the boonies, so no ISDN yet.


Thanks,

Eric Pearce | [e-mail] | O'Reilly & Associates
Publishers of Nutshell Series Handbooks and X Window System Guides
103 Morris St, Sebastopol, CA 95472  1-800-998-9938 or 707-829-0515

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

From: [e-mail] (Ron Martin)
Subject: Want to Buy!
Organization: Memorial University of Newfoundland
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1993 21:30:22 GMT


I want to buy a key set.  Would like to get a small Northern Telecom
Meridian setup with three or four extensions, but will take a look at
any offers.  Mail me with your price, unit description and condition
and any other info.


Thanks in advance,

Ron

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #25
*****************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa22616;
          15 Jan 93 4:45 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA28613
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 15 Jan 1993 02:23:46 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA21677
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 15 Jan 1993 02:23:18 -0600
Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1993 02:23:18 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #26

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 15 Jan 93 02:23:15 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 26

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Apartment Security Stupidity (Elana Beach)
    OBT and Flat-Rate Service (Rob Knauerhase)
    Free Publicity on Telecommunications Issues (Tom Worthington)
    Calling Cards (was Calling 1-800 Can Cost You a Fortune) (Andy Sherman)
    Voice Mail With Call Back (Paul Robinson)
    Remote Call Forwarding (Paul Robinson)
    Paging -> SW Bell Gives Up (Guy Hadsall)
    Wiring For CSU/DSU Units (Doug Barr)
    Looking For Portable X.25/Frame Relay Imformation (L. Tzeng via Seth Dobbs)
    Telecom Management Degrees (J.D. Delancy)
    Still 0 + 7D For Local Within 713? (Carl Moore)
    313 Split Not Being Well Publicized (Jim Rees)
    Another Teee Heee :-)) (Rich Greenberg)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Elana Beach)
Subject: Apartment Security Stupidity
Organization: Open Communications Forum
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1993 16:32:05 GMT


I live in an apartment building.  This place uses a system called
Entraguard that lets tenants screen visitors.  The visitor punches a
three number code on the panel outside the front door, the tenant's
phone rings, and if it's someone they want, the tenant hits 9 on
his/her touch-tone phone.  The tone triggers the front door to unlock.

All this was fine and dandy until one day when I came home, I was
taken aside by the assistant manager and told to get a new answering
machine or else.  Turned out that the beep tone on my answering
machine was the same frequency as the tone that opened the door.  It
also turned out that the management of my building traditionally
forced tenants to get answering machines instead of getting this
Entraguard company to fix the original problem.  I talked to the head
manager, who claimed the company had come three times and tried to fix
it, and there was no fixing it at all.

I was supposedly required to get a new answering machine because
unsavory types had discovered that my answering machine would let them
in.  Well, that sure explained the small number of blank messages on my
machine that sounded like they originated at the front door ...

When I heard I had to replace MY machine because of THEIR problem, I
got MAD.  Off the the head manager's office I go.  The main manager
claimed that since this was not a fancy high-income building, I should
not expect them to be able to afford a high-tech security system.  At
the time I knew very little phone tech.  I decided to fake it.  I told
that manager (I was bluffing here) that all that Entraguard had to do
was install a certain electronic chip which cost less than $2 which
would allow the system to know the difference between an answering
machine and a touch-tone.

I really did not know what I was talking about, but THEY didn't know
that.  Within a month, the system seems to have been fixed.  They have
let me keep my answering machine, and some tests I have run recently
show no effect of my beep tone on that door.  Another positive effect:
when I consulted the net for a place to ask about this, I was directed
to the TELECOM Digest.  I have enjoyed reading it ever since.

I threatened the apartment management that if they ever give me
trouble about this door problem again, I was going to bore them with
some REAL technical details until it made their heads spin.  They seem
to be fairly tech-allergic, and they haven't bugged me since.  ;-)


[Moderator's Note: Illinois Bell offers apartment front door security
service to grandfathered customers who had it installed prior to about
1983. They use a sort of hybrid centrex from the central office to run
it. The pairs from the CO to the phones in each apartment have to be
dedicated without any possibility of multiples on those pairs. This is
done for security reasons, and other security techniques include
having the front door opening device camp-on the line *after*
decisions are made by the software to hunt, call-forward, bridge to an
answering service, etc. This prevents the place where you forwarded
your calls to or your answering service from opening the front door of
your building ... the answering service will never see the call, and
even with call-forwarding turned on, a front door call will ring
through with an easily identified ringing cadence of its own. Likewise,
the CO can tell the difference between a digit punched at the phone (4
to open the door, 6 to deny entry and disconnect) and something similar
fed to it from a foreign source like an answering machine or pocket
tone sounder. IBT called this product 'Enterphone', following the
divestiture in the early 1980's, new customers were referred to a
company called 'Interphone', a division of GTE in Canada which makes
customer premises equipment which does the same thing but instead of
being in the CO is wired up at the demarc where telco's pairs meet up
with building house pairs.  I'll elaborate in more detail on both
systems here if anyone is interested.   PAT]

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

From: Rob Knauerhase <[e-mail]>
Subject: OBT and Flat-Rate Service
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 93 10:17:34 CST


 From a local (to Ohio) news item:

(COLUMBUS)--State Representative Mike Stinziano says he will introduce
a bill prohibiting telephone companies from eliminating flat-rate
service. The Columbus Democrat says he believes phone companies will
try to force residential customers to pay based on a time, distance,
length and number of calls formula. An Ohio Bell spokesman says the
company will oppose such legislation.

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

I mailed an article here last Thanksgiving about Ohio Bell's sales
pitches for their relatively new measured-service variants, commenting
that my mother's phone bill listed an _increase_ if she switched to
any of their new plans (based on her typical usage).  Someone from
this group mailed me privately warning that in Michigan there was now
no option of flat-rate, and to watch out for the same thing in
OBT-land.

Well, from the above blurb, something appears to be going on.  So far,
Ohio's PUCO has been relatively good (or compared to CPUC reports
here, stellar :) with respect to rates and features, so I assume
(hope) that flat-rate pricing will not shoot up in the face of this
legislation.

Since OBT is guaranteed a profit (n'est-ce pas?), the Libertarian side
of me has no trouble supporting the continuation of flat-rate service
for those who choose it, even if some who so choose end up subsidizing
high-usage families.  Am I overlooking anything?

As I am for the time being residing in central Illinois, I'd
appreciate it if an interested party closer to Columbus would keep the
Digest (and/or me) informed as to how (and if!) this legislation
proceeds.


Rob Knauerhase
University of Illinois @ Urbana-Champaign, Dept. of Computer Science


[Moderator's Note: I've never understood why people had such a big
objection to simply paying for the service they use. We've had no flat
rate service in Chicago outside a very small local area for many
years, and for most subscribers, the cost for phone service actually
went *down* when they were no longer forced to pay for all the modem
users who went through thousands of units a month at flat rate.
Naturally, the guys who spent hours every night on a modem calling BBS
lines on the other side of the area code (or even inter-area code; our
old flat rate plans took in 312/708 and parts of 815/219/414) squealed
like pigs when the change was announced; *they* had to start paying
their way ... the 90 percent plus of our population which does not use
modems or make hundreds (or thousands) of calls each month was very
pleased to see a reduction in their bills. When IBT ditched almost all
the flat rate stuff a few years ago, the biggest objections came in
the form of countless articles on BBS message bases from people talking
about the greedy and awful old telco.  Count me as one who approves of
'pay for what you use'; I don't like paying subsidies for my neighbor's
use of the phone. I don't do it for the electricity, water or gas they
use, why should I for their phone calls via flat rate, averaged out
pricing?  But then again, I don't run war dialers against entire CO's
or call computer chat lines in the outer fringes of 708/815.    PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Tom Worthington)
Subject: Free Publicity on Telecommunications Issues
Organization: Australian Defence Force Academy, Canberra, Australia
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1993 07:36:36 GMT


Toula Mantis is from the Australian Telecommunications Users Group.
She is looking for telecommunications stories to write about in the
ATUG column in each Monday's Australian newspaper (in the communica-
tions section).

Toula is currently preparing an overview of Australian R&D in
telecommunications for next Monday's issue (her deadline is tomorrow
afternoon).

She would like input from the R&D community on topics like: "How does
R&D in Australia compare with the rest of the world?". Information for
good news stores (like what a wonderful research project you are on)
or bad news stories (like "what happened to the $13M for AARnet?")
would also be welcome.

Contact:

Toula Mantis
Australian Telecommunications Users Group
ph:  [phone]    fax: [phone]

She has an "AAP mailbox" (number 9243). If anyone knows how to send to
it from the Internet, we would all be impressed.


Posted by request by Tom Worthington, Director of the Community
Affairs Board, Australian Computer Society Incorporated, as a service
to the community.


[Moderator's Note: Bearing in mind that as I write this, it is already
Saturday in Australia, I'm not sure if submissions will reach her in
time, but perhaps she will do a followup soon.   PAT]

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

Date: Thu, 14 Jan 93 11:36:33 EST
Subject: Calling Cards (was Calling 1-800 Can Cost You a Fortune)
Organization: Salomon Inc, Rutherford NJ
From: [e-mail] (Andy Sherman)


On 12 Jan 93 00:37:11 GMT, [e-mail] said:

> The other thing that has always confused me is why alternative
> long-distance companies (AOSs?) can charge things to an AT&T calling
> card.  I realize that Ma and the Baby Bells have some sort of
> agreement to allow charges to each others' calling cards.  And I
> gather that this all has something to do with the fact that there is
> some standard way to determine if a calling card number is valid.  But
> again, why does AT&T agree to provide billing service for these
> people?  I can't imagine if Sears suddenly decided to accept payments
> by JCPenny credit cards that JCPenny would actually let them collect
> on the bills.

This should only be the case with the old-style AT&T Card numbers, the
kind that contain your billing telephone number followed by a PIN.
Those are not really AT&T numbers, and therein lies the problem.
Those numbers belong the local carrier, and they will verify that
number for any phone company.

For the past year or more, AT&T has been issuing new cards with a
private number (so-called CIID cards), and the AT&T Universal Card
uses a CIID number also.  A CIID card can *NOT* be billed by an AOS,
and can *NOT* be billed by another carrier.  As you note, AT&T has
cross-verification agreements with virtually every local exchange
carrier in the country, so that LEC cards can be used to bill AT&T
calls and CIID cards can be used to bill LEC carried calls.

If your AT&T card can be billed by the slime, then you need to call
AT&T and get a new card.


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

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

Date: Thu, 14 Jan 93 15:44 GMT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Voice Mail With Call Back


If anyone is interested, I used to use a local area-code 202 voice
mail service which had the option of adding an 800 number on it. Also,
the service, which is run by an interexchange carrier, can be
programmed (by you) to call you whenever a message comes in, anywhere
in the U.S.

The nice thing about this is you can also restrict the hours the
system calls you.  I had mine set up for the hours I was home, 10-2.
So if I get any calls from 2:01 pm until 9:59 am, the system would
hold them and then at 10:00 it would call me and announce I had
messages.  I could then enter my password and have the same access as
if I had dialed in for messages.  If a message comes in between 10 and
2, after the message is left, the system calls me and then announces I
have a message.  Also, since I can reprogram the number for it to
call, if I have to go to a different location, I can take my messages
with me.  Apparently the only thing I can't do is have it signal a
touch-tone pager directly since it uses touch tones to indicate where
to call; but the administrator said that they could set it up if I
wanted it.

The only problem I had with it was the price.  Originally it was $1 a
month plus 16c per minute of usage, with an additional 16c for access
via the 800 number.  Then they raised the rate to a minimum $10 a
month usage (I guess it got too expensive for them to continue to
operate it that way; I had four mailboxes and was running about $8-15
a month usage.)  That was when I had to discontinue the service.

The other thing I could do was have it deliver messages.  I could post
a message, then give it a phone number to send it to, and it would
send it out just like one of those robodialers.

Has anyone else seen anything better than this in a public voice mail
service?  I may end up going back to it because of the capabilities.

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

Date: Thu, 14 Jan 93 15:27 GMT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Remote Call Forwarding


In Telecom Digest 13 #24, Barton F. Bruce <[e-mail]> says:

> And just sometimes telco offers 'REMOTE CALL FORWARDING' where NO line
> goes anywhere. When a local call is dialed, it gets forwarded to the
> remote site.

I had it for a time; the phone company will charge message units for
each local transferred call.  I wanted an area code 703 number for my
voice mail number which was in the 202 area code.

> If you have a trustworthy site you can have the first flavor above
> line delivered to, that is best and someone can plug a phone in and
> reset the number as needed.

Not even that.  Bell Atlantic (C&P Telephone Company's owner) offers
"Ultra call forwarding" in which you can change the call forward
number on your phone even from another location.


Paul Robinson - [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: We have both 'Remote Call Forwarding' here as you
describe it and 'Remote Access Call Forwarding' which is what you
describe as 'Ultra'. We can call the switch, enter our passcode and
divert our line (equipped with call forwarding) wherever we want it.
IBT gives this feature for free as part of the Call Forwarding feature
here.  We have to pay dearly for the first type however, if we want a
phone out of another CO somewhere to be permanently set to ring us.  PAT]

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

Organization: The American University - University Computing Center
Date: Thu, 13 Jan 1993 22:48:00 EST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Paging -> SW Bell Gives Up


It appears that Southwestern Bell Corp. of St. Louis MO is giving up
on the wireless paging business.  It was announed that it will sell
its floundering Metromedia Paging (spun off of John Kluge's Metromedia)
to New York's LOCATE Corporation.

*waving* "Bye Bye Paging as we know it ... hello wireless as we don't
know it!"


Guy Hadsall    Dept. of Health and Fitness
The American Univeristy   Washington, DC
[phone]  VOICE   [phone]  FAX
[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (BARR DOUG)
Subject: Wiring for CSU/DSU Units
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1993 17:10:48 GMT


I am trying to find out what kind of wiring is required from the US
West demark to a CSU/DSU unit. Is there a specification (wire type, db
loss, crosstalk, distance limitation) for all these units or are they
vendor independent. I would appreciate replies. Thanks in advance.

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

From: [e-mail] (Seth Dobbs)
Subject: Looking For Portable X.25/Frame Relay Information
Date: 14 Jan 93 18:17:36 GMT
Organization: Motorola, Inc. GSS-AMT, Arlington Heights, Il


I am posting this for a friend.  Please mail replies to the email
address listed at the end.

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

Dear Netlanders,

I am looking for information on the "Portable" software products/
components in the following areas:

   - X.25
   - X.25
   - X.25 PAD
   - Frame Relay
   - Frame Relay PAD

If you have ported some of the above products to your company's
platforms, I would like to hear your porting experience.  If your
company has the above products, I would like to hear from you, too.

Please either give me a call at [phone] or send me an e-mail at
[e-mail].

Thanks,

Lih-Shyng Tzeng    U.S. Robotics, Inc.
[e-mail]
                        -------------

Seth T. Dobbs  * QMS Royal Artist * | [e-mail]
GSS/AMT Motorola Inc.               | Standard Disclaimer

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

Date: Thu, 14 Jan 93 08:26:51 EST
From: [e-mail] (J.D. Delancy)
Subject: Telecom Management Degrees


Does anyone know what colleges/universities offer a Telecommunications
Management Degree program starting at the associates level?  All I've
seen has been a Masters Level program at places like Univ of Maryland.


[e-mail]

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

Date: Thu, 14 Jan 93 10:43:31 EST
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject: Still 0 + 7D For Local Within 713?


I returned a few days ago from the Gulf of Mexico coast area, traveling
east to Pensacola, Fla. and west to Houston, Texas.  In area 713, I
placed at least one local call via 0+ from a pay phone, and (as
happened once in North Carolina) I had to leave the area code off
although area 713 (and North Carolina) have had to program for N0X/N1X
prefixes.

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

From: [e-mail] (Jim Rees)
Subject: 313 Split Not Being Well Publicized
Date: 14 Jan 1993 16:02:44 GMT
Organization: University of Michigan CITI
Reply-To: [e-mail]


Michigan Bell announced the 313/810 area code split to its customers
in August.  In the announcement they said, "But from now until Aug.
10, 1994 (that's 8-10-94), when the change will occur, Michigan Bell
will carry out a massive program to educate customers."

Apparently that "massive program" does not include any notice in the
phone book.  The 92-93 book, issued by Michigan Bell in November 1992,
contains no mention of the split that I can find.

By the way, you can get more information at 1-800-831-8989 (I don't
know if this is diallable outside of 313/810).  Permissive dialing
starts December 1993, and ends (with mandatory use of 810) August 10,
1994.

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

Date: Thu, 14 Jan 93 16:41:35 PST
From: [e-mail] (Rich Greenberg)
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Another Teee Heee :-))


Hi Pat,

The {Los Angeles Times} carries a comic strip called "Bound & Gagged"
by Dana Summers.  For those not familiar with it, it (IMHO) is a
knockoff of Gary Larson's "Far Side", and unually not up to Larson's
quality.  Yesterday's (1/13/93) strip was one of the (again IMHO)
exceptions, and in addition should be particularly funny to most
readers of the TELECOM Digest.  Please picture this:

A horse drawn wagon, no sides, just a flat bed with a bench seat near
the front.  Sitting on the seat is a SNA (Stereotypical Native
American) driving the horses.

On the bed of the wagon, a fire is burning, and another SNA is waving
a blanket over the fire producing smoke balls.

The caption:  "First Mobil Phone".

Enjoy  :-))


[Moderator's Note: Cute.  Another recent cartoon in a magazine showed
a Dirty Old Man at a payphone covering the mouthpiece with a handker-
chief speaking into the phone.  He is wearing a long trench coat and
probably exposing himself.  The symbol for electricity leads from the
wires on this phone to the next picture of a switchboard where this
hateful looking witch of an operator is saying, "I have an obscene
call for anyone at this number, will you accept the charges?"  The
third panel shows this rather perplexed looking woman on the receiving
end of the whole thing. The final picture has the man being led away
by police and a stern looking judge banging a gavel saying, "he forgot
to use star sixty seven when he placed that call. Don't you make the
same mistake!"  By the way, *67 -does- work from payphones here.  PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #26
*****************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa08308;
          18 Jan 93 1:47 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA02985
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 17 Jan 1993 23:20:29 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA03083
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 17 Jan 1993 23:19:59 -0600
Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1993 23:19:59 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #28

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 17 Jan 93 23:20:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 28

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Gonna Miss Contel (John Higdon)
    Telemarketer Conviction Overturned on Appeal :-( (Jack Winslade)
    Do You Think This is a Fraudulent Ad? :) (Paul Robinson)
    Re: MF Signaling Test Gear (Pat Turner)
    What is dBm0? (Ching-Chang Liao)
    Sprint Can't do Switched 56k (?) (Eric Pearce)
    Help Needed With Novatel 8320 Transportable Cellular Phone (Joe Smooth)
    Correction: AT&T Buys 20% of Unitel (Dave Leibold)
    AT&T PRI (was 800 Numbers and Live ANI Advice Sought) (David G. Lewis)
    ISDN Modems/Boards? (Sid Stuart)
    What is GTE NorthNet? ([e-mail])
    Info Wanted on Telecom Exhibitions and Conferences (Cliff Featherstone)
    Source For Used Panasonic 616 Wanted (Steve Gaarder)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sun, 17 Jan 93 19:31 PST
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Gonna Miss Contel


This past week has been a study in contrasts. All three of the LECs
with which I have service have had an opportunity to show what it is
made of.

Torrential rains (at least for here) have come down and many circuits
have failed. The first to go was an audio circuit to Mt. Loma Prieta
which is used by an Iranian programming outfit to get program audio to
a transmitter site for SCA broadcasts. Pac*Bell was called, a repair
person picked up the keys, and the circuit was repaired.

Day before yesterday, all the data circuits and the telephone quit up
at another transmitter facility served by GTE. First, it took a good
half-hour waiting on hold to find out that I had called the wrong
number to find out the right number for "priority repair". I ended up
calling corporate headquarters in Thousand Jokes. Good thing it was a
weekday during business hours!

Then I reported the list of circuits to someone at a number in Long
Beach. An hour and a half later, someone called back to tell me that
the circuit IDs were incorrect -- did I have other numbers? No. Thirty
minutes after that, someone called to tell me that everything tested
fine and that they were closing the tickets out. I reopened the
tickets.  Later in the day, I was told that someone would have to
visit the site but that due to the rain and mud, it would have to be
some other day.  Since I had just made two trips to the site myself, I
gave the person an earful and told him what would be acceptable was
complete repair in one hour -- after that major complaints would be
filed.

The next excuse involved keys. Someone would have to let them in. I
told them to use the keys that I had provided years ago for this very
purpose. I silenced the whining by pointing out that a new data
circuit had been installed the week before without anyone letting in
the installer, so they obviously still had the keys.

Sometime that night the circuits (except for the telephone itself)
started working and some repair person woke me up at 7:30 AM to tell
me that everything was fixed. Another call to the 310 number got the
phone working by noon.

Today, I discovered that our 800 number in Victorville was
"disconnected" and called the Contel business office to find out why.
I was told that there was no reason for it to be that way and the
person offered to report it to repair service. Within fifteen minutes,
I received a call from repair service telling me that it had been
corrected. Fifteen minutes after that a very apologetic person from
the Contel business office told me that it had been out of service for
over a week and that she would credit me with the entire monthly
service charge as compensation.

(If this had been GTE, it would have been days before anyone would
have even called me back. It would have somehow been my fault and
there would have been no compensation granted whatsoever. With GTE,
dollars win out over customer relations every time.)

BTW, it should be pointed out that Pac*Bell gives toll-free numbers to
call techs back on. Contel invites you to call collect. GTE just gives
you toll numbers and expects you to pay. I have no idea how much I
spent calling 714, 310, and 805 numbers the other day.

When Contel falls into the GTE sewer here in California, the only
major phone company left (that knows anything about service) will be
Pac*Bell.


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

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

Date: Sun, 17 Jan 93 02:57:27 EST
From: [e-mail] (Jack Winslade)
Subject: Telemarketer Conviction Overturned on Appeal :-(


According to the {Omaha World-Herald}, Friday, Jan 15, 1993, evening
edition, an 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals panel has said that
evidence was insufficient to prove that Bedford Direct Marketing, and
its president, Ellis B. Goodman, had defrauded telephone users who had
called a 900 number.  This decision voids a two-year sentence for
Goodman and a $750,000.00 fine for the firm.

'The case has been watched closely by prosecutors and postal
inspectors eager to stop what they regard as abuse of 900 phone
numbers.'

As I reported here some time ago, Bedford Direct Marketing sent cards
to thousands of people telling them they had won a prize -- a cash
prize or a 'discount shopping spree' {yeah, sure} from Bedford's
catalog, and that they must phone a 900 number to claim the prize.

The judges stated that the plan was not a scheme to defraud because it
accurately and fully explained the costs that people deciding to
participate would pay.  The dissenting judge stated that 'the court's
assessment of the record misses the mark in the real world where
schemers like Goodman and Bedford prey upon ordinary people they deem
ripe for plucking.'


Good day.

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

Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1993  19:34:50 EST
Subject: Do You Think This is a Fraudulent Ad?  :)


An advertisement on page 3 of the January, 1993 issue of "Midrange
Computing" mentions Exabyte Corporation's new 2.5 Gigabyte EXB-8200.

The ad claims that the Bit Error Rate (BER), number of 1017 bits
before an error occurred, is now 1 in 10.  The ad further states
that:

   The new BER means that a user will encounter on
   average one unrecoverable error in 1017 (sic)
   bits of data read.  This reliability specification
   amounts to one error in the information contained
   in 100 million years of {The Wall Street Journal}.

I found that hard to believe.  I don't have the WSJ here, but I do
have the {Washington Post}.  The Post is a six-column newspaper and a
rough estimate is that it is 100 lines deep and 180 characters across.
To compensate for pictures, call it 20K per page.

10 ** 17 is 100,000,000,000,000,000 bits.  Assume 10 bits are needed
for each character (or picture image point, to compensate for the
higher amount of data that pictures require.)  That amounts to 10e16
bytes of data.

As I stated the average page has 20K, so that figure is 500,000,000,000
pages.  If the Journal does 50 pages an issue, that's 10,000,000,000
issues.  There are roughly 250 business days a year (I know the number
is higher, but this is fairer to them and it divides evenly.)  That
translates into 40,000,000 years.

This is a 150% inflation of the number of issues that you could read
before you'd find an error!  I resent this; if I only read 40 million
years' worth of the {Wall Street Journal} before I discovered an
error, I'd not be pleased.


Paul Robinson -- [e-mail]
These opinions are mine alone

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

Date: Sun, 17 Jan 93 20:00 EST
From: rsiatl![e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: MF Signaling Test Gear


Bob Turner writes:

> Does anyone know of test gear available to test CPE that uses MF (NOT
> DTMF) signalling? It can be for two or four wire circuits.  I know
> such a device exists, I just don't know who manufactures it.

Several transmission test sets will generate MF.  The Ameritec AM-48
($3k) and AM-44 ($2k) both do.  At least one of Ameritec's
non-handheld units does also.  Some of Hekimian's test sets will too,
if a signaling option is purchased.  If you don't need to purchase a
new TIMS, I would look at one of the Hacker {insert color} boxes that
will generate the tones.  I have considered purchasing one, as my
Ameritec was stolen, and I now use a recently purchased HP 3591A (no
DTMF or MF).  I was looking at the one sold by Hack-Tic.  I'm sure
Bill would send you info.  You will need to add a xformer, and maybe a
DC blocking cap.

As far as grabbing MF digits, the digit grabbers double in price with
the MF option.  As an example: Metro-Tel TPM-32 (DTMF, DP) $250,
Metro-Tel TPM-32/MF $700.  I think Ziad also makes MF digit grabbers.
They do make a butt set that has a digit grabber built in (pHD or PHd)
I am considering buying rather than a TS22A.  If anyone knows anything
about their quality, I would appreciate a note.  Some AT&T CPE techs
use a Ziad combination digit grabber and level meter, that they seem
to have had good luck with.


Pat Turner KB4GRZ   [e-mail]

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

From: Ching-Chang Liao <[e-mail]>
Subject: What is dBm0?
Date: Sun, 17 Jan 93 20:54:28 CST


I just read a paper taken from AT&T Technical Journal. The subject of
this paper is "THE 32 KB/S ADPCM CODING STANDARD". In this paper the
author use "dBm0" as a unit to represent the level of input signal. I
don't know what the definition of "dBm0" is. Is "dBm0" same as "0
dBm"? Is there anyone who knows the answer and can answer this
question for me? I will be appreciated if someone answer my question.


NAME: Stephen  REAL NAME: CHING-CHANG LIAO
SCHOOL: University of Missouri-Rolla
HOME ADDRESS: 607 E. 12TH ST., Rolla, Mo 65401
TELEPHONE: [phone]    E-MAIL: [e-mail]

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

Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1993 16:21:43 -0800
From: [e-mail] (Eric Pearce)
Subject: Sprint Can't Do Switched 56k (?)


We have a Sprint T1 with 16 channels for voice and 1 56k dedicated
data line.  I want to add a single switched 56k line out of the same
channel bank (since there are spare slots).  The reasoning behind
getting a CB was to be able to mix and match various types of service.

Sprint sales says they can't do it, as their "switched 56k network is
too advanced for PacBell and won't be able to talk to it" (we are in
northern CA).  They also volunteered that AT&T and MCI are be able to
provide this even though Sprint can't.  Does this make any sense?

Right now I'm looking at buying a separate SW56 from PacBell
(connected to a Adtran DSU 2AR).  If I was able to go through the
Channel Bank (a Telco Systems Route 24), would I need a OCU card?  It
seems like the motivation for this would be to avoid a separate
termination fee from PacBell, right?


Thanks,

Eric Pearce | [e-mail] | O'Reilly & Associates
Publishers of Nutshell Series Handbooks and X Window System Guides
103 Morris St, Sebastopol, CA 95472  1-800-998-9938 or 707-829-0515

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

From: Joe Smooth <[e-mail]>
Subject: Help Needed With Novatel 8320 Transportable Cellular Phone
Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1993 03:51:49 GMT


Hi if anyone has ANY information what-so-ever on the Novatel 8320
transportable phone, please let me know. I am extremely interested in
technical information and programming information. Thanks a lot!

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

Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1993 23:50:02 -0500
From: [e-mail] (Dave Leibold)
Subject: Correction: AT&T Buys 20% of Unitel


In my previous post on Unitel, I wrote:

> service so far. Bell Canada revenues last year were $2.2 million,
> Unitel's $400 million.

Hmmm ... well, maybe Unitel picked up a bit more market share than it
bargained for :-) ... actually, Bell should get $2.2 *billion* rather
than million.

Other than typos like that, the source of info on this one was
{The Toronto Star}.


Dave Leibold - via FidoNet node 1:250/98
INTERNET: [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (david.g.lewis)
Subject: AT&T PRI (was 800 Numbers and Live ANI Advice Sought)
Organization: AT&T
Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1993 14:36:01 GMT


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

> As Pat stated 800 service with Real Time ANI is available from the big
> three.  As far as I know this always involves a dedicated trunk to
> their POP.  AT&T is the least flexible, offering to deliver it only
> out of band with PRI ISDN.  At one time this required a AT&T switch,
> now I suspect there are other peices of CPE equipiment that will
> handle it.

There certainly are: AT&T operates a conformance testing lab, testing
CPE against TR 41459 (the AT&T ISDN PRI specification), and while I
don't know the exact numbers, I would estimate that several dozen
different products have been certified compatible with 41459.

> I would imagine that as AT&T complies with the newer ISDN-1
> standards, most any PBX could handle it.

SR-NWT-001937, National ISDN-1, has the following to say about Primary
Rate Access:

"The switch shall support Primary Rate Access.  The detailed
requirements on primary rate access for each application are in the
process of being defined... The B-channels shall be able to support
voice, circuit-switched data, and provisioned packet-switched data.
On Demand B-Channel packet on Primary Rate Access is not required for
National ISDN-1.  The D-Channel initially will only be used for
signaling to control B-Channels; therefore, support of packet-switched
data on the C-Channel is not required for National ISDN-1.

"A transition plan to move from current Layer 1 implementations to
TR-754 and the current ANSI T1 Standard at Layer 1 is being worked.
Layer 2 shall follow TR-793.  The layer 3 network/PBX interface
requirements are expected to be a subset of TR-268, Issue 3..." (note:
these have since been published in TR-1268.)  "In general, current
Primary Rate access implementations that are substantially in
agreement with the documents listed in this paragraph are acceptable,
in Bellcore's view, for National ISDN-1."

If I were a marketing type, I would claim that that means that my
implementation, which is substantially in agreement with TR-1268,
Q.931, T1.607, and NIU.302, is already NI-1 compliant.  But I'm not,
so instead I'll point out that SR-1937 doesn't really specify in any
kind of detail any requirements for PRI for NI-1, leaving that to
NI-2, and that while it's possible to talk about PRIs being NI-1
compliant, that can't be interpreted as meaning you can take an "NI-1
compliant PBX" from vendor A and an "NI-1 compliant network switch"
from vendor B, hook them up, and expect them to work.  That has to
wait until NI-2.

That said, I will reiterate that not only AT&T products are capable of
connecting to AT&T network PRIs.  Most PBXs, from my knowledge, allow
the user to provision which flavor of PRI protocol is to be supported
on a given trunk, and AT&T 4ESS is usually one of the options.

> The AT&T service is called INFO-2 and is part of their Megacom
> service.

Minor correction: MEGACOM 800 service.  MEGACOM service is an
outward-calling, WATS-type service.

> Sprint will deliver ANI with in band MF and MCI will deliver it with
> your choice of MF or DTMF.  If you can't deal with a T span, any dumb
> channel bank will do.  The extra DS0's can be used to taste to joys of
> LEC bypass.

Of course, so can the B-channels on a PRI; additionally, with PRI, you
can use call-by-call service selection, so instead of having to
dedicate, say, 8 DS0s to 800 and 12 DS0s to WATS, you can have a
call-by-call group of, say, 18 channels and take advantage of the fact
that one large trunk group will require fewer trunks to handle the
same traffic volume with a given blocking probability than will
multiple small trunk groups.

Disclaimer: I do work on this stuff, but I'm not in Product
Management, so nothing I say has the Ring of Authority.  I'm just a
simple protocol nerd ...


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Sid Stuart)
Subject: ISDN Modems/Boards?
Date: 17 Jan 1993 18:22:27 GMT
Organization: Thinking Machines Corporation, Cambridge MA, USA


New England Telephone is starting to establish ISDN services in the
Boston area. We would like to make use of this service to connect NCD
Xterminals, Macintosh's and PC's(running DOS/Windows) to Sun dialin
servers. I am trying to find out what equipment is available to do
this.

I know of two pieces of equipment that have ISDN interfaces, but doubt
they are compatible. SparcStation 10's have an ISDN port, but I am not
sure what, besides another SS10, it will connect with. I have also
seen ISDN modems from Black Box that will deliver 38400 bps aync. It
looks like they will cost ~$2,000 for each side of the connection
though.

Are there better solutions out there? Will an ISDN card in a PC
running TCP/IP interact with an SS10 ISDN port?


Sid Stuart, Thinking Machines Corp.
[e-mail]    {uunet,harvard}!think!sid

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

Organization: Penn State University
Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1993 14:01:28 EST
From: Doug <[e-mail]>
Subject: What is GTE NorthNet?


I recently came across a few documents which mentioned a "GTE
NorthNet".  Is this a big private network of GTE, or is it something
the public has access to?  If so, where/how do you get connected to
it?

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

Date: 17 Jan 93 05:01:09 EST
From: Cliff Featherstone <[e-mail]>
Subject: Info Wanted on Telecom Exhibitions and Conferences


'ello

I am looking for information on international conferences and
exhibitions relating to telecommunications in general and voicemail
technology in particular.

Any information / pointers (preferebly via e-mail) would be appreciated.


Cliff Featherstone
SERCH (Specialised Electronic Research)
South Africa

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

Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1993 02:10:44 -0500
From: anarres![e-mail]
Subject: Source For Used Panasonic 616 Wanted


A local coop grocery is looking for a new phone system. The Panasonic
616 seems to fit the bill nicely, but is a little too pricey.  Does
anyone know of a good source for a used unit?


Thanks,

Steve Gaarder <[e-mail]>

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #28
*****************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa27268;
          18 Jan 93 11:02 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA18079
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 18 Jan 1993 08:08:00 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA06725
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 18 Jan 1993 08:07:22 -0600
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1993 08:07:22 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #27


TELECOM Digest     Sun, 17 Jan 93 22:41:30 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 27

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    EFF ... Important Changes ... $  (Karim Saouli)
    Norway Goes Eight-Digit: One Week and Counting (Morten Reistad)
    You Didn't Accept a Collect Call, But You'll be Billed Anyway? (J. Decker)
    Cheaper Source of 66 Block Pads Wanted (Pat Turner)
    "Secret" Phone Codes (Kennita Watson)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1993 11:08:36 +0100
From: Karim Saouli <[e-mail]>
Subject: EFF ... Important Changes ... $


MAJOR CHANGES AT THE ELECTRONIC FRONTIER FOUNDATION

Cambridge, Massachusetts    [e-mail]   Wednesday, January 13, 1993

The Electronic Frontier Foundation was founded in July, 1990 to assure
freedom of expression in digital media, with a particular emphasis on
applying the principles embodied in the Constitution and the Bill of
Rights to computer-based communication.

EFF has met many of those challenges. We have defended civil liberties
in court. We have shaped the policy debate on emerging communications
infrastructure and regulation. We have increased awareness both on the
Net and among those law enforcement officials, policy makers, and
corporations whose insufficient understanding of the digital
environment threatened the freedom of Cyberspace.

But we've found that Cyberspace is huge. It extends not only beyond
constitutional jurisdiction but to the very limits of imagination. To
explore and understand all the new social and legal phenomena that
computerized media make possible is a task which grows faster than it
can be done.

Maintaining an office in Cambridge and another in Washington DC, has
been expensive, logistically difficult, and politically painful. Many
functions were duplicated. The two offices began to diverge
philosophically and culturally. We had more good ideas than efficient
means for carrying them out. And an unreasonable share of leadership
and work fell on one of our founders, Mitch Kapor.

These kinds of problems are common among fast-growing technology
startups in their early years, but we recognize that we have not
always dealt with them gracefully. Further, we didn't respond
convincingly to those who began to believe that EFF had lost sight of
its founding vision.

Against that background, the EFF Board met in Cambridge on January 7,
8, and 9 to revisit EFF's mission, set priorities for the Foundation's
future activities, adopt a new structure and staff to carry them out,
and clarify its relationship to others outside the organization.


1. EFF'S CAMBRIDGE OFFICE WILL CLOSE.

We will be shutting down our original Cambridge office over the next
six months, and moving all of EFF's staff functions to our office in
Washington.

2. JERRY BERMAN HAS BEEN NAMED EFF'S EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR

In December, we announced that Mitch Kapor would be leaving the job of
Executive Director. He wanted to devote more time and energy to
specific EFF projects, such as The Open Platform Initiative, focusing
less on administrative details and more on EFF's strategic vision. We
also said that we would conduct a search for his replacement,
appointing Jerry Berman as our Interim Director. Jerry's appointment
is now permanent, and the search is terminated.

3. CLIFF FIGALLO WILL MAINTAIN EFF'S PRESENCE ON-LINE, AND WILL DIRECT THE
   TRANSITION PROCESS.

Cambridge Office Director Cliff Figallo will manage the EFF transition
process, working out of Cambridge. He is now considering a move to
Washington for organizational functions yet to be defined. In the
meantime, he will oversee our on-line presence and assure electronic
accessibility.

4. STAFF COUNSEL MIKE GODWIN'S ROLE TO BE DETERMINED

We recognize the enormous resource represented by Mike Godwin. He
probably knows more about the forming Law of Cyberspace than anyone,
but differences of style and agenda created an impasse which left us
little choice but to remove him from his current position. EFF is
committed to continuing the services he has provided. We will discuss
with him a new relationship which would make it possible for him to
continue providing them.

5. COMMUNICATIONS STAFFERS GERARD VAN DER LEUN AND RITA ROUVALIS WILL
   LEAVE EFF.

Despite the departure of the Cambridge communications staff, we expect
to continue publishing EFFector Online on schedule as well as
maintaining our usual presence online. Both functions will be under
the direction of Cliff Figallo, who will be assisted by members of the
Board and Washington staff.

6. JOHN PERRY BARLOW WILL ASSUME A GREATER LEADERSHIP ROLE.

John will replace Mitch Kapor as Chairman of EFF's Executive
Committee, which works closely with the Executive Director to manage
day to day operations. Mitch will remain as Board Chairman of EFF. All
of the directors have committed themselves to a more active role in
EFF so that decisions can be made responsively during this transition.

7. EFF WILL NOT SPONSOR LOCAL CHAPTERS, BUT WILL WORK CLOSELY WITH
   INDEPENDENT REGIONAL GROUPS.

We have labored mightily and long over the whole concept of chapters,
but, in the end, the Board has decided not to form EFF chapters.
Instead, EFF will encourage the development of independent local
organizations concerned with Electronic Frontier issues. Such groups
will be free to use the phrase "Electronic Frontier" in their names
(e.g., Omaha Electronic Frontier Outpost), with the understanding that
no obligation, formal or informal, is implied in either direction
between independent groups and EFF. While EFF and any local groups
that proliferate will remain organizationally independent and
autonomous, we hope to work closely with them in pursuit of shared
goals. The EFF Board still plans to meet with representatives of
regional groups in Atlanta next week to discuss ideas for future
cooperation.

8. WE CLARIFIED EFF'S MISSION AND ACTIVITIES

In undertaking these changes, the board is guided by the sense that
our mission is to understand the opportunities and challenges of
digital communications to foster openness, individual freedom, and
community.

We expect to carry out our mission through activities in the following
areas:

POLICY DEVELOPMENT AND ADVOCACY. EFF has been working to promote an
open architecture for telecommunications by various means, including
the Open Platform Initiative, the fight against the FBI's Digital
Telephony wiretap proposal, and efforts to free robust encryption from
NSA control.

FOSTERING COMMUNITY. Much of the work we have done in the Cambridge
office has been directed at fostering a sense of community in the
online world.  These efforts will continue. We have realized that we
know far less about the conditions conducive to the formation of
virtual communities than is necessary to be effective in creating
them. Therefore, we will devote a large portion of our R & D resources
to developing better understanding in this area.

LEGAL SERVICES. We were born to defend the rights of computer users
against over-zealous and uninformed law enforcement officials. This
will continue to be an important focus of EFF's work. We expect to
improve our legal archiving and dissemination while continuing to
provide legal information to individuals who request it, and support
for attorneys who are litigating. Both the board and staff will go on
writing and speaking about these issues. Our continuing suit on behalf
of Steve Jackson Games is unaffected by these changes.

RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT. We have started many projects over the years
as their need became apparent. Going forward, EFF will allocate
resources to investigating and initiating new projects. To ensure that
our projects have the greatest impact and can reasonably be completed
with the resources available, EFF will sharpen its selection and
review process.

IN CONCLUSION ...

We expect that the foregoing may not sit well with many on the Net. We
may be accused of having "sold out" our bohemian birthright for a mess
of Washingtonian pottage. It may be widely, and perhaps hotly,
asserted that the "suits" have won and that EFF is about to become
another handmaiden to the large corporate interests which support our
work on telecommunications policy.

However plausible, these conclusions are wrong. We made these choices
with many of the same misgivings our members will feel. We have toiled
for many months to restore harmony between our two offices. But in
some cases, personal animosities had grown bitter. It seems clear that
much of the difficulty was structural. We believe that our decisions
will go far to focus EFF's work and make it more effective. The
decision to locate our one office in Washington was unavoidable; our
policy work can only be done effectively there.

Given the choice to centralize in Washington, the decision to
permanently appoint Jerry Berman as our Executive Director was
natural. Jerry has, in a very short time, built an extremely effective
team there, so our confidence in his managerial abilities is high. But
we are also convinced of his commitment to and growing understanding
of the EFF programs which extend beyond the policy establishment in
Fortress Washington.

We recognize that inside the Beltway there lies a very powerful
reality distortion field, but we have a great deal of faith in the
ability of the online world to keep us honest. We know that we can't
succeed in insightful policy work without a deep and current
understanding of the networks as they evolve -- technically,
culturally, and personally.

To those who believe that we've become too corporate, we can only say
that we founded EFF because we didn't feel that large, formal
organizations could be trusted with the future of Cyberspace. We have
no intention of becoming one ourselves.

Some will read between these lines and draw the conclusion that Mitch
Kapor is withdrawing from EFF. That is absolutely not the case. Mitch
remains thoroughly committed to serving EFF's agenda. We believe
however, that his energies are better devoted to strategy and to
developing a compelling vision of future human communications than in
day to day management.

The difficult decision to reject direct chapter affiliation was based
on a belief that no organization which believes so strongly in
self-determination should be giving orders or taking them.
Nevertheless, we are eager to see the development of many outposts on
the Electronic Frontier, whether or not they agree with us or one
another on every particular. After all, EFF is about the preservation
of diversity.

This has been a hard passage. We have had to fire good friends, and
this is personally painful to us. We are deeply concerned that, in
moving to Washington, EFF is in peril for its soul. But we are also
convinced that we have made the best decisions possible under the
circumstances, and that EFF will be stronger as a result. Please cut
us some slack during the transition. And please tell us (either
collectively at [e-mail] or individually at the addresses below)
when we aren't meeting your expectations. In detail and with examples.
We don't promise to fix everything, but we are interested in listening
and working on the issues that affect us all.

The Board of Directors of the Electronic Frontier Foundation:

Mitch Kapor, [e-mail]
John Perry Barlow, [e-mail]
John Gilmore, [e-mail]
Stewart Brand, [e-mail]
Esther Dyson, [e-mail]
Dave Farber, [e-mail]
Jerry Berman, [e-mail]
Cliff Figallo, [e-mail]

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

Date: 17 Jan 93 15:57 +0100
Organization: Oslo Stock Exchange
From: Morten Reistad <[e-mail]>
Subject: Norway Goes Eight-Digit: One Week and Counting


Thursday, January 28th 1993 at 16:00 local time, Norway will go
through step one in the great number change towards uniform
eight-digit dialing in the entire country, without any area codes.

The area code 02, now used for Oslo and parts of surrounding Akershus
will be affected. Other numbers will stay the same.

The new numbers will be :

  02 XX XX XX  Within Oslo       22 XX XX XX  (Postal codes 0100-1299)
  02 XX XX XX  Within Asker      66 XX XX XX  (affects 02-78/79/84/90/98)
  02 XX XX XX  Within Baerum     67 XX XX XX  (affects 02-12/13/53/54/58/59)
  02 24 XX XX  Within Baerum     67 14 XX XX
  02 47 XX XX  Within Baerum     67 57 XX XX
  02 51 XX XX  Within Baerum     67 56 XX XX
  02 87 XX XX  Within Baerum     67 15 XX XX
  02 88 XX XX  Within Baerum     67 80 XX XX
  02 7X XX XX  Within Nittedal   67 0X XX XX  (affects 02-76/77)
  02 70 XX XX  Within Loerenskog 67 90 XX XX
  02 82 XX XX  Within Loerenskog 67 92 XX XX
  02 97 XX XX  Within Loerenskog 67 97 XX XX
  02 XX XX XX  Within Oppegaard  66 XX XX XX  (affects 02-80/81/99)

And, if dialing any of the above from abroad you dial +47 XX XX XX XX,
while the rest of the country is still +47 A XX XX XX or +47 AA XX XXX.

Doing such a thing at 16:00 is outragous. On a Thursday, when all
shops have open late is even worse. Guess it's still "We don't care.
We don't have to. We're The Phone Company". And there is NO permissive
dialing period. Go figure.

TV commercials are run at one-hour intervals now reminding us about
this.  So at least a lot of actors get paid.

This will be part one of a five-stage change. Next change is April
15th, when the 09 and parts of 06 will change, covering parts of
eastern Norway.  There is a diskette available with the entrire
numbering plan. I will try to get permission from the Telco to post in
the archives.


Morten Reistad

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

Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: You Didn't Accept a Collect Call, But You'll be Billed Anyway?
Date: 17 Jan 93 09:26:34
From: [e-mail]


I'm sure this isn't the first time this has ever happened to a TELECOM
Digest reader, but it struck me as a poor way to do business.

The phone rang the other day and a young female voice asked to speak
to my 15-year-old son.  It was a friend of his from the Upper
Peninsula of Michigan, where we used to live before our move to GTE
country.

Anyway, she was calling from a pay phone, and had deposited money to
pay for the call (this was an inter-LATA call so it was handled by
AT&T).  But then the operator (or the automated equipment) let the
call go on for several minutes without requiring another deposit.
When the operator did come back on the line, the girl didn't have
enough money to pay for the rest of the call, and because her parents
don't currently have a phone (or so she claims), there was no number
that the call could be billed to.  So the operator stated that the
remainder would be charged to the party she called.  At no time did
the operator converse directly with my son, although he could overhear
all of this.  After this the call was disconnected.

I called AT&T back to inquire about this, and they basically said that
they will bill the unpaid remainder of a coin phone call to the
calling party, but only if the calling party accepts the charge.  I
told her that the charge had not been accepted, and that in any case
my son (who is a minor) would have no authority to accept such a
charge anyway.  The AT&T rep then said that if the call appeared on my
bill (and it probably would), I could call AT&T and they would issue a
credit.  That might be acceptable if I were still in Bell territory,
but living here in GTE land I sure don't need anything else to foul up
my bill.

Then she had the nerve to start asking me why I didn't use AT&T as my
long distance carrier!  I just said it was because I'd had one too
many billing screw-ups like this one from AT&T.

I rather anticipate that Pat may comment that AT&T is just trying to
collect their money, but I would counter that if I answer the phone
and the call is not announced as collect (it would be refused in such
a case), I should be able to hand it over to one of my children
without worrying that an operator might try to stick them with the
charge.  In a way, this strikes me as deliberately fraudulent, in the
same way as if I'd gone to a self-serve gas station and the car before
me pulled out without paying, so they added his gasoline purchase to
my credit card.  In this case, I did nothing to induce that call, I
did not agree to pay for it, and it shouldn't be appearing on my bill.
The fact that I or someone in my family was a party to the call is
irrelevent; unless it can be shown that we had somehow conspired with
the caller to do this as a means of toll avoidance (which is certainly
NOT the case here, since we had no idea this girl was even going to
call), we should not be getting the bill for it, period.

I know that we have all come to expect sleazy billing practices from
third-tier carriers, but don't think for a moment that AT&T is squeaky
clean either!


Jack Decker --- 1:154/8.0 FidoNet, [e-mail]
Gated through a Linux system

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

Date: Sun, 17 Jan 93 13:14 EST
From: rsiatl![e-mail]
Subject: Cheaper Source of 66 Block Pads Wanted
Reply-To: [e-mail]


An orgnazation I am affiliated with uses a large quality of Larus
pads.  These pads are aproxmently 3/8"x5/8"x1" and replace the
bridging clips on 66 blocks.  They use a four resistor square pad
configuration to provide a 600 ohm impedence fixed attenuation.  The
problem is that the total cost of these four resistors and the plastic
shell runs about $18/ea.  The pads are usually purchased in quantities
of a hundred or more.

I am wondering if anyone knows of a cheaper source for similar pads?


Pat Turner   KB4GRZ   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Kennita Watson)
Subject: "Secret" Phone Codes
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1993 07:57:41 GMT


At the end of the month I'm moving to a house that already has one
phone line installed, and having a second line turned on.

I have heard that there is a code I can dial into a phone that will
tell me what phone number that phone is connected to.  Would somebody
please email me what it is?  If there are other similar nifty codes,
I'd love to know those too.

I don't normally read this group, so please email me.


Thanks in advance,

Kennita Watson   [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: No Kennita, obviously you do not read this group
very often, if at all, or you would know we have covered this time and
again here. The 'secret code' you are seeking changes from one town to
the next, and from one phone exchange to the next. Sometimes they are
changed after a few months to something else. There is no standard,
and no clue at all as to what it might be without knowing *where*
(what area code and exchange) the phone is located, and even then,
there may be no difinitive answer except from some of the local guys
in that town.   PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #27
*****************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa28223;
          18 Jan 93 11:25 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA22265
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 18 Jan 1993 07:58:34 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA04990
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 18 Jan 1993 07:58:02 -0600
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1993 07:58:02 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #29

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 18 Jan 93 07:58:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 29

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    N.E. Telephone Admits Ripoff - Refuses Restitution (Scott Hannahs)
    Questions on FDDI, 500GB File Servers, Remote NFS Mount IBM (Nita Avalani)
    Wanted: Small (4-12 Line) PBX/Phone System (Larry Augustin)
    How to Plan a x.25 Numbering Scheme? (Guido Weppler)
    New Developments in ISDN From Illinois Bell (David E. Martin)
    Beware: Portability (Bill Cerny)
    Looking For Recommendations For UPS For Phone System (Robert P. MacKin)
    ANI and SS7 (Ross Alexander)
    Philippine Telephone Monopoly to be Broken (Ang Peng Hwa)
    Is This a "Real" Security Alert Message of Some Sort? (J. Eric Townsend)
    USR HST 14.4 Forsale ([e-mail])
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Scott Hannahs <[e-mail]>
Subject: N.E. Telephone Admits Ripoff - Refuses Restitution
Organization: Massachvsetts Institvte of Technology
Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1993 16:40:45 GMT


These are reposts of some articles involving an ongoing dispute with
New England Telephone that I posted to ne.general a week ago.  It was
suggested that I repost them here.  This is an interesting problem in
that they seem to be hitting universities and modem users.  I have
heard from at least one other person who was misbilled involving
other exchanges.  This problem applies to unlimited local service
where you get an unlimited number of very local calls un-itemized bill
for not-so-local calls.  The unitemized bill obviously involved my
modem usage to the University which was supposedly in the "free" area.
Things seem to be moving along in that I now have an admission that
the bills are wrong for lots of people.  But it would be "too
expensive" to rebate people who were misbilled.

        ---------------reposts follow---------------

To continue this thread, I have an interesting story about ongoing
misbilling by NET which is probably widespread.

[e-mail] (Boaz Ben-Zvi) writes:

> Following N.E.T's announcement of raising some of their rates on 1/15,
> I begun wondering how one may offset some of the hike.
> Unlimited service costs more than 6-8 bucks above the measured one,
> and gives unlimited service to your local area (your town plus the towns
> surrounding it), which would otherwise cost $.016/minute (plus 1 cent
> per call). I.e., it'll take more than (approx.) 6-8 hours of monthly
> phone use (in the local area!) to make Unlimited service a good choice.
> (Well, some modem-owners use that much in a single day :-)

I saw this about a year ago and after carefully checking that my modem
is to a "free" call signed up for unlimited local which was about
$6/month cheaper.  However after a month or so, I was getting large
bills that could only be from the modem calls.  I have spent the last
year convincing NET that their software is in error and that I was
being billed for these "free" calls.  Most of the time I have been
ignored or told that I do not know what is going on in my own
household.

Two weeks ago after 50 calls and a formal complaint to the DPU I got
someone who admitted that there was a problem and that the table was
incorrect for our phone. However he claimed that it was only our
phone and nobody else's. I do not see how the billing software could
only single out our phone. I have not gotten a satisfactory reply to
that question from NET and the complaint to the DPU has not been
withdrawn.  Since the bill for unlimited local is not itemized to what
numbers are called, it is difficult to prove or disprove billing
mistakes.  I am still asking for an outside review of the billing
system but don't know if I have the political clout to get it since
they have admitted the one mistake and are stonewalling that there may
be others.  If anyone else has had a similar problem, I would
certainly like to hear about it.

Anybody know a good "sleazy" lawyer?  This could be an interesting
class action.  Fortunately I consider it more of a hobby than an
annoyance, also an excuse to withold payment to NET since they owe me
big time.

> The announcement said "New England Telephone does not receive any
> additional revenue as a result of the new rates". Sure, they spend
> the money we pay them on TV commercials :-)

But they can always just bill you incorrectly and make up the
difference ... :-) The claim is that you get a cheaper rate since
they don't have to itemize your calls, and then they can charge you
for whatever calls they feel like.  YIKES!

Just a follow up to the note I posted last week.  New England
Telephone now admits (verbally) that they were miss-billing (read
overcharging) everyone in my exchange.  They are willing to rebate me
the amount they overcharged but I was told, "We can't rebate everyone
since that would cost too much".  I didn't hear any complaints about
collecting too much money.  They will rebate anyone who complains
about it.

This is sleaze at its finest.

I do not know how many other bills are incorrect only that calls from
Jamaica Plain to the 353 exchange were (are?) billed at the local zone
1 call rate and not the free local rate.  With the kind of quality
control that they operate with I would guess the system is riddled
with errors.  Has anyone else found such problems?  I was told that
there couldn't be an error since no one else complained.  HAH!

I am still waiting for a formal response before pushing the issue
further.

[e-mail] (George J. Carrette) writes:

> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
> (Scott Hannahs) writes:

>> I am still waiting for a formal response before pushing the issue
>> further.

> Good, when you get a written response you can publish it.

I certainly will.  What I have verbally as of today is that N.E.T.
has misbilled everyone from the Jamaica Plain exchange with
unlimited local service.  These people were billed for calls to the
Boston Central exchange which was a supposedly non-billable number.
These are two fairly large groups of people.  This situation has
existed for at least a year.  I was told that NET may not be able to
figure out when the problem first occurred.  I asked about software
change logs but got a blank response with a "we will discuss that"
type answer.

The hopeful news was that this was the first time NET mentioned
"subscriber notification" and that this problem is "bigger than we
first thought".  Some person in billing is trying to fix my bill; she
actually got permission (heavy sarcasm here) from her supervisor to
spend two hours checking back a year on it.

As for written response, after sending many certified letters to NET
(including directly to the president Paul O'Brien) I have not received
more than a postcard specifying the amount of my bill adjustment
(which was incorrect).  I am not sure how many people there are
literate.  In fact today it was suggested by an NET liason to the DPU
that I should have contacted the presidential appeal council (or some
such body).  I mentioned that I had no idea such a council existed and
that the NET main office number is unlisted.  I asked why I had not
recieved an answer to the letter to the president that this person had
a copy of and was given another "we have to look into that" answer.
So it goes.

> Remember the other MIT graduate who found that NET had overcharged
> the State House something like a few millions of dollars?

No. I might not have been here then.  Do you have a date, or
reference, names etc.  I would like to get ahold of that info.


Dr. Scott Hannahs      [e-mail]
F. Bitter National Magnet Lab, MIT NW14-1313, [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Nita Avalani)
Subject: Questions on FDDI, 500GB File Servers, Remote NFS Mount IBM
Organization: Princeton University
Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1993 14:00:14 GMT


I have following questions:

(1) Is there any way to increase the size of a file partition from 2GB
(to 20 - 50 GB, for example) in Unix OS?  Is there currently an upper
limit on the size of file partitions in mainframe (IBM) environment?

(2) Are there any high speed hardware/software alternatives to
restore/dump in Unix that would back up everything on the
nets/subnets?  If so, what is the best product?

(3) Does any one have any experiences (good or bad) with the
following:

Either (1) a FDDI backbone with ethernet from each offices to the
backbone/routers/whatever environment or (2) a FDDI backbone with FDDI
drop to each offices, with 100+ users accessing very large
databases/files (20 GB+) at will and simultaneously.

Does the network performance suffer in any way?  Can the line speed
(100 Mbps for FDDI) be achieved for data transfer for each user under
maximum loads? What are the do's and don'ts?  I hear that 3COM has
atleast two similar set ups (at Northrop and NASA Kennedy space
center), does that setup work as planned?  Is that the best out there?

(4) Are there any pitfalls to setting up a high speed link (T1, T3 or
FDDI) between a mainframe (say in California) and Unix LAN (say in
Maine)?  Even if one could receive data at line speeds, would a file
server (Sun, Auspex, IBM) be able to handle it?  More importantly,
would each user be able to realize the same data transfer rate from
their desktops (say Sparc10's) to the file servers?

(5) I hear that the NFS, TCP/IP technology is available for IBM
mainframes.  Has any one ever NFS mounted the mainframe (in CA) on to
their Unix file servers (in ME) using T1, T3 or FDDI lines?  If so,
could you please forward all your experiences (good, and of course,
bad)?  Were you ever able to access large data files from the
mainframe for all your users instantly?  Was it a reliabile set up?
and finally,

(6) Are there any products/vendors out there who make high speed unix
file servers of 500GB and more (per server)?

All comments, criticisms, etc. are welcomed.  Thanks in advance.


Nita

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

From: [e-mail] (Larry Augustin)
Subject: Wanted: Small (4-12 Line) PBX/Phone System
Organization: DSO, Stanford University
Date: 17 Jan 93 19:10:42 GMT


I'm looking for an inexpensive phone system for a small business.  I
don't have any experience with vendors in this area.  I'm looking for
recommendations, vendors phone numbers, etc. Here are some of the
features we're looking for:

    - we currently have two outside lines and six extensions. We would
like the system to be expandable to about four outside lines and twelve
extensions.

    - automated attendant; an incoming is call reaches an automated
attendant, and the caller is routed to a particular extension based on
a menu selection.

    - uses standard touch-tone phones for extensions.

    - any extension can be connected to any outside line.

We don't need:

    - voicemail; we would be satisfied with attaching answering
machines to individual extensions.

    - extension to extension connections (the office isn't that big
:-)).  if going off hook on an extension immediately connects you to
an available outside line (or gives a dial-tone otherwise) that's
fine.

The most important constraint is cost.  PC based solutions are fine --
we have a spare 386 PC we can use.


Thanks in advance,

Larry

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

Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1993 20:31:45 +0100
From: [e-mail]
Subject: How to Plan a x.25 Numbering Scheme?


Hi, Networkers!

Since we have to plan the numberging scheme of a large X.25-network I
wonder if anybody can give me a hint where to get some information
about this problem. Today, our network covers only Germany, but we
intend to make it international in the near future. The network is
growing steadily (more than 200 switching nodes now, to be about 1000
nodes in the future) and transport services over it are used by more
and more users. For user addressing we intent to use 14 digit numbers.

The question is how to organise those numbers to get a structured
numbering scheme that will work even if the network will grow. How
many digits should be used for area coding, for subaddressing and for
the node ID, etc.?  I really would like to know if anybody had to deal
with that kind of problem before and I would be very pleased to
receive a literature tip or any other kind of information on that
problem.


Thanks in advance,

G. Weppler

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

From: [e-mail] (David E. Martin)
Subject: New Developments in ISDN from Illinois Bell
Date: 17 Jan 1993 22:29:23 GMT
Organization: Fermi National Acclerator Laboratory, Batavia, IL, USA
Reply-To: [e-mail]


I talked with Bill Kalmyer after getting a cryptic letter from him
about ISDN service. He works for Ameritech and is their ISDN product
manager for Illinois. Here is what he told me:

1) Base ISDN rates are going up 18%. This will raise our monthly bills
for residental service by about $5.00 to about $40 for 2B.

2) IBT is going whole-hog for National ISDN-1.  All new services will
be by default NI-1.  You can still get AT&T Proprietary ISDN (what IBT
calls "custom" ISDN) by special request.

3) IBT is offering free FX (foreign exchange) service to those not
served by a ISDN-capable CO, so they can get service at the same
rates.

5) There is a new ISDN data products center in Wheaton, IL.

6) IBT formerly offered ISDN only from AT&T switches.  They now offer
NI-1 service from AT&T, NTI, and Siemens.

7) They are working on a new tariff to cut the cost for people with
very high monthly circuit-switched data usage.


David E. Martin
National HEPnet Management                      Phone: [phone]
Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory           FAX: [phone]
P.O. Box 500, MS 368; Batavia, IL 60510  USA\   E-Mail: [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Beware: Portability
Organization: Sun, Surf 'n Sushi, San Diego, CA
Date: 18 Jan 93 03:31:01 GMT


Inbound call center managers beware: the mad rush to implement CCS-7
(American extension to CCITT SS7) in order to support 800 number
portability is going to give you several migraines. Why? A short
story:

Earlier this week a client discovered they could no longer reach their
own x00 number (served by Sprint).  Panic ensued, "My customers can't
call me!"  A urgent call was placed to Sprint: Sprint denied any
network problem.  They denied it adamantly!  Quick escalation up
through management.  Somebody finally listened, and 48 hours later the
problem was traced to a Sprint switch "upgrade" to Northern Telecom's
BCS-34 (BCS: Bad Canadian Software ;-).

In the meantime, inbound traffic volume diminished.  Frantic calls
were made to friends, and friends of friends across the nation, "Can
you get through on my x00 number?"  Blockages were found in three
other LATAs, with dozens still untested.  Worse still, a blockage was
discovered for an AT&T x00 number, too!

If your core business depends on inbound x00 traffic, you have been
warned.  I recommend that you routinely check inbound call completion
from your major markets.  And get a list of management's phone numbers
at your long distance company.


Bill Cerny  <[e-mail]> | 10288-0-700-FON-BILL

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

From: [e-mail] (Robert Patrick MacKin)
Subject: Looking For Recommendations For UPS For Phone System
Organization: University of Western Ontario
Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1993 19:27:27 GMT


I am looking for recommendations for a UPS suitable for KEY and PBX
systems. It should handle 120vac at three or four amps output.  I hear
Tripplite in Chicago carries something of the description, but I have
neither an address nor phone number. I also know that ALPHA UPS
systems have a suitable device, but I have no source for them at all.
Any help here?  Thanks!


[e-mail] (Robert Patrick MacKin)
Western Business School  --  London, Ontario

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

From: [e-mail] (Ross Alexander)
Subject: ANI and SS7
Organization: Computer Science, Auckland University
Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1993 20:09:52 GMT


Could anybody tell me what ANI is all about?  I follow this group
regularly but the common kiwi doesn't have to worry about interstate
laws and Caller ID (yet).  I've read up on the basic idea of SS7 and
ISDN so I follow the idea of both in channel signaling and D channel
signaling.  Any help would be most appreciated.


Ross Alexander   Computer Science   University of Auckland
Auckland  New Zealand

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

Date: Mon, 18 Jan 93 10:12:54 SST
From: Ang Peng Hwa <[e-mail]>
Subject: Philippine Telephone Monopoly to be Broken


This from Reuter:

MANILA -- Senior Philippine communications official Josefina Lichauco
said yesterday (Friday) she was determined to break up the country's
telephone monopoly after renewed pressure from President Fidel Ramos.

"The president has issued an order to abolish the monopoly and it
shall be implemented," said undersecretary Ms Lichauco, who oversees
the nation's communications policy.

President Ramos, angered by a report that over 600,000 telephone
applications have been pending for years, ordered officials this week
to dismantle the Philippine Long Distance Telephone Co (PLDT)
monopoly.

The average would-be subscriber has to wait four years to get a phone
installed in the Manila area.

Ms Lichauco said she was determined to force PDLT, one of the country's
biggest companies, to allow other telecommunication companies to
interconnect with the PLDT network.

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

Comments: a strange story that makes Ms. Lichauco a central figure in
breakup. I would have thought that if the President says so, you do
so.  Regardless of how you feel, you *have* to be determined.

Also, for those unfamiliar with the Philippines, it is a long standing
joke that the Philippine phone system is modeled after the American
AT&T pre-divestiture model. With one exception -- the Philippine
system does not work.

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

From: [e-mail] (J. Eric Townsend)
Subject: Is This a "Real" Security Alert Message of Some Sort?
Organization: Numerical Aerodynamic Simulation, NASA Ames
Date: 17 Jan 93 16:21:00


Got this while logging in to a BBS a month or two ago.  I was doing
the "new user look around" thingie.  I didn't bother calling back.

It looks a bit like those fake messages that sysops sometimes send in
order to scare people off.  The "NO CARRIER" bit came when they
dropped carrier on me.

 ---start included text---

CYBERTRON CORP!  (R)Telecommunications Security Node:#264839-LL

NOTIFICATION: FCC-#9632852 - LINE VERIFICATION IN PROGRESS!

ROUTE LINE IS CURRENTLY BEING FORWARDED TO:
{DT*2VRP}(c) CALIFORNIA BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION!

You have commited a FELONY, according to the FCC ruling #6828744
Telecommunications Privacy Act (1989) Section IV - 3529A-6 Municipal
Code of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, AND IT'S AGENTS HEREIN ...
Therefore, you are hereby WARNED! Any further attempt to contact this
customer will result in CRIMINAL PROSECUTION and/or EXTRADITION by
FEDERAL authorities....Your telephone number has been recorded in our
central office!

Thank you for using..."CYBERTRONICS SECURITY RESOURCES"

Summary: Notify Police and local phone company? YES!
         Continue to monitor violator? YES!
Total time logged was 1 minute(s), with 24 minutes remaining for
07/25/92.

Thank you for calling, Eric.


NO CARRIER

 ---end encluded text---


J. Eric Townsend --  [e-mail] -- 415.604.4311 (DoD# 0378)


[Moderator's Note: This looks like a very poor attempt at humor to me.
I do not think it is any sort of 'real' security alert. After all, why
would they close by thanking your for calling and telling you how many
minutes you had left on your call? The sysop not only has a warped
sense of humor, but he is not very good at editing the print statements
in his program.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Alvin)
Subject: USR HST 14.4 For Sale
Date: 18 Jan 93 03:57:12 GMT


I have a USR HST 14.4 for sale.  It's an external modem for all
computers.  It has v.42 and v.42bis and tranfser at 1600cps.  I still
have the original package and documents.  It's upgradeable to v.32 or
v.fast from USR directly.  I am asking $300 for the modem.  Email me
if interested it.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #29
*****************************











Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa28678;
          18 Jan 93 11:39 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA09984
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 18 Jan 1993 08:36:37 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA20469
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 18 Jan 1993 08:36:02 -0600
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1993 08:36:02 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #30

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 18 Jan 93 08:36:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 30

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: OBT and Flat-Rate Service ([e-mail])
    Re: OBT and Flat-Rate Service (John R. Levine)
    Re: OBT and Flat-Rate Service (Maxime Taksar)
    Re: OBT and Flat-Rate Service (Jeff Sicherman)
    Re: OBT and Flat-Rate Service (Patrick Lee)
    Re: OBT and Flat-Rate Service (John Higdon)
    Re: OBT and Flat-Rate Service (Joshua E. Muskovitz)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: OBT and Flat-Rate Service
Organization: CompuData Inc., DeLand
Date: Sun, 17 Jan 93 22:29:39 GMT


Do not be surprised if the phone company does push for elimination of
flat rate calling.  They will cite the old argument that one should
pay for what one uses, and that low-usage customers subsidize the high
usage customers.

The problem with this argument is that off-peak phone service (and
most residential use is off-peak) does not really cost much to
provide.  It costs more to meter the service than to provide it,
because the physical plant is already installed to deal with the
peaks.

The cost of phone service  may  be  divided  into  several  broad
areas:
    (a) power
    (b) accounting functions (billing &c)
    (c) operator services
    (d) outside wiring, from office to customer premises
    (e) inside plant (switches &c.)

Let us consider each in turn.

Power consumption is negligible.  Commercial power costs pennies per
Kw/H, and the power requirement is so small that phone companies have
been known to satisfy it with batteries.  Figure less than a penny per
hour, and Florida Power is not known for its altrusim.

Accounting functions are largely automated.  Humans do not tally your
phone calls any more; instead, a computer generates a long tape which
is sent to be processed into bills.  A human does answer the phone
when you call to complain about being over billed.  Also, there is a
certain cost to generating an itemized bill, amounting to some
measurable fractions of a penny per line.  If you require accounting
on measured service, this can add up.  Figure a cost of several cents
per page to print a bill showing the measured calls.  Figure a small
cost in computing, as well, to figure out how much measured service
you used even if you do not demand an itemized bill.  It is the
availability of computers to generate bills which make measured
service possible: other costs of providing service would not be worth
metering.

Operator services are generally billed, and should be at least
self-liquidating.  Services to work around faulty equipment should be
charged against that portion of the plant which has failed.  Reference
to tarriffs, along with an estimate of time required for service to
yield dollars per hour, should be enlightening.  Careful measurement
and calculation has determined the optimum number of operators on duty
at any one time.

Outside wiring does not wear out faster if you are talking and more
slowly if the phone is on-hook.  Unless you have a party line, the
wiring is there unused if you are not talking on the phone, so usage
does not affect this.  This is a fixed cost, however, and is non-zero.
You should expect a calculable cost to maintain the wires from the
office to your house, and this may be a large portion of your phone
bill.  In addition to maintenance, you should expect to pay a "cost of
money" charge to pay for the original installation of copper between
the office and your house; again, this should be a calculable fixed
monthly charge.

The inside plant is different.  Switch capacity is generally a
fraction of what would be required if all of the outside plant wanted
to talk at once.  (To demonstrate, hit an important power pole with a
large truck, then try to get dial tone.)  The reason that the switch
capacity is a limited is simple.  They figure out what will be
required during peak periods, add a fudge factor, and that's the
amount of inside plant purchased for the office.

If you are talking during the peak period, you are pushing up the
requirement for inside plant.  Off-peak, most of the capacity sits
idle.  When are you at home talking to your friends (or, to cite a
favourite example, calling the BBS at the opposite end of the local
calling area)?  After work, during the off peak hours.

Thus, the argument that measured residential service means that you
are paying for what you use, is unconvincing.  Of course, it sounds
good on the surface, and many PUC commissioners will buy it, but for
residential service it is not true.  So long as the marginal cost of
providing off-peak local calls (outside of the effort of metering
them) is best measured in the tenths of pennies per hour, and the
fixed cost of maintaining physical plant dominates, then it is
reasonable to base the charges on the fixed cost.

A form of measured service which only charged for peak-hours usage
would be reasonable, however, because it would be taking into account
the requirement for increased physical plant.  An unmetered option
here may turn out to be cheaper: just charge a fee for peak-hour
access equal to the expensed cost of providing added inside plant.
The reason that this may prove cheaper is that you avoid having to
track usage and do not have to totalize and generate billing
information.

You may want to watch the PUC in which you are interested.  Surely, if
the phone company has expressed interest in going all-metered, the
matter will not drop.  If you have an appointed PUC, as we now do,
they will tend to be fairly responsive to the utilities and less
responsive to the rate payers.  In order for the rate payers to have
any effect at all, they will have to watch carefully and be sure to
timely file all testimony.

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

Subject: Re: OBT and Flat-Rate Service
Organization: I.E.C.C.
Date: 17 Jan 93 18:10:40 EST (Sun)
From: [e-mail] (John R. Levine)


> [Moderator's Note: I've never understood why people had such a big
> objection to simply paying for the service they use.

This has been argued to death, so I don't suggest that we flood
telecom with it, but there is very little connection between the
actual cost of providing local exchange service and the message rate
plans that telcos offer.  Apparently a reasonable message rate for
intra-CO calls would be something like one cent per ten minutes, not
the two cents/minute or so that most message rate plans charge.

There's no reason that people who make long BBS calls at night should
pay more, since they're using capacity that is certainly unused at
that hour.  What would make economic sense is something like the way
that industrial customers pay for electricity: partly charge per use,
but mostly charge for maximum demand, e.g. your bill is largely based
on how much you're on the phone at peak hours like 10AM and 2PM.  But
good luck explaining that to regulators or POTS users.  The NYC plan
where you pay for the number of local calls regardless of length also
makes some sense, since setting up the call is usually the most
expensive part.


Regards,

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

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

Date: Sun, 17 Jan 93 18:34:37 -0800
From: [e-mail] (Maxime Taksar KC6ZPS)
Subject: Re: OBT and Flat-Rate Service


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

> [Moderator's Note: I've never understood why people had such a big
> objection to simply paying for the service they use. We've had no flat
> rate service in Chicago outside a very small local area for many
> years, and for most subscribers, the cost for phone service actually
> went *down* when they were no longer forced to pay for all the modem
> users who went through thousands of units a month at flat rate.
> Naturally, the guys who spent hours every night on a modem calling BBS
> lines on the other side of the area code (or even inter-area code; our
> old flat rate plans took in 312/708 and parts of 815/219/414) squealed
> like pigs when the change was announced; *they* had to start paying
> their way ... the 90 percent plus of our population which does not use
> modems or make hundreds (or thousands) of calls each month was very
> pleased to see a reduction in their bills. When IBT ditched almost all
> the flat rate stuff a few years ago, the biggest objections came in
> the form of countless articles on BBS message bases from people talking
> about the greedy and awful old telco.  Count me as one who approves of
> 'pay for what you use'; I don't like paying subsidies for my neighbor's
> use of the phone. I don't do it for the electricity, water or gas they
> use, why should I for their phone calls via flat rate, averaged out
> pricing?  But then again, I don't run war dialers against entire CO's
> or call computer chat lines in the outer fringes of 708/815.    PAT]

This is a very nice theory, Pat, but you have, once again,
conveniently forgotten that a "unit" is not an actual, tangible item
or product.

What we, as telephone consumers, are paying for is network capacity.
(Including the wire plant to our doorstep, switching capacity, and
various features).

The capacity is there whether we use it or not.  Remember who uses the
most capcity, and therefore determines how much must be there?  Yes,
they're commercial users.  These are the same commercial users that
for the most part use this capacity only during the business day.

Any amount of money that the telco gets for off-peak usage is just
icing -- if they didn't get it, it would not change how much they
would get or how much they would spend on peak capacity.

Do you really want to be subsidising the peak-period users, Pat?
That's exactly what you're doing.

I am one of those dreaded modem users, but I use it only during
off-peak hours.  I also strongly agree with you in that we should pay
for what we use.  I propose the following solution:

All lines should be measured, *however*, there should be a significant
(e.g. 60%) discount for calls made during near-peak periods (i.e.
evenings) and a 100% discount for off-peak periods (i.e. nights,
weekends).

What if "near-peak period" usage starts to approach the levels of
"peak period" usage?  Reclassify the times that the discounts apply
(with approval of the PUC, of course).

This would be much closer to true pay-for-what-you-use system than the
all-lines-always-measured system.


Maxime Taksar              KC6ZPS           [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: Well, IBT does give discounts. Telco says we must
pay for what we use, but they do give it away a lot cheaper if we use
it at night and weekends. I think the overnight discount is 40 percent
off of day rates. Seems fair enough.   PAT]

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

Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1993 02:20:16 -0800
From: Jeff Sicherman <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: OBT and Flat-Rate Service
Organization: Cal State Long Beach


In response to Rob Knauerhase's posting of a local (to Ohio) news
item, the ever-ready Moderator sayeth:

(Quote deleted, see earlier message this issue.)

  There's probably little doubt that BBS's and their callers use more
than their share of phone network bandwidth but at times when the
network is rather lightly loaded, so I think the attack is a little
misplaced. Given the costs of building and running the network and the
relation of those costs to peak usage (as a measure of sizing and
support) rather than overall usage, I don't see that you are
realistically subsidizing anyone, especially if a lot of *your*
activity is business realted during the daytime peak periods.

  This all comes back to the fact that, for the most part, there is no
competition in the local loop so that prices that the Baby Bells
charge reflect more on their desire for revenue and their ability to
bamboozle utility commissions with legions of economists, lawyers, and
lobbyists that those that would be produced by real competition.
Hence, as John Higdon as pointed out before, this is all probably part
of a strategic plan by the babies to eliminate flat rate service
altogether by initially by making it economically more attractive and
then eliminating the flat rate service when (virtually) everyone has
been motivated to switch. They will then be free to start escalating
per-unit/call charges.


Jeff Sicherman

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

From: Patrick Lee <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: OBT and Flat-Rate Service
Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1993 18:32:41 -0500 (EST)


Our Moderator noted:

> I've never understood why people had such a big objection to
> simply paying for the service they use. We've had no flat rate
> service in Chicago outside a very small local area for many
> years ...

Me neither.  Most residents in New York City has untimed, but
measured, rate service.  Just about all the numbers in the 718/ 212
area codes are local to each other, with a few exceptions for border
areas.  I can't understand why so many phone companies out there still
have flat rate service and that their customers don't mind (and now we
have state legislatures trying to keep flat rates alive)!  I for one
like paying for what I use (and I do make over 300 local calls -- 10.6
cents a call with 40 and 65 percent discounts at different times).  I
have no problem with that even though I will probably be paying less
with flat rate.

I pay for what I use, fair is fair.


Patrick <[e-mail]>

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

Date: Sun, 17 Jan 93 11:07 PST
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: OBT and Flat-Rate Service


On Jan 15 at  2:23, TELECOM Moderator notes:

> [Moderator's Note: I've never understood why people had such a big
> objection to simply paying for the service they use.

Then allow me to give you some. After reviewing many different LEC
proposals and conversions from flat rate to measured, a pattern
emerges. While at the instantaneous moment of the proposal the move
does appear to be revenue-neutral and simply shift costs from the
"Aunt Marthas" to the mean and nasty "modem users". But once approved,
the LEC is given great latitude with respect to the rates and charging
methods relating to that measured service.

In California, many residential customers were wooed into giving up
unmeasured residential service for measured when it was pointed out
how much money could be saved. What they were not told was that even
as we speak there is a proposal before the PUC to DOUBLE the
per-minute rate for local calls. Well, I suppose if you do not use the
phone, this is no problem. But then why have one if you do not use it?

A reality so far observed by the CPUC and the state telcos is that
residential traffic as a class is far under the peak capacity required
by business traffic, which universally pays for measured service.
Usage of the local network between 8 PM and 8 AM (even by those
despicable modem operators) is virtually down in the noise. For this
reason, even business and other measured service customers are given
an off-peak break. In my opinion, it should be free (included with the
basic charge).

The fact of the matter is that the price of no one's service would "go
down" as the result of univeral measured service. This is a can of
beans hinted at by telco to encourage passage of tariffs eliminating
unmeasured plans.

> We've had no flat rate service in Chicago outside a very small
> local area for many years, and for most subscribers, the cost for
> phone service actually went *down* when they were no longer forced to
> pay for all the modem users who went through thousands of units a
> month at flat rate.

This is complete nonsense. During off-peak hours, people who do not
use the phone never "subsidize" those who do. The network maintenance
costs are present even if NO ONE used the telephone at all. A "unit"
as you put it is not a commodity in the same fashion as an ounce of
gold. If I pick up the phone and make a local call at 11 PM and it is
not charged for because of my unmeasured service, there is not some
tiny cost that is now spread over the other millions of customers in
California. The cost to complete the call is zero and I was charged
zero. The cost that we all share is maintenance of the plant. Business
is charged for usage, because the construction of peak facilities is
usage-determined, and measured service in this case spreads the burden
equitably.

> the 90 percent plus of our population which does not use modems or
> make hundreds (or thousands) of calls each month was very pleased to
> see a reduction in their bills.

Oh? How much did your bill go down? If your service was degraded from
unmeasured to measured at the same time, this was not a cost reduction
but a forced COS change.

> When IBT ditched almost all the flat rate stuff a few years ago, the
> biggest objections came in the form of countless articles on BBS
> message bases from people talking about the greedy and awful old
> telco.

In the information age it is natural for the telco to want to cash in
big time. To do so on the back of the pioneers of that coming era
(when indeed those same people are in NO WAY increasing the telco's
cost of doing business) is to my mind completely reprehensible. You
have obviously swallowed the "equitable sharing of costs" argument for
mandatory residential service hook, line, and sinker. And, apparently,
so have the Illinois regulators. At least in California, it is
possible to have home access to electronic information without paying
through the nose, having the telco limit your number of lines, or
having telco otherwise stifle open residential use of the telephone.

Mandatory measured residential service opens the door for another
telco scam: Information Services. It is a simple matter for telco to
offer dialup online services that carry no local charges. Competitors
cannot do this except through the use of expensive 800 numbers. It has
long been believed that compulsory measured service is a precursor to
such inequitable arrangements.

> Count me as one who approves of 'pay for what you use'; I don't like
> paying subsidies for my neighbor's use of the phone. I don't do it for
> the electricity, water or gas they use, why should I for their phone
> calls via flat rate, averaged out pricing?

A telephone call is not a cubic foot of gas, a KWH of electricity, or
a cubic foot of water. All of these things are consumable commodities.
A telephone call is not. While long distance has been traditionally
priced in this manner, there are some valid, serious considerations
that even this may need to be changed eventually. Your comparison to
electrical, water, and gas usage is completely bogus, and your use of
such tells me that you have read all of the IBT propaganda and have
accepted it as gospel.

> But then again, I don't run war dialers against entire CO's
> or call computer chat lines in the outer fringes of 708/815.    PAT]

So what? How are the people that do this driving up IBT's cost, when
they do it in the middle of the night? Particularly when they use a
tiny fraction of the capacity that must be in place for the daytime
traffic?

When someone proposes a "measured day/unmeasured night" scheme, then
let's talk.


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

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

Date: Mon, 18 Jan 93 00:25:55 EST
From: Joshua E. Muskovitz <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: OBT and Flat-Rate Service


> [Moderator's Note: I've never understood why people had such a big
> objection to simply paying for the service they use. We've had no flat

I would suspect that it is because people consider local phone service
to be a subscription service, just like the newspaper or cable TV.
With the newspaper, you pay the same amount every day, regardless of
the number of pages in the paper.  Why not pay by weight, or by
section?  Why not pay for cable by usage?  Because it is inherently
more convenient for the USER to conceptualize the charge and prepare
for it.  It would annoy me every month if my local phone bill was
different and I had to puzzle it out.  How am I going to assure myself
that I really made those calls?  With my long distance bill, I can
look at the city/number combos and identify 95+% of the calls
immediately.  Surely the LEC won't itemize the local bill, and even if
they did, how am I going to find out the 555-1234 is that wrong number
I dialed last month?

I realize that from the LECs perspective, matered billing now makes
sense because it is technically feasible.  But so what?  Why should a
regulated monopoly get to annoy its captive audience simply for higher
profits?


josh.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #30
*****************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa28959;
          19 Jan 93 2:08 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA30066
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 18 Jan 1993 23:47:48 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA28185
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 18 Jan 1993 23:47:22 -0600
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1993 23:47:22 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #31

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 18 Jan 93 23:47:20 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 31

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: What is Tariff 12 (or is it 11)? (John R. Levine)
    Re: What is Tariff 12 (or is it 11)? (Dave Levenson)
    Re: What is Tariff 12 (or is it 11)? (Andy Sherman)
    Re: What is Tariff 12 (or is it 11)? (Lars Poulsen)
    Re: Apartment Security Stupidity (Nelson Bolyard)
    Re: Apartment Security Stupidity (Peter Sleggs)
    Re: Apartment Security Stupidity ([e-mail])
    Re: Phonejak Transmission System (Mike Baptiste)
    Re: Phonejak Transmission System (Brad S. Hicks)
    Re: It's Not a Bug, It's a Feature ... (Ron Heiby)
    Re: It's Not a Bug, It's a Feature ... (Alex Pournelle)
    Re: It's Not a Bug, It's a Feature ... (Chuck Munro)
    Re: Sad to Say, Telemarketing Works (Richard Nash)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Re: What is Tariff 12 (or is it 11)?
Organization: I.E.C.C.
Date: 18 Jan 93 20:28:48 EST (Mon)
From: [e-mail] (John R. Levine)


Hi, it's me again.  Tariff 12 is how AT&T cuts special deals with big
customers.  All of their LD offerings have to be tariffed, but under
tariff 12 they make up plans customized to large clients.  For
example, if they were making a pitch for DEC's business, they'd make a
tariff 12 offering for so many leased lines from Maynard to the rest
of the world, so much VPN, so much this, and so much that, with
pricing determined in some way.  They publish it under t-12 and after
a short delay to allow for objections to be filed, it goes into effect
and the customer buys it.  I suppose that if you happened to have the
exact same telecom needs as a t-12 customer, you too could buy it
under the same terms.  In reality, the main point is that it requires
AT&T to disclose the special deals they make with large customers so
the competition can object if it's predatory and no doubt try to go in
and undercut them.

Something that may or may not be related is the aggregator business.
AT&T has a standard tariff in which many locations get service with
the rates determined by the total of all the locations, but bills sent
to each location individually, designed for large companies with
decentralized accounting.  But since resale of LD telephone service is
allowed, Fred's Fone Co. can buy service with this deal and then
resell it to lots of unrelated companies, with AT&T still billing each
location direct and Fred keeping part of the difference between the
aggregate rate and the POTS rate.  On the one hand, AT&T isn't crazy
about having all of the Freds selling their service, since these
companies tend to be sort of sleazy and unstable.  But on the other
hand, this is a way that they can offer competitive rates for
companies smart enough to know that POTS is overpriced but not big
enough to be worth t-12.  I suppose that a really big aggregator could
try and cut a t-12 deal of their own, but I'm sure MCI would scream
bloody murder.


Regards,

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

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

From: [e-mail] (Dave Levenson)
Subject: Re: What is Tariff 12 (or is it 11)?
Organization: Westmark, Inc.
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1993 14:41:05 GMT


Tariff 12 describes AT&T's quantity-discount service.  It is offered
to selected huge companies which spend millions on communications
services, and provides very deep discounts.  If you happen to be
General Motors, American Airlines, or perhaps John Higdon, ask how
much you could save on your long distance bill if you want _lots_ of
talk time!


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

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

Date: Mon, 18 Jan 93 23:01:20 EST
Organization: Salomon Inc, Rutherford NJ
Subject: Re: What is Tariff 12 (or is it 11)?
From: [e-mail] (Andy Sherman)


On 15 Jan 93 00:15:51 GMT, [e-mail] (Paul Robinson) said:

> AT&T has a special schedule for some customers, which apparently the
> customers love and AT&T's competitors hate.  I was wondering what it
> was.

> The name of the schedule is either the infamous "Tariff 11" or "Tariff
> 12".

It's Tariff 12, and yes, big customers love it and (usually) the
competition hates it.

Tariff 12 offerings are how AT&T puts together special package deals
for big customers.  Say you're a big firm and want to bundle a whole
lot of various voice and data services together.  So you go to MCI or
Sprint and they offer you a special deal, just for you.  They you
comparison shop and go to AT&T.  So they offer you a special deal
that's maybe a little sweeter than MCI's or Sprint's.  *However*, AT&T
cannot offer that special deal to just you.  No indeed, AT&T is the
only player in this game who is still regulated and must file tariffs
with the FCC for every price change, and AT&T is not allowed to wheel
and deal just for you.  But, the FCC lets AT&T go after your business
by making sure that anybody buying the same particular bundle of
services that you are buying can get the same deal you got.  AT&T
files a new schedule under Tariff 12 that covers your deal.  In the
unlikely event somebody can actually use your deal, they can get your
deal, since it's tariffed.

So, by continually amending Tariff 12, AT&T can meet price competition.
Needless to say, the competition is often heard objecting to Tariff 12
filings, since their belief in free markets seems to be limited to
their own pricing, not AT&T's.  Most of the time the Tariff 12's go
through, although recently either the FCC or the courts decided that
800 services could not be bundled into a Tariff 12 offering.  (Seems
bizarre to me, but hey, what do I know?)

Oh yes one other interesting and little known postscript.  (BTW, This
is *NOT* proprietary information from my AT&T days, it was in the
media at the time, but nobody remembers this stuff).  Among AT&T's
Tariff 12 customers is none other than, (Pat, a drum roll please),
 ....................... MCI.  No fooling.


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."


[Moderator's Note: Do you recall what it is that MCI purchases from
AT&T under Tariff 12? Some international circuits to places MCI does
not cover, perhaps?   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Lars Poulsen)
Subject: Re: What is Tariff 12 (or is it 11)?
Organization: CMC Network Systems (Rockwell DCD), Santa Barbara, CA, USA
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 93 05:52:27 GMT


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

> AT&T has a special schedule for some customers, which apparently the
> customers love and AT&T's competitors hate.  I was wondering what it
> was.

AT&T is recognized by FCC as "the dominant Inter-Exchange Carrier" and
subject to stricter regulations than other carriers, such as MCI or
Sprint.  In effect, all of AT&T's pricing must be in accordance with
published tariffs, approved by the FCC.

Occasionally, however, a large customer comes along, who "deserves"
special discounts. The deal is worked out ... and then it is written
up in the same kind of anonymous-but-specific language that will be
familiar to those of you who have read the fine print in the federal
tax code (Like how all real property must be depreciated over 20 years
except for football stadiums in cities between one and three million
west of the Mississippi which started construction during August of
1990; those can be written off over three years ... while this example
is fictitious, you'd be surprised at how blatant much of this is).

Tariff 12 is a collection of all the special deals, described in
anonymous detail. "Regardless of other tariffs, the following rates
apply to business with 1000 to 1195 trunks and a call volume of
1,000,000 to 3,000,000 million minutes per day where less than 65% of
the call minutes are within the greater New York City Standard
Metropolitan Area ....".

In the last couple of years, courts have forced AT&T to honor these
tariffs whenever somebody else could match the published descriptions,
and creative resellers have put together aggregation packages based on
these deals.

AT&T of course want to see the tariff 12 rules replaced by a simple
statement to the effect that "other tariffs notwithstanding, the
company shall be free to offer such discounts as it shall deem
necessary to secure important customers"; this is essentially the rule
under which MCI or Sprint operates.

It is fair to allow sweetheart deals? I guess it depends on your
political attitudes. Personally, I think we all would be better off,
if the system had a mild bias in favor of "the little guy". Thus, I
think it is reasonable to place more restrictions on the dominant
carrier. I also think the obligation to publish the sweetheart deal
and offer the same terms to any customer in similar circumstances is
reasonable.


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] (Nelson Bolyard)
Subject: Re: Apartment Security Stupidity
Date: 18 Jan 1993 11:05:25 GMT
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc., Mountain View, CA


One of my wife's relatives lives in an apartment building with an
entry control device similar to the one described in the cited
article.

When we went to visit her, we followed the instructions on the
intercom box, and dialed her three-digit apartment number on what was
obviously a pay-phone keypad, and waited for her to grant entry.  We
then listened as the device obtained dial tone, and dialed a phone
number using touch tone dialing.  We heard the phone ringing, and
heard her answer her phone, obviously not knowing we were at her
doorstep.  When she told us she'd unlock the door for us, we could
hear a touch tone on the intercom at the same time the door lock
buzzed.

My first thought was that perhaps a "bad guy" with a "pocket dialer"
device (capable of producing the usual 12 dialing tones) could also
gain entry, even against the occupant's will.

Later in our visit we learned that this device is not only used by
visitors but also by the residents of the apartment building (which
has roughly 30 apartments) themselves to enter to the building.  This
is done by pressing the * or # key on the outside keypad, followed by
the resident's "password" which (I learned) is set by the apartment
manager to the last four digits of the resident's phone number.

A listing of the occupants' names and apartment numbers appeared on
the front of the intercom box, and it would seem that this information
plus a phone book should suffice to grant entry to anyone.

But even without the right phone book, one can gain access pretty
quickly.  This device's "password" protocol does not involve entering
the apartment number first, and any resident's password will work.
So, given that there are 30 apartments, there are 30 combinations of
four digits that will open the door.  And given that less than 9000
numbers from a typical "exchange" of 10,000 are used, one has a better
than one in 300 chance that any valid phone number will work.  It is
likely that any single page from a phone book contains a working
"password".

Before leaving, I advised her to keep her door deadbolted even when
home, in case she received any phone calls from any unwanted visitors.


Nelson Bolyard     [e-mail]     {decwrl,sun}!sgi!nelson
Disclaimer: I do not speak for my employer.


[Moderator's Note: I am rather surprised that this system actually
dialed a seven-digit phone number. Most such arragements simply seize
the pair at some point between the CO and the tenant to (1) temporar-
ily disconnect the wire from the CO and (2) impose their own battery
and ringing current on the line. Under the system where your in-law
lives, call-waiting is absolutely necessary; otherwise a visitor at
the door might wait a long time to reach someone if the line was busy.
Better quality systems such as I described will first test for busy on
the CO line (I think tip to ground or something) and if the line is
busy with a call from the CO then the device puts its own call-waiting
tone on the line (regardless of whether the tenant has it otherwise)
and when the tenant flashes the hook, the device will put the CO on
hold while connecting itself to the pair (and the tenant's phone).
When the tenant either admits the guest or denies entrance, the device
re-instates the CO and drops from the line ... the system has its own
distintive ring of course, so the tenant knows if the incoming call is
from the CO or the front door. Most lobby directories (where these
systems are installed) do NOT include the tenant's apartment number in
the directory ... merely the two or three digit door code. It is up to
the tenant to tell guests how to get where they are going. The systems
which offer 'ringback' type admission to tenants typically use a five
or six digit code selected at random and changeable at will by the
tenants.  Even those systems still have a regular lock and key for the
door to use as an override as well, and for Fire Department and/ or Post
Office use.    PAT]

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

Subject: Re: Apartment Security Stupidity
From: [e-mail] (Peter Sleggs)
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1993 10:10:49 -0500
Organization: Bellatrix Systems Corp., Mississauga, ONT Canada


> [Moderator's Note: Illinois Bell offers apartment front door security
> ...
> company called 'Interphone', a division of GTE in Canada which makes
> customer premises equipment which does the same thing but instead of
> being in the CO is wired up at the demarc where telco's pairs meet up
> with building house pairs.  I'll elaborate in more detail on both
> systems here if anyone is interested.   PAT]

Please do.


Regards,

Peter
Bellatrix Systems Corp. Mississauga, Ontario Canada
[e-mail] or beltrix!bsc!peters


[Moderator's Note: See my detailed replies in this issue.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1993 13:01:38 -0500
Subject: Re: Apartment Security Stupidity


Another problem with these apartment security systems is that some of
them leave the microphone on during the dialing.  In some cases you
can flash the switchhook, get a dialtone, and use your Radio Shack $15
tone dialer to make all the phone calls you want.  My friend's
building was very surprised to find several calls to expensive 900
numbers from the entry phone!


Ron   ([e-mail])


[Moderator's Note: To repeat, the better systems do NOT use dialtone
from the CO. They generate their own dial tone and only get as far as
the box by the basement demarc or wherever. The only calls they can
make are to two, three or four digit door code numbers. Even the
system from IBT which has equipment housed in the CO uses what would
be better described as an 'intercom line' or maybe a special sort of
centrex to operate. Those phones do not get near the network.  One
system I installed for a landlord here about fifteen years ago left
nothing to chance. I did not even leave a receiver there for the
people to get their dirty hands on. I used a speakerphone mounted in
the wall behind a steel plate with touchtone buttons ... sort of like
a payphone built into a wall. The touchtone buttons were steel, like
the ones on payphones. There were 94 apartments, two offices for
the real estate company, the quarters for the building engineer and
the manager's apartment. The codes were numbered 01 through 98. They
pressed '1', then the two digit code. The first digit pressed turned
the speaker on. They could hear the phone ringing in the apartment
they were calling, and converse with the tenant over the speakerphone
which I had permanently regulated as to sound level, etc.  The tenant
opened the door with '14'; the digit '1' split the connection leaving
the control unit listening only to the apartment. To deny entry, the
tenant simply would hang up (or dial '16' to disconnect from the door
and return to a call left on hold). If downstairs tried to press '14'
all that happened was they cut themselves off, but otherwise, they had
no control over the downstairs unit. When the apartment disconnected,
the battery dropped off the line and the downstairs unit went dead.
The tenants all used keys to open the door as did the postman, and the
newspaper delivery man.  PAT]

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

Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1993 19:23:00 +0000
From: Mike Baptiste <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Phonejak Transmission Systems


My parents purchased one of these sets (even though I warned them) and
the sound quality on a cordless phone is noticably degraded when it is
used vs a direct connection.  In fact, they tried two different phones
(AT&T and Uniden) with the same results.  As for modem use, that
wasn't tried.

Using a standard phone with it worked well with very little if any
sound quality problems.


Mike Baptiste       Bell-Northern Research RTP, North Carolina
Net: [e-mail]
My employer knows enough than to agree with my opinions!

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

From: mc/G=Brad/S=Hicks/OU=[e-mail]
Date: 18 Jan 93 15:10:03 GMT
Subject: Re: Phonejak Transmission System?


In TCD 13.22, [e-mail] (David Morgenstern), asking
about the Phonejak extension system, mentioned:

> The company says that it will support 2400 kbaud data
> transmission, ...

I doubt that very much.  Let's see, 2.4 million baud with trellis
encoding to support 4 bits per baud, you could easily squeeze almost
10 million bits per second through that.  Round off, we'll call it six
and a half full T-1 trunks, or one hundred and fifty 64 kb/sec DS0
channels.  Somehow I doubt that you can carry 150 full-quality phone
lines as a carrier tone on top of your house electrical wiring,
certainly not with such inexpensive hardware.

On the other hand, you ought to be able to push 2400 bits per second
through it pretty easily.

I thought you BMUG guys knew your computer jargon better than that.
(Somebody get this man a copy of Newton's Telecom Dictionary.)  I'm
sorry if it sounds like I'm being a little rough on you, but "2400
kbaud" goes way beyond the usual spelling errors.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Ron Heiby)
Subject: Re: It's Not a Bug, It's a Feature ...
Organization: Motorola Computer Group, Schaumburg, IL
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1993 21:17:29 GMT


Paul Robinson <[e-mail]> writes about playing tones from "Close
Encounters" on a line printer.

At a Comdex in Las Vegas about eight years ago, a printer company
(sorry I don't remember their name) had one of their printers with the
cover off and was playing *multi-part* music on it, using the print
head, platen motor, print head moving motor, etc., anything that would
move, buzz, beep, or otherwise make a sound.  It was *very*
impressive!


Ron Heiby, [e-mail]    Moderator: comp.newprod

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

From: [e-mail] (Alex Pournelle)
Subject: Re: It's Not a Bug, It's a Feature ...
Organization: College Park Software, Altadena, CA
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1993 02:09:42 GMT


Paul Robinson <[e-mail]> writes:

> [e-mail] writes in TELECOM Digest 13 #14 about how
> someone programmed the IBM 1130 to generate tones on an AM radio.

I've got one even even better.  How about programming a CDC 3600 to
play the Star-Spangled Banner on its tape drives -- in stereo!

I hear it, for real.  What a great way to waste time!


Alex Pournelle, freelance thinker
Also: Workman & Associates, Data recovery for PCs, Macs, others
 ...elroy!grian!alex; voice: [phone]
fax: [phone]  bbs: 791-1013; 8N1 2400/12/3


[Moderator's Note: One of the most peculiar concerts I've ever gone to
was a program which consisted entirely of "Pictures at an Exhibition"
performed four ways in a row. Imagine, first the original piano
version ... and then the fun began: a transcription for solo guitar
was followed by one for the pipe organ; then came the crown jewel:
Several people pushed a Sun computer out on the stage along with a big
file server. A man walked over to the console, typed a couple things
then walked out to the audience and sat down. The computer did the
whole thing. The people in the audience (this was at the Chicago
Temple Building auditorium) sat there sort of stunned.  When the work
was finished, they introduced the fellow who had programmed it. For an
encore, the computer performed a piece called 'Concert Variations on
the Star Spangled Banner', written by John Knowles Paine.  I left the
program absolutely higher than a kite; it was so wonderful!  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Chuck Munro)
Subject: Re: It's Not a Bug, It's a Feature ...
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1993 14:16:39 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Canada Ltd, Dartmouth, N.S.


Well, as a matter of fact .....

When I was a customer of H-P (*many* years ago) I had a program on my
HP1000 that would rapidly move the brake solenoid up and down on the
paper tape reader.  This would result in music (quite loud if you
placed an IBM punch card in the reader) which you could play from the
console keyboard.  This was my first experience with a pre-MIDI
computer music system.

There, I feel better now that I've defended my employer's honor   :-)


Chuck

p.s.  I may work for H-P, but they would probably rather deny it   :-))

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

Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1993 21:38:55 -0700
From: [e-mail] (Richard Nash)
Subject: Re: Sad to Say, Telemarketing Works


[e-mail] (Matt Healy) writes:

>> BTW, Some mail carriers will not deliver 4th class junk if you ask
>> them, but it is illegal for them to not deliver it.

> In my apartment building, there's a bin next to the mailboxes where
> the carrier puts all "extremely obvious" junk mail (ie, 27 identical
> envelopes arriving bulk rate to various apartments).  Every couple of
> days it gets emptied of anything nobody has claimed.  May not be
> technically legal, but it sure is handy.

Underneath my mail box is the famous recycling "blue-box" where it
takes only a matter of seconds to sort the junk from the bills.  All
junk goes into the blue-box:) :)


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

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #31
*****************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa03113;
          19 Jan 93 4:24 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA31124
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 19 Jan 1993 00:47:46 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA30301
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 19 Jan 1993 00:47:16 -0600
Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1993 00:47:16 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #32

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 19 Jan 93 00:47:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 32

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: What is Teleport? (Dave Weitzel)
    Re: What is Teleport? (David G. Lewis)
    Re: Is This A "Real" Security Alert Message? ([e-mail])
    Re: Norway Goes Eight-Digit: One Week and Counting (Eric Naggum)
    Re: Cordless Key Systems? (Todd Inch)
    Re: Looking For DID Information (Brent Capps)
    Re: Hooking up a US Modem in Czechoslovakia (Richard Budd)
    Re: US Losing Lead in Telecom - USC Report (Jim Gottlieb)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: What is Teleport?
Organization: The MITRE Corporation, McLean VA 22102
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1993 20:26:42 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail].
ac.be (Johan Vounckx) writes:

> I've recently heard the word "teleport".  It seems to be a place where
> companies can make use of lots of communication services, like
> videoconferences, ...
> Can anyone give me more information on that?  Are there some teleports
> existing?  (It seems that in Torino, Italy, there is one.)

> [Moderator's Note: A company in the USA headquartered in New York City
> called 'Teleport' provides local telco bypass service to a few large
> companies both in that city and a few other places such as Chicago.  PAT]

Many cities over the past decade or more have had (sometimes with
political support) "teleports" established nearby.  The original idea
was to have a concentrated group of satellite earth stations to
direct, redirect etc.  outbound, inbound, and satellite hopping
communications (video, voice, data, or whatever).  Usually these
"teleports" were kept out of the city center on nearby cheaper land.
For example Washington Teleport is near D.C. in Alexandria.  These
"teleports" were sometimes supported by business and political
interests in the "let's be the city of the future" kind of way.

Anyway, if you are trying to get landline access to the "teleport"
from the city center some other savings can accrue.  The "teleport"
may assist in the acquisition or bypassing of the local monopoly
telco.  Why wait until the signal reaches the teleport before you earn
cash?  Bundle and go.  So, this is how some of the "teleports" got
into the local bypass/competitive access business.  They got right of
ways to have dedicated (usually fiber) links between downtown and the
"teleport".  Once you build a self-healing fiber loop to maximize your
"teleport" users connectivity, why worry about the "teleport"?  Other
downtown businesses may just want to use the loop and not the
teleport.  Many want to get to the "teleport" since its often an
interexchange carrier point-of-presence.

Eventually companies like TCG (Teleport Communications Group on Staten
Island, nearby cheaper land, remember), MFS (Metropolitan Fiber
Systems in Oak Brook Illinois), Teleport Denver, etc. realized there
was as much or more money to be made on the alternative (to the Telco)
fiber loop than in being in the ground station business.  Within the
last several months the FCC has made it alot easier for these CAPs due
to several FCC actions on switched access interconnection.  Stay
tuned, it will be one of the hot telecommunications fights of the
90's.  Over 50 US cities now have CAPs.


Dave Weitzel
"standard disclaimer, and BTW I do NOT work for any of these guys on
either side"

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

From: [e-mail] (david.g.lewis)
Subject: Re: What is Teleport?
Organization: AT&T
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1993 14:23:36 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail].
ac.be (Johan Vounckx) writes:


> I've recently heard the word "teleport".  It seems to be a place where
> companies can make use of lots of communication services, like
> videoconferences, ...

> Can anyone give me more information on that?  Are there some teleports
> existing?  (It seems that in Torino, Italy, there is one.)

teleport (n): A location, usually including an office complex, which
incorporates advanced telecommunications facilities available to
tenants and occasionally to other parties.

Teleport, the (n): An office complex in New York City, Borough of
Staten Island, jointly owned by the Port Authority of New York and New
Jersey, Merrill Lynch, and other minority investors, with advanced
telecommunications facilities provided by Teleport Communications
Group (q.v.) and IDB Inc.  (Teleport operates all switched and
dedicated landline and microwave facilities; IDB operates the
satellite earth stations.)

Teleport Communications Group, Inc.: A close-held corporation jointly
owned by Cox Enterprises (majority shareholder) and Tele-Communications,
Inc. (minority shareholder), which owns and operates primarily
fiber-optic facilities as a Competitive Access Provider, providing
leased-line services at rates from DDS (64kb/s and subrate) through
DS3 (45Mb/s) in New York City, Boston, Chicago, Houston, Los Angeles,
San Francisco, and Dallas.

Teleport, Denver: A Competitive Access Provider unrelated to Teleport
Communications Group.

Teleport, Bay Area: A teleport (q.v.) located in the San Francisco area.

teleport (v): To instantaneously move from one location to another,
usu. via parapsychic means.

> [Moderator's Note: A company in the USA headquartered in New York City
> called 'Teleport' provides local telco bypass service to a few large
> companies both in that city and a few other places such as Chicago.  PAT]

More than a few (more like over a hundred).  Locations are shown
above; there may be some others since I left there (1991).


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

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Is This A "Real" Security Alert Message Of Some Sort?
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 93 13:44:31 CST


> Got this while logging in to a BBS a month or two ago.  I was doing
> the "new user look around" thingie.  I didn't bother calling back.

> It looks a bit like those fake messages that sysops sometimes send in
> order to scare people off.  The "NO CARRIER" bit came when they
> dropped carrier on me.
> ---start included text---

How did the phone company manage to disconnect the far end modem and
connect theirs without causing a loss of carrier or at least some line
noise.  (Yes, its technically possible, but I doubt any switches out
there have the capability).


> CYBERTRON CORP!  (R)Telecommunications Security Node:#264839-LL

> NOTIFICATION: FCC-#9632852 - LINE VERIFICATION IN PROGRESS!

The FCC does not do line verifications.

> ROUTE LINE IS CURRENTLY BEING FORWARDED TO:
> {DT*2VRP}(c) CALIFORNIA BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION!

What is a "route line" and how can it be forwarded?

> You have commited a FELONY, according to the FCC ruling #6828744
> Telecommunications Privacy Act (1989) Section IV - 3529A-6 Municipal
> Code of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, AND IT'S AGENTS HEREIN ...

The United States does not have a municipal code.  Municipalities
(cities, etc.)  have municipal codes.  Also, if this was forwarded to
the Calif. Bureau of Investigation, it would be California author-
ities, not federal ones, handling it.

> Therefore, you are hereby WARNED! Any further attempt to contact this
> customer will result in CRIMINAL PROSECUTION and/or EXTRADITION by
> FEDERAL authorities....Your telephone number has been recorded in our
> central office!

Federal authorities do not engage in extradition.  One state can
extradite you from another.  The federal Government does not need to
go through this.  (Well, if you are in a foreign country, they do ...
but otherwise, not.)

> Thank you for using..."CYBERTRONICS SECURITY RESOURCES"

> Summary: Notify Police and local phone company? YES!
>         Continue to monitor violator? YES!
> Total time logged was 1 minute(s), with 24 minutes remaining for
> 07/25/92.

> Thank you for calling, Eric.

> NO CARRIER

> ---end encluded text---


Brett   ([e-mail])

P.S.  Of course, I know this is totally fake, and didn't even take it
seriously from the start ... but it's interesting to see how little
sense it makes when it is closely analyzed ...

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

From: Erik Naggum <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: Erik Naggum <[e-mail]>
Date: 18 Jan 1993 07:04:30 +0100
Subject: Re: Norway Goes Eight-Digit: One Week and Counting


[Morten Reistad]

>   [Numbering plan changes]

>     02 XX XX XX  Within Asker      66 XX XX XX  ...
>     02 XX XX XX  Within Baerum     67 XX XX XX  ...

>   And, if dialing any of the above from abroad you dial +47 XX XX XX XX,
>   while the rest of the country is still +47 A XX XX XX or +47 AA XX XXX.

There is something fishy here, and no one I have talked to (or tried
to) in our beloved and caring Phone Company have been able to help me.

Area codes 066 and 067 are in use at present, and they will change at
some later date, June 3, I think.  Between January 28 and June 3,
then, subscribers in Baerum will have international phone numbers like:

    +47 67 xx xx xx

whereas subscribers in the existing 067 area will have international phone
numbers like:

    +47 67 xx xxx

OK, so my question to the phone company is how they're going to deal
with this variable length dialing sequences that Norway has never
suffered before.  Apparantly, they don't plan to do anything at all.
Nobody calls these remote mountain villages from abroad, anyway, I
guess.

> Doing such a thing at 16:00 is outragous. On a Thursday, when all
> shops have open late is even worse. Guess it's still "We don't care.
> We don't have to. We're The Phone Company". And there is NO permissive
> dialing period. Go figure.

Please be more considerate, Morten.  The phone company employees have
families, too, and doing this at night would be terrible for them, I'm
sure.  Remember, most of them had to be at work at 0730, and they'll
appreciate being able to leave early on Thursdays to make it to the
shops that are open late, like the rest of us.

There are rumors that there will be automatic recordings to tell you
what new number you should call.  I'm sure they'll charge callers for
that information.  Calling DA from a phone booth now costs you >$2 a
minute.

I've always appreciated silence, and I guess I'll get plenty of it
soon.  Those ringing phones have been a plague and an annoyance for
years.  At last, they do something to help us stressed out independent
consultants, and what a wonderful excuse when you failed to call back
to an "old" number.  Oh, I love it.

Actually, what amazes me is that nobody have come forth with little
devices that will allow you to dial old and new numbers all through
1993 and they will take care of the translation to the new number when
appropriate.  What amazes me even more is that they haven't done the
entire country en bloc.

And this in a country where people can't remember their area code in
the first place, and where getting their four-digit zip code right is
a major feat for most Oslovians.


Best regards,

Erik Naggum        ISO  8879 SGML                   [phone]
Oslo, Norway       ISO 10744 HyTime   Watch this space ^
<[e-mail]>   ISO  9899 C
<[e-mail]>  ISO 10646 UCS

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

From: [e-mail] (Todd Inch)
Subject: Re: Cordless Key Systems?
Organization: Maverick International Inc.
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 93 18:23:01 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Jonathan Edwards) writes:

> I am thinking of putting a "key" phone system into my home. The main
> reason for this is to gain paging capability.  But I also want to be
> able to use cordless phones.  I presume that if this is possible at
> all I would lose the paging function at the cordless phones.  Is there
> any solution to this, or should I just install a separate intercom?

I suppose it depends on how much of a telecom do-it-yourselfer you
are.  Radio Shack sells (sold?) a paging adapter that you plug all
your phones into and then plug it into the telco jack, then press * to
page or somesuch.  It has relay outputs and an adjustable line-level
audio output to be fed into a PA amplifier to drive speakers.

If you have one/more cordless phones with a paging button, you could
have the relay contacts run the paging button (a simple solder job) or
drive several remote-located relays if you have more than one cordless
phone.

Then put a PA speaker near the base station's microphone.  Total cost:
about $50 if you have an amp and speakers laying around (any old
stereo will work as an amp -- I pick them up all the time at garage
sales for $10, including a wonderful Marantz tuner/amp with 80 Watt
RMS outputs that is driving my walkman-style headphones in my office
and acting a corporate music-on-hold at the moment.)

If you want a PBX/key system anyway, a small system that supports
single-line analog phones will also support your cordless phone(s)
and, if not built-in, a paging adapter that essentially replaces an
extension phone and automatically picks up intercom calls are
available for $100 or less.  Then you'd need to use external paging
and be near a speaker with your cordless, or use the above relay-type
kludge to hit the cordless's base-station button.  Maybe a VOX circuit
on the paging speakers instead?

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

From: [e-mail] (Brent Capps)
Subject: Re: Looking For DID Information
Organization: Atlas Telecom Inc.
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1993 19:19:22 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Roy M.
Silvernail) writes:

> This little quest is inspired by John Higdon's recent DID discussion.
> Can someone provide me a pointer to the DID signalling spec?
> Hopefully, it's on an ftp site somewhere, although I didn't see any
> mention in the Telecom Archives index PAT posted last week.  Or do I
> need to go to Bellcore for this?  (If so, got a document number?)

Well, I've done a lot of DID design work but I've never run into a
spec devoted solely to DID.  It is described in the LSSGR section 6,
of course, but the LSSGR is probably *major* overkill for what you
want.

For 'conventional' one-way analog DID where the customer supplies -48V
battery, try the Notes on the BOC InterLATA Networks TR-NPL-000275 (my
copy is from '86, but they came out with an updated version 2 years
ago) section 6, DID signaling.  This type of DID signaling is just a
combination of wink-start/immediate-start/delay-dial signaling, loop
reverse-battery supervision and DTMF/MF/DP outpulsing.  Nothing magic
to it, but you should be aware that the scheme John is talking about
may be considered infringement on a patent held by Brooktrout
Technologies of Natick, MA.  They make fax/voice response PC cards
with an on-board DID interface for just the purpose you described.

For the new two-way analog DID, just substitute two-wire E&M
supervision for the loop reverse-battery on the trunk and go about
your merry way.  This service was just tariffed last year by USW here
in Portland OR.

For digital DID, all you need to do is specify the proper type of
supervision on the A/B bits, loop signaling or E&M signaling, and
whether you want to use wink-start signaling, DTMF, etc.

For DNIS, you just tell MCI or whomever that you want the dialed
number to be provided on your incoming 800 calls.

If you have specific questions you can drop me an e-mail at my telecom
address and I'll try to give you a hand, time permitting.


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

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

Date: Mon, 18 Jan 93 10:41:38 EDT
From: Richard Budd <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Hooking up a US Modem in Czechoslovakia
Organization: CSAV UTIA


[e-mail] (Raul Rathmann) asks in TELECOM Digest V13.18:

> I have a friend of a friend that is teaching at university in
> Czechoslovakia.  He wants to hook up a modem to the university phone
> system.  I'm assuming that he can use the extension line coming in to
> his office to dial out, then with his modem hooked up, he can get the
> modem to grab the connection with an AT command and he's on his way.

Is he using a modem designed for RJ11 or for the local telephone
system?  If it is for American telephones, he is going to need an RJ11
adapter, (Easy to find at any Radio Shack but a little tough here in
Prague). Then he must take the cover off the extension plug and wire
the adapter into the phone line.  Without an adapter, he can cut the
plug off one end of the modem's connection to the telephone line, pull
out the blue and brown wires inside that line, and attach them into
the extension's outlet.  That is our setup with the Gandalf 24EC.

He is probably also going to have to reconfigure the modem itself to
adjust to local conditions.  Instructions to do so will be in the
user's guide with the modem.  In November, I installed a 1200 baud
Hayes external modem an American high school contributed to a school
here in Prague.  We used the procedure described above using an RJ11
adapter.

The modem will also require an MNP-5 card.  Otherwise, all he'll get
is garbage characters because the phone lines here have a lot of
background noise.  The MNP-5 tests the line to determine what comes
over are actually data bits, and not the next door neighbor or the
buzzing sound I always get when calling cross town.

When he has his modem running, I would advise him to set it to 1200
bps.  Believe it or not, the modem will run faster at this setting
because the MNP-5 card will not have to correct as many bad characters
generated by background noise.

> By the way, he has said that there is no way to get this info from
> the university, they're in the dark ages and information is not
> readily shared.

In which university is he teaching?  Of course, I work with 'techies'
and we are constantly sharing data.  Also, this is Prague.  I just
returned from spending several weeks in a town in eastern Slovakia and
believe me, felt at times like I had warped to the 1950s.  Went to the
equivalent of prom night at the local gymnasium and thought in the
next minute Fonzie from 'Happy Days' would walk in and say 'Heeeyy'.

PS Thanks for all the responses to my question about the modem failing
to go off-line when the connection ended.


Richard Budd  | USA  [e-mail]    | CR    [e-mail]
              |      139 S. Hamilton St.    |       Kolackova 8
              |      Poughkeepsie, NY 12601 |       18200 Praha 8

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

From: [e-mail] (Jim Gottlieb)
Subject: Re: US Losing Lead in Telecom - USC Report
Organization: Info Connections, West Los Angeles
Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1993 02:46:19 GMT


[e-mail] (Ang Peng Hwa) writes:

> The study added: "During this remarkable period of rapid technological
> progress and obsolescence, asset lives for public network equipment of
> local exchange companies have actually increased in the US. Nations
> like Japan, the United Kingdom, Singapore and others write off and
> replace equipment twice as fast as most US carriers."

I suspect it is much easier to upgrade existing facilities when your
country is much smaller than the vast United States.  What does
Singapore have to do to upgrade to digital?  Cut a few cables and run
a few fiber strands?


Jim Gottlieb   E-Mail: [e-mail]
V-Mail: [phone]   Fax: [phone]   Voice: 824-5454

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #32
*****************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa04327;
          19 Jan 93 5:12 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA18267
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 19 Jan 1993 02:13:40 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA22189
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 19 Jan 1993 02:13:04 -0600
Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1993 02:13:04 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #33

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 19 Jan 93 02:13:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 33

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    FCC Awards Pioneers Preference to Volunteers in Tech Assistance (N. Allen)
    Attempted Mindvox Break-in (John F. McMullen)
    Alteration of Ring Cadence (Charles Mattair)
    Do Telcos Record the Numbers of Local Calls? (Denis Coskun)
    Updated Bellcore Report on Future of N. American Number Plan (D. Leibold)
    Top Ten Traumas? (Dr. Ross Alan Stapleton)
    Re: Area Code 610 (Spyros Bartsocas)
    Re: Area Code 610 (Carl Moore)
    Re: Can Paging Software Detect Alphanumerics? (Guy Hadsall)
    Re: Can Paging Software Detect Alphanumerics? (Craig R. Watkins)
    Re: Good Opportunity For Fraud (Rod Gamble)
    Re: Good Opportunity For Fraud (Patrick Lee)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1993 19:43:00 -0500
From: [e-mail] (Nigel Allen)
Subject: FCC Awards Pioneers Preference to Volunteers in Tech Assistance
Organization: Echo Beach, Toronto


Here is a press release from Volunteers in Technical Assistance.

FCC Awards Pioneers Preference to Volunteers in Technical Assistance
To: National Desk, Science Writer
Contact: Joe Sedlak of Volunteers in Technical Assistance,
         703-276-1800

   WASHINGTON, Jan. 14 -- The Federal Communications Commission today
allocated four MHz of VHF/UHF spectrum to the Mobile Satellite Service
for the low-earth orbit satellites (LEO-MSS) and finalized the
tentative pioneer's preference awarded to Volunteers in Technical
Assistance (VITA).

   The award is the first pioneer preference granted by the
commission.

   Henry Norman, president of VITA, said "We are deeply gratified by
the action taken by the FCC.  VITA's global communications network is
designed to bring scientific and technical knowledge to the poor in
developing countries.  The Pioneer's Preference given to VITA for
advancing the technology and extending communications to people not
now served indicates a recognition that the poor of the world should
not be denied a share in benefits of modern technology.

   The FCC stated that it awarded the pioneer's preference to VITA
because it was the first to develop and demonstrate the utility of a
small low earth orbiting satellite system for civilian communications
purposes.  The commission also noted that VITA's pioneering efforts
led to this proceeding authorizing spectrum for LEOs to provide
services that will provide low-cost data communications between ground
stations located anywhere in the world.

   VITA's system, VITASAT, is designed to provide data communications
between 1,000 ground stations, most of them located in developing
countries.  A major use of the global network will be for disaster
prevention, preparedness and mitigation communications.

   Norman said, "Our goal is to help bring the poor people of the
developing world into the information mainstream of development.  VITA
is really about inclusion -- extending the benefits of modern science
and technology to the poor."

   VITA has already installed ground stations connected to the VITASAT
prototype, the PACSAT Communications Experiment, in Sierra Leone,
Djibouti, Indonesia, Pakistan, Ireland, the South Pole, and at the
Sandia National Laboratories in New Mexico.

   "Today's FCC decision is very important to the development of the
VITASAT program," said Helena Wisniewski, VITA's vice president of
communications technology.  "The FCC's granting the Pioneer's
Preference has been the catalyst for the development of the next
generation of fully-automated ground stations which will be less
expensive and easier to use than our prototypes in the field today."

   VITASAT is one part of a system called VITACOMM that also includes
terrestrial digital packet radio networks in several countries
(VITAPAC), and an electronic E-Mail system (VITANET).  VITACOMM is
designed to link people with the rest of the world.

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

Nigel Allen, Toronto, Ontario    [e-mail]

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

Subject: Attempted Mindvox Break-in
From: [e-mail] (John F. McMullen)
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 93 13:55:17 EST
Organization: [Phantom Access] / the MindVox system


The following was carried on {Newsbytes} today -- feel free to
re-publish it (as long as it carries the permission).  John

THe following appeared on {Newbytes}, a copyrighted commercial
service, on January 18, 1993. It is republished here with the express
consent of the authors:

Phantom Access Foils Cracking Attempt 01/18/93 NEW YORK, NEW YORK,
U.S.A.,1993 JAN 18 (NB) -- An attempt to illegally break into, or
"crack" the "Mindvox" conferencing stem contained in Phantom Access, a
flat-rate New York-based online service recently featured in various
news publications, was detected and rebuffed.

Bruce Fancher, co-owner of Phantom Access, told {Newsbytes}, "There
was no real damage and we have notified all of our users about the
attempt in the hope that they will be even more conscious of security.
The nature of this attempt points out one of the things that users of
any on-line system must be aware of in order to protect her/his
privacy."

The attempt came to the attention of the owners of the system, Fancher
and Patrick Kroupa, when subscribers reported receiving the following
message:

"It has been brought to my attention that your account has been
'hacked' by an outside source. The charges added were quite
significant which is how the error was caught. Please temporarily
change your password to 'DPH7' so that we can judge the severity of
the intrusion. I will notify you when the problems has been taken care
of. Thank you for your help in this matter. -System Administrator"

The system owners immediately sent a message to all subscribers
declaring the message to be fraudulent. In addition to pointing out
the textual errors in the message -- for example, Mindvox is a "flat
rate" system and charges are not accumulated -- the owners admonished
users to both safeguard their passwords and insure that they are not
easy to decipher.

Fancher told {Newsbytes} that the review of Mindvox in a recent issue
of Mondo 2000, its mention in an issue of {Forbes}, and his speaking
engagements on behalf of the system have led to more rapid growth than
had been anticipated. He said, "We are moving to larger space on
February 1st and will be upgrading our equipment from a single Next
system to multiple Suns. We will also increase the number of dial-in
ports and greatly increase the speed of our Internet connection. We
are very grateful for the user response to date."

(Barbara E. McMullen & John F. McMullen/Press Contact: Bruce Fancher,
Phantom Access, [e-mail] (e-mail), 212-254-3226, voice/19930115)

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

John F. McMullen           [e-mail]    Consultant,
[e-mail]        [e-mail]            Writer,
[e-mail]   [e-mail]                 Student,
GEnie - nb.nyc             [e-mail]                     Teacher

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

Date: Mon, 18 Jan 93 12:57:17 CST
From: [e-mail] (Charles Mattair)
Subject: Alteration of Ring Cadence
Organization: Synercom Technology, Inc., Houston, TX


We've got three lines coming into our residence:
    . main number which rings downstairs (one two line phone upstairs)
    . modem number - no ringers attached
    . daughter's number which rings upstairs (one two line phone downstairs)

Due to our house's layout and phone locations, you can hear any ringer
throughout most of the house.  The problem is exactly that -- which
line is ringing.

Converting all phones to multiline really isn't an answer -- they're
expensive and we really don't need (want) access to both voice lines
all over the house.  Does anybody make a (relatively) inexpensive
device to convert ring cadence.

SWB does not offer alternate cadences on a primary number or I would
do that.  The order clerk suggested getting a second number with
Distinctive Ring (sm) on one of the lines and not using the primary
number for that line.

Thanks.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Denis Coskun)
Subject: Do Telcos Record the Numbers of Local Calls?
Organization: Alias Research, Inc., Toronto ON Canada
Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1993 00:15:43 -0500


Do telcos record the dialed digits for all local calls?

My back-of-the-envelope calculation suggests that it is entirely
feasible for telcos to store the number of every single local call
that you dial: In a city with 1,000,000 phones, with an average of 10
calls a day on each phone, and logging both origin and destination
phone numbers (7 digits each, so 14 ASCII characters), such a log
would consume just 1,000,000 * 10 * 14 = 140 Mbytes per day.  That
would fit on a tape which costs less than $20.

If they do keep such logs, what do they use it for and how long do
they keep it?  And if not, how can you be sure that they don't?  Are
there laws anywhere that prevent such activity?  There couldn't be a
blanket restriction against it because they do log long distance
calls.

In regions where you have measured service for local calls (rather
than a flat rate), do you get an itemized list of all your local
calls?


[Moderator's Note: We here in Chicago do not routinely get a detailed
list of local calls, however it is possible, and I have received such
a list when I requested it. I think they save the paper for a few
months and the microfilm forever. This cuts both ways: When I once
complained about excessive usage on my line, a prim and very smug
service rep promised to send me the print out so I could see the error
of my ways ...

When I reviewed the print out in detail, I found a number of calls to
internal numbers at IBT; that is, doing a cross-check of the name and
address came up with results like 'IBT Company Supply Depot' and 'IBT
Company Vehicle Repair Garage', all made at times like eight in the
morning when I could not possibly have been at the phone in question.
It turned out that a major (like 5000 pairs) demarc in the basement of
the office building next door was a hangout for several installer/
repair guys who drank coffee and shot the bull there in their spare
time. They also kept lots of supplies in a locker there.  My line very
conveniently showed up multipled on the first strip in that demarc;
anyone calling the supply depot, their foreman, their wife or
girlfriend, to get a truck, etc clipped their butt set right on there
and made the call.

When I called Ms. Prim back, we read selected parts of the print out
together in unison.  I told her, "I call that theft of service and/or
fraud, what do you call it?"  After a couple minutes on hold, her
supervisor came on the line and told me IBT would write off *all*
message units on my bill for the past three months. I told her that
was very nice, but to please have her supervisor tell the outside
plant supervisor to tell his foreman to tell his guys to lay off my
line -- they must have one of their own down there they could use.
The calls ceased after that.  This all occurred in 1973, within months
of the CO I was in then converting to ESS after 60 years of stepping
switches.  I might add they knew the SxS was on the way out; for the
final six months of the old 'Wabash Cannonball' (Chicago-Wabash CO)
they let it go to hell, doing absolutely no routine work at all, and
it sounded like it at the end!  :)   PAT]

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

Date: Mon, 18 Jan 93 23:15:30 EST
From: David Leibold <[e-mail]>
Subject: Updated Bellcore Report on Future of N. American Number Plan


I just received a document from Bellcore entitled "North American
Numbering Plan Administrator's Proposal on the Future of Numbering in
WZ1 - Second Edition", an update to last year's document outlining the
future of North American telephone numbering.

Like its predecessor, this document is being made available for
general release to industry for review. There is a related industry
forum scheduled for 16-18 March 1993 in the Washington DC area;
comments will be handled under "ANSI procedures, i.e. a
contribution-driven consensus process".

There is "a recommendation to form both a world Zone 1 and a United
states Numbering Steering Committee" in section 9 of the report.

To obtain this document, try writing to Fred Gaechter, NANP
Administration, Bellcore - Room 1B225, 290 West Mt Pleasant Avenue,
Livingston NJ USA 07039 (fax [phone]). I will review the
document to see what other details are present.


[e-mail]

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

Subject: Top Ten Traumas?
From: [e-mail] (Dr. Ross Alan Stapleton)
Date: 18 Jan 1993 20:40 MST
Organization: University of Arizona MIS Department


While this is perhaps most appropriate to RISKS, and I'll solicit
there as well, what would I need to list as the top ten cases of
damage/loss due to telecommunications accidents, disasters, cases of
sabotage, etc?  I would call the Chicago flood such a thing, as one
disaster caused a telecommunications failure, which in turn was
disasterous in terms of those who were deprived services.  The
switching center power failure in New York that caused, among other
things, the whole northeast air traffic control system to go comatose
is another good candidate.  Is there a good way to assess net losses,
so as to ever produced a ranked list?


Ross

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

Date: Mon, 18 Jan 93 15:12:01 +0200
From: [e-mail] (Spyros Bartsocas)
Subject: Re: Area Code 610


The ad features an "International TeleFRIENDS" logo.  The whole ad
is in a box.  In the border of the box the following countries are
listed: MEXICO, USA, THAILAND, ITALY, AUSTRALIA, BELGIUM, HOLLAND,
SPAIN, ENGLAND, GERMANY, CHILE, ARGENTINA, BRAZIL and something that
ends in ANCE.

The ad goes as follows:

Do you speak any English? (This line in Greek) Do you want to make new
friends all over the world?  Call International Telefriends day or
night and speak with up to 15 people at the same time about travel,
life and romance. Call now!

001 610 204 2907

15 Seconds cost 107 Drachmas (this line in Greek).
(This is a few cents less than 50 cents).

In the same section of the paper there are three more adds.  All of
them list KING FISHER INC.  Each add has in a different country code.
All of them are sex lines.  The first few digits of the numbers are:

00.852.17.nn.nn.nn.nn (cost 144 GDM/ 15 Sec)

00.611.41.nn.nn (cost 139 GDM/ 15 Sec)

and

00 525 809 nn nn (cost 91 GDM/ 15 Sec)
00 525 809 nn nn

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

Date: Mon, 18 Jan 93 9:51:27 EST
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Area Code 610


By the way, those special services dialable only from overseas in
"area 610" are on 610-204-xxxx, according to earlier postings.

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

Organization: The American University - University Computing Center
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1993 20:10:31 EST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Can Paging Software Detect Alphanumerics?


Brad,

Everything depends upon the Paging Company's paging terminal and
gateway.  Most of the *new* paging terminal front ends handle it, but
who in their right (business) mind would invest big bucks into new
equipment that is planned on being obsolete in two years?

My recommendation is to get really friendly with yur paging company,
or a competitors technicans; sales people havent a clue, their job is
sell.

Hope this helps.


Peace

GuyH

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

From: Craig R. Watkins <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Can Paging Software Detect Alphanumerics?
Date: 18 Jan 93 11:25:40 EST
Organization: HRB Systems, Inc.


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

> Is it possible under the IXO/TAP protocol, or any companies'
> interpretations of it, to detect whether or not a particular pager
> number can receive text pages?

I haven't seen any indication.

When we send IXO pages to digit display pagers, it just takes whatever
numbers are in the message and sends them, ignoring all the alpha.

> .... But the paging computer I call also sends
> an error message, I think it's <CR><NAK><CR> error message <CR>.  This
> is fine by the spec, which says that after you transmit, you're
> supposed to ignore anything other than the ACK, NAK, or ESC-EOT.

I have seen thoese "messages" come in different places from different
switches.  Some before the <NAK>, some after, etc.

> Now what I'd really like, is for the paging computer to detect that
> I'm trying to send an alphabetic page to a numeric-only pager and give
> me a <NAK> with an error message that says so.

I think what you mean is you want an <RS> followed by the message
(which would mean a reject) rather than a <NAK> which I've always
interpreted as a data error which should be retried.

> Would this be a reasonable thing to ask the folks at Cybertel and/or
> Skytel to support?

It would be nice info to know if the paging terminal knows.  However
to get it implemented, I'm not sure how much control they have over
their paging terminal manufacturer.  Since the protocol is pretty dumb
to begin with and there's not much you can derive from it now, I'm not
sure much software (other than possibly your's) would take advantage
of it.


Craig R. Watkins    [e-mail]
HRB Systems, Inc.   [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Rod Gamble)
Subject: Re: Good Opportunity For Fraud
Organization: Sydney University Computing Service, Sydney, NSW, Australia
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1993 12:10:14 GMT


> Bank card passwords are stored in encrypted form (one way encryption
> using the DES algorithm on a combination of the account number, user
> selected PIN and a few other things) which allows for local
> verification of passwords but only by your own bank.  There are two
> different standards by which this is done, but each has a
> bank-specific encryption key (often refered to as the Pin Verification
> Key, or PVK).  This key is kept highly confidential -- anyone with the
> key could generate the hashed pin for each possible password (only
> 10,000 in the typical four digit password) , compare each to the
> hashed value on the card, and decode the PIN that way.

> Your own back can verify the password within the ATM; other bank's ATM's
           ^^^^
> must query your bank via the network.

    About two or three years ago the Bank of England (for some
reason or other) decided to find out what people used as words for
there PINs . Well guess what ... If you found a BoE card in the
street you had a 56% chance of using it in a ATM machine if you used a
four lettered word beginning with F*** Only a 18% chance with S**T and
13% with C***. Either the Brits are very unimaginary (and I really
don't think they are in the English speaking world) or that is
probably the case both here or in the USA. It only left 13% with
various other PINs.

    Also another bank in England again which had user choice
numbers had a huge group of people that just used the last four digits
of there telephone number. I can't remember what is was exactly but it
was around the 40% mark.

Gee just my luck to find one with a PIN of Rumplestiltskin!! Oh well


Cheers de Rod

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

From: Patrick Lee <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Good Opportunity For Fraud
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1993 18:33:21 -0500 (EST)


[e-mail] (Ed Oliveri) wrote:

> Are you sure this was Citibank?  Every Citibank ATM I've seen
> CANNOT eat a card since the card is dipped into the card
> reader, never leaving the user's fingers.

Our Moderator Noted:

-> The Citibank ATM's in Chicago eat the card for a minute and
-> spit it out when finished with it.

I guess Chicago's Citibank has older ATM machines than we have here in
New York City.  I haven't seen any Citibank ATM machine which eats the
card for the past few years.  Just dip the card in and take it out and
proceed with answering which of the five languages to use.


Patrick <[e-mail]>

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

nd of TELECOM Digest V13 #33
*****************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa21606;
          20 Jan 93 4:08 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA24081
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 20 Jan 1993 01:37:08 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA18137
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 20 Jan 1993 01:36:36 -0600
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 1993 01:36:36 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #34

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 20 Jan 93 01:36:30 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 34

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: OBT and Flat-Rate Service (Michael Peirce)
    Re: OBT and Flat-Rate Service (David J. Greenberger)
    Re: OBT and Flat-Rate Service (Ang-Peng Hwa)
    Re: OBT and Flat-Rate Service (Jeffrey C. Miller)
    Re: OBT and Flat-Rate Service (Jack Decker)
    Re: Apartment Security Stupidity (Mike Kimura)
    Re: Apartment Security Stupidity (Ethan Miller)
    Re: Good Opportunity For Fraud (Ed Greenberg)
    Re: Good Opportunity For Fraud (John Pettitt)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Michael Peirce)
Subject: Re: OBT and Flat-Rate Service
Date: Tue, 19 Jan 93 14:34:22 PST
Organization: Peirce Software
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Michael Peirce)


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

>> [Moderator's Note: I've never understood why people had such a big
>> objection to simply paying for the service they use. We've had no flat

> I would suspect that it is because people consider local phone service
> to be a subscription service, just like the newspaper or cable TV.
> With the newspaper, you pay the same amount every day, regardless of
> the number of pages in the paper.  Why not pay by weight, or by
> section?  Why not pay for cable by usage?  Because it is inherently
> more convenient for the USER to conceptualize the charge and prepare
> for it.  It would annoy me every month if my local phone bill was
> different and I had to puzzle it out.  How am I going to assure myself
> that I really made those calls?  With my long distance bill, I can
> look at the city/number combos and identify 95+% of the calls
> immediately.  Surely the LEC won't itemize the local bill, and even if
> they did, how am I going to find out the 555-1234 is that wrong number
> I dialed last month?

It's interesting to note that some of the cellular vendors are
starting to introduce a sort of subscription service.

They often bundle in the first hour, say, of usage in the stardard
charge.  Usage beyond this baseline is charged for in a more
traditional way, but for that first lump sum of service you basically
have a subscription telephone service.


Michael Peirce     [e-mail]
Peirce Software    Suite 301, 719 Hibiscus Place
                   San Jose, California USA 95117
Makers of:         voice: [phone] fax: [phone]
     Smoothie      AppleLink: peirce & America Online: AFC Peirce

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

From: [e-mail] (David J. Greenberger)
Subject: Re: OBT and Flat-Rate Service
Organization: Cornell Information Technologies
Date: 19 Jan 93 05:24:06 GMT


Hi, Patrick!

[e-mail] (Patrick Lee) writes:

> areas.  I can't understand why so many phone companies out there still
> have flat rate service and that their customers don't mind (and now we
> have state legislatures trying to keep flat rates alive)!  I for one
> like paying for what I use (and I do make over 300 local calls -- 10.6
> cents a call with 40 and 65 percent discounts at different times).  I
> have no problem with that even though I will probably be paying less
> with flat rate.

And I can't understand why you object to phone users in areas
supporting flat rate using it.  If the phone company thinks it can
make money off of it, what's wrong with it?  Even for users who don't
make more than three phone calls a day (which is about what Ithaca's
flat rate service is worth), they have the peace of mind of not having
to worry about how many calls they're making.  I frequently have
trouble connecting to my UNIX system, but I don't have to worry about
plugging away with flat rate service.

> I pay for what I use, fair is fair.

No, you only pay per call.  You don't pay by the minute.  You don't
pay based on distance.  Do you really think you're "using" just as
much in making a ten-second call next door as in making a four-hour
call from southern Brooklyn or Staten Island to northern Bronx?  The
cost is the same.


David J. Greenberger    BBS: [phone]
106 West Avenue         Internet: [e-mail]
Ithaca, NY 14850        RIME: Common, ->48
[phone]

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

Date: Tue, 19 Jan 93 17:11:48 SST
From: Ang Peng Hwa <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: OBT and Flat-Rate Service


Here in Singapore, we recently swtiched to an *all-metered* system.
There is not flat rate service at all except for toll-free lines where
the firm called pays. There is an annual "access charge" of S$100
(US$61).

The rates are 1.4 Singapore cents a minute during office hours (8-5)
and 0.7 cents otherwise. That works out to about US0.85 cents and
US0.42 respectively. (They tout it as the cheapest tolls in the world.
Ha.)

Result? There was a lot of initial resistance. Today, about 78 percent
of subscribers pay less. Among my group of friends four of five have
phone bills below S$2 monthly. (In my case, it was about S65cents for
a few months.  It was so low, the phone company didn't even deduct
from our autobank.)

Singapore Telecom said it was "losing" between S$1 and S$2 million
(US$0.6 to US$1.2 million) a month even though they had designed the
system to be revenue neutral.

Businesses are paying more. In part, users like me are switching to
them instead of making calls from home.

I'm not sure if the compactness of Singapore plays a part here. But
the above may give some indication as to the economics of the local
call.

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

From: [e-mail] (Jeffrey C Miller)
Subject: Re: OBT and Flat-Rate Service
Organization: Air Force Institute of Technology
Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1993 19:28:30 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> Rob Knauerhase <knauer@cs.
uiuc.edu> writes:

> I mailed an article here last Thanksgiving about Ohio Bell's sales
> pitches for their relatively new measured-service variants, commenting
> that my mother's phone bill listed an _increase_ if she switched to
> any of their new plans (based on her typical usage).  Someone from
> this group mailed me privately warning that in Michigan there was now
> no option of flat-rate, and to watch out for the same thing in
> OBT-land.

Yup, for the third consecutive month, OBT has told me how much extra
I'll pay if I switch to a measured service.  Darned nice of them to
remind me how economical flat-rate is.

> As I am for the time being residing in central Illinois, I'd
> appreciate it if an interested party closer to Columbus would keep the
> Digest (and/or me) informed as to how (and if!) this legislation
> proceeds.

I'll try ... after all, it's in my interests :-).

> [Moderator's Note: I've never understood why people had such a big
> objection to simply paying for the service they use. We've had no flat
> rate service in Chicago outside a very small local area for many

> Count me as one who approves of "pay for what you use'; I don't like
> paying subsidies for my neighbor's use of the phone. I don't do it for
> the electricity, water or gas they use, why should I for their phone
> calls via flat rate, averaged out pricing?  But then again, I don't
> run war dialers against entire CO's or call computer chat lines in the
> outer fringes of 708/815.  PAT]

As someone's .sig said, "those who can't talk math are doomed to talk
nonsense" (or something like that) ...

I just happen to have my latest OBT bill here right in front of me:

Touch-Tone Service : $1.80
FCC Access Charge :  $3.50
911 Service Charge : $0.12
Local Access Line  : $6.70
Flat-Rate Service  : $8.55

Now I'll be more than happy to pay for what I use just as soon as they
can tariff it in such a way that I can tell what I'm paying for.  By
my reckoning, there are four separate charges there that apply to
local calls.  Why the hell should I pay extra for the "privilege" of
Touch-Tone service when it's no more difficult for OBT to process DTMF
than DP?  Why should I pay the LEC for access to a LD carrier; why not
have that charged back through the LD carrier as a charge for access
to me as a customer, if lost revenue due to divestiture is a problem?
Why should I pay for 911 before I use it -- they're more than happy to
charge $0.30 / call for 411, why not the same for 911?

Now maybe I'm the one talking nonsense, but it seems to me some
significant overhaul is needed before we can start talking about "pay
as you use" for LEC's.


Jeff Miller,  NH6ZW/N8,  AFA1HE (ex WD6CQV, AFA8JM, AFA1DO)
AFIT School of Engineering, Wright-Patterson AFB, OH

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

Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: OBT and Flat-Rate Service
Date: 19 Jan 93 19:50:02
From: [e-mail]


Pat, I generally approve of the way you moderate this conference but I
wonder why you always feel compelled to get in "the last word" on any
message opposing mandatory measured service?  You say you don't
understand the opposition to it, yet folks have explained it to you
numerous times.  For your benefit and those of other Digest readers
(assuming you allow this article into the Digest), let me give you a
(hopefully) BRIEF summation of the arguments against measured service:

1) In the two states where voters have actually had an opportunity to
vote on the issue (Maine and Oregon), they have turned down mandatory
measured service handily.  The public doesn't want it.

2) Local calls are not itemized.  Maybe you trust your telco to count
calls accurately.  I don't.

3) You don't get credit for wrong numbers or poor connections (some-
thing of special concern to those of us who live in GTE land).

4) Unlike gas or electricity, you are not using something up when you
use your telephone.  There is virtually no cost increase to the phone
company when you place a call, since the switching equipment remains
powered up and ready whether there are any calls or not.  Telephone
cables and other "outside plant" (by far the largest expense for any
phone company) do not wear out any faster because they are used more
often.

5) Even if you assume that the phone company had to add switching
capacity because of the number of simultaneous calls placed (and it is
really a stretch to assume that, except perhaps on some heavily-loaded
exchanges in financial districts and the like), measured local service
does not deal with the problem fairly because it charges on a PER-CALL
basis, not by time.  Thus, a modem user (whom you seem to see as the
evil force that necessitates measured service, even though most of us
do our modeming during off-peak periods) who ties up a phone circuit
for an hour at a time is not charged nearly as much as the guy who
makes several one-minute calls to see if a friend or relative has
arrvied safely after making a crosstown trip in icy weather.

The only reason the telcos want to charge on a per-call basis is
because it's now possible to do so economically, and they can convince
some gullible people that it's really fairer to do it that way.  Do I
think telcos are greedy?  Well, I have noticed that the small,
independent telcos who charge only fifty cents or a buck a month for
custom calling features and touch tone (or even offer touch tone free
even though NOT required by law to do so) almost NEVER ask for
mandatory measured service.  Only the big, fat, greedy companies who
try to get top dollar for every service offered do.

Honestly, Pat, this sounds like a case of "my mind is made up; please
don't confuse me with facts!"  You are certainly entitled to your
opinion, but I do rather wish you'd quit using your position as
Moderator to beat us over the head with it.  It's certainly not the
majority opinion; not here and not among the general public if the
votes in Maine and Oregon were at all representative.


Jack Decker --- 1:154/8.0 FidoNet, [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: Your message is the last one in this series of
replies I started publishing a couple days agp. This time, instead of
me getting the last word, you get the last word, okay?    PAT]

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

Date: 19 Jan 1993 15:42:11 -0800 (PST)
From: Mike Kimura <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Apartment Security Stupidity


> [Moderator's Note: I am rather surprised that this system actually
> dialed a seven-digit phone number. Most such arragements simply seize
> the pair at some point between the CO and the tenant [...]

I am not surprised since both the apartment I previously lived at and
my current condominium use a system that dials the telephone number.
In fact, at most of the security units I visit I can hear the system
dialing (sometimes even pulsing) the telephone number.

We used to have a private intercom system that opened the front gate.
It was inconvenient because the ringer was so quiet I couldn't hear it
from upstairs and you had to be downstairs where the unit was to talk
and open the gate.  When our condo board decided to upgrade to a
system using the telephone,  I extracted some articles from Telecom,
which our Moderator wrote, describing the "better" system.

However, next we received a request to provide our telephone number so
it could be programmed into both of our entry gates.  Instructions
indicated to push "9" to let someone in.  No mention was made as to
how to deny entrance nor was any mention made as to a "password" to
open the gate yourself.  Also, it was suggested that we purchase
Call-Waiting so people at the front gate won't get a busy signal.

Most recently the condominium board has been bemoaning the fact that
PacBell charges them for two (one at each gate) *BUSINESS* lines.  I
believe each call from the gate to a condo unit ends up being charged
at business rates.  Also, the phone lines to these entry gates
terminate in the parking garage with a regular phone jack.  I wonder
how long before someone taps in a phone there and makes calls charge
to the association?


Mike Kimura ([e-mail])


[Moderator's Note: Well again, the 'better' systems don't leave this
sort of thing to chance. They do not require call waiting; they do not
require that you provide your phone number for programming; they do
not even require that you have phone service from telco. With the
system from IBT, if by chance your phone service is terminated, let's
say due to a credit disconnect, the front door intercom still works.
Your phone may be sitting there dead 99 percent of the time, but if
someone comes to the door, presto, you get the door call. The better
systems do not care who plugs into whatever jack they please: all they
will get is a dialtone to a very limited in scope 'network'.
Incidentally, tell the condo association to get only one business line
if they insist on doing it the way they are. Have the phone at the
back gate be an extension to the one at the front gate. Given that the
door calls are only a few seconds in length ideally (in fact, IBT
times out the connection after 30 seconds, as does the customer
premises version), it would be rare that someone was trying to use the
phone at the front gate simultaneously with someone at the back gate.
By bringing the gate latch through a certain contact in the phone unit
itself, it is possible to fix things so only the gate where the phone
is off hook at that moment would get the unlatching pulse, and an
'in-use' light on the phone would be honored by most courteous people
who saw it illuminated for a few seconds when they arrived.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (ethan miller)
Subject: Re: Apartment Security Stupidity
Date: 19 Jan 93 17:45:43
Organization: Berkeley--Shaken, not Stirred
Reply-To: [e-mail]


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

> [Moderator's Note: To repeat, the better systems do NOT use dialtone
> from the CO. They generate their own dial tone and only get as far
> as the box by the basement demarc or wherever. The only calls they
> can make are to two, three or four digit door code numbers. Even the
> system from IBT which has equipment housed in the CO uses what would
> be better described as an 'intercom line' or maybe a special sort of
> centrex to operate. Those phones do not get near the network. ...]

The key word here is "better systems."

We have a lot of small (8-25 unit) buildings here in Berkeley.  Many
are protected by intercom security systems.  Some of the systems are
totally separate from the phone system (push buttons on a wall speaker
in the apartment, typically).  All of the rest (my sample size is
dozens) dial the full phone number.  I know; I can recognize the
tenant's phone number from the tones or pulses(!) that the system uses
to dial.

A separate phone line system is *much* cheaper to install for a
building without a preexisting security system.  You need to put in a
new phone line ($40 in Berkeley), a wire from the new line's demarc to
the security box, and the box itself.  Since the box is on an outside
wall, running the phone wire isn't terribly hard.  Monthly cost is
around $10.  My girlfriend's building got such a system about a year
ago.  It definitely dials her number (via pulse dialing) when I punch
up the appropriate code.  It even gets a busy signal occasionally.
The two digit code number from the keypad is translated to a seven
digit phone number.  I'll experiment to see if I can make other calls
using an external dialer.


ethan miller--cs grad student
[e-mail]   #include <std/disclaimer.h>


[Moderator's Note: All the landlord needs is a few long distance calls
made from that phone to demonstrate a 'regular phone line' is NOT a
cheaper way to go. Some landlords may even be too stupid to have those
phones blocked from 900/976/incoming calls, allowing someone to stand
at the front door and accept incoming collect calls from sex services,
etc.  The CPE version, from GTE in Canada only cost me about two grand
when I installed it for the apartment building I mentioned yesterday.
Of course, I did not charge myself for my own labor.  :)   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Ed Greenberg)
Subject: Re: Good Opportunity For Fraud
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)
Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1993 22:20:18 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> Patrick Lee <patlee@Panix.
Com> writes:

> I guess Chicago's Citibank has older ATM machines than we have here in
> New York City.  I haven't seen any Citibank ATM machine which eats the
> card for the past few years.  Just dip the card in and take it out and
> proceed with answering which of the five languages to use.

I lived in New York when the CBCs (Citicard Banking Centers) first
came out.  They were unique in those days because (a) every branch had
them and (b) they were all behind locked doors with card readers,
instead of out in the street.  They were also unique because the card
was dipped and removed and HAD NO MAGNETIC STRIPE!

I was told that there were bits of metal in the cards that were
inserted between two plates of a capacitor.  Based on where the metal
was, some caps discharged and others did not.

Nowadays, I understand that Citibank cards have magstripes, so that
they can intenetwork, but remember that there was no plus, star or
cirrus system in those days and no reason for Citibank cards to work
anyplace but Citibank.

I banked at Citibank from January 1978 to October 1979, when I changed
jobs and was offered free checking at Marine Midland.  By that time,
ATMs were becoming more popular around the metro area and Citibank's
branch and ATM network was no longer as unique as it had once been.

Nonetheless, the CBCs, and available cash 24 hours a day, was quite an
oddity on Long Island in those days, and we were happy to have it.


Edward W. Greenberg  | Home: [phone] | [e-mail]
1600 Stokes St. #24  | Work: [phone] | DoD#: 0357
San Jose, CA  95126  | Fax:  [phone] | KM6CG (ex WB2GOH)


[Moderator's Note: I got my first ATM card from the Northern Trust
Company here in 1973 or 1974. There was no networking; the machine was
purely local to that bank and sat in the outer lobby. If it broke down
during off-hours (and believe me, it seemed to be down more than it
was up) then the lobby security guard had the home phone numbers of a
couple bank employees who were on standby duty. They'd come from home
at odd hours of the night and restart the machine.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (John Pettitt)
Subject: Re: Good Opportunity For Fraud
Organization: Starnet-Public Access UNIX--Los Altos, CA  415-949-3133
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 1993 00:43:50 GMT


[e-mail] (Rod Gamble) writes:

[ story about PINs on UK ATM's being four letter works or phone
numbers ]

Sorry to shoot down your nice urban legend but ...

1) Most UK cards either come with a number or let you choose a number
at first use.  However the machines don't as I recall have alpha
keypads (British phones have not had letters on the dial/keypad for a
looooonnnnggg time).

2) There was a survey and the most common numbers started 19?? or
ended with two digits between 01 and 12.  This strongly implies that
dates are used by most people when asked for a pin.


John Pettitt, CEO, Dolmus Inc.            [e-mail]
Archer N81034                    apple!starnet!jpp
Me, say that, never: It's a forged posting!    Fax:   [phone]
                        Voice: [phone]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #34
*****************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa25698;
          20 Jan 93 5:56 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA16194
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 20 Jan 1993 02:49:03 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA30897
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 20 Jan 1993 02:48:31 -0600
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 1993 02:48:31 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #35

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 20 Jan 93 02:48:30 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 35

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    GTE Apologizes! (Jack Decker)
    Help: Phone Network Modelling Algorithms (Peter Murray)
    Modem Dial Lines and Problems (Jack Lowry)
    Freeway Call Boxes and CA Rain (Randy Gellens)
    Strange International "Chat Line" Service -- How's it Work? (James Elliott)
    10XXX UnBlocking (Barton F. Bruce)
    NYNEX Slashes in LATA LD Prices (Barton F. Bruce)
    Differences Between ANI and Caller-ID (Paul Robinson)
    AT&T Public Phone 2000 Credit Card Bug (Paul Robichaux)
    Logging Into AUDIX Box (Daniel L. Grillo)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wed, 20 Jan 93 00:47:00 EST
From: [e-mail] (Jack Decker)
Subject: GTE Apologizes!


I am somewhat astonished.  As you know if you saw my earlier message
about GTE, I received a first bill from them that was quite a bit
higher than I had expected, due to failure to credit me for an
installation prepayment that had been made at the time I ordered the
service, and failure to apply a lifeline credit to my first 38 days of
service.  Well, today in the mail I received a quite unexpected and
very apologetic letter from someone quite high up the the GTE North
regional offices (I don't know if he'd be upset if his name or title
were posted publicly, so I won't).

The gist of the letter was that the credits had been issued, and that
the company is currently experiencing some internal billing problems
which caused my account not to be credited properly (and it says that
they are in the process of resolving them).  Also, a copy of the
tariff for the Michigan Lifeline Credit (one sheet) was enclosed for
my review, and I was given an 800 number and the name of a contact
person I could call if I had any further questions or concerns.

Oh, and the letter explained that the 911 operational charge of $.50
is a charge approved by the voters of Muskegon County to cover part of
the cost of operating the 911 emergency service center (I tend to
believe we have enhanced 911 here).  The funny part about that is that
I don't recall ever questioning that charge in my conversations with
folks at the GTE business office, though I DID question it when I
posted my original message here!  Things that make you go hmmmm ...

As I say, the letter was very apologetic in tone and I believe it was
sincere.  My only hope is that the person who sent it to me actually
will make some attempt to get business office procedures changed a
bit, so that the next person who calls will not have to insist on
seeing a tariff sheet in order to get their credit.  Of course, it
would be better yet if the billing problems can be resolved soon, so
that this situation doesn't occur again.  I suppose it would be too
much to ask that everyone else who has been overbilled receive the
credit they are due without having to ask for it, but now that GTE is
aware of the problem, we can hope that at least it will be fixed so
that it doesn't happen again.

In any case, I was favorably impressed by the fact that for whatever
reason, they apparently cared enough to send this letter.  I think I
may well call the 800 number and express my desire to be off this
subscriber carrier in the not TOO far distant future, although I have
been sort of holding off on that until warmer weather comes and I can
get underneath my mobile home and give all my internal wiring a good
inspection, to make sure that's not part of my "low volume" problem (I
rather doubt it but want to be ABSOLUTELY sure; it would be quite
embarrassing to call and raise a big fuss and then find out I had a
problem with my wiring.  I know I can just plug a phone in at the
network interface box, but it's hard to determine something as
subjective as a volume level on a phone when you're standing outside
shivering, your teeth are chattering and the wind is howling!).  :-)


Jack

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

From: [e-mail] (Peter Murray)
Subject: Help: Phone Network Modelling Algorithms
Organization: Telecom Australia, Information Technology Development
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 1993 00:17:09 GMT


Does anyone know of any software tools that could be used for the
modelling and dimensioning of both hierarchical and non-hierarchical
telephone networks?

I would imagine that the software would implement various graph
algorithms for both directed and undirected graphs as well as
algorithms to calculate the grade of service among other things.

Any feedback on available software, algorithms, studies etc ... would
be much appreciated.


Peter C. Murray       [e-mail]
Telecom Mobiles    Information Technology Development
Information Technology Group    Telecom Australia

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

From: jackl@pribal (jack lowry)
Subject: Modem Dial Lines and Problems
Organization: Prism Medical Systems
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 1993 00:37:56 GMT


What is the guarenteed maximum loss on a local voice line?

Here is our problem: We have a pair of MULTITECH v.32 modems in use
with a terminal and slaved printer over a dialup circuit. The customer
called telling us that the response time was awful. We go out to the
site and very quickly find out that the modems are connecting at a
maximum of 2400 baud. Forcing the modems to connect at 9600 results in
no connection. We have been round and round with the local telco and
had no success ... until one of the phone techs that have been coming
onsite "hooked us upto a 'FIBER optic circuit'" We have also been told
that the loss on the line is 6db and that modems start having trouble
at 8bd with 10db being the max guaranteed loss on a phone connection.

Modern folklore has it that there used to be a "special" modem phone
line avalible. Is this still true?

Are there even differenet grades of dialup phone lines?


Thanks,

Jack   wb3ffv.ampr.org!pribal!jackl

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

From: MPA15AB![e-mail]
Date: 19 JAN 93 18:07
Subject: Freeway Call Boxes and CA Rain


I've heard (but don't know if it is true) that the prolonged rain
we've experienced here in Southern California has caused some of the
freeway call boxes to run low on power (they are solar powered).


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: [e-mail] (James Elliott)
Subject: Strange International "Chat Line" Service -- How's it Work?
Organization: U of Wisconsin Madison - Computer Sciences
Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1993 20:09:18 GMT


A friend found a listing for a party chat service in a magazine, with
a strange phone number, which seemed clearly to be an international
call, but with fewer digits than seemed to make sense. (The number is
011-592-1999, which according to my local phone book goes to Guyana,
and the 1999 is some combination of city code and very short number).
The service is billed as "free, except for normal long-distance
charges."

Curious, he tried the number, and sure enough, it worked. Then he
spent half an hour or so calling operators and customer assistance
people trying to find out how much such a call would cost, where it
went, and the like.

The most common reaction was "Well, that's an international call. Wait
and see how much it costs on your bill." When pressed harder, more
sophisticated representatives were able to say that it was a Guyana
number, but invariably claimed that it was incomplete -- that there
were not enough digits for the call to go through. His assertion that
it had worked was met with disbelief.

Anyway, this leaves me with a few questions. First, why does this
number work? Secondly, how does a business make any profit from it? My
suspicion is that they set up their own little telephone company in
Guyana and bill whatever they feel like as "normal long-distance
charges." But I hope that some readers of this group may have more
educated guesses than mine, or even some actual knowledge of what's
going on!


Jim Elliott    [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: Your friend was calling the gay chat line which (I
think) used to operate out of the Netherland Antilles with the same
sort of billing arrangement. The rates charged are those set by the
carrier originating the call to the international point. The way the
operator of the service makes money is by getting a piece of the
action from the local telco based on the cut *they* get from the
originating carrier. The reason the call goes through with 'so few
digits' is because someone along the line is intercepting what is
dialed and doing with it as they wish, sending it to wherever. You can
consider it similar to 'speed dialing' from your local telco. You hand
the telco an asterisk and a single digit or two; telco looks at it and
translates it into something else. Likewise, the 011-592 sends the
call to Guyana and the telecom administration there sees it coming,
plucks it off and does something else with it.

When this topic came up here awhile back, some readers suggested the
call was not getting to Guyana if only because of the miserable
condition of the phone service there and the likely inability of the
Guyana telecom administration to deal with it. Naturally everyone
involved hopes the gay guys in the USA have enough expendable cash
that they'll be willing to spend BIG $$ calling; the people running
the 386 with a half-dozen Dialogic cards and a bridge attached (that's
about all it is) like the checks they get each month; the Guyana
Telecom would like to see the balance in their settlement accounts
with the USA carriers tipped in their favor, and like the three
monkeys, MCI, Sprint and the Mother Company cover their eyes, ears and
mouths and take the traffic which is handed to them.

Those calls are not very expensive; I subscribe to AT&T's 'Reach Out
World' program and pay something like 83 cents a minute for many
overseas calls during off-peak hours. At least AT&T has apparently
seen the dollar signs flashing where sex-talk is concerned; men and
women whispering sweet nothings to one another over the long distance
telephone in the wee hours of the morning must pay off since AT&T now
cuts similar deals inside the USA with anyone who runs a bridge and
can produce the required traffic. AT&T denies it of course, but
702-333-8444 is a good example. Try calling it on any carrier *other*
than Mother. AT&T graciously accepts the twelve cents per minute and
cuts the 'bridge tender' in on the action.  PAT]

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

Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1993 05:18:39 -0500 (EST)
From: Barton F. Bruce <[e-mail]>
Subject: 10XXX UnBlocking
Organization: Cambridge Computer Associates, Inc.


AT&T has been offering substantial $ rebates for expenses incurred by
hotels and such while unblocking their PBXes to handle 10XXX traffic.

The time limit for applications for such rebates was Jan 15, but now
has been extended to, I think, March 16.

AT&T has offered to the LECs *free* a form of screening that made such
unblocking very easy for the customer. When I had just attended an
AT&T unblocking seminar many many months ago, I had asked NET&T if
they would be offering this screening, and got a letter back saying
"NO".

Just five days before AT&T's Jan 15 original cutoff date for rebates,
NET&T made available the new form of screening for unblocking.

Presumably, if you use it, you will have no further problems when the
XXX in 10XXX goes to four digits.

AT&T said the NET&T order code and pricing are: RBVXC, $11/line
install, $0.00/mo!!, but cautioned me that it was on MY head to
determine if whatever NET&T is offering is what my customers need.

The usual NET&T sales response is that noone has heard of it, but
since AT&T had provided the info that it was only a few days old, the
NET&T sales types are off checking on it at least.

It may now be offered in your area under some other code. Call AT&T
(1-800-UNBLOCK) and ask for the technical specialist on duty. The
folks that first answer are for more routine questions.

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

Date: Wed, 20 Jan 1993 03:32:35 -0500 (EST)
From: Barton F. Bruce <[e-mail]>
Subject: NYNEX Slashes in LATA LD Prices
Organization: Cambridge Computer Associates, Inc.


NET&T has been running ads to tell everyone they have slashed the LD
charges within MASS.

They are now maybe 1/2 of what they were before, and the old price is
quite recent and was radically lower than traditionally.

This time they have something to really fear.

Teleport Communications has a large fiber loop out through the LATA
that gets to many telco tandems and Teleport offers LOCAL DIALTONE
from their own #5ESS.

If you get your local phone number from them, as I think Lechemere
Sales has done, you are a LOCAL call away from probably ANYWHERE in
the LATA.

They are co-located in some central offices, so even if their fiber or
cable-co-coax doesn't reach you, telco can (read has to) provide that
last mile on copper.

Teleport is owned maybe 50% by various cable companies. Telco should
be worried!

Ethernet to the home is very close.

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

Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1993 15:27:55 -0500 (EST)
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Differences Between ANI and Caller-ID


In TELECOM Digest 13-29, Ross Alexander <[e-mail]>
writes:

> Could anybody tell me what ANI is all about?  I follow this group
> re gularly but the common kiwi doesn't have to worry about interstate
> laws and Caller ID (yet).  I've read up on the basic idea of SS7 and
> ISDN so I follow the idea of both in channel signaling and D channel
> signaling.  Any help would be most appreciated.

ISDN, ANI and Caller ID are only slightly related.

You are essentially confusing (in part) three different areas.  While
ISDN telephone switches can supply Caller ID and/or ANI, you can
receive the information (or your information can be passed) on
non-ISDN switches.

ISDN is a scheme to provide the means to run aproximately three
channels on a single pair of phone wires.  In the Basic Rate package
(BRI), there are two 56K channels (or two standard "voice" channels)
and one 16K data channel that while it is supposedly for call setup
and teardown, I have heard you could use it for lower-speed data (look
who's talking about 'lower speed' -- I still use a 2400 baud modem.)

Caller ID is a means by which a private party can obtain, in real
time, the telephone number of the individual calling them, or in some
areas, the name or business name of the person or organization calling
them.  This information is provided automatically unless the party
blocks it.  (In some areas such as Virginia and New Jersey, if memory
serves me correctly, unless you have politically approved connections
(like judges and police officers), you cannot block delivery of your
telephone number.)

ANI is a process by which the billed party of a call obtains the
telephone billing number (which in the case of an individual is their
telephone number; in the case of a business it could be the main
outgoing trunk line or whichever line happened to be selected) of the
party who is placing a call at their expense.  If the billed party is
also the telephone number being called, and is done using "wats" in
which the telephone system automatically charges the called party, it
is possible for the called party to obtain, in real time, the billing
number of the calling party at the time the call is placed.

If the call is third-party billing, or placed collect/reverse charge,
or billed to a telephone credit card, the ANI information is printed
on the telephone bill.  Let me ask you, in New Zealand, if someone
calls you reverse charges, does the bill show the number from which
you were called?

I differentiate between the two because ANI has been available since
probably inbound WATS numbers have been in existence, and it's only
with the availability of Caller ID that this issue even came up.


Paul Robinson


[Moderator's Note: Actually, no. The earliest 800 lines I can remember
were not in a position to identify who was calling by number.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Paul Robichaux)
Subject: AT&T Public Phone 2000 Credit Card Bug
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: New Technology, Inc.
Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1993 16:17:10 GMT


While traveling last week, I had a chance to try my first Public Phone
2000 (PP2k). Unfortunately, the phones at present have two serious
problems which render them unusable, at least for me.

Bug #1 is intentional. The phones only accept SWBT and Bell Atlantic
calling cards for data calls. Since I have a South Central Bell
calling card, that moves me to bug #2.

Bug #2 occurs whenever you attempt to place a data call billed to a
credit card (Visa, MC, or Amex; I think it might take Discover also.)
After swiping my card and dialing the number, the phone displays a
curious message:

    Divide by zero error - R6003

and reboots itself!

A call to AT&T's customer service confirmed that bug #1 was
intentional and that bug #2 was known and in work. Unfortunately, I
never did get to use the darn thing. Moral of the story: always carry
your _real_ AT&T card when travelling.


Paul Robichaux, KD4JZG
Mission Software Development Div.
New Technology, Inc.

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

From: [e-mail] (Daniel L Grillo)
Subject: Logging Into AUDIX Box
Organization: Penn State Computer Science
Date:     Tue, 19 Jan 1993 19:42:52 -0500


Here at work we have an AT&T AUDIX voicemail system that's running on
a 3Bsomething.

Since it appears this machine is running Unix of some AT&T flavor, it
would be nice to be able to log in with a normal shell, grab the audix
name & extention database, and have access to the actual recordings.

The AUDIX maintainer only has a single account, and it gives him a
pretty-text based useless-for-our-needs shell.

Is there an account on these boxes without a password?  Is there a way
to escape out of the AUDIX maintainer program and get a command line?

Any info or insight is appreciated.


Dan Grillo   [e-mail]   [NeXTmail, PrivateMail, MIME welcome]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #35
*****************************










From telecom Thu Jan 21 02:11:43 1993
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA26456
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for [e-mail]); Thu, 21 Jan 1993 02:11:43 -0600
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 02:11:43 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <telecom>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #36
Status: RO

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 21 Jan 93 02:11:30 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 36

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Released GSA Docs Slam FBI Wiretap Proposal (NY Times via Mark Boolootian)
    Chicago Pay Phone Rip-Off; COCOT Triumph! (Bill Pfeiffer)
    Internet *67 Service (Paul Robinson)
    Interchangeable NPA Prep (Tim Gorman)
    Question Concerning 'Smart' House (Rachana D. Patel)
    Anyone Know of Telecommunication GUI Standards? (Stephen Gay)
    702-333-8444 (was Strange International "Chat Line" Service) (Tom Ace)
    Re: Strange International "Chat Line" Service (Fred Goldstein)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Mark Boolootian)
Subject: Released GSA Docs Slam FBI Wiretap Proposal
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 1993 07:59:54 -0800 (PST)


Moderator's Note: Mark passed along this correspondence from Dave
Banisar discussing a recent newspaper report.  PAT]

  Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1993 23:22:47 -0500
  From: Dave Banisar <[e-mail]>
  Subject: Released GSA Docs Slam FBI Wiretap Proposal

"GSA Memos Reveal that FBI Wiretap Plan was Opposed by Government's
Top Telecomm Purchaser"

The {New York Times} reported today on a document obtained by CPSR
through the Freedom of Information Act.  ("FBI's Proposal on Wiretaps
Draws Criticism from G.S.A.," {New York Times}, January 15, 1993, p.
A12)

The document, an internal memo prepared by the General Services
Administration, describes many problems with the FBI's wiretap plan
and also shows that the GSA strongly opposed the sweeping proposal.
The GSA is the largest purchaser of telecommunications equipment in
the federal government.

The FBI wiretap proposal, first announced in March of 1992, would have
required telephone manufacturers to design all communications
equipment to facilitate wire surveillance.  The proposal was defeated
last year. The FBI has said that it plans to reintroduce a similar
proposal this year.

The documents were released to Computer Professionals for Social
Responsibility, a public interest organization, after CPSR submitted
Freedom of Information Act requests about the FBI's wiretap plan to
several federal agencies last year.

The documents obtained by CPSR reveal that the GSA, which is
responsible for equipment procurement for the Federal government,
strongly opposed two different versions of the wiretap plan developed
by the FBI.  According to the GSA, the FBI proposal would complicate
interoperability, increase cost, and diminish privacy and network
security.  The GSA also stated that the proposal could "adversely
_affect national security._"

In the second memo, the GSA concluded that it would be a mistake to
give the Attorney General sole authority to waive provisions of the
bill.

The GSA's objections to the proposal were overruled by the Office of
Management and Budget, a branch of the White House which oversees
administrative agencies for the President.  However, none of GSA's
objections were disclosed to the public or made available to policy
makers in Washington.

Secrecy surrounds this proposal.  Critical sections of a report on the
FBI wiretap plan prepared by the General Accounting Office were
earlier withhold after the FBI designated these sections "National
Security Information."  These sections included analysis by GAO on
alternatives to the FBI's wiretap plan.  CPSR is also pursuing a FOIA
lawsuit to obtain the FBI's internal documents concerning the wiretap
proposal.

The GSA memos, the GAO report and others that CPSR is now seeking
indicate that there are many important documents within the government
which have still not been disclosed to the public.

Marc Rotenberg, CPSR Washington office        [e-mail]

Note: Underscores indicate underlining in the original text.  Dashes
that go across pages indicate page breaks.

[Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility is a nonprofit, public
interest membership organization. For membership information about CPSR,
contact [e-mail] or call 415/322-3778.  For information on
CPSR's FOIA work, contact David Sobel at 202/544-9240
([e-mail]).]

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

                      (#4A)

              Control No. X92050405
               Due Date:     5/5/92

Brenda Robinson (S)

After KMR consultations, we still _"cannot support"_ Draft Bill. No.
118 as substantially revised by Justice after its purported full
consideration of other agencies' "substantive concerns."

Aside from the third paragraph of our 3/13/92 attachment response for
the original draft bill, which was adopted as GSA's position (copy
attached), Justice has failed to fully address other major GSA
concerns (i.e., technological changes and associated costs).

Further, by merely eliminating the FCC and any discussion of cost
issues in the revision, we can not agree as contended by Justice that
it now " ... takes care of kinds of problems raised by FCC and others
 ...."

Finally, the revision gives Justice sole unilateral exclusive
authority to enforce and except or waive the provisions of any
resultant Iaw in Federal District Courts. Our other concerns are also
shown in the current attachment for the revised draft bill.

Once again OMB has not allowed sufficient time for a more through
review, a comprehensive internal staffing, or a formal response.

                       /Signature/

                       Wm. R. Loy  KMR     5/5/92

Info: K(Peay),KD,KA,KB,KE,KG,KV,KM,KMP,KMR,R/F,LP-Rm.4002

(O/F) -   9C1h (2) (a) - File (#4A)

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

                          ATTACHMENT
                 REVISED JUSTICE DRAFT BILL
                       DIGITAL TELEPHONY

The proposed legislation could have a widespread impact on the
government's ability to acquire _new_ telecommunications equipment and
provide electronic communications services.

_Existing_ Federal government telecommunications resources will be
affected by the proposed new technology techniques and equipment. An
incompatibility and interoperability of existing Federal government
telecommunications system, and resources would result due to the new
technological changes proposed.

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has been removed from the
legislation, but the Justice implementation may require modifications
to the "Communications Act of 1934," and other FCC policies and
regulations to remove inconsistencies. This could also cause an
unknown effect on the wire and electronic communications systems
operations, services, equipment, and regulations within the Federal
government. Further, to change a major portion of the United States
telecommunications infrastructure (the public switched network within
eighteen months and others within three years) seems very optimistic,
no matter how trivial or minimal the proposed modifications are to
implement.

In the proposed legislation the Attorney General has sole _unilateral
exclusive_ authority to enforce, grant exceptions or waive the
provisions of any resultant law and enforce it in Federal District
Courts. The Attorney General would, as appropriate, only "consult"
with the FCC, Department of Commerce, or Small Business
Administration. The Attorney General has exclusive authority in
Section 2 of the legislation; it appears the Attorney General has
taken over several FCC functions and placed the FCC in a mere
consulting capacity.

The proposed legislation would apply to all forms of wire and
electronic communications to include computer data bases, facsimile,
imagery etc., as well as voice transmissions.

The proposed legislation would assist eavesdropping by law
enforcement, but it would also apply to users who acquire the
technology capability and make it easier for criminals, terrorists,
foreign intelligence (spies) and computer hackers to electronically
penetrate the public network and pry into areas previously not open to
snooping. This situation of easier access due to new technology
changes could therefore affect _national security_.

                            (1)

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

The proposed legislation does not address standards and specifications
for telecommunications equipment nor security considerations. These
issues must be addressed as they effect both the government and
private industry. There are also civil liberty implications and the
public's constitutional rights to privacy which are not mentioned.

It must be noted that equipment already exists that can be used to
wiretap the digital communications lines and support court-authorized
wiretaps, criminal investigations and probes of voice communications.
The total number of interception applications authorized within the
United States (Federal and State) has been averaging under nine
hundred per year. There is concern that the proposed changes are not
cost effective and worth the effort to revamp all the existing and new
telecommunications systems.

The proposed bill would have to have the FCC or another agency approve
or reject new telephone equipment mainly on the basis of whether the
FBI has the capability to wiretap it. The federal-approval process is
normally lengthy and the United States may not be able to keep pace
with foreign industries to develop new technology and install secure
communications. As a matter of interest, the proposed restrictive new
technology could impede the United States' ability to compete in
digital telephony and participate in the international trade arena.

Finally, there will be unknown associated costs to implement the
proposed new technological procedures and equipment.  These costs
would be borne by the Federal government, consumers, and all other
communications ratepayers to finance the effort. Both the Federal
government and private industry communications regular phone service,
data transmissions, satellite and microwave transmissions, and
encrypted communications could be effected at increased costs.

                               (2)

[Documents disclosed to Computer Professionals for Social
Responsibility (CPSR), under the Freedom of Information Act December
1992.]



Mark Boolootian        [e-mail]        [phone]
Disclaimer:  booloo speaks for booloo and no other.

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

From: [e-mail] (Bill Pfeiffer)
Subject: Chicago Pay Phone Rip-Off; COCOT Triumph!
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 1993 02:00:57 -0600 (CST)


I have not seen this matter dealt with much in the TELECOM Digest so I
am writing about it.

About a month ago, Illinois Bell began re-programming their pay
telephones to require 30 cents for a local call that used to cost a
quarter.  My understanding is that this was their remedy for having to
refund some kind of an ill-gotten rate increase that they had levied
against residential customers.

I find this practice very inconvenient and a bit insulting.  First,
now I have to have AT LEAST two coins to complete a local call from a
Ill Bell payphone, while COCOTS remain at a quarter (although they are
timed while Bell phones are not).  Second, it is quite aggrivating to
realize that Bell is allowed to hike the cost of local pay service to
the HIGHEST in the nation, so that they can pay back a bogus rate
charged to other customers.  They claim that the surcharge is only
temporary.  Their idea of 'temporary' is five years!  I have never
seen a 'temporary' surcharge reversed.  When it is time to do so,
inflation will be sited as a reason to keep the charge in place.  The
Illinois Toll Roads were built in the 1950's as 'temporary toll'
roads.  Guess what, the toll booths are still there and the fees go up
every few years.  Surprise, surprise!

It is not so much the extra nickle, as it is the inconvenience of
having to feed multiple coins into the phone and what appears to be a
blatent act of robbery.  If Ill. Bell collected monies that they
shouldn't have, then they should have to pay it back themselves, not
burdon the public phone users with an additional fee.  How many calls
will be completed using two quarters or a quarter and a dime simply
because the caller does not have a nickle?

In addition, calls that once cost the basic rate of 25 cents now cost
thirty-five (or more) cents, indicating that the boundries of what is
considered a 'local' call have been shrunk.  What arrogance!

I have seen stickers on many COCOTS saying "Local calls still a
quarter".  My business requires that I make several short (one to
three minute) calls to clients when paged.  I now seek out COCOTS
rather than avoid them as I used to.

Maybe this is designed to make cellular more attractive.  Perhaps it
will, but if I do have to go cellular, it darned sure will not be with
Ameritech, the carrier connected with Ill Bell.


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


[Moderator's Note: Bill, you and I have been personal friends for
fifteen years; we've lived in Chicago most of our lives and I presume
you read the papers as I do. Let's put the record straight here: A tax
was imposed many years ago on local telephone calls made from pay
phones. The tax was/is one cent. Being unable to collect one cent in a
payphone, IBT decided to spread the tax over all their subscribers,
more or less by a formula which took the number of payphone calls made
in a period of time, multiplying this by one cent each, dividing by
the total number of subscribers and tacking it on the bill of each
divided by 12, the number of bills in a year.  The billing, collection
and payment of taxes on telephone calls and service with the varying
rates involved is an enormously technical and complicated process.

Someone sued and said subscribers should not have to pay the taxes of
the pay phone users. IBT asked, "Don't you also use payphones, on
average, X times per year? ... So pay your taxes ..."  But that
argument did not wash. The court said to refund the tax (which had
already been paid to the city/county/state) paid by subscribers and
henceforth to collect the tax from payphone users who actually made
the calls and incurred the tax liability. So now the payphones collect
an additional five cent coin, which is the closest present technology
can come to collecting one penny. One penny pays the tax for the pay
phone call being made at present; the other four pennies compensate IBT
for the taxes they paid in the past but had to refund to subscribers
without being allowed to collect-back from the governments here who
said essentially, "hey, the calls were made and you owe us the penny
for each one .. ". (The old system was in effect for twenty years.)

I think technically, pay phone calls are 25 cents, tax is one penny
and 'adjustment for tax previously paid on user's behalf' is four
pennies. IBT estimated that five year's worth of collecting the extra
'adjustment pennies' would compensate them for what they were forced
to refund yet unable to reverse back to the governments in the same
process. After five years, yes, you will still continue to deposit 30
cents in payphones for calls, barring other unforseen changes, but the
distribution of the money will change: IBT will no longer be compen-
sating themselves four pennies at a time, although unless the technol-
ogy changes, they'll still be getting the pennies but putting them in
a different pocket. The COCOT taxes are a little different as are
taxes on 'semi-public' coin phones where someone is paying IBT to
have the coin phone there.  I won't go on, this is already outrageously
boring.  Utility tax collection/remittances/pro-rations and tax
credits are a very technical, detailed and complex process.  Add to
payphones the fact that the local telcos have to collect and
distribute the tax money on long distance calls to the various
carriers, etc. Lots of people are employed in the Tax Accounting
department at IBT and other telcos.  PAT]

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

Date: Wed, 20 Jan 1993 10:35:30 -0500 (EST)
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Internet *67 Service


Having a full Internet feed for the first time including news group
access has exposed me to a new and wider range of services and
features available from the Internet.  I'd like to tell people about
one of them.

If the phone system had had Caller ID from the very start, the way
people place telephone calls now would be very different.

Electronic Mail has generally always identified who sent a message to
you, especially on the Internet where all mail is in RFC 841 format
which provides the sender's name/id and account address.

Only now there is a new capability out which I call "Internet *67
Service" after the telephone code which someone dials to send a
message.

This service - the one that's left - is being provided by a system in
Finland.  You send it messages with distribution information in the
header and it resends them out with a unique alias.  It uses a
"double-blind" system, where if you send a reply to someone's alias,
it assigns YOU an alias and sends the message to them with the alias
for your account!

Mostly people have been using it to post to "embarassing news groups"
 - usually certain "alt" ones - but it could be used in any case where
someone wishes to post a comment where the identity of the sender
might be embarassing (One example was Moderator having to post a
message for "a major telecommunications executive" because he
preferred it not be known who it was.)  Hirings and Work Wanted items
could spring to mind.  Posting of messages by persons who want to
discuss how they recoverered from being the victim of incest are
another.

You can get information about this service by sending a request to
[e-mail].

Note earlier in this message I said "the one that's left".  There was
a service being run in Australia that did even more.  First you used
the program PGP - a free RSA Public key generator - to create a public
and private key.  You could then send the service your public key
first, then send messages which were UUENCODEd using the matching
private key, and told that system where to send the message.  It would
use the previously supplied key to decrypt the message and then
forward it under the unique ID.

Unfortunately the backbone supplier for his area caught on to what he
was doing, and like most stuffy governmental authorities, takes a dim
view of people keeping their private matters private, informed him
that the activity he was doing was not a valid use of the network and
ordered the service discontinued.  Boo.


Paul Robinson -- [e-mail], [e-mail],
[e-mail]  (Sort of tells you I like this name, doesn't it?)


[Moderator's Note: I guess the Internet equivilent of 'blocked call
blocking' (where people refuse to accept calls sent with ID blocked)
would be to put a line in our kill files automatically sending
messages from anon.penet.fi to /dev/null, eh?   :)     PAT]

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

Date: 20 Jan 93 07:53:16 EST
From: tim gorman <[e-mail]>
Subject: Interchangeable NPA Prep


Over the past several months, I have read a number of postings
concerning dialing patterns and interchangeable NPA readiness.

I would be very interested in any specific examples the readers of the
Digest could pass along concerning changes the various telco's are
making that have the future interchangeable NPA conversion in mind.

If these could be emailed to me, I will summarize and post.


Thanks,

Tim Gorman - SWBT
*opinions are mine, any resemblance to official policy is coincidence*

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

From: [e-mail] (Rachana D Patel)
Subject: Question Concerning 'Smart' House
Date: 20 Jan 93 20:11:57 GMT
Organization: University of Pennsylvania


I am working on a term paper for a mangement of technology class at
the Wharton school of Business at the University of Pennsylvania.

I was wondering whether anyone knows about the work Bell Atlantic is
pursuing on the cellular technology in a 'smart' house. I have heard
that there are plans to provide each individual with a phone line
which will be provided over cellular lines. ALso, there are plans for
integrating other functions such as heating,airconditioning, phone
biils, and banking all over cellular lines.

Is there anyone who knows more about this? I would like to know where
I could find more information on this. Please let me know about any
information that could help me.


Thanks,

Rachana D. Patel                     University of Pennsylvania
[e-mail]         Telecommunication Systems &
Management and Technology Program    trategic Management

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

From: [e-mail](Stephen Gay)
Subject: Anyone Know of Telecommunication GUI Standards?
Organization: MPR Teletch Ltd
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 93 21:39:12 GMT


Greetings,

I am trying to locate any standards or recommendations for the
graphical display of information pertinent to monitoring a
telecommunication network.

For instance, is there a standard or recommendation that says that a
normal condition should be green and that an alarm condition should be
red, or that a point that has been in alarm and has not been
acknowledged should blink?

I would appreciate any information about such a standard or which
group is working on such a standard or any other information you could
supply.

Please email me directly at [e-mail].


Thanks in advance,

Stephen M. Gay     MPR Teltech Ltd.  [e-mail]

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

Date: Wed, 20 Jan 93 11:18:31 PST
From: awry![e-mail] (Tom Ace)
Subject: 702-333-8444 (was Strange International "Chat Line" Service)


Our Telecom Moderator writes:

> ... AT&T denies it of course, but 702-333-8444 is a good example.>
> Try calling it on any carrier *other* than Mother. AT&T graciously
> accepts the twelve cents per minute and cuts the 'bridge tender' in on
> the action.  PAT]

10333 1 702 333 8444 completed the call.  What were you expecting
would happen?


Tom Ace    [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: I *know* two things happened. Someone is taking
your 10333 and either ignoring it and handing it off one plus by
default to AT&T or changing it to 10288 which is another way of
getting Mother. I tried 10333 from here and the call definitly would
not complete. Actually, it *did* complete to that number, which is an
answering machine telling the caller to redial using 10288. On the
other hand, AT&T sees those calls arriving in Reno (I think), grabs
them and sends them over a T-1 direct to the bridge tender without
handing them to the local telco for completion as does Sprint, MCI,
etc.  Are you in control of your 10xxx assertions when you dial, or is
some PBX/COCOT/other private system making those decisions whether you
like it or not ... or indeed even if you know it or not?  Try 10333 + 0
and ask the operator who she is ... betcha she'll say AT&T, because
your system kicked you over there when you thought otherwise. Please
let us know the results of your further testing.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Fred Goldstein [k1io; FN42jk])
Subject: Re: Strange International "Chat Line" Service -- How's it Work?
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Fred Goldstein [k1io; FN42jk])
Organization: Digital Equipment Corp., Littleton MA USA
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 1993 22:56:27 GMT


> When this topic came up here awhile back, some readers suggested the
> call was not getting to Guyana if only because of the miserable
> condition of the phone service there and the likely inability of the
> Guyana telecom administration to deal with it.

I saw an article in one of the trades (TE&M or Telephony) lately about
Guyana's telephone service.  A couple of years ago, it was purchased
by the owner of Virgin Islands Tel.  They've invested real money and
are building pretty much a new network (since the old one was pretty
worthless).  It's already more than twice the size it used to be.

Since these are an entrepreneurial sort, I suspect that they are
quietly marketing their country code for such applications.


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

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #36
*****************************


[NOTE: A SPECIAL ARTICLE ENTITLED 'INSIGHT TELECOM WINNERS AND LOSERS'
WENT OUT NEXT, THEN ISSUE #37. DUE TO TRANSMISSION/FILE SAVING ERRORS
SOME DATA FROM THE SPECIAL ISSUE WAS LOST.  *MOST* OF THE SPECIAL
ARTICLE IS INTACT BELOW.   PAT]

Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa12145;
          21 Jan 93 4:49 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA20080
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 21 Jan 1993 00:36:12 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA20008
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 21 Jan 1993 00:35:47 -0600
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 00:35:47 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Insight 1/93: Telecom Winners & Losers


I am passing this along FYI to interested readers of TELECOM Digest,
with thanks to Matt Lucas for sending it in.

PAT

 Date: Tue, 19 Jan 93 10:50:44 -0500
 From: matt lucas <[e-mail]>
 Subject: Insight 1/93: Telecom Winners & Losers


This is the lead article in the January 1993 issue of {TeleStrategies
Insight.} I thought it would be of interest to readers of this
bulletin board. (Information about TeleStrategies, Inc. and
TeleStrategies Insight appears at the end of the article.)  Matt.


                 TELECOM WINNERS AND LOSERS IN 1993
       By Dr. Jerry Lucas, President, TeleStrategies, Inc.,
               and Publisher, TeleStrategies Insight

It's 1993, time for TeleStrategies' annual analysis of winners and
losers in the coming year. First, we'll review how we called them last
year (TeleStrategies Insight, January 1992) because it's fun to toot
your own horn when you're right. Then we'll cover what happened in
1992 that influenced our assessment for 1993. Finally, we'll tell you
what to expect this year if you like to pick winners rather than
losers.

TELESTRATEGIES' TOP TEN WINNERS AND LOSERS
1.  ATM/SONET
2.  Collocation
3.  PCS
4.  Cellular Technologies
5.  800 Number Portability
6.  Video Dial Tone
7.  IntraLATA Toll
8.  Screen Phones
9.  AIN
10. ISDN

1. ATM/SONET
First, a quick technology refresher: Synchronous Optical Network
(SONET) is the standardization of optical fiber transport;
Asynchronous Transfer Mode (ATM) is the multiplexing and/or switching
access to SONET transport.

Last year at this time, the only ATM/SONET game was the RBOCs'
Switched Multimegabit Data Service (SMDS). We deemed it a loser and
that opinion remains unchanged. Why? SMDS doesn't create value for end
users. As planned, SMDS would deliver LAN connectivity to users via a
public packet network with 1.5 to 45 Mbps access. First, there is no
demand today for public (i.e., inter-company) LAN connectivity except
in the research and education market. If you are a player in R&E, you
get it for "free" via Internet. (See TeleStrategies Insight, November
1992).  Second, if you want switched, intra-company LAN-to-LAN
connectivity with 1.5 Mbps access, and you have to pay for it, you can
get it today with frame relay technology. Third, the only way to
justify 45 Mbps access today is interconnection to an interexchange
carrier where voice, data and video can be integrated to the IXC
serving center. In summary, if your view of how ATM/SONET will roll
out in 1993 is megabit per second, data only, access to a public ATM
switch (SMDS), you lose.

So what happened in 1992 to make ATM/SONET timely and a winner for
1993? The ATM Forum. In 1992 the computer/LAN people joined with the
router, T1 mux, DCS and CO vendors to push for CPE ATM standards
compatible with carrier SONET. The end result: it is now possible for
ATM CPE to interface with an ATM/SONET-based IXC. Look for the large
end user to see the first wave of ATM CPE products and compatible
private line carrier offerings by year end.

2. COLLOCATION
Last year we picked 1992 as the year the FCC would follow the New York
PSC's lead regarding CO collocation for the Alternative Local
Transport Service (ALTS) providers. The FCC did just that last summer
with the result that collocation for special private line access is
here. So, if you were an ALTS and took the risk to start up or fortify
your market position, as you already know, you were a winner in 1992.

What else happened in 1992 to affect collocation opportunities in
1993? Plenty. First, collocation has now been established as an
acceptable practice at the state PUC level. RBOC COs haven't been
destroyed by "incompetent" ALTS technicians when on site at the CO,
etc. Second, Senator Al Gore was elected Vice President. It is likely
that he will use his position to become the U.S.  "technology czar,"
putting special emphasis on his "baby," the National Research and
Education Network (NREN), the gigabit replacement for Internet (see
TeleStrategies Insight, June 1992).  Third, the RBOCs acknowledge they
lost the special access monopoly with collocation (a $3 billion
market). It's just a matter of time until switched access (a $20
billion market) is opened to competition, further eroding the RBOCs
position. In light of this a few RBOCs (or independents) have realized
that "if you can't beat them, join them."

What should you expect in 1993 regarding collocation opportunities?
First, a lot of hype about the telecom infrastructure creating jobs
(the Gore/NREN effect) followed by creative RBOC/state PUC initiatives
to attract new business. The bottom line for 1993: very special
collocation agreements between corporate networking customers and
RBOCs with the blessing of state PUCs. If the RBOCs are going to get
bypassed anyway, why shouldn't they get in on it themselves. The RBOCs
could win big politically with Washington, their state governments and
others by teaming with end users! Collocation offers endless
possibilities. Watch the creative ones in 1993.

3. PCS
Last year we said that there wouldn't be any new spectrum
reallocations for Personal Communications Services (PCS) and that the
FCC's Pioneer Preference system was the best way to go if you wanted
to start up now. We were right on both counts.

If you are exploring PCS opportunities in 1993, here's what happened
in 1992 that you should know about. (1) You can no longer file for a
Pioneer's Preference; (2) The FCC issued a Notice of Proposed Rule
Making for PCS frequency reallocation and was deluged with comments.
MCI's proposal drew significant attention. It calls for the creation
of three national consortia in which no one company would have a
controlling interest and no one would be allowed to hold both cellular
and PCS licenses in the same geographic area. (3) Last month Pacific
Bell blew it for RBOC PCS set-asides last when they announced their
"Divestiture II," which will split their cellular operations and
regulated local exchange operations into two separate companies.
Readers of TeleStrategies Insight (August 1991) shouldn't have been
surprised because we predicted a year and a half ago that an RBOC
would do exactly what Pacific Bell now says it will do.

If you aren't a cellular carrier or a PCS pioneer but want to get into
PCS in 1993, start by reading MCI's PCS consortia proposal to the FCC.
It's well thought out and has had a lot of input from industry
players. Start networking with these consortia because 1993 will be
open for filings. There will be no set-aside frequencies nor will
there be lotteries as with cellular.

4. CELLULAR TECHNOLOGY
Last year at this time, the hot topic in cellular was TDMA vs.  CDMA.
We called TDMA the definite winner for this year and we were right.
McCaw, Rogers Cantel and Southwestern Bell are implementing TDMA.
Others (Pacific Bell, NYNEX, U S WEST) who are publicly leaning toward
CDMA may have to go with TDMA just to meet the digital marketing hype
that's starting to float around.  Regarding 1993, what new technology
developments have arisen to create future opportunities? Packet data
via cellular. The significance of packet data via cellular is that the
air time costs drop (you pay by the data burst) and less power is
drawn from the batteries (giving you longer periods between
recharges).  The packet cellular systems tested in 1992 were made by
Cellular Data, Inc., and IBM (Cellplan II). Cellular carriers are
getting ready to roll out one or the other. In 1993, opportunities
abound for applications and distribution for low-cost, portable data
communications.

5. 800 NUMBER PORTABILITY
Number portability allows current 800 customers to move their 800
business to another IXC without changing their phone numbers; they can
divide their business based on call origination location, time of day
or by a random percentage allocation. No winners or losers were
predicted last year because 800 number portability wasn't scheduled to
happen until 1993.

Starting in May, 1993 or shortly thereafter, 800 number portability
will create new opportunities for:

IXCs who are lusting after AT&T's 800 customers. Even the smallest
IXCs will be able to participate because they can carry national 800
account originating traffic in their service area only.

THE MEDIA will bombard the U. S. with 800 advertisements. TV and print
media are in for a revenue windfall. Big bucks will be spent by AT&T,
MCI, Sprint and others on 800 service advertisements.

CONSUMERS will benefit because 800 number portability brings SS7
connectivity with it. This means almost all telephone calls will be
distance-insensitive regarding call set-up time.

POTENTIAL TOLL FRAUD VICTIMS will have less exposure. Almost all toll
fraud (that end users are liable for) originates with an 800 call to a
company's voice mail box or direct inward system access (DISA) line.
800 number portability gives users the ability to "red line." Here's
an example: the Bronx area of New York City is a hot bed of toll fraud
activity. Users will be able to block calls down to that NPA-NXX.

LECs performing centralized data base dips will not only be
compensated for IXC selection and more, but the SS7 infrastructure
will be in place to create other intelligent network services.

But what about AT&T? On the surface, 800 number portability looks like
a loser for them; they're going to lose 800 customers or at least part
of their customers' traffic. But there are some things AT&T can do to
mitigate the damage:

1. Fight for Deregulation -- Once 800 number portability goes into
effect, AT&T can make the case to the FCC that the


                    (some data lost in this file here)

operate a cellular
system and demerits in the application process for major, regulated
LEC involvement in the consortium.) Also, they are pushing early for
end-user number portability. This is a viable PCS/AIN approach.

Sprint and AIN: Sprint has it all in some areas regarding full
services -- long distance, cellular (the Centel merger) and local
(United) service. If they selectively go after AIN in markets where
they have all three forces, it's going to be a good PCS/AIN approach.

AT&T: AT&T has it all and more, too. It is the largest long distance
carrier, telecom manufacturer and has an option to control the largest
cellular carrier, McCaw. I'll bet AT&T is currently modifying its 4
and 5 ESS's to come up with a super AIN/PCS/cellular/cable TV
switching network. If they focus on AIN/PCS they, too will be uniquely
positioned. Also, you can expect to see AT&T protecting its
intelligent network patents in 1993 (I know I said that before.) and
you can't get into AIN without violating their string of patents
concerning the wiretap proposal.

                  (lost some data here)

The GSA memos, the GAO report and others that CPSR is now seeking
indicate that there are many important documents within the government
which have still not been disclosed to the public.

Marc Rotenberg, CPSR Washington office        [e-mail]

Note: Underscores indicate underlining in the original text.  Dashes
that go across pages indicate page breaks.

[Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility is a nonprofit, public
interest membership organization. For membership information about CPSR,
contact [e-mail] or call 415/322-3778.  For information on
CPSR's FOIA work, contact David Sobel at 202/544-9240
([e-mail]).]

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

                      (#4A)

              Control No. X92050405
               Due Date:     5/5/92

Brenda Robinson (S)

After KMR consultations, we still _"cannot support"_ Draft Bill. No.
118 as substantially revised by Justice after its pu


                    (lost some data here)


[NOTE: THE SPECIAL MAILING 'TELECOM WINNERS AND LOSERS ENDS AT
THIS POINT.  SORRY, AN INTACT UNCORRUPTED COPY IS NOT AVAILABLE.]

^A^A^A^A
^A^A^A^A

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 22 Jan 93 02:30:15 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 37

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: N.E. Telephone Admits Ripoff - Refuses Restitution (Ken Thompson)
    Re: N.E. Telephone Admits Ripoff - Refuses Restitution (Curtis Sanford)
    Re: N.E. Telephone Admits Ripoff - Refuses Restitution (Dave Niebuhr)
    Re: US Losing Lead in Telecom - USC Report (Andy Rabagliati)
    Re: US Losing Lead in Telecom - USC Report (Tom Roberts)
    Re: US Losing Lead in Telecom - USC Report (Larry Cipriani)
    Re: US Losing Lead in Telecom - USC Report (Ang-Peng Hwa)
    Re: Do Telcos Record the Numbers of Local Calls? (David G. Lewis)
    Re: Do Telcos Record the Numbers of Local Calls? (Martin McCormick)
    Re: Apartment Security Stupidity (Martin McCormick)
    Re: Apartment Security Stupidity (Albert Crosby)
    Re: Good Opportunity For Fraud (Paul Wallich)
    Re: Good Opportunity For Fraud (Henry Mensch)
    Re: "Secret" Phone Codes (Charles McGuinness)
    Re: "Secret" Phone Codes (Pete Tompkins)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Ken Thompson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: N.E. Telephone Admits Ripoff - Refuses Restitution
Date: 21 Jan 93 23:32:38 GMT
Organization: NCR Corporation Wichita, KS


[e-mail] (Scott Hannahs) writes:

> Just a follow up to the note I posted last week.  New England
> Telephone now admits (verbally) that they were miss-billing (read
> overcharging) everyone in my exchange.  They are willing to rebate me
> the amount they overcharged but I was told, "We can't rebate everyone
> since that would cost too much".  I didn't hear any complaints about
> collecting too much money.  They will rebate anyone who complains
> about it.

Complain to your state corporation commision.  They regulate
utilities, and can force them to refund all rate payers for
over-charges.


Ken Thompson    N0ITL
NCR Corp.  Peripheral Products Division   Disk Array Development
3718 N. Rock Road  Wichita KS 67226   [phone]
[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Curtis Sanford)
Subject: Re: N.E. Telephone Admits Ripoff - Refuses Restitution
Date: 22 Jan 93 00:47:27 GMT
Organization: Ascend Communications, Alameda CA


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

> These are reposts of some articles involving an ongoing dispute with
> New England Telephone that I posted to ne.general a week ago.

>> Remember the other MIT graduate who found that NET had overcharged
>> the State House something like a few millions of dollars?

> No. I might not have been here then.  Do you have a date, or
> reference, names etc.  I would like to get ahold of that info.

I believe you are refering to Len Evanchik, who was then (and may
still be) Director of Telecommunications for the Commonwealth of
Massachusetts (and yes, an MIT grad).  One of first acts upon taking
office was to take a calculator to his past Centrex bills.  I believe
he uncovered three to five years of double billing on all Centrex
measured service calls.  The refund was in the millions.

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

Date: Thu, 21 Jan 93 10:43:13 EST
From: [e-mail] (Dave Niebuhr)
Subject: Re: N.E. Telephone Admits Riposs - Refuse Restitution


In TELECOM Digest V13 #29 Scott Hannahs <[e-mail]> writes:

> This is an interesting problem in that they seem to be hitting
> universities and modem users.  I have heard from at least one other
> person who was misbilled involving other exchanges.  This problem
> applies to unlimited local service where you get an unlimited number
> of very local calls un-itemized bill for not-so-local calls.

Much text deleted ... dwn

What I did when the Suffolk County, New York, government obtained
three exchanges for its own use and found that an overbilling was
occurring on calls to one of them was to file a formal complaint with
the New York Utility (oops, Public) Service Commision when I received
exactly no response from NYTel.

How did I find out and prove my case?  I simply asked the NYTel people
to start sending me a Detail Charge Listing on a permanent basis so
that I could monitor these calls.  While my local calls aren't listed
I found that *all* calls made by each assigned phone number are
logged.  NYTel goofed and listed a call from 516-395-XXXX to
516-281-XXXX which are both *in my house*, in the same CO and serve
the same three communities.

The overbilling is now finished and I pay the normal rate to call that
particular exchange.  It took over a year of pleading, talking,
attempting to prove that I was right and simply telling the NYTel rep
that she/he didn't know what they were talking about.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Andy Rabagliati)
Subject: Re: US Losing Lead in Telecom - USC Report
Organization: W.Z.I.
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 20:33:40 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Ang
Peng Hwa) writes:

> This report is from UPI:

> Los Angeles -- America's traditional lead in telecommunications is
> eroding very rapidly as other nations promote new technologies,
> according to a study released Wednesday.

> Nations like Japan, the United Kingdom, Singapore and others write
> off and replace equipment twice as fast as most US carriers."

Well, the United Kingdom had Strowger mechanical exchanges in a lot of
places up until eight years ago. They held back on their equipment
replacement until BT's System X was ready.


Cheers,

Andy.
[e-mail]      W.Z.I. Consulting [phone]

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

Date: Thu, 21 Jan 93 10:10:57 CST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: US Losing Lead in Telecom - USC Report
Organization: AT&T


 From article <[e-mail]>, by [e-mail]
(Jim Gottlieb):

> [e-mail] (Ang Peng Hwa) writes:

>> The study added: "During this remarkable period of rapid technological
>> progress and obsolescence, asset lives for public network equipment of
>> local exchange companies have actually increased in the US. Nations
>> like Japan, the United Kingdom, Singapore and others write off and
>> replace equipment twice as fast as most US carriers."

> I suspect it is much easier to upgrade existing facilities when your
> country is much smaller than the vast United States.  What does
> Singapore have to do to upgrade to digital?  Cut a few cables and run
> a few fiber strands?

No, you missed the point. It is federal tax policy which is
dramatically different between the U.S.A. and many other countries.
This is *NOT* a technological question/problem, it is a political one.
U.S. carriers cannot "cut a few cables and run a few fiber strands"
because U.S. tax policy makes it prohibitively expensive to do so.
Telephone equipment has a *VERY LONG* lifetime in the U.S. tax codes
(I believe it is 20 years, used to be 30(!)).  This was based upon the
rate of technological change in the telephone industry during the '30s
through the '50s, and is hopelessly out of date in the '90s.

[side observation: virtually all U.S. telephone companies are smaller
than Japan; most are probably smaller than Singapore (measured by #
lines). Size has nothing to do with it.]

So what does this mean? It means that U.S. telephone companies can
only depreciate their investments in equipment over that long period
of time. It is *VERY* difficult for them to justify the replacement of
equipment which has not yet been fully depreciated. That means that
moderately old equipment (five to ten years old) cannot, in practice,
be replaced, EVEN IF THE NEW EQUIPMENT WOULD REALLY SAVE THEM MONEY
(not to mention providing new capabilities and services).

New equipment, however, can be as modern and as efficient as possible.
That is where the action is in the telecom industry.


Tom Roberts  att!ihlpl!tjrob  [e-mail]  AT&T Bell Laboratories

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

Date: Thu, 21 Jan 93 12:56:10 EST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: US Losing Lead in Telecom - USC Report
Organization: Ideology Busters, Inc.


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

> [e-mail] (Ang Peng Hwa) writes:

>> like Japan, the United Kingdom, Singapore and others write off and
>> replace equipment twice as fast as most US carriers."

> I suspect it is much easier to upgrade existing facilities when your
> country is much smaller than the vast United States.

That's part of it.  Another is US tax code depreciate rates for
telecom gear are slower than other countries.  If I recall correctly,
switching equipment is depreciated over something quite large, on the
order of 15 years.  Maybe that made sense pre-AT&T divestiture when
telecom gear didn't improve as fast as it does today.


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

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

Date: Thu, 21 Jan 93 16:55:19 SST
From: Ang Peng Hwa <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: US Losing Lead in Telecom -- USC Report


I had written:

> The study added: "During this remarkable period  of rapid technological
> progress and obsolescence, asset lives for public network equipment of
> local exchange companies have actually increased in the US. Nations like
> Japan, the United Kingdom, Singapore and others write off and replace
> equipment twice as fast as most US carriers.

Jim Gottlieb replied:


> I suspect it is much easier to upgrade existing facilities when your
> country is much smaller than the vast United States. What does Singapore
> have to do to upgrade to digital? Cut a few cables and run a few fiber
> strands?

Jim, you are right that Singapore has an edge in its compactness when
it comes to going digital. So that report has to be taken with some
salt.  (I spoke to a mid-level manager at Singapore Telecom and he
said as much.  This is an about face from not too long ago when big
was regarded as better.)

But I think the report is right on the money when it notes that while
others are writing off equipment faster, the US is going in the
opposite direction. This may be due to the recession but it does not
bode well in the long term.

Personally, I am bit concerned with the headlong rush here in
Singapore into high-tech. Often, when I have spoken with those who are
either implementing those ideas or who have dreamed them up, I leave
with the unshakeable feeling that they do not really know what they
are doing. Such feelings, however, cannot be captured in a report like
the one above.

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

From: [e-mail] (david.g.lewis)
Subject: Re: Do Telcos Record the Numbers of Local Calls?
Organization: AT&T
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 14:41:31 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Denis
Coskun) writes:

> Do telcos record the dialed digits for all local calls?

> My back-of-the-envelope calculation suggests that it is entirely
> feasible for telcos to store the number of every single local call
> that you dial: In a city with 1,000,000 phones, with an average of 10
> calls a day on each phone, and logging both origin and destination
> phone numbers (7 digits each, so 14 ASCII characters),

Minor quibble: phone numbers are almost always stored as ten digits,
but are stored in BCD, so that the total size of the phone number is
five octets.

> such a log would consume just 1,000,000 * 10 * 14 = 140 Mbytes per
> day.  That would fit on a tape which costs less than $20.

Of course, they also store a lot of other information, such as
originating number, call start time, call end time, etc., etc., etc.


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

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

Subject: Do Telcos Record the Numbers of Local Calls?
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 93 11:00:21 -0600
From: [e-mail]


In June 1987, there was one of those high-profile murders, in
Stillwater, that kept everybody talking for weeks.  An 18-year-old
girl who lived in a nice middle-class addition shot and stabbed both
her parents to death, one night.  The girl, initially told police that
she had been out all night with her friends and had come home to find
the bloody mess.

     According to our paper, one of the things that the police did was
to ask Southwestern Bell for telephone records.  Apparently, blood was
found on a telephone and the police wanted to see who might have been
called.

     All of this occurred about a month after Stillwater got its
DMS100 switch.  I don't know what the records showed, because the
girl's story fell apart and she ended up essentially admitting to the
murders.  I wouldn't be a bit surprised if there is some internal
maintenance log of connections.  We do not have measured service,
here, but even the old Xbar switch printed logs of trouble reports.


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

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

Subject: Re: Apartment Security Stupidity
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 93 09:47:19 -0600
From: [e-mail]


> 'in-use' light on the phone would be honored by most courteous people
> who saw it illuminated for a few seconds when they arrived.  PAT]

That is, if they can see the light.  The growing use of purely visual
indicators on publicly accessible telephone equipment is a real
scourge.  I cringe every time I hear somebody singing the praises of
some new payphone or other communications device containing a
graphical screen or other visual indicator.  That is just something
else that will have to be fixed, at some time, or that will give grief
or maybe even cause a dangerous situation for either a blind person or
somebody else whose call gets stepped on because some blind person
didn't get enough information about the system to use it properly.

 There have been light detectors for use with LED's and other types of
signal lamps , for over 30 years.  These things are easy to build and
quite cheap.  They have made most office phone systems accessible.
The problem is that most blind people don't carry a light probe around
with them.  If they did, and came upon this signalling system for the
first time, they would probably have been given instructions from the
person they were visiting telling them how to use the phone but
omitting the part about the in-use lamp since most people just don't
think about things like that.

 A better solution for the hypothetical situation would be to have
exclusionary switching on each phone so that if the line voltage is
low, that phone can't be picked up.  I believe that is how the devices
work that prevent extension phones from being picked up when one is
already in use.

 As for the big non-hypothetical problem, there is no easy answer, but
we, as technical people, need to give it the college try.  There will
be more and more people with different handicaps in the work force.
Solutions which fix one or two telephones, here or there, just won't
solve the problem.  The best solution will be to make sure that
telecommunication facilities are as accessible to as many people as
possible.  A good title for a thread on this subject would be, "Why do
you Have to See to Hear?"


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

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

Date: Thu, 21 Jan 93 20:42:03 -0600
From: Albert Crosby <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Apartment Security Stupidity


In several of the recent issues, PAT has mentioned that it is stupid
to use a plain telephone line for an apartment building security
system.  A poster or two have noted that the system is fairly common,
and that it is less expensive to use the systems that use POTS.

In SWBT territory, it at least was possible to have a POTS line
_with_no_1+_long_distance_carrier.  I had a good friend who used this
as a cost control measure. (No teenagers, he and his wife just felt
less inclined to make long distance calls if they had to dial on a
card.)

If you blocked 900 numbers, 976 numbers (and I guess in this day and
age, 800 numbers) plus had no default LD carrier, is there any reason
such a line wouldn't be suitable for a security system?


Albert


[Moderator's Note: No, provided the line also had Billed Number
Screening, meaning collect and/or third number calls could not be
billed to it, and provided security was not compromised (i.e. calls
could get through without busy signals -- call waiting on each line --
and actual phone numbers could not be ascertained by listening to what
was being dialed, and the door could not be tricked into unlatching by
means of a pocket tone-decoder blown into the receiver). It might also
be wise if the phone at the door (a) was non-pub in directory
listings, (b) had a number not generally known except to people in
management who need to know it, and (d) was set for one-way service,
outgoing local calls only in the event someone did learn the phone
number. To prevent the line from being used for social conversations
from the lobby to an apartment or excessive units from being charged
if it is a metered line, you might also consider a timer which would
disconnect the line after 30 seconds or so of it going off hook. A
special touchtone pad which went dead after the maximum number of
digits required would be a good idea as would an armored handset ala
payphone style to prevent the receiver from being liberated every week
or two by vandals. Glue the ends of the receiver where they unscrew to
avoid losing the mouth or earpiece innards to pranksters. Basically,
making it like a payphone style handset or if possible, a speakerphone
hidden behind a little slot people would speak into, with only the
*metal* buttons of the touchtone pad protruding out of the wall would
be best. Avoid the plastic touchtone pads if possible since people
like to hold cigarette lighters up to them and melt the buttons, etc.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Paul Wallich)
Subject: Re: Good Opportunity For Fraud
Organization: Trivializers R Us
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 20:08:37 GMT


In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Patrick Lee)
writes:

> [e-mail] (Ed Oliveri) wrote:

>> Are you sure this was Citibank?  Every Citibank ATM I've seen
>> CANNOT eat a card since the card is dipped into the card
>> reader, never leaving the user's fingers.

> Our Moderator Noted:

>> The Citibank ATM's in Chicago eat the card for a minute and
>> spit it out when finished with it.

> I guess Chicago's Citibank has older ATM machines than we have here in
> New York City.  I haven't seen any Citibank ATM machine which eats the
> card for the past few years.  Just dip the card in and take it out and
> proceed with answering which of the five languages to use.

Actually it's the other way around. NYC Citibank ATM's are older than
ATM's anywhere else becaue citi (whatever else their many myriad
faults) had (one of) the first atm network(s). Back in the dim times,
some marketing schlub discovered that people were afraid to hand their
life savings (or card representing same) to a machine that would
probably eat it. Citi harped on the safety of their system even though
it required developing card-reader technology that wouldn't work with
anybody else's cards.

The amusing thing is that (at least up through a couple years ago)
Citibank in NYC and Citibank in the rest of the country were two
different entities, so that a card that worked at one place wouldn't
work in the other, e.g. my NYC card wouldn't work in Berkeley. Even
more fun, when the various cash-card networks got going (CIRRUS, NYCE
&c), a situation developed where an out-of-state Citicard would work
anywhere in New York _except_ at Citibank itself. Let's hear it for
good network design.


paul


[Moderator's Note: Speaking of good opportunities for fraud, on my way
home tonight, I passed a sidewalk ATM downtown which was beeping as I
went past. I went to look at it, and the message on the screen said
'Do you need more time?  yes ---->
                         no  ---->

Mercy me, I said to myself, what have we here?  A receipt sticking out
of the little slot said *someone* had taken $50 and still had a
balance of $32,000 in their account ... simple-minded fool that I am,
I pressed the 'no' (I do not need more time) button, and of course a
First National Banking Card (combination ATM and debit card here)
popped out of the slot ... ooops! Mercy me, I said to myself, what did
I do that for! :) Once the card had ejected, it was pointless to stand
there putting it back in and trying to hack a passcode, particularly
with that camera staring out at me snapping my picture.  I took the
card to the bank across the street, put it in a night deposit envelope
with a note saying 'found loose by ATM, please return to owner' and
dropped it in the slot. Riding home on the subway, I was able to feel
morally superior and Socially Responsible about the whole incident
which was a better way to feel than feeling like a stupid klutz. :)  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Henry Mensch)
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 93 10:21:12 -0800
Subject: Re: Good Opportunity For Fraud
Reply-To: [e-mail]


 From: Patrick Lee <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1993 18:33:21 -0500 (EST)

> The Citibank ATM's in Chicago eat the card for a minute and
> spit it out when finished with it.

> I guess Chicago's Citibank has older ATM machines than we have here in
> New York City.

Actually, they have newer ones.  Citibank was, I think, the first bank
in the New York metro area to offer ATM cards ... and they designed
all their own hardware (nobody else was doing it at the time). From
day one, Citibank ATMs in New York did not have the possibility of
retaining your card (they even used to advertise this fact ... some
customers early on were wary of machines which "ate" the card for a
while).

Citibank banks in other parts of the country are different banks using
what looks like any of the usual range of ATM machines available to
banks everywhere.

Some inaccuracies have probably crept in; it's been many years since
This info was useful to me.


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


[Moderator's Note: We still have some machines of the type where you
dip the card, and a few where you swipe it through a card reader, then
imprint a receipt and take the receipt to a cashier for payout (at the
grocery store.)  PAT

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

From: Charles McGuinness <jyacc![e-mail]>
Subject: Re: "Secret" Phone Codes
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 93 17:21:35 EST


> At the end of the month I'm moving to a house that already has one
> phone line installed, and having a second line turned on.
> I have heard that there is a code I can dial into a phone that will
> tell me what phone number that phone is connected to.

There is such a secret code that works everywhere in your situation!
You dial the phone number of your second phone line.  The telephone
company will give you a ringing tone if you are on your first line or
a busy signal if you are on your second line. This is a little known
feature, so don't spread the word or the phone company might
discontinue it! ;-)

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

From: [e-mail] (Tompkins)
Subject: Re: "Secret" Phone Codes
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Tompkins)
Organization: Transaction Technology, Inc.
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 19:19:13 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Kennita
Watson) writes:

> At the end of the month I'm moving to a house that already has one
> phone line installed, and having a second line turned on.

> I have heard that there is a code I can dial into a phone that will
> tell me what phone number that phone is connected to.  Would somebody
> please email me what it is?  If there are other similar nifty codes,
> I'd love to know those too.

In one of those discussions, about a year ago, a number was posted
that purported to work nationally: 10732-1-404-988-9664.  10732 is a
private ATT network.  I know that this number does return your area
code and number verbally from 213, 310 and 818 area codes, and I have
read reports from others that it works elsewhere.  It does add an
"eight" to the end of any number I've ever called it from.


Pete Tompkins   [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #37
*****************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa10748;
          23 Jan 93 19:10 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA22516
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 23 Jan 1993 17:09:25 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA00332
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 23 Jan 1993 17:09:00 -0600
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 17:09:00 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #38

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 23 Jan 93 17:09:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 38

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    CCITT SDL Forum - Call For Papers (Joanna Patti)
    PacBell Intra-LATA Rate Ripoffs (Glenn McComb)
    University Telephone System (David S. Greenberg)
    Integratel Forcing Charges Through (Thomas Brown)
    Question on Automatic Dialing Equipment and Laws (Jeremy Brest)
    Wiring For Multi-Lines on One Jack (Richard Osterberg)
    Subscribable Mailing Lists on Internet? (Paul Robinson)
    Any Good Books About ISDN and Telecommuting? (Tim Miller)
    Iridium Information (Christopher Ward)
    Government Open Systems Document For Comment (Tom Worthington)
    Voice Mail For Small PBXs (Halim S. Say)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 93 12:56 CST
Subject: CCITT SDL Forum - Call For Papers
Followup-To: [e-mail]
Keywords: CCITT SDL telecomunications language


             Sixth CCITT SDL Forum
               Darmstadt, Germany
              11 - 15 October 1993
                CALL FOR PAPERS

The International Telecommunications Union first published a standard
for a Specification and Description Language (CCITT SDL) in the
1970's. Since then SDL has evolved to a language with a formal basis
which is used throughout the world's telecommunications industry as
the major language for software and systems engineering specification,
design and description.  Although the large user base needs SDL to be
stable, enrichment to meet the changing demands of telecommunications
engineering is also essential.  Recently, the SDL-92 recommendation,
which adds object-oriented features to SDL, has been completed.

The SDL Forum was established so that all aspects of engineering
involving SDL can be discussed at an international level. Based on
previous Forums the expected audience is existing and potential users
of SDL, suppliers of tools, and maintainers of the language. The Forum
provides tutorials on SDL and a showcase for commercial and research
tools and the opportunity to present and discuss new ideas.

Papers on all aspects of SDL are solicited as well as papers on usage
of SDL in combination with other notations, e.g. Message Sequence
Chart, ASN.1, TTCN and programming languages.


          Objectives of the Forum

Presentation of Papers
Workshops for exchange of information and ideas
Discussions of the evolution of SDL
Tool demonstrations
Tutorials on SDL (11 Oct.)

         Suggested Topics for Papers

Use and Experience
Application Reports
Education and Training
Testing, Verification and Validation
Environments for SDL: tools and methods
Methods, Methodologies, S/W Engineering
Reuse of Specifications and Components
Object Orientation
Combining with other approaches
Established and research-oriented tools

        Publication and Deadlines

Papers are expected to be published as a North-Holland book for the
Forum.  Dates to be met are:

Draft Paper:         15th February 1993
Acceptance Notified: 31st March    1993
Final Copy:          15th May      1993
Publication:          6th October  1993

Authors' Contact:

Amardeo Sarma,
Forschungs- und Technologiezentrum
Postfach 10 00 03, W-6100 Darmstadt, Germany
Telephone:  [phone]
Facsimile:  [phone]
Telex:      419511 ftz d
email:      [e-mail]

Authors should send the paper title/scope as soon as possible.
Information for authors will be sent in January or on contact.

The participation fee (includes proceedings, excludes accommodation)
is expected to be under 400DM, since the event is hosted on the
premises of Bundespost, Telekom in Darmstadt, Germany. Darmstadt is
only 25 km away from Frankfurt Airport (22 minutes by bus, which
leaves every half-hour or 15 min by taxi) offering convenient
traveling connections. An official CCITT SG X meeting on SDL is
scheduled for October 19 - 28 in Geneva, offering a convenient
coverage of both events for non-European CCITT-delegates.

Programme Committee:

Chairman: Ove Faergemand, TFL, Denmark
  (CCITT WP X/3 chairman);
Local organizer: Amardeo Sarma, Telekom, Germany;

Laura Cerchio, CSELT, Italy;
Joachim Fischer, Humboldt Univ., Berlin, Germany;
Dieter Hogrefe, Univ. of Berne, Switzerland;
Maria Manuela Marques, INESC, Portugal;
Michel Martin, France Telecom, France;
Heinrich Nirschl, Alcatel-ELIN, Vienna, Austria;
Anders Olsen, TFL, Denmark;
Birger Moeller-Pedersen, Norwegian Computing Center,Norway;
Rick Reed, TSE, UK;
Heikko Sorgenfrei, Siemens, Germany.
        Corresponding Members:
Kong E. Cheng, RMIT,Australia;
Joao Franco, Telebras, Brazil;
Lindsay Jackson, Singapore Polytechnic, Singapore;
Audris Kalnins, Latvian State Univ., Latvia;
Evan Magill, Univ. of Strathclyde, Glasgow, UK;
Joanna Patti, AT&T Bell Lab, USA;
Anders Rockstroem, Televerket, Sweden;
Behcet Sarikaya, Bilkent Univ., Ankara, Turkey;
Yasushi Wakahara, Kokusai Denshin Denwa, Japan;
Shem J. Ochuodho, Univ. of Nairobi, Kenya.

Please copy and widely distribute this document.  It is also available
is a LaTeX document from Amardeo Sarma.

A North American contact for any questions or issues is:

    Joanna Patti
    AT&T Bell Laboratories
    263 Shuman Blvd. P. O. Box 3050
    IHP 2F-545
    Naperville IL 60566-7050

    tel: [phone]
    fax: [phone]
    email: [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Glenn McComb)
Subject: PacBell Intra-LATA Rate Ripoffs
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 08:10:15 GMT


Hello!  I'm trying to find out how to dial from my (408) to (415) and
(510) via my preferred carrier (MCI).  When I dial 10222 (MCI access)
and then a 415 number, a recording tells me "it is not necessary to
use your carrier" or something like that.  What they mean is that they
are trapping the call and requiring me to pay 0.25/minute for a
ten-mile call!!!  I know that most states have made this predatory
bulls--t illegal, but what is the status on the other states?  I'm
being strung up by PacBell in California.

BTW, MCI would charge me 0.13 + 0.11 for the same call!

Any ideas?

Thanks.


[Moderator's Note: I believe under the tariffs, your local telco, (in
this case Pac Bell) has the right to keep that traffic for itself, and
there is some question in my mind if MCI is lawfully allowed to handle
intra-lata calls between 415/408/510. In reference to the rates you
quoted for MCI, I think you mean they would charge those rates for a
call of that distance -- provided it was an *inter*-lata call. AT&T
also charges 12-13 cents per minute on interstate calls during off-peak
hours, but they are not technically allowed to handle intra-lata calls
either.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (David S. Greenberg)
Subject: University Telephone System
Date: 23 Jan 1993 01:01:25 -0600
Organization: Greeny's Bar & Grill


Hi all. At the university I attend/work at, one is able to apply for a
four digit code which allows one to make long distance calls by
dialing 1,xxxx,AC + 7D (where xxxx is the code...).  This then goes
out over some outgoing WATs line I suppose, etc. Usually the service
isn't too bad, and it's not super expensive, but there are two things
that are irritating:

    1)    Each time a bill is sent to someone, they're charged a
35 cent billing fee.

    2)    If one wants to call 900 numbers with a code, one has
to ask for the 900 number access to be enabled for the code, and be
willing to pay a 10% surcharge on top of whatever the regular 900
number cost is.

My question is thus "Is it legal for the University to do either or
both of the above?", and/or are such actions covered by some
tariff(s) somewhere? (or rules, laws, regulations, guidelines,
etc...).

Also, I've noticed that it's impossible to dial a 900 number with a
calling card (I wanted to call a mail order computer store one day
that's what this all stems from).  Asking Sprint, MCI, or AT&T
garnered the response that the 900 calls have the potential to be more
costly than an overseas call, so they've been blocked, and ONE can not
equest that access be granted. Doesn't this violate something related
to equal access?

Finally (yes, this is more than I mentioned), can the University be
required to allow "dial-1" access from a phone in which the individual
room resident gets to choose his/her long distance carrier of choice
rather than being forced to deal with the University run system?

Thanks in advance,


Microcomputer Support Specialist, Student Residential Programs
Western Illinois University, Macomb, IL  61455
Internet: [e-mail] (preferred) GEnie: GREENY (once a month)
AOL: [e-mail] (really infrequently....use the internet!)


[Moderator's Note: The person, organization, company or institution
ultimatly responsible for the payment of the bills gets a lot of
leeway in deciding how to run things. There is very little they *have*
to give you at all. The 35 cent billing fee they charge is about half
of what some telcos add as a surcharge to calling card calls. Your
four digit PIN essentially functions like a calling card. Where most
telcos will not allow 900-number calls on calling cards, your school
is willing to do it provided you pay a surcharge for the extra
paperwork involved. It seems to me you have a much better deal than
some universities give their students.

Read the message from Thomas Brown which follows next in this issue to
see *why* some places will not allow '900-style' calls to be billed to
credit cards. While his case deals with the workaround to 900 blocking
which involves being called back 'collect', the problem remains the
same.  There are too many disputes involved; no one wants to be in the
middle of it. If your university is willing to do it for a ten percent
surcharge, then you've got a good deal, I think.  PAT]

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

From: Thomas Brown <[e-mail]>
Subject: Integratel Forcing Charges Through
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 20:42:31 GMT
Organization: Lehigh University


Our room was recently billed for $90 worth of collect calls from
Integratel despite the fact that Lehigh University supposedly traps
collect calls to student rooms.  Lehigh claims that Integratel must
not subscribe to the database of phone exchanges not to allow collect
calls through.  Lehigh has been unable to figure out how to contact
Integratel and is, therefore, passing the charges on to us.  What can
I do to protect my rights in this case?  Is it lawful for a company to
bill me for something which I did not request or accept and not
provide me with information on how to contact the billing company to
dispute the bill?  Lehigh says that they just pay Bell of PA in one
lump sum and that Bell of PA passes on the money to the individual
long distance companies.  Bell of PA would not provide me with any
useful information on how to contact Integratel.

I have read several threads of discussion in the past on this
newsgroup regarding questionable billing practices and tactics by
Integratel and I wonder if anyone has come up with any more
information that I might use and/or pass on to the Deptartment of
Telecommunications at Lehigh.


Thanks much,

Thomas Brown, KA2UGQ          Internet: [e-mail]
Lehigh University UC Box 855  UUCP: ..!uunet!lehigh.edu!twb0
Bethlehem, PA  18015          AX.25: [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: The telephone bill each month lists the charges
from each LD carrier on a page (or more) of its own. There should be a
page in the billing from telco entitled "Integratel", and a phone
number to reach that company for questions. Integratel can in turn
tell you the name/address/phone number for their client. Reaching that
client is not always an easy task, but it can be done. For starters,
your university telecom person should note the number for Integratel
from the page in the telephone billing where it appears. They should
then notify Integratel and the local telco that the charges are
disputed and will not be paid. They will get to fight with Integratel
for a couple months on this subject before the charges are finally
removed. Since you are not Bell of PA's customer (the university is),
Bell of PA need not discuss anything with you, but they might at least
have given you Integratel's phone number for customer service.
Integratel does maintain its own data base of numbers to which no
collect or third number calls should be billed and when you speak with
their representative, they'll add you to that data base on request.

But let's face it; you, or someone with access to the phone in your
room did agree to accept collect charges, in all probability from an
'adult service', since that is the kind of thing Integratel's clients
deal in for the most part. It might have been from a COCOT, but $90
seems a bit steep for a regular long distance call. It seems a bit
steep for the other kind also, but who am I to decide what gets a
person off? :)  We all can sympathize with having to pay after the fun
is over though; that always has been the hard part of those late night
or early morning transactions.  By the way, the toll free number (how
else would you want to call them!) for Integratel is 800-736-7500.
Tell your complaint to the representative who answers. Your telecom
administrator might want to call and get all the school numbers blocked.
Yours won't be the first call Integratel has received from young men
who were similarly situated (or dirty old men for that matter), nor
will it be the last.  Next time, read the fine print closer in the ad
or listen to the message played out when you first call! :)   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Jeremy Brest)
Subject: Question on Automatic Dialing Equipment and Laws
Organization: Swarthmore College
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 00:05:20 GMT


Does anyone know about any successful applications of the Federal
statute restrincting the use of automatic telephone dialing systems?
Any reasons to think that successful application would be difficult?
The statute is 47 USC 227, for those interested.  I can't find any
appellate level decisions citing it.

Please reply by e-mail.


Thanks,

Jeremy Brest / 824 San Francisco Court / Stanford, CA  94305 / 415-322-1728

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Wiring For Multi-Lines on One Jack
Date: 23 Jan 93 01:06:06 GMT


Here at Harvard, "they" a few years ago (I'm a freshman) wired each
dorm room with new telephone jacks. Each wall plate has a "voice jack"
and a "Data jack", with the data one reserved for future use in a
campus network that's in the works. Anyway, the voice jack is a
standard modular jack, except that it has eight leads on it. They're
each setup for only one line (on a CENTREX system), and I can plug in
my one line phone with a regular two-lead modular cord. I want them to
install another line, and I'm making progess. It seems there's no
reason that this jack can't handle four lines on eight leads, correct?
Can someone give me a quick outline as to how the standard modular
jack is wired. I suspect that each line starts with the middle two
leads, and branches outward with line four using the two outside
leads.  Can someone give me a hint?


Thanks.

Rick

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

Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 06:41:46 -0500 (EST)
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Subscribable Mailing Lists on Internet?


A TELECOM Digest reader asked me if there was a way to get a list of
Internet news lists he could subscribe to.  Here is a copy of the
reply I sent him:

It depends on whether your system charges you for incoming mail.  If
they don't (or you don't mind paying the charges, which could be as
high as US $12 or more at the typical outrageous 5c/K some X.400
services like Sprintmail can get away with for charges), and you can
receive a *large* message (250K) then send a message with the
following text (subject is ignored):

LIST GLOBAL

To the following internet address:

[e-mail]

This will send you the "List of Lists" of what mailing lists that are
available from Bitnet.  Including lists that peer each other (where
the list runs out of two or more sites to reduce network overhead)
there are about 3200 lists, 2500 of which are probably different,
ranging from the APL language (APL-L) to the ZWriter Users group
(ZWSUG).

Internet doesn't have any trouble sending a file this large because I
got it via MCI Mail once.  I once E-Mailed myself (via Internet) a
single file to MCI Mail that was 840K.  It received it and MCI Mail
allowed me to download it.

Someone else may have the list of Internet based subscribable lists, I
know there is one I just don't know who makes it.  I will CC this
message to TELECOM Digest and allow the readers there to give some
insight.


Paul Robinson -- [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Any Good Books About ISDN and Telecommuting?
Organization: Rocky Mountain NeXT Users' Group
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 02:17:41 GMT


Are there any good resources available that discuss ISDN and it's
relationship to telecommuting? I'm interested in developing a list of
applications that would support a telecommuter.

Are there any good journals dedicated to this or related topics.


Tim Miller, Boulder, CO   [e-mail] [NeXTmail accepted]

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

From: [e-mail] (Christopher Ward)
Subject: Iridium Information Wanted
Date: 23 Jan 93 17:28:40 GMT
Organization: Auburn University Engineering


I have been gathering some technical data about Motorola's Iridium
system, and I am having some problems correlating some of the
available data:

 From the {IEEE Spectrum} issues of February 1992 (pages 20-33):

Iridium uses the L-band (1610-1626.5 MHz) for bidirectional
communication between the LEO (Low Earth Orbit) satellites and the
portable phone units.

Communication between satellites (crosslinks) and between a satellite
and the Earth-based gateway stations (uplink/downlink) occurs in the
Ka band:

    Crosslink:    22.5-23.5 GHz
    Uplink:        18.8-20.2 GHz
    Downlink:    27.5-30.0 GHz

These gateways support 1300 user channels in the baseline design at
4800 kbps.  Basically the aggregate data rate requirements of the
up/down links are in the order of 1300 x 4800 = 6.24 Mbps.

So what I see (maybe I am missing something) is an approximate
bandwidth of 1 GHz in the up/down links allocated to support data
rates that "seem" to be well below the actual capabilities of those
connections.

Does anybody see an obvious explanation to this?
    (6.24 Mbps <======> 1 Ghz bandwidth) ?

Is the Ka band being currently utilized for other satellite communications?
    (i.e. Geosynchronous satellites) ?


Thanks,

SdlC

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

From: [e-mail] (Tom Worthington)
Subject: Government Open Systems Document for Comment
Organization: Australian Defence Force Academy, Canberra, Australia
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 04:20:25 GMT


The Australian government has issued a draft Open Systems standards
document for your comment by 12 February 1993. The document available
via the Internet. For further details see the "aus.acs" or
"comp.protocols.iso" newsgroup.


Tom Worthington   Director of the Community Affairs Board
Australian Computer Society Incorporated  E-Mail: [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (say,halim s)
Subject: Voice Mail For Small PBXs
Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 93 19:02:16 GMT


How can I get product information on multi-line answering
machine/voice mail equipment that can be connected to small PBXs?
Would that be in a trade journal? A special issue perhaps?

Thanks for your reply,


SABiT SAY   [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #38
*****************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa18246;
          23 Jan 93 23:41 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA22482
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 23 Jan 1993 21:27:20 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA16863
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 23 Jan 1993 21:26:32 -0600
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 21:26:32 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #39

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 23 Jan 93 21:26:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 39

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Apartment Security Stupidity (Dave Levenson)
    Re: Apartment Security Stupidity (Jim Gottlieb)
    Re: Apartment Security Stupidity (Steve Forrette)
    Re: Apartment Security Stupidity (Bruce Sullivan)
    Re: Apartment Security Stupidity (John Higdon)
    Re: Good Opportunity For Fraud (Dan Danz)
    Re: Good Opportunity For Fraud (Jim Gottlieb)
    Re: Good Opportunity For Fraud (Actually ATMs) (Joe Konstan)
    Re: 702-333-8444 (was Strange International Chat Line Service) (D Burstein)
    Re: 702-333-8444 (was Strange International Chat Line Service) (Tom Ace)
    Re: "Secret" Phone Codes (Timothy Hu)
    Re: "Secret" Phone Codes (Ronal Thompson)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Dave Levenson)
Subject: Re: Apartment Security Stupidity
Organization: Westmark, Inc.
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 15:01:26 GMT


Regarding apartment security systems, Pat writes (in part):

> [Moderator's Note: All the landlord needs is a few long distance calls
> made from that phone to demonstrate a 'regular phone line' is NOT a
> cheaper way to go. Some landlords may even be too stupid to have those
> phones blocked from 900/976/incoming calls...

Where my parents live, the entrance phone translates a two-digit
tenant number into a seven-digit POTS number, pulse-dials the number,
and allows the tenant to unlock the door by a DTMF signal.

The line is arranged for pulse-dialing only (which is why the phone
uses pulses) and the transmitter is not enabled until dialing is
complete.  There is no switchook.  Entry of the tenant-code causes
the phone to go off-hook, pulse-dial, and then enable the
transmitter.  There appears to be no opportunity to enter
tone-dialed digits, or to introduce additional pulses, or even to
get the CO dialtone, other than the obvious possibility of
physically intercepting the CO pair between the phone and the
demarc.

Tenants are encouraged to get call-waiting service, to reduce (but not
eliminate) the busy-signal problem.  The only obvious security hole
here is the call-forwarding hole, and even that is under the control
of the tenant.

If I lived there, I'd much rather have that risk than have some
strange CPE that is not under my own direct control sit between my
telephone set and my CO loop.  Wouldn't you?


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


[Moderator's Note: Well Dave, I'm not sure if I would or not. This
would be purely an applications problem, and depend on several things.
Since I keep my modems on a line totally separate from my 'voice'
line, a call-waiting signal from the door would not influence the
connection. As for a 'strange CPE that is not under your control', it
is really designed to be transparent and I think the advantages out-
weigh the disadvantages. To be sure, you cannot control the call-
waiting, even if you otherwise have it turned off with *70. You cannot
forward the calls, even if your phone is otherwise being forwarded.
You can of course unplug the phone or turn off the bell in order to
avoid the disturbance.

On the plus side however, if you otherwise hate call-waiting and do
not want it on the line for ordiinary phone usage, you still get the
flexibility of responding to the front door without having to stay off
the phone for some period of time when visitors are expected. You can
forward phone calls while allowing visitors at the front door to leave
a message on a cheap answering machine installed just for the purpose
of picking up calls from the door. If front door calls were allowed to
be call-forwarded, there is always the risk the place to where calls
are forwarded would be busy. At least with an answering machine which
answers the door (use one of those devices which listens to the ring
and forwards to a device, i.e. fax, modem, etc to keep the answering
machine from responding to regular calls) when you are gone, people
could be given some message about 'I am busy now and can't receive
visitors'; they would not be told you were on the other side of town
somewhere and not possibly able to get home prior to them burglarizing
your place and escaping at their leisure. So, you have to define your
specific requirements to detirmine if a 'strange CPE in the line' is
the way to go or not. Overall, I prefer the stand-alone units.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Jim Gottlieb)
Subject: Re: Apartment Security Stupidity
Organization: Info Connections, West Los Angeles
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 19:37:05 GMT


> [Moderator's Note: All the landlord needs is a few long distance calls
> made from that phone to demonstrate a 'regular phone line' is NOT a
> cheaper way to go. Some landlords may even be too stupid to have those
> phones blocked from 900/976/incoming calls,

Time to check the statute of limitations again ...

I've had a lot of fun with these things over the years.  Back in high
school (1978), some friends and I saw one for the first time.  We
ordered Call Forwarding on that line and took turns forwarding it to
ourselves so that we could have a line from that rate area.  In fact,
I still had it forwarding to myself until about 1990, when I guess
they got suspicious about the large number of local calls on their
bill.

And in the building I now live in, I used to have the line for the
entrance phone wired into my apartment.  I used it exclusively as a
"wake-up line".  That was the one phone that would ring while I sleep
and the phone system is in "Night Mode".  I didn't make calls on it,
and it seemed silly to pay for a line that may be used once every
month when someone needs to wake me up.

Alas, GTE discovered it one day and turned me in to the office of the
building.  Now I use a pocket pager to wake me up at night.

Now what about that lonely line for the payphone in the lobby that no
one ever uses ...  :-)


Jim Gottlieb
E-Mail: [e-mail]    In Japan: [e-mail]
V-Mail: [phone]   Fax: [phone]   Voice: 824-5454


[Moderator's Note: You get caught tapping a payphone line (or running
an extension of it in secret to somewhere) and you might go to jail.
At least Illinois Bell takes that quite seriously. What would you do,
use that line to get incoming calls only? You certainly cannot deposit
coins for an outgoing call :).  How would you deal with being on the
phone talking to someone when a legitimate user in the lobby picked up
the receiver to make a call?  I guess it would be good for quick (and
free) calls to directory assistance. Years ago as a young teenager, my
uncle owned a drug store with a payphone, and a regular phone back at
the pharmacy counter. He had a two-line, turn-button phone with the
business line on one side of the button, and an extension to the semi-
public payphone on the other side. (Extensions *are* legal on semi-public
payphones, but the polarity used to be reversed so you could answer,
but not dial out on the payphone extension.) In those days, pay phones
had ground start lines and the coin dropping down the slot caused a
contact to connect ground to the tip for just a second. I fixed things
up so the third position on the turn button phone (momentary press
down and release) applied the needed ground to the pay phone line and
this allowed outgoing calls without a coin. It took about two days for
telco to send an Inspector out to the store to snoop around.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Forrette)
Subject: Re: Apartment Security Stupidity
Date: 23 Jan 1993 02:21:25 GMT
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA


> [Moderator's Note: It might also be wise if the phone at the door
> (a) was non-pub in directory listings, (b) had a number not generally
> known except to people in management who need to know it, and (d) was
> set for one-way service, outgoing local calls only in the event
> someone did learn the phone number. To prevent the line from being
> used for social conversations from the lobby to an apartment or
> excessive units from being charged if it is a metered line, you might
> also consider a timer which would disconnect the line after 30 seconds
> or so of it going off hook.

The entry phone where I used to live was an armored type that
connected to a POTS line and dialed your regular phone number.  It
disconnected the call after 60 seconds.  One day, I was looking for
some phun, so I decided to investigate further.  I took my cordless
phone and pocket dialer down to the entry phone.  I punched in the
2-digit code assigned to me, and when my cordless phone rang, I
answered the call then immediately hang up.  The entry phone did not
detect the CPC pulse, and after 20 seconds or so, there was dialtone
on the entry phone.

Although the pad was disabled, I could use my pocket dialer to dial
anywhere I wanted (by the time I dialed the call and it was set up,
there was only 25 seconds or so for the called party to answer and
talk before the phone's timer expired and it hang up; but I could do
this over and over if I wanted to).  I did not think to try to call
900 or 976 numbers.  Pacific Bell does not offer any sort of toll
restriction, except for Centrex customers (at least to my knowledge),
so I could place toll calls.  I called the local ANAC number, and
discovered the number for its line.  Then, I called the entry phone
from my cordless phone to see what would happen.  The "in-use" light
came one while the call was ringing, but it did not ring, and you
could not pick up the line while the in-use light was on.  So, this
unit apparently was designed to share the line with other such units,
or other devices.

Also, I'd like to take issue with the Moderator's opinion on which
type of system is the "better" kind.  I much prefer the stand-alone
unit that uses a POTS line to dial the residents' regular phone
numbers.  One reason is that if a computer is using the line, I don't
want the CPE-generated "call waiting" to interrupt.  If I specifically
disable call waiting via *70, I don't want the call interrupted,
period.  Also, the POTS line units will honor any call forwarding I
have enabled.  Several times, I would have visitors arrive and call up
to my unit.  I had my line forwarded to my cellular number, so I'd
answer their call from my car.  I could then tell them that I'm just a
few minutes away, and will be there shortly, or whatever the case was.
The hard-wired units won't honor call forwarding, so the caller would
get the answering machine, and may leave even though I was almost
home.


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: See my response to Dave Levinson earlier in this
issue. This is really an applications problem each person has to solve
for themselves. A stand-alone unit may or may not be better for your
needs, depending.   PAT]

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

Date: Sat, 23 Jan 93 20:05 GMT
From: Bruce Sullivan <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Apartment Security Stupidity


> [Moderator's Note: I am rather surprised that this system actually
> dialed a seven-digit phone number. Most such arragements simply seize
> the pair at some point between the CO and the tenant to (1) temporar-
> ily disconnect the wire from the CO and (2) impose their own battery
> and ringing current on the line. Under the system where your in-law
      (rest of message deleted....)

I was relatively unfamiliar with/naive about these systems when I had
an interesting experience a couple years ago with one which *did* dial
a seven-digit number. I received a call at work from a rather confused
person who was standing at the front door of an apartment building
about three miles away. Seems they'd punched in the access code for
their friends' apartment and got me instead. I suppose the building
management must have had a finger check when the input the number. I
got the tenants phone number & actually tried to transfer the call to
them. Couldn't do that for some reason, but I did call her up and say,
"This is Bruce at such-and-so company. Bob is waiting for you at the
front door and you should let your manager know that there's a
problem."

Frankly, 'Bob' and the tenant took it in stride. I think *I* was a bit
more taken aback at the time than they were. I was unfamiliar with the
workings of these systems. Since then, I've lived in a number of
buildings which had similar systems -- all of which required the use
of my phone *and* seven-digit number (and, subsequently, call-waiting).

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

Date: Sat, 22 Jan 93 10:47 PST
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: Apartment Security Stupidity


Albert Crosby <[e-mail]> writes:

> If you blocked 900 numbers, 976 numbers (and I guess in this day and
> age, 800 numbers) plus had no default LD carrier, is there any reason
> such a line wouldn't be suitable for a security system?

What about intraLATA calls not carried by an IXC? Does SWBT agree to
block calls that generate revenue for itself? And what about carrier
codes? I have a number of lines with no default carrier, but any
company that allows casual calling is happy to put the call through
and bill the number. How about charges for DA? How about charges for
emergency intercept or verification placed through the SWBT operator?

Tell you what: you put an ordinary telephone set on any line that has
dial tone one it from SWBT and let me have a crack at it. I'll take
you to dinner if I cannot run up some kind of extra charge on it.


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


[Moderator's Note: John points out the best reason of all for using a
stand-alone unit instead of a POTS line. Even the most secure of the
front door POTs lines still have little chinks in the armor for use by
people who know what they are doing, and that is all it takes.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Dan Danz)
Subject: Re: Good Opportunity For Fraud
Date: 23 Jan 1993 01:28:32 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer Inc, Marlboro MA


Quite some years ago, in my previous job, I travelled frequently to
New York City with a co-worker who, everytime we passed an ATM of a
certain brand and model, would walk up to it and punch in a few
numbers.  You know, sort of like the people that absent-mindedly open
the coin-return door on a payphone.

After a few times, I got curious and asked why he made the effort.  He
said that he had worked for the manufacturer of that particular ATM
during college.  His job was at the end of the assembly line; he
tested the bill dispenser by entering the secret code for supervisor
state and then entering a diagnostic code that made the dispenser
cycle through the dispense cycle as fast as it could go.

He just _KNEW_ he'd find an ATM where somebody had left it in
supervisor state after doing some work on it ...

If he ever does, there'll be a snowstorm of bills coming out.

He never would tell ME the code, though.


L. W. "Dan" Danz     (WA5SKM)     VOS Mail:  [e-mail]
Sr Consulting Software SE         NeXT Mail: [e-mail]
Customer Assistance Center        Voice Mail/Pager: [phone]
Telecommunications Division       Customer Service: [phone]
Stratus Computer, Inc. 4455 E. Camelback #115-A, Phoenix AZ 85018

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

From: [e-mail] (Jim Gottlieb)
Subject: Re: Good Opportunity For Fraud
Organization: Info Connections, West Los Angeles
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 19:25:41 GMT


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

> Citibank banks in other parts of the country are different banks using
> what looks like any of the usual range of ATM machines available to
> banks everywhere.

The Citibanks here often use a nifty ATM built by Transactional
Technologies (owned by Citibank).  These use a touch-screen running
under the X windowing system.

However, due to banking regulations, Transactional Technologoes is not
allowed to sell these to other banks.  Some rule about banks not being
in the bank equipment business.


Jim Gottlieb
E-Mail: [e-mail]    In Japan: [e-mail]
V-Mail: [phone]   Fax: [phone]   Voice: 824-5454

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

From: Joe Konstan <[e-mail]>
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 93 11:06:26 CST
Subject: Re: Good Opportunity For Fraud (actually ATMs)


In TELECOM Digest V13 #37, Henry Mensch writes about the Citibank ATMs
in Chicago vs. New York:

> Actually, they have newer ones.  Citibank was, I think, the first bank
> in the New York metro area to offer ATM cards ... and they designed
> all their own hardware (nobody else was doing it at the time). From
> day one, Citibank ATMs in New York did not have the possibility of
> retaining your card (they even used to advertise this fact ... some
> customers early on were wary of machines which "ate" the card for a
> while).

Almost.  Citibank was far from first, but they did become the biggest
based on ATMs.  Two elements in the story are interesting (though
their Telecom relevance is somewhat minimal):

First, in NYC at least, the earliest "Cash Machines" were just cash
machines -- no other banking.  At Dollar Savings Bank you would have
to open a special, non-interest bearing account, which always needed
to have either 200 or 300 dollars in it AFTER any withdrawl (or it
would eat your card).  They put in a couple of machines at the
branches, and as best I could tell the machines were completely
off-line.  They recorded information on your card and reconciled
balances and transactions at the end of the day.

Not long thereafter, larger banks started moving into real ATMs.
Chemical Bank (where I later worked) was both proud and chagrined by
the fact that it had the first ATMs of the major banks in NYC.
Chagrined because of what a smaller bank by the name of First National
City Bank did.

And here is the second part of the story.  First National City Bank,
which was not, at the time, in the top 5 banks, seized on the idea of
ATMs and 24 hour service.  They changed their name to Citibank and
armed themselves with the slogan "The Citi Never Sleeps."  Soon,
Citibank ATMs were everywhere and they left the competition in the
dust.  In an industry with tremendous consumer inertia, Citibank
pulled off one of the biggest coups of all time.

Much later, a number of other NYC banks put together NYCE (the New
York Cash Exchange), a local network of ATMs that was designed to
counter Citibank's predominance in the ATM business.  While this is
less important now, with the high degree of interconnectivity, I
believe that NYCE transactions are still generally made without ATM
fees.

There are other stories involved in home banking (with which I was
involved at Chemical), the Atari 400, and related topics, but I'll
save those for another time.


Joe Konstan   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Daniel Burstein)
Subject: Re: 702-333-8444 (was Strange International "Chat Line" Service)
Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix, NYC
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 15:00:52 GMT


In <[e-mail]> TELECOM Moderator noted in response
to awry![e-mail] (Tom Ace):

> Try 10333 + 0 and ask the operator who she is ... betcha she'll say
> AT&T, because your system kicked you over there when you thought
> otherwise. Please let us know the results of your further testing.  PAT]

Or, in most cases, you could try 10xxx-1-700-555-4141
                                 10xxx-0-700-555-4141

to get the automated notice of long distance carrier.


[e-mail]

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

Date: Sat, 23 Jan 93 09:36:40 PST
From: awry![e-mail] (Tom Ace)
Subject: Re: 702-333-8444 (was Strange International "Chat Line" Service)


Yesterday, I had success calling 702 333 8444 when preceded by 10333;
our Moderator had these comments:

> [Moderator's Note: I *know* two things happened. Someone is taking
> your 10333 and either ignoring it and handing it off one plus by
> default to AT&T or changing it to 10288 which is another way of
> getting Mother.  ...
> ...  Are you in control of your 10xxx assertions when you dial, or is
> some PBX/COCOT/other private system making those decisions whether you
> like it or not ... or indeed even if you know it or not?  Try 10333 + 0
> and ask the operator who she is ... betcha she'll say AT&T, because
> your system kicked you over there when you thought otherwise. Please
> let us know the results of your further testing.   PAT]

I had placed the call yesterday on a PacBell residential POTS line
(415-821); there was no PBX to screen the 10333.  Today, it doesn't
work the same way -- I get a recording saying I need to use AT&T to
reach the number.  I made calls to PacBell and Sprint to ask about all
this, and Sprint told me there had been fiber outages which affected
service in my area yesterday (not implausible given the amount of rain
we've had over the past few weeks).  Indeed, I had to try twice to get
through yesterday -- I got an "all circuits are busy" recording the
first time I placed the call.

The PacBell rep was fascinated to hear about a number that could only
be reached by AT&T, but she assured me that PacBell would always honor
my 10333 request.  I wonder if that's true in all cases; does anyone
know whether it's common for an LEC to ignore 10xxx codes when there
are service outages associated with a long distance carrier (or for
any other reason)?  If PacBell didn't route my call to AT&T yesterday,
then did Sprint do it?


Tom Ace    [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: Perhaps due to the outage, Sprint was automatically
transferring some of their overflow traffic to AT&T. It happens.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Timothy Hu)
Subject: Re: "Secret" Phone Codes
Organization: Interactive Systems Corp., Boulder CO
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 18:01:06 GMT


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

> that purported to work nationally: 10732-1-404-988-9664.  10732 is a
> private ATT network.  I know that this number does return your area
> code and number verbally from 213, 310 and 818 area codes, and I have
> read reports from others that it works elsewhere.  It does add an
> "eight" to the end of any number I've ever called it from.

I tried it here in Boulder. It works!


Timothy Hu [e-mail]     | The intelligence (or lack of) expressed
Interactive Systems Corporation  | above does not necessarily reflect
Resource Solutions International | that of anyone else.

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

From: [e-mail] (Ronal Thompson)
Subject: Re: "Secret" Phone Codes
Organization: Telebit Corporation; Sunnyvale, CA, USA
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 18:05:37 GMT


[e-mail] (Tompkins) writes:

> In one of those discussions, about a year ago, a number was posted
> that purported to work nationally: 10732-1-404-988-9664.  10732 is a
> private ATT network.  I know that this number does return your area
> code and number verbally from 213, 310 and 818 area codes, and I have
> read reports from others that it works elsewhere.  It does add an
> "eight" to the end of any number I've ever called it from.

Works from 408, but I dialed from my DID number, and got the right
area code and prefix, but some strange suffix. Maybe our trunk?


Ron

[e-mail]                These ain't no opinions but my own!
R.THOMPSON65  GEnie
MJWG99A  Prodigy    and remember,  what you think of me is none of my business

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #39
*****************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa19425;
          24 Jan 93 0:27 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA17332
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 23 Jan 1993 22:20:51 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA14802
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 23 Jan 1993 22:20:19 -0600
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 22:20:19 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #40

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 23 Jan 93 22:20:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 40

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Can Paging Software Detect Alphanumerics? (Dan Danz)
    Re: Can Paging Software Detect Alphanumerics? (Mark Williams)
    Re: Can Paging Software Detect Alphanumerics? (Lonnie Filbrun)
    Re: MF Signaling Test Gear (Macy Hallock)
    Re: MF Signaling Test Gear (Daniel Drucker)
    Re: "Secret" Phone Codes (Tom Perrine)
    Re: "Secret" Phone Codes (Dave Rand)
    Re: AT&T Public Phone 2000 Credit Card Bug (Kenneth Crudup)
    Re: AT&T Public Phone 2000 Credit Card Bug (Jim Knight)
    Re: Alteration of Ring Cadence (Glen Ecklund)
    Re: Alteration of Ring Cadence (Rich Greenberg)
    Re: Modem Dial Lines and Problems (Tim Gorman)
    Re: Modem Dial Lines and Problems (Tom Hitchcock)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Dan Danz)
Subject: Re: Can Paging Software Detect Alphanumerics?
Date: 24 Jan 1993 01:00:26 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer Inc, Marlboro MA


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

> Is it possible under the IXO/TAP protocol, or any companies'
> interpretations of it, to detect whether or not a particular pager
> number can receive text pages?
[...]
> But sometimes those error messages are helpful.  For example, if it's
> an invalid pager ID, you get a message that says so, so I search the
> return strings for "INVALID PAGER" and if I find it, don't bother
> retrying.

> Now what I'd really like, is for the paging computer to detect that
> I'm trying to send an alphabetic page to a numeric-only pager and give
> me a <NAK> with an error message that says so.  Does anybody do this?
> Would this be a reasonable thing to ask the folks at Cybertel and/or
> Skytel to support?

If I send Skytel "**12345", I get back **12345 ... INVALID NUMERIC
MESSAGE ... ENTER NUMERIC MESSAGE:>

However, since when did SkyTel start using IXO/TAP?  I'm currently
talking to them using their menu-driven PC connection that is
definitely not IXO/TAP, which I would prefer.


L. W. "Dan" Danz     (WA5SKM)     VOS Mail:  [e-mail]
Sr Consulting Software SE         NeXT Mail: [e-mail]
Customer Assistance Center        Voice Mail/Pager: [phone]
Telecommunications Division       Customer Service: [phone]
Stratus Computer, Inc. 4455 E. Camelback #115-A, Phoenix AZ 85018

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

Date: 23 Jan 1993 18:29:40 +0000 (GMT)
From: [e-mail] (Mark Williams)
Subject: Re: Can Paging Software Detect Alphanumerics?
Organization: Texas Christian University


Is there an online version of the IXO/TAP standard for alpha pagers?
(Of the documentation, that is.)


Mark Williams    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Lonnie Filbrun)
Subject: Re: Can Paging Software Detect Alphanumerics?
Date: 23 Jan 1993 13:11:02 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer Inc, Marlboro MA


Hello,

As a tech from *S W*ST Paging I used all models of BBL 3, 3r, 4x, DSS
1, Glenayre GL3000L, M, S, UniPage, and also Motorola paging
terminals.

Like mentioned before the most common action is to parse the
alphanumeric data entered and only transmit numerics giving no
indication of the intent to send alpha to a numeric display pager.

 ---------------------from IXO/TAP protocol---------------------

The response to each block is one of four:

1. "<optional message sequence><CR><ACK><CR>"
    OK, send next block.

2. "<optional message sequence><CR><NAK><CR>"
    Checksum or transmission error, send last block again.

3. "<optional message sequence><CR><RS><CR>"
    Abandon current transaction and go to next. <RS> may occur
    when the checksum is OK, but the current transation violates
    a system rule.

4. "<optional message sequence><CR><ESC><EOT><CR>"
    Begin disconnect.

Any of the responses may have an optional message sequence before
them, although the system designer should understand the consequences
to the user with all planned entry devices.

It is expected that many systems will save their message sequence
responses until immediately before disconnect. For some entry devices,
it may also be desirable that messages describing non-checksum errors
associated with a particular transaction in a PG service will begin
with the letter ID followed by the contents of field 1 for that
transaction.

After reception of an <ACK> or <RS> for the last transaction in a
given service, the entry device sends <EOT><CR> meaning there are no
more transactions remaining in this service.

An optional message sequence may be sent at this time to indicate the
degree of acceptability of information in all transactions received
during the current interchange. Although optional, this message is
highly desirable.

example:
1 PAGE(S) SENT.<CR>

An <RS><CR> should be sent at this point if the paging central finds
any data <ACK> in step 8 (step 8 is where it sends the one of four
responses) by the system to be unacceptable because of content (eg, an
invalid pager number or a message field inappropriate for the type of
pages, etc. see #2)

( #2 It is most desirable to catch all types of errors in step 8, but
practically, some systems will be too slow to catch content errors as
they happen.)

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

Using a datascope, you might want to experiment trying to send invalid
pager numbers, alphanumerics to a "known" numeric pager and check the
output of the last step above for it may tell you something useful.

As to getting the terminals manufacturer to upgrade their code to
implement a fix, hope you want to buy alot of paging terminals!!! :-)

Hope this helps!


Regards,

Lonnie

#import <stdDisclaimer.h>----------< NeXT Mail Welcome >-------
Lonnie L. Filbrun      [e-mail] (SOS Mail)
Stratus Computer, Inc.           [e-mail] (NeXT Mail)
Customer Assistance Center           [phone] (Voice Mail)
Telecommunications Division [phone] (Alphanumeric Access#)

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

Date: Sat, 23 Jan 93 19:54 EST
From: [e-mail] (Macy Hallock)
Subject: Re: MF Signaling Test Gear
Organization: F M Systems  Medina, Ohio USA


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

>  Bob Turner writes:

>> Does anyone know of test gear available to test CPE that uses MF (NOT
>> DTMF) signalling?

If size is not too important, I'd consider used central office toll
test gear.  I know of at least two companies that buy and sell this
stuff that they get from the telco's as surplus from C.O.  upgrades.
Their are also instrument resale companies that sell at hamfests that
carry used telco C.O. test equipment.

Pricing is very flexible.  Much of the equipment is W.E., Northeast
Elecronics, H.P., W&G and the like.  Most of the units are -48 VDC
powered (rather than powered from 110 VAC).  Its a good idea to know
what you want and something about the models/specs.  The sellers don't
know very much about this stuff, they're just salvage brokers.  I've
seen a lot of the Northeast and HP MF test units for sale for $100 to
$400.


Macy Hallock  N8OBG +1.216.723.3000 Fax [phone] [e-mail]
F M Systems, Inc.  150 Highland Drive  Medina, OH USA         [e-mail]

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

Subject: Re: MF Signaling Test Gear
From: mertwig![e-mail] (Daniel Drucker)
Reply-To: Daniel Drucker <uunet![e-mail]>
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 93 17:06:02 EST
Organization: Abnormalities of Reality


rsiatl![e-mail] writes:

> Bob Turner writes:

>> Does anyone know of test gear available to test CPE that uses MF (NOT
>> DTMF) signalling? It can be for two or four wire circuits.  I know
>> such a device exists, I just don't know who manufactures it.

> Several transmission test sets will generate MF.  The Ameritec AM-48
> ($3k) and AM-44 ($2k) both do.  At least one of Ameritec's

Why pay thousands when you can purchase something like a portable
Commodore 64 or some other old computer with a sound chip and make the
tones on that?

I have a [cr|h]acker's program for the C-64 that does everything from
MF to ST/KP to TASI.


Daniel Drucker        N2SXX     [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Tom Perrine)
Subject: Re: "Secret" Phone Codes
Date: 23 Jan 93 21:11:37 GMT
Organization: Logicon, Inc., San Diego, California


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

<original query deleted>

> In one of those discussions, about a year ago, a number was posted
> that purported to work nationally: 10732-1-404-988-9664.  10732 is a
> private ATT network.  I know that this number does return your area
> code and number verbally from 213, 310 and 818 area codes, and I have
> read reports from others that it works elsewhere.  It does add an
> "eight" to the end of any number I've ever called it from.

It works from 619, I called from behind our PBX and it returned the
outgoing trunk number ...


Tom E. Perrine (tep)     | [e-mail]       |Voice: [phone]
Logicon, Inc.            | sun!suntan!tots!tep   |  or : [phone]
4010 Sorrento Valley Blvd|                       |  FAX: [phone]
San Diego CA 92121-1498

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

From: [e-mail] (Dave Rand)
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 10:26:37 PST
Subject: Re: "Secret" Phone Codes


If you have the AT&T EasyReach 700 service, you can use the on-line
redirection facility to allow you to determine the number you are
calling from. Up util about three months ago, it also returned the
(bogus) billing number, not the real number, when calling the
EasyReach service from my cellular phone. Now, the message says that
EasyReach can't forward to the number as entered.

To use this service, you must be an EasyReach subscriber (a bargain,
in my opinion). First, dial your EasyReach number. Enter your primary
PIN.  Then press "1". Then press "2". Press "1#". Press "#". The
number of the line you are calling from will be read back to you.
There is no extra charge for this call, and no bill will appear on the
number. What you are doing is: "1" - request forwarding; "2" - only
calls made with a PIN (although you can specify all calls if you
wish); "1#" - forward for 1 hour; "#" use the number that you are
calling from as the forwarding number. If you hang up after the number
is read back, then your forwarding will not be activated.

You can also use the "calls made with a PIN" feature to eliminate the
calling card surcharge commonly added by telephone companies.  Set up
the forwarding number to the number you wish to dial, then use the "2"
menu feature to call the number. Only $0.25/minute during the day,
$0.15 at night ($0.23/$0.13 in California) ...


Dave Rand
{pyramid|mips|bct|vsi1}!daver!dlr    Internet: [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Kenneth Crudup)
Subject: Re: AT&T Public Phone 2000 Credit Card Bug
Organization: Open Software Foundation
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 23:51:24 GMT


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

> While traveling last week, I had a chance to try my first Public Phone
> 2000 (PP2k). Unfortunately, the phones at present have two serious
> problems which render them unusable, at least for me.

> Bug #1 is intentional. The phones only accept SWBT and Bell Atlantic
> calling cards for data calls.

Are you sure? I don't know where you are, but I used a PP2K at
Cleveland airport, and used my New England Telephone calling card,
which leads *me* to bug #3: The line was only 1200 bps, and the noise
was so high as to be unusable.


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] (Jim Knight)
Subject: Re: AT&T Public Phone 2000 Credit Card Bug
Organization: UMCC
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1993 03:10:00 GMT


[e-mail] (Paul Robichaux) writes:

> While traveling last week, I had a chance to try my first Public Phone
> 2000 (PP2k). Unfortunately, the phones at present have two serious
> problems which render them unusable, at least for me.

I've used the Public Phone 2000's in several areas of the country on
multiple occasions.  The terminals seem to work fine at 2400 bps with
a decent but not great vt100 emulation.  I was able to use vi and elm,
etc with it.

The only thing I don't like about them, is even though I use my AT&t
Calling card which normally gets billed with my home phone for regular
calls, these calls get billed separately, and I get a bill directly
from AT&T for them.

Other than that, I've had very good experience with the phones ...


Jim    M-Net -- America's First Public Access Unix System
       [phone]  -or-  telnet m-net.ann-arbor.mi.us
       [e-mail]              [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Glen Ecklund)
Subject: Re: Alteration of Ring Cadence
Organization: U of Wisconsin Madison - Computer Sciences
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 21:44:26 GMT


[e-mail] (Charles Mattair) writes:

> Due to our house's layout and phone locations, you can hear any ringer
> throughout most of the house.  The problem is exactly that -- which
> line is ringing.

> SWB does not offer alternate cadences on a primary number or I would
> do that.  The order clerk suggested getting a second number with
> Distinctive Ring (sm) on one of the lines and not using the primary
> number for that line.

It doesn't sound like you need different ring cadences.  Just use
phones with different sounds.


Glen Ecklund     [e-mail]   [phone] Office, 262-1204 Dept. Sec'y
Department of Computer Sciences        1210 W. Dayton St., Room 3355
University of Wisconsin, Madison       Madison, Wis. 53706  U.S.A.

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

From: [e-mail] (Rich Greenberg)
Subject: Re: Alteration of Ring Cadence
Organization: Hatch Usenet and E-mail.  Playa del Rey, CA
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1993 01:49:25 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail].
hounix.org (Charles Mattair) writes:

> We've got three lines coming into our residence:

> SWB does not offer alternate cadences on a primary number or I would
> do that.  The order clerk suggested getting a second number with
> Distinctive Ring (sm) on one of the lines and not using the primary
> number for that line.

That's kind of expensive, so of course its the one SWB would suggest.

If the phones have the old mechanical ringers with metal bells (Like
the ones in the 2500 type phones), You can do a bit of creative
surgery on the bells with a hacksaw.  Saw a slice from the rim halfway
to the center on each cup shaped bell and re-install.  The bell will
now sound quite different.

For electronic ringers, I can't help.


Rich Greenberg      Work: [e-mail]   310-417-8999
N6LRT               Play: [e-mail]       310-649-0238
What?   Me speak for Amdahl?  Surely you jest....


[Moderator's Note: A hacksaw is a bit of an overkill. All you need to
do is adjust the clapper inside by bending it just a tiny bit, or
turning the bell parts slightly to create a sort of dull ring on the
one phone, and a more shrill ring on the other.  PAT]

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

Date: 23 Jan 93 09:46:01 EST
From: tim gorman <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Modem Dial Lines and Problems


jackl@pribal (jack lowry) asks in TELECOM Digest V13 #35:

> What is the guarenteed maximum loss on a local voice line?

> We have also been told that the loss on the line is 6db and that modems
> start having trouble at 8bd with 10db being the max guaranteed loss on a
> phone connection.

I think someone has only given you part of the story. Actual local
loops can run up to 8dB as a design limit, individual long loops can
have even higher losses. So if both circuits are in the same central
office, you could have a possible connection loss of 16dB. If the two
circuits are not in the same central office then another 3dB to 6dB of
loss could be added by the central office in a totally digital
network. This would give a possible overall connection loss of 22dB.
If the interoffice connections are over an analog network the
interconnecting losses could be even higher depending on how many
central offices are traversed and how far apart they are.

I would assume that overall connection losses of 25-27dB could be
feasible and within normal design limits. If you actually have this
situation, you have encountered a rather unfortunate circumstance.

> Modern folklore has it that there used to be a "special" modem phone
> line available. Is this still true?

I've never actually known of or had anyone admit to knowing about a
"modem" line in the state of Kansas. Various conditioning levels have
been able to be ordered. These provide certain levels of loss and
slope. There is, of course, a charge for this. Perhaps these have been
considered as modem lines?


Tim Gorman - SWBT
*opinions are mine, any resemblance to official policy is coincidence*

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

Subject: Re: Modem Dial Lines and Problems
Organization: Multi-Tech Systems, Inc., Mounds View, MN
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 93 10:29:41 CST
From: [e-mail]


                      Multi-Tech Systems Inc.
                        Tom - Tech Support
                      800-972-2439 Ext.#602

  To: Jack Lowry
  Re: Connection problems w/ V.32 modems

The modems should be able to connect over voice quality dial-up lines.
You should not need a special data line.  There are a couple of
questions I have for you:

       A. What is the exact model of the modems you are
          using?
       B. What are the serial numbers? I can see what vs.
          EE prom is currently in the modem.
       C. Are you using error correction on the modems?
       D. Did you try connecting at 4800 baud?

It is possible since you are connecting over a Fiber line that the
modems are over driving each other preventing you from getting
connected. There is an undocumented register that can be changed.
That register is S20. Try changing this register to a 8.(ATS20=8&W)
This will boost the transmit level to a -8db. The factory setting is a
-10db. It is not advisible to go any stronger than this on a dial-up
line. If this makes it worse change the S20 register to a 12 (ATS20=12&W).

If you have any questions Please give me a call or respond via mail.
The hours here are 8:30 to 5:00 cst.

Regards,

Tom Hitchcock

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #40
*****************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa25814;
          24 Jan 93 3:42 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA09171
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 24 Jan 1993 01:37:23 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA13985
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 24 Jan 1993 01:36:41 -0600
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1993 01:36:41 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #41

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 24 Jan 93 01:36:30 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 41

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Do Telcos Record the Numbers of Local Calls? (Aninda V. Dasgupta)
    Re: Do Telcos Record the Numbers of Local Calls? (Tony Pelliccio)
    Re: Do Telcos Record the Numbers of Local Calls? (Dave Niebuhr)
    Re: It's Not a Bug, It's a Feature ... (Robert J. Woodhead)
    Re: It's Not a Bug, It's a Feature ... (Jonathan Haruni)
    Re: Fast Backups of Data Over Nets/Subnets (Dave Niebuhr)
    Re: What Is dBm0 ([e-mail])
    Re: Opinions on PBX - Toshiba Strata DK-56 (Todd Inch)
    Re: Telecom Management Degrees (Tom Lahey)
    Re: ISDN Modems/Boards? (J. Reschly Jr.)
    Re: Sprint Can't Do Switched 56k (Fred R. Goldstein)
    Re: What is Tariff 12 (or is it 11)? (John Higdon)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Aninda V. Dasgupta)
Subject: Re: Do Telcos Record the Numbers of Local Calls?
Organization: Philips Laboratories, Briarcliff, New York
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 13:28:04 GMT


Talking of telcos recording numbers, a recent sad case of child
abduction in Long Island, NY comes to mind.  (The following narration
is a summary of what the {NY Times} reported.)

Katie Beers, a ten-year old, growing up in a severely disfunctional
family, is enduring a custody battle between her natural mother and
her god-mother, who had brought her up for most of her young life. In
steps a certain Mr. Esposito, who had, a few years ago, pleaded guilty
to unlawful imprisonment and sexual offenses on a young boy.  He
showers this emotionally deprived child with gifts and lavishes her
with attention. He then takes her out shopping for Christmas gifts,
buys her dolls and video games. Next stop: a 7-11 store for some
ice-cream. The 7-11 surveilance camera records Katie paying for the
ice-cream and meticulously putting back the change in her handbad and
carefully tucking the bag under her arm.

The pervert then lures Katie into a garage-apartment behind his
bungalow and while Katie is trying out the video games, he removes his
stero system, turns around a revolving book-shelf and bar, lifts up
layers of carpet and flooring, runs a bolt through a hook and lifts up
a heavy concrete trap-door using a winch, and opens up the passage to
a dungeon. When his sexual advances on Katie is spurned, he gets
violent, throws her down the chute into the cramped underground
cellar, ties a collar on her neck and imprisons her.

Within hours of her imprisonment, the sick man forces Katie to record
a message on a tape-recorder, something like : "I am being held by a
bad man with a knife ... Oh my God, here he comes!"  Katie's
god-mother gets that message on her answering machine.  Police search
Mr. Esposito's bungalow and Katie gets to see the search via close
circuit TV, but her cries for help do not penetrate the thick bunker
walls. In the search of the premises, police find user manuals to a
brand-new portable tape-recorder and Katie's handbag and jacket in the
man's van.

Police look at phone company logs and determine that the call to
Katie's godmother was made from a pay phone, but a search and
questioning of people in the neighborhood of the pay-phone reveals
nothing new. More searching in the phone logs reveals that 15 attempts
were made to place that call to Katie's godmother, but her phone
always happened to be busy. So, the person who left the message, got
through only on the 16th attempt. This tells police that the call was
not made by Katie, because the message sounded as if she got a chance
window of a few seconds to place that call. Getting such a window once
is acceptable, but 16 times? FBI analysis on the message on the
anwering machine reveals that it was indeed played off a tape-recorder.

Police start a heavy pressure campaign on Esposito and his family
members. They constantly follow them and keep their residences under
24-hour-watch. Finally, the guy succumbs and confesses.  Police find
Katie safe and sound after 16 days in the cramped dungeon.

Anyway, what interested me was in this sad, sad story is the fact that
the phone company keeps logs of all calls made from a pay-phone
(perhaps all phones?) and calls to a residential phone (again, perhaps
all phones?)  Moreover, the police (or does it have to be the Feds?)
can get to the phone logs in a matter of hours.


Aninda DasGupta ([e-mail]) Ph:[phone] Fax:[phone]
Philips Labs\n 345 Scarborough Rd\n  Briarcliff Manor\n NY 10510


[Moderator's Note: Yes, you are correct; very little escapes telco's
notice these days, and that INHO is good for just such reasons as the
case you cited.  The telephone should *never* serve as a medium for
harassement, fraud or the commission of other crimes. The fact that
the telephone has served these purposes over the years was due to the
technology in use for many years, not a deliberate thing by telco. The
development of ESS and the sophisticated ways in which traffic can be
analyzed and reviewed could be viewed by some twisted logic as an
'invasion of privacy' by some people, but I do not view it that way.

On a separate note, it should be recalled that under the Constitution
of the United States, Mr. Esposito must be presumed innocent of the
crimes he is charged with unless he is proven otherwise in court.  PAT]

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

Date: Sun, 24 Jan 93 00:12:03 EST
From: Tony Pelliccio <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Do Telcos Record the Numbers of Local Calls?


YES THEY DO! ESS Systems, even the old XBAR systems were able to do
it.  It's amazing the things the phone company does that they don't
tell you about.  I remember there was a Bell pamphlet on the AMA's
(Automatic Message Account) that was supposed to go out to all
customers but Bell decided that it would be too heavy for people to
handle. I mean, after all, knowing that EVERY number you dial is being
recorded isn't very comforting. I wonder, with the advent of SS7, do
they still use tapes? I mean, with all that connectivity you'd think
the info would be sent to a central storage facility. We'll have to
wait and see I suppose. But the phone company WILL provide you with a
detailed list of all numbers dialed, if you ask for it.


Tony

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

Date: Sat, 23 Jan 93 09:54:22 EST
From: [e-mail] (Dave Niebuhr)
Subject: Re: Do Telcos Record the Numbers of Local Calls?


In TELECOM Digest V13 #37 [e-mail] (martin
McCormick) writes:

[ ... Text about murders in Stillwater, Ok. deleted ... ]

> According to our paper, one of the things that the police did was
> to ask Southwestern Bell for telephone records.  Apparently, blood was
> found on a telephone and the police wanted to see who might have been
> called.

> All of this occurred about a month after Stillwater got its
> DMS100 switch.  I don't know what the records showed, because the
> girl's story fell apart and she ended up essentially admitting to the
> murders.  I wouldn't be a bit surprised if there is some internal
> maintenance log of connections.  We do not have measured service,
> here, but even the old Xbar switch printed logs of trouble reports.

The recent sad case of Katie Beers of Mastic Beach, New York, saw the
telephone involved in her safe recovery and the apprehension of John
Esposito who allegedly (I use that word only because he hasn't been
convicted yet) kidnapped her and held her in a dungeon.

The payphone where Katie made a call was found by doing a check of her
godmother's phone logs at the telco office.  This helped in finding
the girl and the arrest of Esposito.

BTW: I live three blocks from her in Mastic Beach, New York, but I
cannot honestly say that I ever saw her in the last few years.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Robert J Woodhead)
Subject: Re: It's Not a Bug, It's a Feature ...
Organization: Foretune Co., Ltd.
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 12:06:29 GMT


[e-mail] (Alex Pournelle) writes:

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

>> [e-mail] writes in TELECOM Digest 13 #14 about how
>> someone programmed the IBM 1130 to generate tones on an AM radio.

> I've got one even even better.  How about programming a CDC 3600 to
> play the Star-Spangled Banner on its tape drives -- in stereo!

I heard about an artist who noticed that when he drove over a local
suspension bridge, the metal grid deck of the bridge (made this way so
snow could fall through it) interacted with the tires of his car to
produce a hum, and the frequency of the hum was proportional to the
speed of the car.

He thereupon went and recorded the tones of the bridge at various
speeds, and edited the tapes into a musical score.

To my mind, the record-holder for world's largest instrument.


Robert J. Woodhead, Biar Games / AnimEigo, Incs.    [e-mail]
AnimEigo US Office Email (for general questions): [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Jonathan Haruni)
Subject: Re: It's Not a Bug, It's a Feature ...
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Micrognosis International, London
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 14:16:17 GMT


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

[about a Sun computer performing music to a live audience]

> When the work was finished, they introduced the fellow who had
> programmed it.  I left the program absolutely higher than a kite; it
> was so wonderful!

Please elaborate ... was the Sun controlling some sort of Synthesizer card
which the guy had written a command script for?  Was it controlling a
MIDI controller plugged into some commercial synth?  Or was it just playing
some digital recording?  What exactly did the guy "program"?  What was
so wonderful?  What was the big file server for?  Why was this more
impressive than a tape recorder?


Jonathan Haruni


[Moderator's Note: It was a series of great big executables which were
called up one after another for each of the various movements (or
parts) of the musical work. I think the executables were kept on the
storage device which was connected to the computer until it was their
turn to be used. It should be noted that "Pictures at an Exhibition"
is about thirty minutes in length, and is composed of several
movements, or 'sketches' each ranging in length from a minute or two
to several minutes. There was no synthesizer card or MIDI or similar
device attached.  The executables sent pulses to speakers attached to
the computer (actually, what would have been an audio output on the
computer was fed to the building sound system) and the speed and
duration of the pulses caused the speakers to make the sounds required
to resemble the music. That is an overly simplistic explanation of
what makes speakers work, but you get the idea. What was so nifty to
me was the total lack of any external equipment; just electricity sent
to an output causing the speakers to vibrate the way he wanted it.

I used to do the same thing with my little Apple ][+ ten years ago,
poking binary values into RAM in a certain order then calling the
routine so that musical sounds would come out of the speaker, but
never of the magnitude of the performance I attended. The Apple had a
cassette jack on the back to load programs from tape. By making use of
the little two (or maybe four) byte A/D converter inside, I found I
could digitize my voice using a microphone plugged into the cassette
jack then save the resulting binary on a floppy disk and play it back
through the speaker on the Apple. Because this sort of thing is of
interest to me, I find fascinating anyone who can write sufficient
executable script to transcribe a technically difficult piece of music
of 30 minute's duration.  A tape recording would not have been the
same. Part of the pleasure was hearing the live performance and seeing
the 'performer'.   PAT]

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

Date: Sat, 23 Jan 93 10:48:38 EST
From: [e-mail] (Dave Niebuhr)
Subject: Re: Fast Backups of Data over Nets/Subnets


In TELECOM Digest V13 #29 From: [e-mail] (Nita Avalani)
writes:

> (2) Are there any high speed hardware/software alternatives to
> restore/dump in Unix that would back up everything on the
> nets/subnets?  If so, what is the best product?

Yes there are.  AT&T has a product called ABARS that does this very
quietly and fast.  All data is stored on optical media and all
iterations of files are backed up daily.

We at Brookhaven National Laboratory have this system installed and
I've found that retrieval is quite quick (under two minutes for a file
of up to 20K bytes with most of the overhead being in finding the
correct platter.  It's even faster if the file or files are located on
the same one.


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

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: What Is dBm0
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 93 13:33:10 CST


> I just read a paper taken from AT&T Technical Journal. The subject of
> this paper is "THE 32 KB/S ADPCM CODING STANDARD". In this paper the
> author use "dBm0" as a unit to represent the level of input signal. I
> don't know what the definition of "dBm0" is. Is "dBm0" same as "0
> dBm"? Is there anyone who knows the answer and can answer this
> question for me? I will be appreciated if someone answer my question.

dBm0 is power referenced to the test level for the circuit in
question.  (i.e. if the test level is -16 dBm and the signal currently
being measured is -18dBm, then it would be -2dBm0).  This is used
because most communication circuits have some gain or loss built into
them.  (The company I work for has +23dB of gain on all of its
circuits).  By measuring in dBm0, it is possible to have consistent
levels.  For example, if I have a circuit that has a test level of
-16dBm at the transmit, and +7dBm at the far end receive, then I can
put in a -16dBm0 tone at the transmit (-32dBm) and get a -16dBm0 tone
out at the other end (-9dBm).


Brett   ([e-mail])

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

From: [e-mail] (Todd Inch)
Subject: Re: Opinions on PBX - Toshiba Strata DK-56
Organization: Maverick International Inc.
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 93 18:43:22 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Raul
Rathmann) writes:

> I am considering picking up a Toshiba Strata DK-56 PBX with various
> handsets.  Does anyone have any opinions on this unit, good or bad?

I looked at this and chose a Tadiran Coral system instead.  The Coral
is more flexible and slightly cheaper -- several interconnects I spoke
to are making it their system of choice.

One problem (from memory -- my notes aren't handy) is the Toshiba
would not connect to a certain type of line -- either T-1 or DID.
Also someone mentioned that there is something wrong with the dialing
buttons on Toshiba -- they either don't produce real tones the user
can hear (minor annoyance) or they have timed tones which won't sound
for as long as you hold down the keys, which is a real pain trying to
access answering machines and some voicemail-type services.

Also, the Coral is almost infinitly expandible, while the Toshiba
contains the number 56 for a reason :-).

The Coral also has some funky data features that we may want to use in
the future, such as an integral serial data jack (optional) on phones,
data-pbx functions, and built-in modems.  It has one built-in
maintenance modem for remote programming and diagnostics.  Since I'm
really the DP guy, this appealed to me.

The Coral has "CoralMail" as a VM option, so I didn't inquire further.

Overall, the Toshiba looks like a decent system, though.  I found at
least two local interconnects who I like and favor the Tadiran, but
getting parts/service on the Toshiba is probably easier, maybe
significantly so in your area.  Service can be a big issue for PBX's.
The people trying to sell me a Toshiba sell nothing else, so they are
biased, whereas the Coral-pushers have sold and serviced many brands
including the Toshibas.

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

Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 10:21:46 -0500
From: [e-mail] (Tom Lahey)
Subject: Re: Telecom Management Degrees


> Does anyone know what colleges/universities offer a Telecommunications
> Management Degree program starting at the associates level?  All I've
> seen has been a Masters Level program at places like Univ of Maryland.

The New Hampshire Vocational Technical College in Nashua New Hampshire
offers an Associates Degree in Telecommunications. They have both day
and evening programs. Phone number is: 603-882-6923


Tom Lahey   batfish![e-mail]

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

Date: Sat, 23 Jan 93 17:14:09 EST
From: Robert J. Reschly Jr. <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: ISDN Modems/Boards?


   I am at home and the literature is at work, but there is an outfit
called DigiBoard which builds Ethernet bridge (I think that is right
 -- the bandwidth differential would certainly make bridging much more
effective) boxes that connect over a 1B or 2B voice or data link.  I
think they also do some compression over the ISDN, but cannot recall
for sure.  These boxes also run ~$2K per end.

   I can post more details from the literature if there is an
interest.  I'm not affiliated with DigiBoard; just saw them at InterOP
last fall and grabbed some literature.


Later,

Bob
IP: [e-mail]   UUCP: ...!{{cmcl2,nlm-mcs,husc6}!adm,smoke}!reschly
U.S. Army Research Lab. / Advanced Computational & Information Sciences Dir. /
Networked Computer Systems Team / Aberdeen Proving Grounds, MD  21005-5067 /
ATTN: AMSRL-CI-AC (Reschly) //   [phone]   FAX:-5075   DSN:298-

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

From: [e-mail] (Fred R. Goldstein)
Subject: Re: Sprint Can't Do Switched 56k
Organization: Digital Equipment Corp., Littleton MA USA
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1993 04:49:29 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Eric Pearce)
writes:

> We have a Sprint T1 with 16 channels for voice and 1 56k dedicated
> data line.  I want to add a single switched 56k line out of the same
> channel bank (since there are spare slots).  The reasoning behind
> getting a CB was to be able to mix and match various types of service.

> Sprint sales says they can't do it, as their "switched 56k network is
> too advanced for PacBell and won't be able to talk to it" (we are in
> northern CA).  They also volunteered that AT&T and MCI are be able to
> provide this even though Sprint can't.  Does this make any sense?

Huh?  I specifically remember Sprint's ads touting that their domestic
network carries Switch 56 and speech equally and doesn't distinguish
between the two.  You get a T1 access into Sprint's POP and then can
make speech or 56 kbps calls interchangeably.  The one trick is that
you may need to send the echo canceller canceller (not a repeat) tone.

This does not make use of PacBell's Switched 56 at all.  Indeed if
PacBell is like New England Tel, then Switched 56 won't talk to Sprint
 -- Switched 56 from the Bell is classmarked as "in the data domain"
and won't talk to trunks "in the voice domain" which includes Sprint.

But if you have a PBX, its own 56 kbps data applique is probably
compatible with Sprint Switched 56.  As is a channel bank, using the
standard "7/8" coding (V.110/56k).  The signaling is inband tone, same
a a voice call.

BTW, this is probably what inspired me to play with "data over speech"
on ISDN.  We now have ISDN using speech calls carrying 56 kbps around
the LATA, where NETel doesn't even have data trunks yet.


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

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

Date: Sat, 23 Jan 93 21:01 PST
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: What is Tariff 12 (or is it 11)?


[e-mail] (Lars Poulsen) writes:

> It is fair to allow sweetheart deals? I guess it depends on your
> political attitudes. Personally, I think we all would be better off,
> if the system had a mild bias in favor of "the little guy". Thus, I
> think it is reasonable to place more restrictions on the dominant
> carrier. I also think the obligation to publish the sweetheart deal
> and offer the same terms to any customer in similar circumstances is
> reasonable.

This is all very egalitarian and populist-oriented and seems just and
reasonable until one finds himself in the position of a major user.
Then when he is about to spend mega-dollars with a carrier, finds that
"cutting a deal" is not so easy. Any customer who represents a
significant portion of a provider's business deserves recognition for
that business.

Giving "the little guy" a better deal than a major player is something
reserved for activist PUCs who seem to feel that people who use more
can obviously afford it so they should be charged more per unit. It
has no place in the real marketplace which was supposedly created by
divestiture. In a free market, those who buy in quantity are those who
wield the power and can expect accomodations.

Is the telecommunications industry operating in a market environment,
or is it to be manipulated and regulated to death by idiots as
exemplified by the FCC and the CPUC? IMHO, AT&T has long since passed
from "dominant carrier" status and should play under the same rules as
MCI and Sprint. These carriers have had bloody long enough to get
their act together. Sure, AT&T had a century headstart, but in today's
technology ten years is an eternity. If MCI and Sprint cannot make it
without hamstringing AT&T in restrictive tariffs, then maybe we have
too many long distance companies.


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

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #41
*****************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa28199;
          24 Jan 93 5:10 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA06308
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 24 Jan 1993 03:04:31 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA18580
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 24 Jan 1993 03:04:01 -0600
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1993 03:04:01 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #42

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 24 Jan 93 03:04:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 42

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: You Didn't Accept a Collect Call, But You'll be Billed Anyway? (Ron)
    Re: Integratel Forcing Charges Through (John R. Levine)
    Re: Phoneline Simulator to Test Modems - How? (Todd Inch)
    Re: Top Ten Traumas? (David G. Lewis)
    Re: Looking For DID Information (John Higdon)
    Re: Attempted Mindvox Break-in (Graham Toal)
    Re: Question About Teleports (Tyson MacAulay)
    Re: Good Opportunity For Fraud (Jonathan Haruni)
    Re: Good Opportunity For Fraud (Darren Ingram)
    Re: FCC Awards Pioneers Preference to Volunteers in Tech Assist (L. Kellet)
    Re: Differences Between ANI and Caller-ID (M.D. Leech)
    Re: Wanted: Small (4-12 Line) PBX/Phone System (Jack Carden)
    Re: 313 Split Not Being Well Publicized  (H. Peter Anvin)
    Re: Do You Think This is a Fraudulent Ad? : ) (Robert J. Woodhead)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: ucsd!sceard!fewmets![e-mail]
Subject: Re: You Didn't Accept a Collect Call, But You'll be Billed Anyway?
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1993 00:28:44 GMT


[e-mail] writes:

> When the operator did come back on the line, the girl didn't have
> enough money to pay for the rest of the call, and because her parents
> don't currently have a phone (or so she claims), there was no number
> that the call could be billed to.  So the operator stated that the
> remainder would be charged to the party she called.  At no time did
> the operator converse directly with my son, although he could overhear
> all of this.  After this the call was disconnected.

Boy, can I top this story :-)

Several years ago, my 21+ year old son quit his appartment and took an
open-ended trip to Australia. Some disturbing incidents occurred which
resulted in *many* long distance calls from him to me. Several months
later, I received a > $1000 phone bill from AT&T for the calls. Seems
that my son had charged his calls with an AT&T credit card on his
disconnected US phone number. I contacted AT&T and could find no one
that would admit having the authority to change the bill. As far at
AT&T was concerned, my son had the same last name, therefore, I should
pay for the calls (seems logical to me :-) I went around and around
with them. The issue was not setteled until my son returned to the US
and paid the bill himself. I carried a derogatory on my TRW report
(with my explanation appended) for several years. I do not recommend
AT&T as a company to do business with.


[Moderator's Note: Another of our regular contributors could tell a
similar story about having been in business *as a corporation* for a
period of time and going out of business, only to have AT&T come to
him personally for the unpaid phone charges later on, insisting that
he was responsible for the corporation he formerly was associated
with.  But I'll let him tell the story if he wants; it may be for some
reason he does not want the details aired.   PAT]

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

Subject: Re: Integratel Forcing Charges Through
Organization: I.E.C.C.
Date: 24 Jan 93 02:00:41 EST (Sun)
From: [e-mail] (John R. Levine)


> Our room was recently billed for $90 worth of collect calls from
> Integratel despite the fact that Lehigh University supposedly traps
> collect calls to student rooms.  ...

TELECOM Moderator noted:

> But let's face it; you, or someone with access to the phone in your
> room did agree to accept collect charges, ...

Given the thick layer of slime with which Integratel seems to be
coated, it's not at all clear to me why anyone should accept their
claim that someone actually accepted any collect calls.  Given the
exorbitant amount, I'd suspect that either someone called an 800
number for which Integratel handles 900-style collect billing and they
billed back with or without the consent of the caller, or it might
just be completely bogus.


Regards,

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


[Moderator's Note: Well, there has to be *some basis* for putting the
charges through. There can be errors in billing, misunderstandings,
etc, but the charges cannot be made up from thin air. Someone had to
say something or the operator had to think they did. It would be total
fraud if no one consented to anything.  The telcos dislike the extra
work Integretel causes their customer service reps, and most claim
they only deal with Integretel because of divestiture requirements. If
fraud were proveable, they'd drop Integretel in a minute, with the
judge's blessings. Integretel needs the LEC's to bill for them; they
are too smart to cross the narrow, thin line they walk between legal
activity and fraud.

An Integretel executive did tell me the company was 'probably' going
to begin recording the consent to collect charges in order to combat
the reverse fraud which is quite prevalent in the phone-sex industry.
It seems a lot of people do make use of 900/976 phone-sex services
knowing the rates and routines very well yet later try to deadbeat out
of the charges by playing the role of the Injured and Defrauded
Consumer Who Knows His Rights. Integretel thinks that tape recording
the five or ten second authorization request by the operator and the
subscriber's response should put an end to some of this.  ("This is
the Integretel operator, I have a collect call for XXX at this number
from YYY, will you accept the charges at $?? per minute?"  -- subscriber
says yes or no and the operator cuts out of the connection.)  Although
the clients of Integretel are mostly sleaze and you may say there
should be a plague on all of them, I suspect a lot more customers
defraud them than the other way around, from a legal perspective.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Todd Inch)
Subject: Re: Phoneline Simulator to Test Modems - How?
Organization: Maverick International Inc.
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 93 18:52:22 GMT


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

> To test modem/terminal-server settings I would like to connect connect
> the modems directly via a phoneline simulator.

(I'll also e-mail the author as he requested.)

I have sucessfully connected two 2400-baud modems with just a cable -
it took a little trickery and manual manipulation via the AT commands
on both ends, but I was in a pinch and it worked.  Obviously, dialing
and auto-answer cannot be done this way.

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

From: [e-mail] (david.g.lewis)
Subject: Re: Top Ten Traumas?
Organization: AT&T
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 14:17:59 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail].
arizona.edu (Dr. Ross Alan Stapleton) writes:

> Is there a good way to assess net losses [of telecom failures],
> so as to ever produced a ranked list?

The best metric I've seen is User Lost Erlangs, which is the total
traffic interrupted, measured in Erlangs.  So if a switch which
normally processes 1000 successful call attempts per minute, with each
call lasting on average 3 minutes, is out of service for one hour,
this represents 3,000 User Lost Erlangs (ULE).  (1000 calls/minute *
60 minutes * 180 seconds/call / 3600 CCS/Erlang = 3000 Erlangs) If a
DS1 facility with 24 trunks at 80% average occupancy is out for an
hour, this represents 19.2 ULE.  And so on.

The advantages to this are it gives a way to quantitatively measure
different types of failures, it incorporates both the number of
affected users and the time they are affected, and it incorporates
time-of-day and day-of-week factors.


Just My Opinion ...

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

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

Date: Sat, 23 Jan 93 12:04 PST
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: Looking For DID Information


[e-mail] (Brent Capps) writes:

> Nothing magic to it, but you should be aware that the scheme John is
> talking about may be considered infringement on a patent held by
> Brooktrout Technologies of Natick, MA.  They make fax/voice response
> PC cards with an on-board DID interface for just the purpose you
> described.

Somehow, I do not think that any patent can tell you how to use a
standard telephone technology such as DID. But there are other serious
negative considerations to DID (kept in place by the telcos because
DID is a direct competitor to Centrex).

The first is a rather steep installation charge. In Pac*Bell land, it
is about $700 just for establishing the DID group. The second is the
"termination charge" which essentially puts you on the hook for a
multi-year period, even if you disconnect the service.

Back when DID involved literally wiring up a switch for DID trunks,
these charges had some validity. Now, of course, a few key strokes and
the telco has taken thousands of dollars from you. And as a side
benefit, those steep charges make you think twice and possibly
consider Centrex as an alternative. Telco makes much more money from
that in the long run.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Graham Toal)
Subject: Re: Attempted Mindvox Break-in
Organization: Cuddlehogs Anonymous
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 21:42:21 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(John F. McMullen) writes:

> Phantom Access Foils Cracking Attempt 01/18/93 NEW YORK, NEW YORK,
> U.S.A.,1993 JAN 18 (NB) -- An attempt to illegally break into, or
> "crack" the "Mindvox" conferencing stem contained in Phantom Access, a
> flat-rate New York-based online service recently featured in various
> news publications, was detected and rebuffed.

Hmmm. the vox guys weren't so keen for publicity when those hackers in
Hawaii found that nasty hole in the NeXTs password stuff that let them
on to Mindvox.  In fact they seem to be keeping that one to themselves.
Wonder why.

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

From: [e-mail] (Tyson MacAulay)
Subject: Re: Question About Teleports
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 93 11:50:22 EST


          In v13, #32 of TELECOM Digest there were a few entries about
the growth and availablity of Teleports in the US.

          I would be interested to know if anyone has knowledge of any
existing or proposed Teleports in Canada, and who might be building or
organizing them.  Alternately, I would be interested in hearing from
anyone who might be studying the industrial applications of Teleports.


Tyson Macaulay    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Jonathan Haruni)
Subject: Re: Good Opportunity For Fraud
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Micrognosis International, London
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 19:32:33 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Rod Gamble) writes:

>     About two or three years ago the Bank of England (for some
> reason or other) decided to find out what people used as words for
> there PINs . Well guess what ... If you found a BoE card in the
> street you had a 56% chance of using it in a ATM machine if you used a
> four lettered word beginning with F*** ...

I believe this is a myth.  Most ATMs in the UK do not have letters on
the keypads, only numbers.  Furthermore, the Bank of England is not a
consumer bank, and does not have branches, ATMs, ATM cards, or PINs.


Jonathan Haruni

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

Date: Sun, 24 Jan 93 10:34:11 GMT
From: [e-mail] (Darren Ingram)
Subject: Re: Good Opportunity For Fraud


>    About two or three years ago the Bank of England (for some
> reason or other) decided to find out what people used as words for
> there PINs . Well guess what ... If you found a BoE card in the

Er. do you mean the Bank of England (as in the United Kingdom) ... the
BoE here does _not_ issue ATM cards and certainly does not have an ATM
network.  It acts as a central government agency clearing receipts
from the clearing banks and generally playing around with inflation.


DIMS (newsdesk mailbox)([e-mail])   - Views expressed do
184 Brookside Avenue, Whoberley, Coventry CV5 8AD UK - not automatically
Tel:[phone]/Fax:[phone]/Tlx 94026650 - represent those of
*News, features, PR, consultancy & network services* - DIMS or its clients

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

From: [e-mail] (Lehane Kellet)
Subject: Re: FCC Awards Pioneers Preference to Volunteers in Tech Assistance
Organization: G8KMH's home for stray RF signals
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 13:22:57 GMT


[e-mail] (Nigel Allen) writes:

> FCC Awards Pioneers Preference to Volunteers in Technical Assistance

> WASHINGTON, Jan. 14 -- The Federal Communications Commission today
> allocated four MHz of VHF/UHF spectrum to the Mobile Satellite Service

Anybody know which four meg?

> The FCC stated that it awarded the pioneer's preference to VITA
> because it was the first to develop and demonstrate the utility of a
> small low earth orbiting satellite system for civilian communications
> purposes.  The commission also noted that VITA's pioneering efforts

Radio Amateurs aren't civilians? AMSAT have being using LEO for years.
And VITA piggybacked on UOSAT (and co-funded).

A mention of AMSAT/amateur radio would have been nice ...


Regards,

Lehane Kellett. G8KMH. Siemens Nixdorf Information Systems, Bracknell.
[e-mail]  NTS: g8kmh@gb3xp  amprnet: [e-mail]
Standard disclaimers apply. Warranty void if opened.

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

Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 11:04:53 -0500
From: Marcus D Leech <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Differences Between ANI and Caller-ID


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

> [discussion of difference between ANI and Caller-ID, and how they
> relate (or not) to ISDN].

Just to add to the confusion, there's also an emerging ANSI standard
called SCAI, or Switch-Computer Applications Interface.  SCAI gives
you what Caller-ID gives you plus A WHOLE LOT MORE.  The only
implementation that I'm aware of is on NTs large switches, and
marketted as "CompuCall".

The delivery vehicle for this service is typically X.25.

Anybody know of any other implementations of SCAI?


Marcus Leech, 4Y11     Bell-Northern Research  |opinions expressed
[e-mail]          P.O. Box 3511, Stn. C   |are my own, and not
[e-mail]     Ottawa, ON, CAN K1Y 4H7 |necessarily BNRs

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

Date: Sun, 24 Jan 93 07:59:16 GMT
From: texsun.Central!nps002![e-mail] (Jack Carden)
Subject: Re: Wanted: Small (4-12 Line) PBX/Phone System


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

> I'm looking for an inexpensive phone system for a small business.  I
> don't have any experience with vendors in this area.  I'm looking for
> recommendations, vendors phone numbers, etc. Here are some of the
> features we're looking for:

> - we currently have two outside lines and six extensions. We would
> like the system to be expandable to about four outside lines and twelve
> extensions.

> - automated attendant; an incoming is call reaches an automated
> attendant, and the caller is routed to a particular extension based on
> a menu selection.

> - uses standard touch-tone phones for extensions.

> - any extension can be connected to any outside line.

> We don't need:

> - voicemail; we would be satisfied with attaching answering
> machines to individual extensions.

> - extension to extension connections (the office isn't that big
> :-)).  if going off hook on an extension immediately connects you to
> an available outside line (or gives a dial-tone otherwise) that's
> fine.

> The most important constraint is cost.  PC based solutions are fine --
> we have a spare 386 PC we can use.

I would recommend the Panasonic key-systems for cost and simplicity.
They can use standard telephones or fancy custom models.  They will
support several lines (comes in two sizes at least) for a few hundred
dollars!

They will not (to my knowledge) provide automated attendant, but there
are plenty of options there.  Check out BigMouth and other product
offerings if you want to hook up your PC and customize the software to
answer your phone.  My opinion -- I hate those things!

These are my personal opinions.  I have no affiliation with Panasonic.
We used their product for a telecom-related product demonstration system.
I am not am employee of nor do I speak for DSC Communications.


Regards,

Jack Carden   Internet: [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (H. Peter Anvin N9ITP)
Subject: Re: 313 Split Not Being Well Publicized
Reply-To: [e-mail] (H. Peter Anvin)
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 22:38:54 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> of comp.dcom.telecom,
[e-mail] writes:

> By the way, you can get more information at 1-800-831-8989 (I don't
> know if this is diallable outside of 313/810).  Permissive dialing
> starts December 1993, and ends (with mandatory use of 810) August 10,
> 1994.

That's a long permissive dialing period.  Here in Illinois we had
only three months permissive dialing on the 312/708 area split, which
wasn't even announced as much in advance as this one was.

Considering the length of the permissive dialling period, I would
guess they plan to put it in the 1994 phone book when permissive
dialling just has taken effect, and there is still good time for
people to learn.


hpa

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

From: [e-mail] (Robert J Woodhead)
Subject: Re: Do You Think This is a Fraudulent Ad? : )
Organization: Foretune Co., Ltd.
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1993 02:00:28 GMT


Paul Robinson <[e-mail]> writes:

> An advertisement on page 3 of the January, 1993 issue of "Midrange
> Computing" mentions Exabyte Corporation's new 2.5 Gigabyte EXB-8200.

> This is a 150% inflation of the number of issues that you could read
> before you'd find an error!  I resent this; if I only read 40 million
> years' worth of the {Wall Street Journal} before I discovered an
> error, I'd not be pleased.

Clearly, the good folks at Exabyte are compressing their {Wall Street
Journal's} before storing them on hard disc.  I know I would!


Robert J. Woodhead, Biar Games / AnimEigo, Incs.    [e-mail]
AnimEigo US Office Email (for general questions): [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #42
*****************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa04221;
          24 Jan 93 9:05 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA22477
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 24 Jan 1993 03:29:28 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA03973
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 24 Jan 1993 03:28:49 -0600
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1993 03:28:49 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Revised FAQ File For TELECOM Digest


David Leibold has prepared a new FAQ for this newsgroup. I am
attaching a copy of it here. In addition, this version will replace
the existing one being sent to all new subscribers of the TELECOM
Digest mailing list as of today, and it will replace the existing
version in the Telecom Archives. (The archives is accessible via
anonymous ftp lcs.mit.edu).

Thank you, David!

PAT

 Date: Sun, 17 Jan 93 21:45:45 EST
 From: David Leibold <[e-mail]>
 Subject:  FAQ List -- edition 4
 To: Telecom Digest <[e-mail]>


TELECOM Digest - Frequently Asked Questions - v.4   17 January 1993

This is a list of frequently asked questions made in the TELECOM
Digest. New versions of the list are occasionally made available to
deal with new, corrected or updated questions.

Much of the telecom information that is requested can be found in the
TELECOM Digest Archives, which is a collection of text files on
telecom topics. These archives are available for access through the
FTP protocol at lcs.mit.edu. Other archive sites may be available,
plus various FTP mail servers. The monthly posting of the description
of TELECOM Digest should contain specific details on how to access the
Archives.

This list is in the archives under the file name:

         frequently.asked.questions

Direct netmail requests to persons posting on topics of interest to
you may also be helpful. In fact, doing things "behind the scenes"
can be more productive as the Digest Moderator is frequently
swamped with other items. Future editions of this list could
include netmail addresses of contacts for certain topics (say
for ISDN, cellular, area codes/numbering plan, consumer protection
matters, etc); offers to that end would be appreciated.

The index to the Archives should be obtained and kept for reference.
This index has also occasionally appeared as a posting in the Digest.
You should also read the Archives file intro.to.archives to get a
better understanding of how the Archives operate.

A list of terms commonly used in TELECOM Digest may be obtained from
the Archives under the file names glossary.acronyms, glossary.txt and
glossary.phrack.acronyms.

Suggestions for other common questions, or corrections or other amendments
to this file may be made to [e-mail], or [e-mail],
or [e-mail]. Note that any of these addresses
are subject to change. This file will be updated as time and circumstances
permit; all information herein should be considered subject to correction
or change.

Thanks to Nathan Glasser, Dan Boehlke and Maurice E. DeVidts and those
other inquiring TELECOM Digest minds for their frequent questions.
Tad Cook also noted an incorrect touch tone in the 1st edition of
FAQ, an error which was corrected since the second edition.

For v.3, the following people contributed comments, extra questions
and other updated information:

Alan Barclay, ([e-mail])
Steve Beaty ([e-mail])
Rick Broadhead ([e-mail])
Gordon L. Burditt (sneaky.lonestar.org!gordon)
Tad Cook ([e-mail], [e-mail], or [e-mail])
David G. Cantor ([e-mail])
Tony Harminc ([e-mail])
Carl Moore ([e-mail])
Gary Morris ([e-mail])
Dan Sahlin ([e-mail])

For v.4 the following people contributed more comments and information,
(sometimes adapted from the regular Digest postings):

Mark Brader, Richard D G Cox, Brad Hicks, Dave Levenson, Don McKillican,
Jim Morton, Colum Mylod, Peter Sint, Pat Turner and Al Varney

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

List of subjects questions covered as they appear in this list:

Technical

 - How do phones work?
 - What is a Central Office? What is a switch? What roles do Central
   Offices and switches play in the telephone network?
 - How many different types of switches are there, how do they differ,
   and what switches are most commonly found in use?
 - When did the first ESS (electronic) switch go into service?
 - What frequencies do touch tones use for which numbers?
 - What are the A, B, C and D touch tone keys used for? Why are they
   not found on touch tone phone sets?
 - What is call supervision?
 - How can I find out what my own phone number is?
 - Are there other kinds of test numbers used?
 - Can a US modem or phone work in the UK, or some other European
   country? (Or vice versa, or in general for international substitution
   of phone equipment)
 - What do "tip" and "ring" mean?
 - Why use a negative charge (-48 volts) for Ring instead of a positive
   charge (such as +48 volts)?
 - What is "Caller ID" (or Call Display, or CNID (Caller Number
   Identification))?
 - How can I get specifications on how Caller ID service works?
 - What is the best way to busy a phone line?  I have a bank of modems
   which are set up as a hunt group. When a modem dies I would like to
   be able to busy out the line that is disconnected, so that one of the
   other modems in the hunt group will take the call.
 - What is the difference between Caller ID/CNID and ANI?

Numbering

 - What is a numbering plan?
 - How was the country code system developed?
 - What is the correct way to write a telephone number for
   international use?
 - What are the prefix digits used in international dialing?
 - What does NPA, NNX, or NXX mean?
 - What happens when all the telephone numbers run out?
 - How is extra numbering capacity achieved in North America?
 - In North America, why does the long distance dialing within an area
   code often change so that 1 + home area code + number has to be
   dialed, or changed to just seven digits (like a local call)?
 - Is North America really running out of area codes?
 - How will we make room if North American area codes are running out?
 - What about expanding area/STD codes in other countries?
 - What is Bellcore?
 - How can I contact Bellcore?
 - How can I get exchange/billing data? What is a V&H tape?

Regulatory & Tariffs

 - What's this about the FCC starting a modem tax for those using
   modems on phone lines?
 - Why is a touch tone line more expensive than a rotary dial line
   (in many places)?
 - How come I got charged at a hotel for a call where no one answered?
   Why is the timing on some of the long distance carriers inaccurate?

Competition

 - Which countries have competitive long distance service?
 - What is a COCOT?
 - What is an AOS?
 - What is "splashing"?
 - Where can I find a list of equal access (10XXX) codes?
 - How can I tell who my default carrier is (or that of a 10XXX+ carrier)?

Features

 - What is the calling card "boing" and what is it made of?
 - How can I prevent the call waiting tone from beeping in mid-conversation?

Miscellaneous

 - Is there a way to find someone given just a phone number?
 - Where can a Cellular/Mobile Radio mailing list be contacted?

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

---------
Technical
---------

Q: How do phones work?

A: A file in the TELECOM Digest archives under the name "how.phones.work"
   is available and should explain some details of the workings of
   the common telephone.

Q: What is a Central Office? What is a switch? What roles do Central
   Offices and switches play in the telephone network?

A: A Central Office (CO) is the facility to which the telephones in
   a public telephone network are connected. It is the front line in
   terms of the whole telephone system; dial tone, telephone ringing,
   connection to other telephones, or outside trunks, is done here.

   A "switch" is a general term referring to facilities where
   telephone traffic is routed from one destination to another.
   The Central Office has a switch in a local sense; calls within
   a municipality can often be completed within a single switch.
   Beyond this, there are switches for long distance or regional
   traffic, many of which are not directly connected to user
   telephones.

   A hierarchy of switching centres was developed in North America.
   Level 5 switches are the most common and are generally the
   local Central Office switches. Level 4 switches are used in
   regional or larger local settings and occasionally are connected
   to customer telephones. Level 3, 2 and 1 switches serve larger
   regions in turn. In general, a call that cannot be handled at
   one level of switching (by reason of distance covered, or congestion
   at a given switch) is passed onto the next higher level until the
   connection is completed. The breakup of AT&T in the USA and the
   introduction of new services will no doubt have disrupted this
   hierarchy, but this illustrates how a call can progress from one
   place to another.

   A large city usually has many central offices, each serving a
   certain geographical area. These central offices are connected
   to other central offices for local calling, or to higher level
   switches, or into long distance networks.

Q: How many different types of switches are there, how do they differ,
   and what switches are most commonly found in use?

A: The original telephone switches were manual, operator-run switchboards.
   Today, these are generally found in developing countries or in certain
   remote locations as newer types of switches allow for connection to
   automatic telephone service.

   Step-by-step was the first widely-used automatic switching method. This
   was an electro-mechanical system which made use of rotating blades and
   mechanical selection of various levels. Dial pulses would be used to cause
   the switches to select switch groups until the whole number was dialed.
   Some step-by-step facilities still exist today, but will eventually be
   replaced by more modern forms of switching (typically a digital facility).
   Step-by-step, with its mechanical nature, can be difficult to troubleshoot
   and maintain, and does not inherently support touch tones or special
   calling features without special addition of equipment.

   Crossbar was the next step in electro-mechanical switching. Rather than the
   rotary/level switches used in step-by-step, connections were completed by
   means of a matrix of connectors. The configuration of crossbar matrix
   elements was under "common control" which could route the call along a
   variety crossbar elements. Step-by-step's "progressive control" could not
   be rerouted to avoid points of congestion in the switches but was rather
   at the mercy of which numbers would be dialed by the telephone users.

   Electronic switches were developed in the 1960's. These were often reed
   relay switches with an electronic common control faster than previous
   crossbar systems. The fewer moving parts there were, the better. Services
   such as call waiting or call forwarding would eventually be possible
   under electronic systems.

   Finally, the new digital electronic systems provide for a fully-
   programmable telephone operation. These are all-electronic systems
   which would process calls without moving parts (ie. solid-state
   switching) and full computerisation of control. Voice traffic would
   now be converted to digital format for use with digital transmission
   facilities. A wide variety of user services can be implemented such
   as sophisticated types of call forwarding or Caller ID or ISDN
   (Integrated Services Digital Network). Ultimately, all telephone
   subscribers will be served by such switches as these.

   Presently, various kinds of switching systems are in use, and
   the proportions of what technologies are in use in given regions
   will vary. The most common will eventually be the digital
   electronic systems. There are significant costs associated with
   upgrading the network to eventually use digital, fully-programmable
   switching, but the eventual goal is to modernise Central Offices
   and long distance networks to such switches. In the meantime, the
   various switching technologies in use must provide compatibility
   with each other.

Q: When did the first ESS (electronic) switch go into service?

A: In the U.S., the first 1ESS switch went into service May 1965 in
   Succasunna, New Jersey. This was a software-controlled switch using
   magnetic reed relays.

   In Canada, the first ESS was set up in Montreal, circa 1967.

   Despite the capabilities of such ESS switches, some phone companies
   are replacing these older generation electronic switches (eg. ESS or
   SP-1) in favour of digital switches (eg. DMS).

   Any information regarding international firsts in electronic or
   digital switching would be welcome as a future enhancement to the FAQ.

Q: What frequencies do touch tones use for which numbers?

A: The touch tone system uses pairs of tones to represent the
   various keys. There is a "low tone" and a "high tone" associated
   with each button (0 through 9, plus * (star) and # (octothorpe
   or pound symbol). The low tones vary according to what
   horizontal row the tone button is in, while the high tones
   correspond to the vertical column of the tone button.

   The tones and assignments are as follows:

          1     2     3     A  :  697 Hz

          4     5     6     B  :  770 Hz
                                           (low tones)
          7     8     9     C  :  852 Hz

          *     0     #     D  :  941 Hz
        ----  ----  ----  ----
        1209  1336  1477  1633 Hz
               (high tones)

   When the 4 button is pressed, the 770 Hz and 1209 Hz tones
   are sent together. The telephone central office will then
   decode the number from this pair of tones.

   The tone frequencies were designed to avoid harmonics and
   other problems that could arise when two tones are sent
   and received. Accurate transmission from the phone and
   accurate decoding on the telephone company end are important.
   They may sound rather musical when dialed (and representations
   of many popular tunes are possible), but they are not intended to
   be so.

   The tones should all be +/- 1.5% of nominal. The high frequency tone
   should be at least as loud, and preferably louder than the low
   frequency. It may be as much as 4 db louder. This factor is referred
   to as "twist."  If a Touchtone signal has +3db of twist, then the high
   frequency is 3 db louder than the low frequency. Negative twist is
   when the low frequency is louder.

Q: What are the A, B, C and D touch tone keys used for?
   Why are they not found on touch tone phone sets?

A: These are extensions to the standard touch-tones (0-9, *, #)
   which originated with the U.S. miltary's Autovon phone network.
   The original names of these keys were FO (Flash Override),
   F (Flash), I (Immediate), and P (Priority) which represented
   priority levels that could establish a phone connection
   with varying degrees of immediacy, killing other conversations
   on the network if necessary with FO being the greatest priority,
   down to P being of lesser priority. The tones are more commonly
   referred to as the A, B, C and D tones respectively, and all
   use a 1633 Hz as their high tone.

   Nowadays, these keys/tones are mainly used in special applications
   such as amateur radio repeaters for their signalling/control.
   Modems and touch tone circuits tend to include the A, B, C and
   D tones as well. These tones have not been used for general
   public service, and it would take years before these tones could
   be used in such things as customer information lines; such
   services would have to be compatibile with the existing 12-button
   touch tone sets in any case.

Q: What is call supervision?

A: Call supervision refers to the process by which it is determined
   that the called party has indeed answered. Long distance calls
   and payphone calls are normally charged from the time the called
   party answers, and no charges should be assessed where the other
   end doesn't answer nor where the called party is busy or blocked
   by network problems.

Q: How can I find out what my own phone number is?

A: If the operator won't read your number back to you, and if you can't
   phone someone with a Calling # ID box, there are special numbers
   available that "speaks" your number back to you when dialed. These
   numbers are quite different from one jurisdiction to the next. Some
   areas use 200 222.2222; others just require 958; still others 311 or
   711 and others have a normally-formatted telephone number which can
   be changed on occasion (such as 997.xxxx).

   Such numbers exist in many countries; no set rule is used in
   determining such numbers other than that these are often assigned
   to codes outside normal customer number sequences and would not
   be in conflict with regular telephone numbers.

Q: Are there other kinds of test numbers used?

A: Yes. Again, space (and available information) does not permit
   a complete list of what each telephone company is up to in
   terms of test numbers. The most common number is a "ringback"
   test number. When a two or three digit number is followed
   by all or the last part of your phone number, another dial
   tone occurs. Tests for dialing or ringing may then be done.

   Other numbers include intercom circuits for telephone company
   staff, or switching centre supervisors, or other interesting
   tests for call supervision or payphone coin tests. Again,
   this depends on the phone company, and such services are
   not usually found in the phone book, needless to say.

Q: Can a US modem or phone work in the UK, or some other European
   country? (Or vice versa, or in general for international substitution
   of phone equipment)

A: Often it can, provided that the AC Voltage and the physical jack
   are compatible or converted, and it can generate pulse dialing,
   as many exchanges are not equipped for touch tone.

   However, in most European countries it is illegal to fit non-approved
   equipment. In the UK approving equipment is the reponsibility of BABT,
   and the penalty is confiscation of the equipment plus a fine of up
   to 2000 pounds sterling. Approved equipment has a mark, usually a
   sticker, of a green circle with the words "APPROVED for connection
   to the telecommunication system specified in the instructions subject
   to the condition set out in them" and the number of the BABT
   certificate. Non-approved items, if they are sold in the UK must
   have a sticker with a red triangle with similar wording except that
   it's saying the exact opposite. It's perfectly legal to sell
   non-approved equipment subject to the above, as there may be a
   valid reason for using it, just not on the UK network.

   In Canada, telephone equipment requires approval from the Canadian
   Department of Communications. Most equipment designed for North
   American conditions should be acceptable, but a small sticker
   from Communications Canada is normally placed on the equipment
   to indicate approval.

Q: What do "tip" and "ring" mean?

A: The conductors of a wire pair to a telephone set are referred to as
   tip (T) and ring (R). Tip (T) is usually positive charge with respect
   to the Ring (R). Ring is typically at -48 volts (subject to voltage
   losses). Tip (T) is then at ground when no current is flowing.

   The actual voltages may differ in PBX/Key system situations (where 24
   volt systems can be found) or higher voltages can be used for situations
   where there are long distances among the subscribers and the switching
   offices.

   Two wires normally suffice to complete a connection between a telephone
   and the central office; any extra wiring would be for purposes such as
   as grounding, party line ringing or party line billing identification,
   or even for dial light power on phones such as the Princess.

   The Tip and Ring terms come from the parts of the plugs that were
   used for manual switchboards.

Q: Why use a negative charge (-48 volts) for Ring instead of a positive
   charge (such as +48 volts)?

A: The reason for doing this is galvonic corrosion protection. A conductor
   with a negative charge will repel chlorine ions, as Cl (chlorine) ions
   are negative also. If the line were to have a positive charge, Cl ions
   would be attracted.

   This form of corrosion protection is called cathodic protection. It
   is often used for pipelines, bridges, etc. Such protection was very
   important in the days of open wire transmission lines.

Q: What is "Caller ID" (or Call Display, or CNID (Caller Number
   Identification))?

A: This is a telephone company service that transmits the number of the
   party to your telephone during the ringing. A data receiver detects
   this signal and displays or otherwise accepts the number transmitted.

   Whether or not a number is transmitted depends on political limitations
   (some jurisdictions do not allow for Caller ID, or at least a fully
   operational version of it) and technical limitations (ie. calls placed
   from older technology switches may not be identifiable; long distance
   services may not be set up to provide end-to-end ID yet).

Q: How can I get specifications on how Caller ID service works?

A: The official documentation on how the Caller ID or calling line ID
   works is available for purchase from Bellcore. A description of
   what those documents are and how to get them is available in the
   TELECOM Digest Archives file caller-id-specs.bellcore, or see the
   question "How can I contact Bellcore?" elsewhere in the FAQ. Local
   telephone companies may be able to provide technical information for
   the purpose of providing equipment vendors with specifications. Check
   the Archives for any other relevant files that may appear such as
   descriptions of the standards and issues surrounding services such as
   Caller ID.

   In Canada, for information about the service (known there as Call
   Display) contact: Stentor Resource Centre Inc, Director - Switched
   Network Services, 160 Elgin Street, Room 790, Ottawa, Ontario, K2P 2C4.
   (This address is changed from the one listed in FAQ #3 of 1992; note
   that the title may be subject to change as well). Tel: [phone].

   The document is "Call Management Service (CMS) Terminal-to-Network
   Interface", Interface Disclosure ID - 0001, November 1989. The document
   at last report was free, at least within Canada. This document deals with
   Bell Canada's Call Display standards, and may not be applicable outside
   their service area (provinces of Ontario and Quebec, parts of the
   Northwest Territories).

   In general, the North American Caller ID information is passed to the
   telephone set in ASCII using a 1200 baud modem signal (FSK) sent between
   the first and second rings.

   In other nations where a Caller ID service exists, or is being
   established, contact the appropriate telephone company for information.

Q: What is the best way to busy a phone line?  I have a bank of modems
   which are set up as a hunt group. When a modem dies I would like to
   be able to busy out the line that is disconnected, so that one of the
   other modems in the hunt group will take the call.

A: "Our modem lines all enter on RJ21 "punchblocks" so I've got some
   rather nice clips that can be pushed over the terminals on the blocks
   and make contact with the pair that I want to busy out. Between the
   two terminals on the clip I have a red LED and a 270 ohm 1/2w resistor
   in series. As long as I get the clip on the right way, it busies out
   the line and lights up so I can see that I've got one of the lines
   busied out."

   "Since most of our modems have error correction, I've even gotten away
   with putting one of these on a line that's in use -- when the user
   disconnects, the line remains busy and I can then pull the modem at my
   leisure. The modem's error correction fixes the blast of noise from
   the clip as I slip it in."

   - Brian

[Further notes [from Dan Boehlke]:  A setup like this is not necessary.
For most systems simply shorting tip and ring together will busy out
the phone line. Some older systems, and lines that do not have much
wire between the switch and the point at which it terminates will need
a 270 ohm 1/2 watt resistor. The resistor is necessary because on a
short line will not have enough resistance to make up for the lack
of a load. Most modern systems have a current limiter that will prevent
problems. Older system may not have a current limiter and may supply
more current than modern systems do. In the followup discussion, we
learned that we should not do this to incoming WATS lines and other
lines that will cause the phone companie's diagnostics centers to get
excited. A particular example was an incomming 800 number that was not
needed for a few days. The new 800 number was subscribed to one of
those plans that let you move it to another location in the event of
a problem. Well the AT&T diagnostic center saw the busy'ed out line as
a problem and promptly called the owner. -dan]

Q: What is the difference between Caller ID/CNID and ANI?

A: Caller ID or CNID or Call Display refers to a service offered to
   telephone customers that allows for display or identification of
   telephone numbers from which incoming calls are made. ANI, or
   Automatic Number Identification, refers to operations within the
   telephone network that allow for the registering of a long distance
   caller's number for billing purposes and not a public offering
   as such.

   Special services such as incoming number identification for
   toll-free or premium program lines (800 or 900 service in
   North America) make use of ANI information and pass this
   along to the called party.


---------
Numbering
---------

Q: What is a numbering plan?

A: This is a plan which establishes the format of codes and subscriber
   numbers for a telephone system or other communications system such
   as Telex. On a local level, subscriber numbers can have a certain
   number of digits (in some cases, the number of digits varies according
   to the exchange centre or digit seqeuence used). The local plan would
   allow for codes used to reach operators, directory assistance, repair,
   test numbers, etc. On a regional or even national level, there need to
   be area codes or number prefixes established in order to route calls
   to the appropriate cities and central offices.

   The typical pattern is to use local numbers within a region, and use
   an STD (subscriber trunk dialing) or area code to call a number in
   another region. The most common method is to use numbers beginning with
   0 as a long distance or inter-regional access digit, followed by other
   digits to route to the proper city (eg. within the UK, dial 071 or 081
   for London, or 021 for Birmingham). Digits other than 0 (generally 2
   through 9) would then represent the initial digit of local numbers.

   In France, there are really two areas; Paris and everything else.
   All local numbers in France have eight digits. Paris uses an area
   code of 1, the rest of the country has no area code as such (just
   the local number, which does not begin with a 1). Long distance
   access is 16 plus the number for regions outside Paris, or
   for Paris, access is 16 + 1 + Paris number.

   Some countries do not use an area code; instead, the local number is
   unique within the country. This often occurs in small nations but such
   plans are also active in Denmark and Singapore. Hong Kong got rid of its
   area codes in recent years and converted to seven-digit local numbers.

   North America is unusual in the world in that the long distance access
   code 1 is commonly used before dialing an area codes plus local number
   (or in most areas, at least until the expansion to new format of area
   codes is in effect, 1 plus number for numbers within an area code). Most
   countries include the prefix in their STD codes listing (021 Birmingham,
   UK; 90 Helsinki, Finland) so that an initial prefix code is avoided.
   North American area codes have three digits, while local numbers have
   seven.

Q: How was the country code system developed?

A: In the early 1960s, a global numbering plan was devised so that the
   various national telephone systems can be linked; this used country
   codes of one to three digits in length, assigned according to geographic
   regions on the Earth. In fact, the system was developed from a numbering
   plan devised in Europe. International Telecommunications Union (ITU)
   documents from that time showed a numbering plan of two-digit country
   codes covering Europe and the Mediterranean Basin countries and even
   described at that time the overseas access codes to be used in
   various countries (France 19, UK 010 - most of these codes are
   still in use today). Many country codes from that original numbering
   plan were used in the worldwide plan such as France 33, UK 44 although
   many codes had to be renumbered for the new worldwide plan.

   The world numbering zones (with initial country code digits) are:

       1        North America
       2        Africa
       3 and 4  Europe
       5        South/Latin America (includes Mexico)
       6        South Pacific countries, Oceana (eg. Australia)
       7        Commonwealth of Independent States (former USSR)
       8        East Asia (eg. Japan, China), plus Marisat/Inmarsat
       9        West & South Asia, Middle East (eg. India, Saudi Arabia)

   There are a few anomalies to the zoning; St Pierre & Miquelon, a French
   territory near the Canadian province of Newfoundland, was issued a
   country code in zone 5 (country code 508), since North America already
   has the country code 1, and there were no codes available in zones 3 or
   4 (at the time of original assignment). There was room in world zone 5
   for the code. Similarly, Greenland (country code 299) could not be fit
   into the European zones, thus 299 was a code that was available from a
   nearby zone.

   The TELECOM Digest Archives has country code listings, including a
   detailed set which indicates area/STD codes used within country
   codes as they would be dialed in international dialing (excluding
   domestic inter-regional prefix digits).

Q: What is the correct way to write a telephone number for
   international use?

A: The method recommended by the CCITT (an international telecommunications
   standards committee) is to use the plus sign then the country code, then
   the STD code (without any common STD/area code prefix digits) and the
   local number. The following numbers (given for the sake of example only)
   describe some of the formats used:

    City             Domestic Number    International Format
    ---------------  -----------------  --------------------
    Toronto, Canada  [phone]     + 1 416 870 2372
    Paris, France    (1) 33.33.33.33    + 33 1 33 33 33 33
    Lyon, France     77.77.77.77        + 33 77 77 77 77
    Birmingham, UK   [phone]     + 44 21 123 4567
    Colon, Panama    41-2345            + 507 41 2345
    Tokyo, Japan     [phone]     + 81 3 4567 8901

   In most cases, the initial 0 of an STD code will not form part of the
   international format number. Some countries use a common prefix of 9
   (such as Finland or Colombia). Some countries STD codes can be used
   as they are where prefix digits are not part of the area code (as is
   the case in North America, Mexico, and a few other countries).

   As indicated in the above example, country code 1 is used for the
   U.S., Canada and Caribbean nations under the North American Numbering
   Plan. This fact is not as well-publicised by American and Canadian
   telephone companies as it is in other countries.

   The important consideration is that the digits following the +
   represent the number as it would be dialed on an international call
   (that is, the telephone company's overseas dialing code followed
   by the digits after the + sign in the international format).

Q: What are the prefix digits used in international dialing?

A: This depends on the country from which an international call is placed.
   The recommended international prefix is 00 (followed by the international
   format number), which most countries have adopted or are planning to
   adopt. Some of the exceptions are:

     Australia    0011            North America     011
     Colombia     90              Russia            810
     Denmark      009             Spain             07
     Finland      990             Nigeria           009
     France       19 W            Papua New Guinea  05
     Ireland      00 (was 16)     Sweden            009
     Mexico +     98              Turkey            9 W 9
     Netherlands  09              United Kingdom    010
     Norway       095

  W = wait for another dial tone before proceeding with rest of number
  + = Mexico uses 95 to access North America (country code 1) specifically;
      98 is used for calling other nations

  (The international access codes in some countries such as Netherlands
  and the UK are eventually expected to change to 00)

Q: What does NPA, NNX, or NXX mean?

A: NPA means Numbering Plan Area, a formal term meaning a
   North American area code (like New York 212, Chicago 312,
   Toronto 416 etc).

   NNX refers to the format of the telephone number's prefix or central
   office code (the first three digits of a seven-digit local North
   American number). The N represents a digit from 2 to 9; an X represents
   any digit 0 to 9. Thus, NNX prefixes can number from 220 to 999, as
   long as they do not have a 0 or 1 as the middle digit.

   NXX means any prefix/central office code from 200 to 999 could be
   represented, allowing for any value in the middle digit. Obvious special
   exceptions include 411 (directory assistance) and 911 (emergency).

Q: What happens when all the telephone numbers run out?

A: With demand for phone numbers increasing worldwide, the capacity
   given by a certain number of digits in a numbering plan will
   tend to be exhausted.

   In whatever country, capacity expansion can be done by such measures as
   adding an extra digit to the local number (as was done in Tokyo, Japan
   or in Paris, France). Extra area/STD codes can be assigned, such as
   splitting a region's codes (London UK was originally STD code 01, now
   split to 071 and 081; Los Angeles in the U.S. was originally area code
   213, then split to add an 818 area, and recently another split of 213
   created the new 310 area).

Q: How is extra numbering capacity achieved in North America?

A: Within an area code, there are a maximum number of prefixes
   (ie. first three digits of a phone number) that can be assigned.
   In the original telephone "numbering plan", up to 640 prefixes
   could be assigned per area code (of the NNX format, 8 * 8 * 10).
   Yet, prefixes get used up due to growth and demand for new numbers
   (accelerated by popularity of separate fax or modem lines, or by
   new services such as the distinctive ringing numbers that ring a
   single line differently depending on which phone number was dialed).

   When the prefixes of NNX format run out, there are two options
   in order to allow for more prefixes, and in turn more numbers:

      1) "splitting" the area code so that a new area code can
         accomodate new prefixes, or

      2) allowing extra prefixes to be assigned by changing from
         NNX format to NXX format.

   The preferred option is to go with 2) first, in order to avoid having
   a new area code assignment. Yet, this gives the area code a maximum of
   160 new prefixes, or 8 * 10 * 10 = 800. When the NXX format prefixes
   are used up, then 1) is not optional. New York and Los Angeles are two
   regions that have gone from NNX to NXX format prefixes first, then
   their area codes were split.

   Interestingly enough, some area codes have split even though there was
   no change from NNX format prefixes to NXX at the time. Such splits have
   occurred in Florida (305/407) and Colorado (303/719). The precise reasons
   why a change to NXX-style prefixes was not done in those cases is not
   widely known, but switching requirements in those areas, plus telephone
   company expenses in changing from NNX to NXX format (and the likelihood
   of an eventual area code split) are likely factors in these decisions.

   Note that it is prefixes, and not necessarily the number of telephones,
   that determines how crowded an area code is. Small exchanges could use
   a whole prefix for only a few phones, while an urban exchange may use
   most of the 10 000 possible numbers per prefix. Companies, paging, test
   numbers and special services can be assigned their own prefixes as
   well, such as the 555 directory assistance prefix (555.1212).

Q: In North America, why does the long distance dialing within an
   area code often change so that 1 + home area code + number has
   to be dialed, or changed to just seven digits (like a local call)?

A: When prefixes change to NXX, that means that the prefix numbers can be
   identical to area codes. The phone equipment is no longer able to make
   a distinction between what is an area code and what is a prefix within
   the home area code, based on the first three digits. For instance, it is
   hard for central offices to tell the difference between 1+210 555.2368
   and 1+210.5552

   Thus, 1 + area code + number for all long distance calls is used in
   many North American area codes. Or ... just dialing seven digits within
   the area code for all calls, local or long distance (thus risking
   complaints from customers who thought they were making a local call when
   in fact the call was long distance).

   It is up to each phone company to decide how to handle prefix
   and dialing changes. The rules change from place to place.

Q: Is North America really running out of area codes?

A: Indeed, apart from special "non-geographic" area codes such as 200, 300,
   400 or 500, there are no longer any area codes that can be assigned from
   the traditional format. At present, all area codes have a 0 or 1 as the
   middle digit (212, 907, 416, 708, etc). It even appears that the 610 code
   was freed from its usage in Canadian TWX/ISDN service (and moved to 600),
   so that the split of 215 area in Philadelphia can use 610. There remains
   the assignment of code 710 which is reserved for mysterious U.S.
   government services.

   Area codes ending in -00 are intended for special services like 800 or
   900 numbers. Also, -11 area codes could be confused with services like
   411 (directory assistance) or 911 (emergency); indeed, a few places
   require 1+411 for directory assistance.

Q: How will we make room if North American area codes are running out?

A: Bellcore, which oversees the assignment of area codes and the North
   American Numbering Plan in general, has made a recommendation that
   "interchangeable" area codes be allowed as of January 1995 (advanced
   from the previous deadline of July 1995 due to unprecedented exhaustion
   of available area codes). That means that there no longer need to be
   a 0 or 1 as the middle digit of an area code, and in fact the area code
   will become NXX format. While some suggest that eight-digit local numbers
   or four-digit area codes be established, the interchangeable area code plan
   has been on the books for many years.

   One aspect of the plan is that, initially, the new area codes may end in
   0 (such as 220, 650, etc). This would make it easier on a few area codes
   so that they could conceivably retain the ability to dial 1+number (without
   dialing the home area code) for long distance calls within the area code,
   provided that they have not assigned prefixes ending in zero that would
   conflict with new area codes. That option is not possible for many area
   codes that have already assigned some prefixes of "NN0" format, however.
   Eventually, the distinction between area code and prefix formats would
   be completely lost.

   The last remaining traditional area code, 910, was recently assigned to
   allow for a split of North Carolina's 919 area code. Still, Bellcore
   expects that NPA capacity is sufficient until the January 1995 cutover
   to interchangeable NPAs. The interchangeable area code plan will be felt
   throughout the U.S. and Canada. As a last resort, the N00 codes (like
   200) may need to be used.

Q: What about expanding area/STD codes in other countries?

A: Many countries tend to use variable numbers of digits in the local
   numbers and STD/area code numbers, thus there is often flexibility
   in assigning new codes or expanding the capacity of codes. Sometimes
   codes are changed to provide for extra capacity or to allow for
   a uniform numbering plan such as ensuring the total number of digits
   of the STD/area code plus the local number is constant within a
   country.

   In the UK, it is reported that the digit '1' will be added to some
   of the major codes as of 1995 in order to create extra STD code capacity.
   For instance, London's 071 and 081 codes would be changed to 0171 and
   0181 respectively (internationally, change +44 71 and +44 81 to
   +44 171 and +44 181).

   There are rumours that France will change its system again, to divide
   the country into a few regions of single-digit area codes. Presently,
   Paris has an area code 1, with the remainder of France having no area
   code as such; eight-digit local numbers are used in and out of Paris.
   The areas outside of Paris would then get area codes corresponding to
   particular regions.

   Australia is moving to single digit area codes, with uniform eight
   digit local numbers. This replaces the current system with variable
   length area codes and local numbers. This new plan is to be phased
   in during the 1990's. New Zealand is also completing a change to single
   digit area codes, with uniform seven digit local numbers.

   Hong Kong actually got rid of its area codes a few years ago, replacing
   the few single-digit area codes with seven-digit local numbers throughout
   Hong Kong.

Q: What is Bellcore?

A: Bellcore, or Bell Communications Research, is a company that does
   a variety of things for the telephone system in North America. It
   assigns area codes, develops and sells technical documents relating
   to the operation of the phone system, and does research and
   development on various communications technologies. Recently,
   Bellcore did development on MPEG, a video data compression method
   to allow transmission of entertainment-quality video on a 1.5 Mb/s
   communications link.

Q: How can I contact Bellcore?

A: The Bellcore document hotline (with touch tone menu) can be reached at
   1 800 521 CORE (ie. 1 800 521 2673) within the USA, or [phone]
   outside the USA ([phone] is the fax number). A catalogue of
   documents can be ordered through this number.

   For the voice menu on Bellcore's document hotline, to order a document
   press 2 at the automated greeting. If you want to talk to a person
   about availability, prices, etc, press 4 at the automated greeting.

   Payment for documents can be made using American Express, Visa, Master
   Card, International Money Orders, and Checks on US Banks. If you don't
   have a document number handy, a catalog of technical documents is available.

   Bellcore TAs and other preliminary "advisories" are only available
   by writing:

     Bellcore
     Document Registrar
     445 South Street - Room 2J-125
     P. O. Box 1910
     Morristown, NJ USA 07962-1910

   The mailing address for ordering other "standard" documents (including
   "TR" documents) is:

     Bellcore Customer Service
     60 New England Avenue
     Piscataway, NJ USA 08854-4196

   NPA/NXX (area codes, exchange codes) information is maintained by
   the (somewhat) separate Traffic Routing Administration (TRA) group,
   at [phone].

   For all other TRA "products", or information about on-line access to a
   database of routing data, contact the TRA Hotline at [phone],
   or write to:

     Traffic Routing Administration
     Bell Communications Research, Inc.
     435 South Street, Room 1J321
     Morristown, NJ  07962-1961

   If you want to talk to the "pub" folks, or a technical person, the
   numbers/addresses are in the front of any TR (and the "Catalog").

   Note that certain Bellcore documents (particularly certain TRA documents),
   require the signing of a "Terms and Conditions" agreement before purchase.

Q: How can I get exchange/billing data? What is a V&H tape?

A: Bellcore sells the NPA-NXX Vertical and Horizontal Coordinates Tape
   (the "V&H Tape"); this is primarily for billing purposes and lists
   (for each NXX, or central office code) the type of NXX, major/minor
   V&H coordinates (a sort of "latitude" and "longitude" used to calculate
   rate distances for long distance billing), LATA Code (identifying the
   U.S. long distance service area), the RAO (revenue accounting office),
   Time Zone, Place Name, OCN (telephone company identifier) and indicators
   for international dialing and "Non-Dialable".

   Other related Bellcore documents include:

   - NPA/NXX Activity Guide lists all NPA/NXX codes schedules to be added,
     removed or "modified" (monthly). There's also an Active Code List that
     lists all NPA/NXX codes that aren't planned to be removed or "modified"
     for the next 6 months.

   - Local Exchange Routing Guide (LERG) contains information on all
     USA/Caribbean destinations, switching entities, Rate Centers and
     Localities, Tandem Homing information, operator service codes,
     800/900 NXX assignments, etc. (three 1600 BPI tapes). Mostly useful
     to interexchange carriers (IXCs) and other telephone companies.

   - Telephone Area Code Directory (TACD) is a document listing area
     codes according to location (ordered by state/province and place).
     TACD also includes a list of Carrier Identification Codes (CICs)
     used for 10XXX+ or 950.ZXXX long distance service selection.


--------------------
Regulatory & Tariffs
--------------------

Q: What's this about the FCC starting a modem tax for those
   using modems on phone lines?

A: This is one of those tall urban legends, on the order of the Craig
   Shergold story (yes, folks, Craig's doing okay as of last report and
   he doesn't need cards of any kind). It started when the FCC took up
   a proposal that, if it had passed, would have raised the rate that
   certain modem users paid, notably those who have set up their own
   long distance networks for public use, like Compu$erve. The proposal
   was not enacted into law.

   Nevertheless, this proposal, or one even worse, could come up again
   in the future. Here's how to tell the facts from the urban legends.
   (1) Demand documentation; don't act until you see a copy of the FCC
   proposal. (2) Once you have the proposal, look at the number. It will
   be in the form yy-n, yy-nn, or yy-nnn. The first number, before the
   hyphen, is the year. If, for example, it's the infamous 85-79, you
   know it was the 79th proposal all the way back in 1985, and no longer
   matters. (3) If you do see an up-to-date proposal, read it carefully.
   If you can't tell what part of it enacts a "modem tax", demand that
   the person who wants you to act explain it to you. If they can't,
   or won't, then (and only then) bring it up on Telecom Digest, making
   sure that you always include the FCC proposal's number, so that people
   know which document you're talking about.

   Regulators in other countries may also have similar types of notices. The
   CRTC in Canada issues public notices and decisions on telecommunications
   using similar numbering schemes.

Q: Why is a touch tone line more expensive than a rotary dial
   line (in many places)?

A: This has been an occasional debate topic in the Digest. Indeed,
   there can be a surcharge from $1 to $3 per month to have the
   ability to dial using touch tone. In modern equipment, touch
   tone is actually better and cheaper for the phone company
   to administer that the old pulse/rotary dialing system.

   The tone dialing charge can be attributed to the value of
   a demanded service; tone is better, thus a premium can be
   applied for this privilege. Also, it is something of a holdover
   from the days when tone service required extra expense to decode
   with the circuitry originally available. This is especially
   true on crossbar exchanges, or where tone would have to be
   converted to dial pulses as is the case with step-by-step
   exchange equipment. Today, cheap integrated circuits are readily
   available for decoding the tones used in dialing, and are
   a standard part of electronic switching systems.

   Some telephone companies have abandoned a premium charge for tone
   dialing by including this in the regular local service charge. Others
   still hold to some form of tone surcharge.

Q: How come I got charged at a hotel for a call where no
   one answered? Why is the timing on some of the long
   distance carriers inaccurate?

A: Where real call supervision is unavailable or inconvenient,
   a ploy used by some call billing systems is to guess when
   a call might be answered. That is, a customer dials the call,
   and the equipment times the progress; after a certain point
   in time the billing will commence whether or not the party
   at the other end actually answers the phone. Thus, calls
   left ringing for more than five or six rings can be billed.
   Adding to the problem is the fact that calls don't necessarily
   start ringing at a fixed time after the last digit is dialed.

   Needless to say, some calls can be left uncharged in this scheme.
   Should the call be answered and completed before the billing timer
   elapses, the call won't be billed.

   There are reports that California requires proper billing and
   supervision of calls. Other areas may adopt similar requirements.


-----------
Competition
-----------

Q: Which countries have competitive long distance service?

A: Most countries have a single monopoly telephone company for their
   local and long distance services. Yet, deregulation of telephone
   companies and telecommunications in general is a worldwide trend.
   For better or worse, the international marketplace is demanding
   more innovation and competition in telecom markets in such areas
   as electronic mail, fax and data services as well as the long
   distance, satellite and other network services.

   The United States has competition in terms of long distance services
   (ie. a choice of carriers such as AT&T, MCI, Sprint, Metromedia/ITT,
   Allnet, ATC). This was established in the early 1980s with the
   court-ordered dissolution of the Bell System into such pieces as
   regional local telephone providers, AT&T (long distance) and
   Bellcore (research, administration of telephone standards, etc).

   The UK has a duopoly long distance situation: British Telecom
   and Mercury can provide long distance services but that could
   be challenged as other companies wish to provide long distance
   services.

   Canada permitted public long distance competition in June 1992.
   Prior to that, there was limited competition in terms of such things
   as fax communication services and various long distance/local service
   resellers, aimed at business interests. Unitel and BCRL/Call-Net
   were successful in their application to compete. A subsequent appeal
   of certain aspects of this decision was made by Bell Canada and other
   existing telephone companies. The result of the appeal was that
   the decision could stand, and that long distance competition may
   proceed.

   New Zealand recently allowed Clear Communications to compete in long
   distance. Australia now has Optus as a long distance competitor. Japan
   has competition in international public long distance services.

   There are initial signs competition in the "local loop", or local
   exchange services, also. Reports from the UK indicate that there is
   significant growth in alternative local services, besides the Mercury/BT
   long distance duopoly (competition of two). Cable companies are touted
   as the alternative local phone companie because of the available capacity
   on cable feeds, plus the cable industry's conversion to fibre optic and
   digital technologies. A choice of "dial tone" providers may eventually
   be available to match the availability of competition in long distance
   services.

Q: What is a COCOT?

A: Customer-Owned Coin-Operated Telephone, or perhaps Coin-Operated
   Customer-Owned Telephone. Essentially, this is a privately-owned
   public telephone as opposed to the traditional payphone that is
   owned and operated by the local telephone company. Most COCOTs exist
   in the United States; their status is not too well-known outside
   the U.S. Certainly there are no approved COCOTs in Canada as
   such and are also likely rare or nonexistent in other nations.

   The COCOT is the target of much scorn as it often delivers less than
   what one would hope for in competition. Cited deficiencies of many
   of these units include prohibiting access to carriers like AT&T, use
   of default "carriers" that charge exorbitant rates for long distance
   calls, etc. Some of them have had problems when newly activated area
   codes were used. In some cases, COCOTs would not even place calls to
   numbers whose new area codes could not be dialed and whose old area
   codes could no longer be dialed.

Q: What is an AOS?

A: AOS is short for Alternate Operator Service. That is a company other
   than a long distance carrier or local telephone company that provides
   operator assisted services for long distance (collect, third number
   billed calls, person-to-person, etc). Normally this involves having
   operator staff handle billing and the necessary dialing, but the AOS
   companies make use of existing long distance services rather than have
   their own network. Using an AOS, whether for a collect call or credit
   card call can be more expensive than bargained for.

   Often, COCOTs (see above) will have their default "carrier" set to
   an AOS, for optimum revenues. Hotels may also set up phones to use
   AOS services by default.

Q: What is "splashing"?

A: Suppose you place a call from city A to city B using an AOS based
   in city C. The call is considered to be "splashed" if the billing
   for the call is based on the distance between city C (AOS) and
   city B (destination) rather than between cities A and B as
   one traditionally expects such calls to be billed. Thus, if the
   splashed distance (C-B) is much longer than the origin-destination
   (A-B) distance, the customer is charged extra money.

Q: Where can I find a list of equal access (10XXX) codes?

A: The TELECOM Digest Archives has lists of these codes. They are contained
   in the files occ.10xxx.access.codes and occ.10xxx.list.updated in the
   TELECOM Digest Archives. New information on these codes or other access
   codes occasionally appears in TELECOM Digest.

   An official, full list of these codes was part of Bellcore's Telephone
   Area Code Directory document. Bellcore also maintains a list of these
   Carrier Identification Codes as a separate document (see "How can I
   contact Bellcore?" question for details on purchasing Bellcore documents).

Q: How can I tell who my default carrier is (or that of a 10XXX+
   carrier)?

A: In the U.S., dial 1 700 555.4141, and that should get a recording
   indicating the default carrier. This should be a free call. From
   regular lines, dialing 10XXX + 1 700 555.4141 can yield the
   identifying recordings of other carriers.

   On payphones, AT&T is always a "default" carrier for coin calls, but not
   necessarily so when it comes to calling/billing card numbers, collect
   calls or other operator-assisted calls. Thus on payphones, AT&T's
   recording is heard regardless if what carrier access codes are used
   before 1 700 555.4141. Apparently, no other long distance carrier is
   interested in collecting coin revenues. COCOTs usually handle coin
   calls with self-contained coin billing equipment (and guessing of
   call connection time).


--------
Features
--------

Q: What is the calling card "boing" and what is it made of?

A: When a North American call is dialed as 0 + (area code if necessary)
   + number, a "boing" is heard after the number is dialed. This is the
   prompt to enter a telephone company calling card number to bill the
   call with, or to select the operator (0) for further handling, or in
   some regions to specify collect or third number billing for the call.

   The boing consists of a very short burst of the '#' touch tone, followed
   by a rapidly decaying dial tone. The initial '#' tone is used in case
   certain tone-pulse converters exist on the line; such converters use the
   '#' to disable conversion of tones to dial pulses, a conversion which
   would prevent card number entries from reaching the long distance provider.

Q: How can I prevent the call waiting tone from beeping in
   mid-conversation?

A: If you place the call, and don't want to get interrupted, a call
   waiting suppression code is dialed before dialing the call itself.
   The most common code for this in North America is *70 or 1170 (on
   rotary dial phone lines). 70# (or 70 and wait on rotary phone) could
   also be used in some areas. Other countries will have special codes
   for this, and will vary in terms of capabilities offered.

   Local phone companies in some areas charge installation and monthly
   fees for 'Cancel Call Waiting', and you must subscribe for this to
   work. In some areas it comes free with Call Waiting. In a few other
   areas it may be unavailable at any price.

   Thus, to call 555.0000 so that call waiting is disabled, dial *70
   (or whatever the correct code is for your area), wait for another
   dial tone, then dial 555.0000 as usual.

   Suppressing call waiting tone on an *incoming* call may be possible
   depending on how your phone company has set the central office.
   One possible way of doing this is to flash your switch-hook briefly,
   see if a dial tone comes on, then try dialing the call waiting
   suppress code (*70 or whatever). Southwestern Bell, for instance,
   uses a variant of this: <flash hook> *70 <flash hook> (ie. a second
   hook flash required). The methods are not guaranteed, however; your
   phone company might be able to give a better answer if the preceding
   doesn't work.

   NOTE: each phone company will determine the capabilities of Call Waiting
   features, and what codes will be used to activate them, and what costs
   the service will be provided at. The codes are not necessarily the same
   from place to place. Please consult your phone company for official
   information in your particular area if any of the above codes do not work
   properly. Also check the phone book introductory pages as these sometimes
   include instructions on how to use special calling services such as
   Call Waiting.

-------------
Miscellaneous
-------------

Q: Is there a way to find someone given just a phone number?

A: Sometimes. There are often cross-referenced city indexes available in
   libraries and other places that have lists ordered by the phone number.
   These directories go by names such as Bowers, Mights, Strongs or other
   brands. Unlisted numbers are not listed, nor are they intended to be
   traced by the general public. One catch is that such directories are
   necessarily out of date shortly after their publication what with the
   "churn" of changing telephone numbers and addresses.

   In addition, there are phone numbers provided by telephone companies
   that connect to live lookup services. Operators at these numbers will
   determine a person according to the phone number. Only a few of these
   lookup numbers are intended for the general public (eg. Chicago and
   Tampa). Some countries have also provided number to name lookup as a
   matter of normal telephone service, although these are often chargeable
   calls. Otherwise, most of these lookup numbers are for internal telephone
   company usage. Again, unlisted numbers are not intended to be provided
   by these services, while the listed numbers are often found in the
   introductory pages of local phone books.

   The Compuserve on line service had a facility to find names and addresses
   based on phone numbers. This facility is reported to have more recent
   information for residential numbers than for business numbers. Those
   interested should contact Compuserve staff for assistance or information
   on this service.

   Private detectives seem to have other means of getting these
   numbers, but that's another story...

Q: Where can a Cellular/Mobile Radio mailing list be contacted?

A: A mailing list dedicated to cellular/mobile radio technologies, namely
   new digital radio services, is available. Contact [e-mail].

   Fidonet has a CELLULAR conference for cellular telephony issues, for
   those with access to that network.


( end of list )

                         ---------

Send future Frequently Asked Questions direct to [e-mail],
or other addresses mentioned at the beginning of this document. Do NOT use
any of the TELECOM Digest addresses for correspondence regarding the FAQ
unless all the other FAQ addresses are unreachable.











Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa06181;
          25 Jan 93 2:59 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA05212
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 25 Jan 1993 00:55:37 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA02619
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 25 Jan 1993 00:55:03 -0600
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 00:55:03 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #43

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 25 Jan 93 00:54:50 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 43

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: N.E. Telephone Admits Ripoff - Refuses Restitution (Tony Pelliccio)
    Re: N.E. Telephone Admits Ripoff - Refuses Restitution (William Degnan)
    Re: Internet *67 Service (David Cornejo)
    Re: Beware: Portability (Brent Capps)
    Re: US Losing Lead in Telecom - USC Report (Jan Steinman)
    Re: University Telephone System (and Integretel in General) (Udi Manber)
    Re: PacBell Intra-LATA Rate Ripoffs (John Higdon)
    Re: Can Paging Software Detect Alphanumerics? (Ken Stone)
    Re: "Secret" Phone Codes (Gantt Edmiston)
    Re: It's Not a Bug, It's a Feature ... (Sue Miller)
    Re: Wiring For Multi-Lines on One Jack (John R. Levine)
    Re: Telecom Management Degrees (Jack Winslade)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sun, 24 Jan 93 16:12:10 EST
From: Tony Pelliccio <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: N.E. Telephone Admits Ripoff - Refuses Restitution


Oh yes, the system is FILLED with errors. Last I knew NET was
embarking on changing all it's billing and order systems over. Perhaps
your area of MA just went through it. I know Providence went through
it last October. I had a line installed in my new apt. and five months
go by, no bill. Nothing!  The best part is, my number ends in 071x and
the VA Hospital is 710x. Guess where all my LD was being billed to? Uh
huh, the VA. I'd call NET and ask them and they could never find
account info, same thing with AT&T for my LD.  Who knows, maybe I
should have kept my mouth shut and I'd be receiving my service
compliments of New England Telephone.

The only reason I knew about the LD being billed to the VA Hospital in
Providence was because a friend of mine who I call quite often lives
in NJ and he got a rather nasty call from someone at VA who takes care
of the telecom system asking who he knows that works there. Well, he
immediately called me thinking it might have been one of my computer
hijinks again but it wasn't.

To this day, those five+ months of LD have NEVER been billed to me. I
guess VA either just payed them or disputed them. Ah well ... thanks
Uncle Sam!

Tony


[Moderator's Note: I had a phone turned on about twenty years ago at a
place where I stayed occassionally and although the service got turned
on, the paperwork never made it to accounting for the purpose of
setting up a billing account. Since the line had unmeasured metro
service (a type of service we had back then) there were never any
extra units generated and no reason to ever issue a bill. It went on
like that for a year. I was careful to never make any long distance
calls from that line or do anything which would start paperwork going.
Then one day, some $$#%&# phreak billed a third number phraud call to
that line. From a telco unknown to me comes the billing tape; it hits
the accounting department and of course the charges promptly fall out
and go to suspense, there being 'no such number' to bill them to on
this end where Accounting was concerned. In the adjustments/suspense
investigative process, someone at telco actually dials my number and
discovers it turned on .... hmmm, they say, and they ask the CO to
send the paperwork all over again. The next billing cycle, I get a
bill for *12 months to date* of service, plus the installation charge
which never had been billed, plus next month's service in advance, and
of course, plus the (still unknown to telco) phraud LD charge. I got
the phraud charge removed, but was hardly in a position to argue with
them about the service I had been using for the past year. :(   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (William Degnan)
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 00:42:14
Subject: Re: N.E. Telephone Admits Ripoff - Refuses Restitution


[e-mail] (Scott Hannahs) writes:

> Just a follow up to the note I posted last week.  New England
> Telephone now admits (verbally) that they were miss-billing (read
> overcharging) everyone in my exchange.  They are willing to rebate me
> the amount they overcharged but I was told, "We can't rebate everyone
> since that would cost too much".  I didn't hear any complaints about
> collecting too much money.  They will rebate anyone who complains
> about it.

The Mass. Department of Public Utilities might be interested in this
discussion.

And if they are not, try the Office of Public Utility Counsel (or if
this is not what it is called in the Commonwealth, its equivalent).

Oh ...

Did they refund any interest?


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

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

From: [e-mail] (David Cornejo)
Subject: Re: Internet *67 Service
Date: 24 Jan 1993 11:38:40 -0800
Organization: Telco Systems NAC, Fremont, CA


In article <[e-mail]> Paul Robinson <tdarcos@access.
digex.com> writes:

> Note earlier in this message I said "the one that's left".  There was
> a service being run in Australia that did even more.  First you used
> the program PGP - a free RSA Public key generator - to create a public
> and private key.  You could then send the service your public key
> first, then send messages which were UUENCODEd using the matching
> private key, and told that system where to send the message.  It would
> use the previously supplied key to decrypt the message and then
> forward it under the unique ID.

> Unfortunately the backbone supplier for his area caught on to what he
> was doing, and like most stuffy governmental authorities, takes a dim
> view of people keeping their private matters private, informed him
> that the activity he was doing was not a valid use of the network and
> ordered the service discontinued.  Boo.

In a note that I saw posted somewhere, the operator of this service
said that the other reason given by the backbone supplier was that the
links to Australia were overburdened even without this added traffic.
This was the primary reason why he chose not to protest too strongly.

My own feeling is that these services are innappropriate for use on
the Internet. I feel that since some other entity pays to transport my
traffic on its network that I owe them some accountability. (I know
that we usually pay for the connection to the Internet, but in general
the transport is at the expense of someone else) If the Australian
network (which I believe has educational/government funding) feels
that someones late night mumblings to alt.sex.* is inappropriate given
their charter who are we to complain? It is after all their dime.


Dave Cornejo, Telco Systems NAC   voice 510.490.3111
4305 Cushing Parkway                        ext 5158
Fremont, CA 94538                   FAX [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Brent Capps)
Subject: Re: Beware: Portability
Organization: Atlas Telecom Inc.
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1993 16:36:14 GMT


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

> BCS-34 (BCS: Bad Canadian Software ;-).

FYI, the software that drives the DMS-250s used by Sprint is written
by BNR -- in Richardson, TX.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Jan Steinman,- Bytesmiths -,Tel x3946)
Subject: Re: US Losing Lead in Telecom - USC Report
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Ascom Hasler AG
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1993 11:49:54 GMT


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

> From article <[e-mail]>, by [e-mail]

(Quotes speculating on reasons for US telecom tech lag deleted.)

> No, you missed the point. It is federal tax policy which is
> dramatically different between the U.S.A. and many other countries.

Can we speculate what the change in administration may do with this?
The Clinton/Gore campaign stessed renewed infrastructure, and I
believe they specifically called for the funding of a "data highway"
system, similar in scope and effort to that which produced the
Interstate Highway System.

To me, this indicates that if telecom industry lobbyists do their job,
there should be no problem getting amortization rates for telecom gear
down to those of computer gear, at least in the next four years!


Jan Steinman, Bytesmiths           [e-mail]
2002 Parkside Court, West Linn, OR 97068-2767 USA   [phone]
Beundenfeldstrasse 35, CH-3013, Bern, Switzerland   [phone]

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

Date: Sun, 24 Jan 93 20:00:56 -0800
From: [e-mail] (Udi Manber)
Subject: Re: University Telephone System (and Integretel in General)


[PAT writes]:

> Yours won't be the first call Integratel has received from young men
> who were similarly situated (or dirty old men for that matter), nor
> will it be the last.  Next time, read the fine print closer in the ad
> or listen to the message played out when you first call! :)   PAT]

I must take strong exception to the tone of the moderator's reply,
which automatically assumed that Integretel was right and that student
was "guilty."  (Although in fairness, I probably would have reacted
the same way had I not been on the opposite side recently.)
Intergretel will not win any awards for precision or customer service.
They make mistakes.  Lots of them.

In many cases, the "companies" Integretel represents *rely* on the
fact that it is extremely difficult to complain against them.  A great
part of that difficulty is that everyone assumes that you are "a dirty
old (or young) man" automatically.  So, complaining is not only
difficult, it is also embarrassing.

As I detailed in a message a couple of weeks ago, it took me two
months and dozens of phone calls to successfully remove their charges
of $3.95 for one minute call, which occurred through an 800 number
call (which I assume was made in error; Integretel would not tell me
or even the utility commission the 800 number).  It was easier for me
to argue that a one-minute call to an 800 number was made in error and
I never agreed or intended to have any business with these outfits;
but if the charges were $395, I am sure no one would have believed me.

900 numbers provide a reasonable mechanism. There are holes, but if
you dial 1-900 you should know that "buyer beware."  All the other
schemes (call back, call collect, 800 number forwarding, etc.) are
there mainly to circumvent blocking.  In my opinion, 99% of the time
(and I am not sure about the 1% either) the main purpose of such
schemes is to defraud someone.  The fact that no reasonable
regulations exist and these kinds of frauds still flourish is an
outrage in my opinion, especially when the victims are then labeled as
dirty old men.


Udi Manber


[Moderator's Note: You say 'the main purpose of such schemes is to
defraud someone ...'  Who, may I ask, is attempting to defraud whom?
800 numbers being forwarded is one thing, but the willful acceptance
of a collect call when you were notified by the operator that so and
so was calling collect and the charge would be so much per minute is
quite another.  If it were as simple as has been suggested, to simply
make the claim 'someone accepted the charge' when in fact no one was
contacted or made that statement, then why hasn't Integretel done that
to everyone?  If all they have to do in this 'scam' is punch up some
information on billing tapes and pass it along to telco, then why
don't we see much more of it than we do?

I do not stand up for the way Integretel handles customer service, and
I agree that by and large their clients are sleaze.  But if you choose
to deal with their clients then you should plan on paying their
clients. You say 'all the other schemes are there to circumvent
blocking ...'; of course they are. The LD carriers use 1-800 numbers
as a way to circumvent 10xxx blocking.  Some customers use 800/ANI as
a way to circumvent Caller-ID blocking.  Everyone uses something to
circumvent the blocking of something else when it suits their
requirements. Why should sex-by-phone providers be any different?

Integretel may use sleazy business practices, but I am quite sure they
do not commit fraud. If people want to argue with the company and
insist they did not make the call, that is fine. Maybe they did, and
maybe they did not, but be assured there was *some basis* for the
charges. Let's cut out the old BS which goes "I am an injured consumer
defrauded by <name of> company" unless that really happened, and in
most cases it did not happen. If anything, it is far more common for
people to try and weasel out of paying for 'information and services'
provided over the phone than it is for the IP to just send out fraud
billings at random.  PAT]

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

Date: Sun, 24 Jan 93 20:23 PST
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: PacBell Intra-LATA Rate Ripoffs


[e-mail] (Glenn McComb) writes:

> Hello!  I'm trying to find out how to dial from my (408) to (415) and
> (510) via my preferred carrier (MCI).  When I dial 10222 (MCI access)
> and then a 415 number, a recording tells me "it is not necessary to
> use your carrier" or something like that.

There are two ways around this. One is to find a carrier who will give
you "950" access and the other is to install direct trunks to your
carrier. The first is perfectly doable for even the small user; the
latter is something more and more businesses are doing to bypass
Pac*Bell and its usary rates.

> [Moderator's Note: I believe under the tariffs, your local telco, (in
> this case Pac Bell) has the right to keep that traffic for itself, and
> there is some question in my mind if MCI is lawfully allowed to handle
> intra-lata calls between 415/408/510.

The tariff is tricky. There is nothing in it to prevent you, the end
user, from making intraLATA calls over a long distance carrier. A long
distance carrier is merely prohibited from OFFERING the service to you.
Most of them are pretty good about this and even if you ask, the
carrier will deny any capability of carrying intraLATA calls. It is we
who are in the know who take advantage of the above two methods to
save big time on our short distance calls.

Pac*Bell has seen this handwriting on the wall for some time and
realizes that much revenue is leaking away through bypass. Its remedy
(on application to the CPUC) is to lower intraLATA rates to competitive
levels (making bypass look less attractive) and then screwing the truly
captive customers who cannot go anywhere else for service: the
residential and small business local exchange customers.

Frankly, I would like to see the current system maintained. Keep the
reasonable rates for residence and small business local service. Those
of us who know better will bypass Pac*Bell for intraLATA calls, and
just let those who don't know any better pay through the nose,
subsidizing the rest of us!

> AT&T also charges 12-13 cents per minute on interstate calls during
> off-peak hours, but they are not technically allowed to handle
> intra-lata calls either.  PAT]

AT&T Megacom subscribers pay around 9 to 10 cents per minute (or
whatever they can negotiate). And of course, that includes intraLATA
since the trunks come direct from AT&T. No self-respecting business of
any size uses Pac*Bell for intraLATA traffic anymore. All that are
left doing that are residence and very small business chumps.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Ken Stone)
Subject: Re: Can Paging Software Detect Alphanumerics?
Date: 24 Jan 1993 20:51:06 -0800
Organization: Hewlett Packard, San Diego Division


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Dan Danz) writes:

> If I send Skytel "**12345", I get back **12345 ... INVALID NUMERIC
> MESSAGE ... ENTER NUMERIC MESSAGE:>

> However, since when did SkyTel start using IXO/TAP?  I'm currently
> talking to them using their menu-driven PC connection that is
> definitely not IXO/TAP, which I would prefer.

SkyTel has their own stuff on one dial in number and IXO/TAP on
another.  Last time I set it up, I had to call their tech assist
number and go thru three people before I got some one that understood
what I wanted.


Ken

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

From: [e-mail] (Gantt Edmiston)
Subject: Re: "Secret" Phone Codes
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 04:11:14 GMT
Organization: SAS Institute Inc.


[e-mail] (Tompkins) writes:

> In one of those discussions, about a year ago, a number was posted
> that purported to work nationally: 10732-1-404-988-9664.

Works from 919 too!


Gantt Edmiston - SysAdmin      SAS Institute Inc.
Quality Assurance - V416  Cary NC 27513    919-677-8000 x6091
[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Sue Miller)
Subject: Re: It's Not a Bug, It's a Feature ...
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 06:27:24 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Chuck
Munro) writes:

> Well, as a matter of fact .....

> When I was a customer of H-P (*many* years ago) I had a program on my
> HP1000 that would rapidly move the brake solenoid up and down on the
> paper tape reader.  This would result in music (quite loud if you
> placed an IBM punch card in the reader) which you could play from the
> console keyboard.  This was my first experience with a pre-MIDI
> computer music system.

I had that same program on an HP 2000 system.  We had some nice
classical pieces, the names of which I can no longer remember.  This
was, hmm, 1977 or thereabouts, during my college days as system
administrator of the math dept's system.

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

Subject: Re: Wiring For Multi-Lines on One Jack
Organization: I.E.C.C.
Date: 25 Jan 93 01:53:54 EST (Mon)
From: [e-mail] (John R. Levine)


You're right, you can wire up several lines on a single modular jack.
You can only get up to three lines, since standard phone plugs only
have six wires.  For eight wires you need a data plug, which isn't
very different, but there's no conventions for wiring voice pairs on
data plugs.  On the six wire voice plug, the pins are numbered from
one to six.

The wiring arranagement for a single line is the familiar RJ-11, with
pins three and four being the ring and tip sides of the pair.

For two lines, it's called RJ-14. with the ring and tip for the second
line on pins five and two.  This is a very common arrangement -- most
two-line phones plug into an RJ-14.  At the Radio Shack you can get an
adapter plug for about $3 which splits out the two lines to separate
RJ11 jacks.  (At the Harvard Square Rat Shack they don't even ask for
your name any more for small cash purchases.)

For three lines, it's called RJ25, with the third ring and tip on pins
six and one.  This arrangement is much less popular.  I haven't seen
any consumer RJ25 equipment and adapters, though it would be easy
enough to wire it up on your own.  Keep in mind that most modular
telephone cables are only four wires and wouldn't work for RJ25.


Regards,

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

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

Date: Mon, 25 Jan 93 01:13:32 CST
From: [e-mail] (Jack Winslade)
Subject: Re: Telecom Management Degrees
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: DRBBS Technical BBS, Omaha


In a message dated 14-JAN-93, J.D. Delancy writes:

> Does anyone know what colleges/universities offer a Telecommunications
> Management Degree program starting at the associates level?  All I've
> seen has been a Masters Level program at places like Univ of Maryland.

College of St. Mary in Omaha offers such a thing.  (Joe, are you
listening in?)  One of our users is currently registered.  I am hoping
he will respond as well.  You might write or phone for info.


College of St. Mary
1901 S. 72
Omaha, NE 68124
402-399-2400


Good day!      JSW
DRBBS   (1:285/666.0)

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #43
*****************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa13672;
          26 Jan 93 11:33 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA15527
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 26 Jan 1993 08:48:05 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA07811
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 26 Jan 1993 08:47:27 -0600
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 08:47:27 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #45

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 26 Jan 93 08:47:15 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 45

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: You Didn't Accept a Collect Call, But You'll be Billed Anyway? (Decker)
    Re: "Secret" Phone Codes (Stuart Tener)
    Re: "Secret" Phone Codes (James H. Cloos Jr.)
    Re: "Secret" Phone Codes (Monte Freeman)
    Re: "Secret" Phone Codes (Roy M. Silvernail)
    Re: Do Telcos Record the Numbers of Local Calls? (Brent Whitlock)
    Re: Do Telcos Record the Numbers of Local Calls? (Graham Toal)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 25 Jan 93 16:18:18 EST
From: [e-mail] (Jack Decker)
Subject: Re: You Didn't Accept a Collect Call, But You'll be Billed Anyway?


In message <[e-mail]>, ucsd!sceard!fewmets!ron@
uunet.UU.NET wrote:

> Several years ago, my 21+ year old son quit his appartment and took an
> open-ended trip to Australia. Some disturbing incidents occurred which
> resulted in *many* long distance calls from him to me. Several months
> later, I received a > $1000 phone bill from AT&T for the calls. Seems
> that my son had charged his calls with an AT&T credit card on his
> disconnected US phone number. I contacted AT&T and could find no one
> that would admit having the authority to change the bill. As far at
> AT&T was concerned, my son had the same last name, therefore, I should
> pay for the calls (seems logical to me :-) I went around and around
> with them. The issue was not setteled until my son returned to the US
> and paid the bill himself. I carried a derogatory on my TRW report
> (with my explanation appended) for several years. I do not recommend
> AT&T as a company to do business with.

And then our Moderator wrote:

> [Moderator's Note: Another of our regular contributors could tell a
> similar story about having been in business *as a corporation* for a
> period of time and going out of business, only to have AT&T come to
> him personally for the unpaid phone charges later on, insisting that
> he was responsible for the corporation he formerly was associated
> with.  But I'll let him tell the story if he wants; it may be for some
> reason he does not want the details aired.   PAT]

Well, if we're trying to top each other on fraudulent billing stories,
I have another entry, only this one involves Sprint.  Does that count? :-)

The following is from memory, so I don't guarantee 100% accuracy on
all the details, but it's pretty close.

About three years ago, give or take one, I got a call from a
collection agency that represented U.S. Sprint.  Turned out that they
wanted me to pay a $700 (or thereabouts) long distance bill that I had
supposedly incurred.  Since my average phone bill is in the < $25
range, I was quite shocked, and pressed for details.

Well, it turned out that the bill had NOT been incurred by me
personally, but by a company that had dealt in computer equipment and
that had gone belly-up.  This company had been owned by a friend that
I've known since high school, and "somehow" my name had been placed on
the account.  While it's not inconceivable that I may have contacted
Sprint on my friend's behalf at some point to inquire about some
aspect of his service (probably with questions about a Sprint "Dial-1
WATS" service that he was considering), I certainly never agreed to be
responsible for his bills!

Now, I explained the facts of the situation to this man: First, I was
never an owner, partner, or even an employee of the firm.  Second, the
firm had been out of business at that point for at least a couple of
years; Sprint had never even so much as attempted to send me a bill,
so why was he harassing me all of a sudden?  Third, I was not
responsible for the calls; I had not placed them and I had not
benefitted from them (I suppose that perhaps a few of them had been
placed to me, but I can't imagine that it was anywhere near $700
worth, and in any case I hadn't agreed to pay for those!).

Further, I offered to give the man the current address and phone
number of the former owner of the firm.  He said he really wasn't
interested in that; the bill was in my name and I was going to pay it!
He used all the usual threats, including ruining my credit rating (big
deal ... I don't buy on credit) and bringing a lawsuit against me
(good luck ... a court would make him PROVE that I owed the money).
However, his tone was so downright hostile that it upsest me greatly.
Three times I just hung up on him; three times he called right back.
My kids said they've never heard me scream at anyone over the phone
the way I screamed at him.

After about twenty minutes of this harassment (and that's all it was
 ...  harassment pure and simple), he finally offered to drop the
matter if I would pay HALF of the amount owed.  I again countered that
it wasn't my bill and that I had no intention of paying one penny of
it, and that if he thought otherwise he could take me to court and try
to prove that I owed the money.  Only at that point was he finally
willing to take my friend's name and number, though he still wasn't
sure if he would contact him or come after me!

During the course of the "conversation" I had managed to obtain the
account number on the bill, so I immediately called up Sprint and
asked to speak to a supervisor.  I related the entire incident and
asked if they could produce so much as a piece of paper showing that I
had any responsibility for that bill.  I then told her that if they
couldn't, they had better call off their collection agency because I
had just recently had a gall bladder attack and was still taking
medication to help heal my stomach, and this incident had me very
emotionally upset and my stomach churning, and I was seriously
considering suing Sprint for harassment and emotional distress (all of
this was 100% true, by the way).  The supervisor said she'd check into
it and call me back.  About 15 minutes later I got a call back, and
she apologized profusely and said they'd make sure I was not contacted
about that account again.  She did mention in passing that sometimes
the collection agency got a bit overzealous in their efforts (that
falls into the category of "Great Understatements of All Time")!

I replied that they had better sit down and have a long talk with
those boys, otherwise Sprint was liable to be on the wrong end of a
nasty lawsuit, not to mention some terrible publicity (I could see the
headlines: "Sprint charged with telephone harassment!").  After all,
the caller had only identified himself as "representing U.S. Sprint",
and never would give me the name of the collection agency (though I
was told that they were out of Chicago).  And even after I
specifically told him not to call me back, he persisted in doing so.

As an aside, when I next spoke to my friend, I more or less let it be
known that I would consider it something of a personal favor if he
would consider putting Sprint at the very bottom of the pile of bills
to be paid from his failed business.  As it turned out, I don't think
they ever did contact him about the matter; they just let it drop (for
some reason I cannot figure out ... maybe the collection agency knew
they had blown it and didn't want to send out any paper with their
name and address on it?).

The moral to this story is, if you ever contact a long distance
carrier on behalf of a friend or client, use their name, not yours, or
at least let it be known that you're just making contact on behalf of
the other person and are not assuming any responsibility for their
bills!  What really bothers me about this incident, though, is that no
one from Sprint EVER contacted me, not even once, before turning it
over to the pit bulls at the collection agency.  If they had, I could
have given them all the information they needed to contact my friend
(who had moved in the interim ... remember, this was a couple of years
after the business had shut down).

I honestly had not felt so assulted since the eighth grade (when for
no apparent reason, another student at the junior high I attended
punched me so hard in the stomach that I went right through a wall).
It took me at least two days to calm down after that experience.  You
would have had to been there; the guy at the collection agency was a
genuinely mean S.O.B., who probably took a lot more pleasure in his
work than he should have.  Please, no mail saying I should have filed
charges against the guy (civil or criminal); I did consider it (and
oh!  Part of me wanted to in the WORST way!) but would have had to
relive the whole incident in court, would probably have had to travel
to Chicago for the trial, and in the end they could afford better
lawyers than I could, so there were no guarantees I would have won.
Besides all of that, I think there are too many lawsuits filed as it
is.

As for Sprint, they DID call back to apologize and apparently DID call
off the dogs, so after the passage of time I am willing to forgive a
little, but my preferred carrier is still MCI.  I only wish that MCI
would duplicate the 20% discount on calls to whomever you call most
frequently in a month (as Sprint does with their "The Most" plan),
even if they're not part of your Friends & Family circle, but I
digress ...


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


[Moderator's Note: Sprint does have some real problems in their
billing and payment procedures. At the firm where I am employed, we
decided to use them for a few months. We go through close to $10,000
per month in long distance charges, and were using a T-1 they
installed to take the calls to their switch. I sent them a check for
about that amount the second month the service had been installed, and
they somehow misapplied the check. To make matters worse, in the
process of endorsing the check and running it through the microfilm
machine (a machine does both; endorses the check, stamps it with a
code saying *where* on the microfilm to look for it; and *where* to
find the application of the check, etc), they somehow did it in such a
way that later on their endorsement was totally illegible due to bank
stamps on top of it, etc.  We've all seen those kinds of cancelled
checks come back from the bank.  Well ... I sent two or three copies
of the check to Sprint for investigation and they never were able to
locate what they did with it or to whom the credit was given, so they
wanted our firm to pay again!  After a few months of these arguments,
they finally placed me with a collection agency. I contacted Sprint's
attorney and he agreed to call off the dogs. He even sent me a letter
saying the account was considered paid. Imagine my surprise then when
about a year later, what should arrive but a letter from another
collection agency.  :)   I called back Sprint's attorney and read him
the riot act; really took him apart over the phone and once again,
Sprint backed off. I think the charges are still open on their books
because no one at the clerical/supervision level is willing to go to
their management for approval of a write-off of that size. I know if
it were people working for me and I had to sign off on it, I'd tell
them you go sit at that $#%%#$ microfilm machine all day if you have
to until you find it!  If I hear from them again (I doubt I will as
this was a few years ago, but if I do, I shall contact the Federal
Trade Commission and a few other places.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Stuart Tener)
Subject: Re: "Secret" Phone Codes
Date: 26 Jan 1993 05:08:02 -0500
Organization: Widener University CS Department, Chester PA


> In one of those discussions, about a year ago, a number was posted
> that purported to work nationally: 10732-1-404-988-9664.  10732 is a
> private ATT network.  I know that this number does return your area
> code and number verbally from 213, 310 and 818 area codes, and I have
> read reports from others that it works elsewhere.  It does add an
> "eight" to the end of any number I've ever called it from.

A friend of mine tried this number, and said it works from 215!  Only
thing is he said that it gave an "8" at the end of the number?!?


stuart b. tener, N3GWG     [e-mail]
(215)-338-6005    n3gwg@k3pgb.#epa.pa.usa.na (packet)

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

From: [e-mail] (James H. Cloos Jr.)
Subject: Re: "Secret" Phone Codes
Organization: Cornell Information Technologies, Ithaca, NY 14853
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 07:34:42 GMT


Tompkins <[e-mail]> writes:

> In one of those discussions, about a year ago, a number was
> posted that purported to work nationally:
> 10732-1-404-988-9664.

I tried it from a couple of phones in the 716 area code.

My home is serviced by an independent co that doesn't, I found out,
support 10xxx service.  I got a "can't complete the call, try again",
type message.

I then tried it from a NYTel pay phone in Buffalo.  It returned my
quarter then asked for $2.60 USD.  My curiosity piqued -- a not
alltogether uncommon situation -- I plopped in the change and ... it
works.


James H. Cloos, Jr.    include <std/qotd>
[e-mail]    include <std/disclaimers.h>
[e-mail]     Snail:  POBox 1111, Amherst, NY 14226-1111
[e-mail]     Phone:  [phone] (voice only, for now)

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

From: [e-mail] (Monte Freeman)
Subject: Re: "Secret" Phone Codes
Date: 26 Jan 93 13:11:45 GMT
Organization: Georgia Institute of Technology


[e-mail] (Tompkins) writes:

> In one of those discussions, about a year ago, a number was posted
> that purported to work nationally: 10732-1-404-988-9664.

 Well, it doesn't work from 404. Here's the results of my poking around:

 From home (404) 634-xxxx with AT&T as my default carrier I got a
reorder.  If I just dial the 404-988-9664 part, then all I ever get is
a busy signal.

 From work (404) 894-xxxx with MCI as the default carrier I got a
recording telling me that it was not necessary to dial a 1 with this
number.

I redialed it this time without the 1. I got a recording that said
that I must first dial a 1 or a 0 plus the area code when calling this
number.

I redialed it again. This time with a 0 instead of a 1. I got a
recording telling me that it was not necessary to dial a _1_ (no,
that's not a typo) with this number.

If I pick up our WATS line and dial this number (I have no idea what
company provides the service), then all it does is ring.

  Strange results from 404 land. Anyone got any ideas here?


Monte Freeman  --  Operations Department / Information Technology
Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta Georgia, 30332
Internet: [e-mail]    Bitnet:   [e-mail]

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

Subject: Re: "Secret" Phone Codes
From: [e-mail] (Roy M. Silvernail)
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 93 17:27:38 CST
Organization: Villa CyberSpace, Minneapolis, MN


[e-mail] (Tompkins) writes:

> In one of those discussions, about a year ago, a number was posted
> that purported to work nationally: 10732-1-404-988-9664.

It works in Minneapolis (612), complete with a trailing 8.  There were
also about ten digits recited after a second tone.  All but the last
were 0, and the last was 2.

I wonder how this will show up on my phone bill?


Roy M. Silvernail |+|  [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: It will show up as a $59.95 charge from AT&T's
'Find Out Your Number' bureau, converted to a 900 call for the
purposes of billing.  :)   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Brent Whitlock)
Subject: Re: Do Telcos Record the Numbers of Local Calls?
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 22:40:07 GMT


[e-mail] (Aninda V. Dasgupta) writes:

> Anyway, what interested me was in this sad, sad story is the fact that
> the phone company keeps logs of all calls made from a pay-phone
> (perhaps all phones?) and calls to a residential phone (again, perhaps
> all phones?)  Moreover, the police (or does it have to be the Feds?)
> can get to the phone logs in a matter of hours.

> [Moderator's Note: Yes, you are correct; very little escapes telco's
> notice these days, and that INHO is good for just such reasons as the
> case you cited.  The telephone should *never* serve as a medium for
> harassement, fraud or the commission of other crimes. The fact that
> the telephone has served these purposes over the years was due to the
> technology in use for many years, not a deliberate thing by telco. The
> development of ESS and the sophisticated ways in which traffic can be
> analyzed and reviewed could be viewed by some twisted logic as an
> 'invasion of privacy' by some people, but I do not view it that way.

Is it only in large metropolitan areas where all calls to and from
residential and pay phones are logged, or is this the case in the vast
majority of phone systems?  In Urbana, after receiving numerous calls
which hung up when answered over a period of a few weeks, I called the
telephone company to see what could be done about it.  They told me
that they could not find out what number those calls were made from.
They said the telephone system did not work that way.  They could put
a "tap" on the line which would record what numbers calls to our phone
were made from, and they would then match the log created by this tap
with a log that we would keep of when we received these hangup calls,
and then the police would pursue the matter.  This would have cost us
a fee (~ $20.00 ?).

Our other option was to have our number changed, which they would do
for free if we then made our new number unlisted.  If they had the
capability of looking through their logs to find out where the calls
were originating from, I think that they should have done that.  We
also received several calls for me from some guy that my wife said
sounded like a cowboy, but I was never available when he called, and
he never left a message or called back at the suggested times.  I
would have loved to find out who this guy was and why he was calling
me, as well as if he was the caller who was hanging up or not.  After
a while, the calls stopped on their own.  At the time, our local
telephone system did not have caller ID available, by the way.
Perhaps Caller ID is necessary for the logs to be made.


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


[Moderator's Note: It is the type of switch being used and the
software it is running rather than the size of the community. If it
can be done one place, it can be done another.   PAT]

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

Date: Tue, 26 Jan 93 12:29:21 GMT
From: Graham Toal <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Do Telcos Record the Numbers of Local Calls?


Not exactly.  Think about this -- the call was placed from a payphone,
and they didn't know which one -- they just knew the called number.
Unless the logs for the called number now include the calling number
of incoming calls, we can conclude that the telco has structured its
data so that you can do a fast search on the called number, ie the
data is indexed by both callers number (for billing) and called number
(for security services purposes).

This is exactly what I said some years ago that the UK System X
service does. I can even make an educated guess that the data
structure used to index the phone numbers is a linked dag, and that
the lookup is almost instantaneous.  (Heck, even with an ISAM it would
be pretty fast ...)

Over here, the over-the-shelf phone cards have serial numbers, so even
though they're anonymous, the security services can still find out who
all the other people you called are even if they found your call to a
single target.  Anonymity of payphones is an illusion.

Also, in London, a great many public phones are in areas covered by
security cameras.  This is how they caught an hoax bomb caller last
year -- they picked him up in the area minutes after making a call on
a payphone.

BTW, there's some commercial neural net software out now for detecting
cliques in graphs.  Want to bet its first application was studying
phone network logs?


G

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #45
*****************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa24179;
          26 Jan 93 16:43 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA24287
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 26 Jan 1993 08:09:32 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA23033
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 26 Jan 1993 08:08:50 -0600
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 08:08:50 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #44

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 26 Jan 93 08:08:40 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 44

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Administrivia: Bad Digest Number (TELECOM Moderator)
    Phone Translation Experiment (Dave Leibold)
    5ESS-2000 Switch (Daily Oklahoman via Mark V. Miller)
    Singapore Phone System Questions (Tom Clayton)
    FAQ List Update Now Ready (David Leibold)
    Strange Intercept Message ([e-mail])
    1-800-CALL-ATT vs. LEC Intra-LATA LD (Mike McNally)
    KS-19522L1 (Two Wire) (Jon Cereghino)
    DMS-100 Bug? (Hans Lachman)
    AS/400, Novell,Token Ring, Windows 3.1 (Matt Memolo)
    How Can I Reach AT&T EasyLink? (Ivan Maldonado)
    Papers on Fibre Wire Using Solitons (Heiko W.Rupp)
    Prodigy <> Internet Gateway Almost Finished (J.D. Delancy)
    Discovering Your Own Phone Number in the UK (Joe Harrison)
    301-303, Not in 410 (Carl Moore)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 25 Jan 93 10:01:08 EST
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Subject: Administrivia: Bad Digest Number


Issue 43 got sent out to Usenet as issue 43, and to the mailing list
the same way, except on the mailing list version, the mail header
referred to it as issue 42.  Please take your copy of 43 and edit the
mail header (if you keep it) so that it reads issue 43.

 > Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 00:55:03 -0600
 > From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
 > Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
 > To: [e-mail]
 > Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #42

 > TELECOM Digest     Mon, 25 Jan 93 00:54:50 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 43

 > End of TELECOM Digest V13 #43
 > *****************************

Sorry about that.


PAT

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

Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 02:09:48 -0500
From: [e-mail] (Dave Leibold)
Subject: Phone Translation Experiment


Reuters reports of a Japanese project to provide live phone
translation.  An experiment was scheduled for this week to test
translation among Japansese, English and German speakers located in
Japan, U.S.A. and Germany respectively. Advanced Telecommunications
Research Institute (ATR) in Tokyo says 90% of regular vocabulary can
be processed, though it may take another decade for such a system to
be placed into public service. ATR, Carnegie Mellon University
(Pittsburgh) and University of Karlsruhe (Munich) are the partners in
this experiment.

The idea is to take voice from one party of a conversation, apply
speech recognition to convert that voice to text, then translate the
text, then send the voice synthesised translation in the language of
the other party.  The process of translating from voice to voice takes
about 20 seconds with this experimental technology.

On other translation topics:

* AT&T's Language Line exists today to provide translation staff for
phone calls. Some organizations such as the Toronto Transit Commission
will connect to AT&T Language Line when handling public inquiries.

* The Nation's Capital Freenet project (Ottawa, Canada - akin to the
Cleveland FreeNet) has an expressed interest to provide automated
e-mail and newsgroup translation for the English and French
communities.


Dave Leibold - via FidoNet node 1:250/98
INTERNET: [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: 5ESS-2000 Switch
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 93 20:01:51 PST


 From  _The_Daily_Oklahoman_, January 21, 1993, p. 25:

 Copyright (C) 1993 by The Oklahoma Publishing Company

                 AT&T Upgrades Switches
                  For Rural Customers

                   By Bob Vandewater
                     Staff Writer

 American Telephone & Telegraph's Oklahoma City factory will produce a
new product designed to bring advanced "digital" computerized switch
services to rural telephone customers across the United States, plant
officials said Wednesday.

  The new switching product is a smaller, stand-alone version of
AT&T's "5ESS" digital telecommunications switch already made at the
plant.

  The product will provide many modern services in market areas with
1,000 or fewer customers where it previously may not have been
economically feasible for a small phone utilities [sic] to provide
such services.

  "Telephone customers in rural areas want access to the same
custom-calling and digital business services that suburban and urban
customers take for granted," said Pete Gannon, manufacturing vice
president at AT&T's Oklahoma City plant.

  "This new product will deliver to the rural markets the same
features, software and operational capabilities as our larger
switches," he said.

  AT&T announced plans for the new product, known as the 5ESS-2000
Switch Compact Digital Exchange, Wednesday in Maui, Hawaii, at the
annual meeting of the Organization for the Protection and Advancement
of Small Telephone Companies.

  The first shipments of this new product are expected in early 1994.
Initial production work may start at the Oklahoma City plant late this
year.

  "While we anticipate significant demand for this product, it is not
expected to require an increase in the size of our work force," Gannon
said.

  The Oklahoma City factory, which had product sales of $1.8 billion
in 1992, has about 4,100 employees.

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

From: [e-mail] (Tom Clayton)
Subject: Singapore Phone System Questions
Organization: Loral Defense Systems
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 17:36:10 GMT


Some of my colleagues are scheduled to go to Singapore on a field
service assignment, and would like to maintain a Fax/data
communication link with our facility here in the U.S.  Their concern
is that the Fax machine and data modem available to them might not be
compatible with the phone system in Singapore.

Any hints, tips, or suggestions would be most welcome. Please respond
via e-mail to:

         [e-mail]

Thanks,

Tom

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

Date: Mon, 25 Jan 93 21:40:46 EST
From: David Leibold <[e-mail]>
Subject: FAQ List Update Now Ready


As intended, the FAQ List for TELECOM Digest has been updated and
upgraded. Some corrections and new data have been incorporated, thanks
to Digest reader mail and other sources of information.


[e-mail]     [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: In fact, the FAQ was mailed to everyone on the
Digest mailing list Sunday night, and distributed to Usenet via the
comp.dcom.telecom group at the same time. It was also incorporated
into the welcome/information letter sent out to all new mailing list
subscribers, replacing the version they had been getting. If you did
NOT get a copy one way or the other by Monday morning, then you should
arrange to pull it with anonymous ftp from the Telecom Archives at the
archives site, lcs.mit.edu if you want a copy. (It will be available
there once I do some filing and house-cleaning work in the Archives,
probably early Tuesday. My thanks to everyone who participated in
creating the revised version.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: Mon Jan 25 14:24:47 EST 1993
Subject: Strange Intercept Message


A friend of mine accidently dialed an 800 number, and received a
strange repeating intercept message.  I haven't even a clue as to the
language, but my guess is the message is attempting to say that the
number you have dialed is not in service.  The number is 800-952-5388.


[Moderator's Note: This is a good example of how '800-style' calls can
be international in scope *if* the subscriber wants international
traffic to the number. In the above example, some company in Germany
wanted calls from the USA, so they arranged for an 800 number here to
ring there. What has happened now is the service in Germany was turned
off for whatever reason and no one has yet told AT&T to quit routing
calls from that 800 number overseas.  I think what it is saying is
'this is not a working number'.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Mike McNally)
Subject: 1-800-CALL-ATT vs. LEC intra-LATA LD
Date: 25 Jan 1993 21:26:29 GMT
Organization: DEC Western Software Lab


I just c alled my voice mailbox to check voice mail (it's in 415, I'm
in 408) and as I listened to the "Thank you for using Pacific Bell"
recording I though of the recent thread concerning intra-LATA long
distance.  On a whim, I decided to try 1-800-CALL-ATT to see if I
could force ATT to carry the call instead.  (PacBell won't let 10288
work for such calls; you get a recording.)  It worked.

I wonder which is cheaper?  I billed both calls to my DEC-issued ATT
card, so I'll never know.


   Mike +   Software +   Digital Equipment +   Western Software +      mcnally@
McNally +    Laborer +         Corporation +         Laboratory +   wsl.dec.com


[Moderator's Note: I've noticed that when an intra-LATA call is placed
here via AT&T because they were more or less forced into handling it
due to it being on their calling card (or via Easy Reach, etc) the
billing for same will come on the AT&T portion of the Illinois Bell
bill, with a statement saying 'call handled on behalf of Illinois Bell
by AT&T'. It is almost as though they are saying, "we cannot legally
handle this call as AT&T, but we can act as agents for Illinois Bell
and handle it for them."  I think AT&T functions like a 'reseller' or
open-ended (no defined customer base) aggregator for the local telcos,
and pays the telcos for calls which are 'rightfully' the telco's to
handle.  In many cases, they may just let the local telco handle the
whole thing but at AT&T rates.  I suspect the same arrangement is in
effect in everywhere with the telco of record for that territory.  PAT]

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

Date: Mon, 25 Jan 93 15:14:51 -0800
From: [e-mail] (Jon Cereghino)
Subject: KS-19522L1 (Two Wire)


I'd like to know if anyone could provide information to hookup a
KS-19522L1 tw0-wire recorder coupler. There are a number of screw
terminals on the board for which I have no information. I'd like to
connect the unit to a 1A2 key system.

I would be willing to pay copying costs to someone who has the Bell
System Practices (including schematic diagrams) for this unit. It's
for hobby use, so my budget is limited to about $10 or so.

I would also like to know if anyone has a source for 106 type
loudspeaker sets (used). Two companies currently make new ones but
they cost $200-325 each. I bought the one I have for $20.

E-mail reply is preferred to preserve the TELECOM Digest noise floor's
low level.


Jon    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Hans Lachman)
Subject: DMS-100 Bug?
Organization: Netcom
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 06:26:25 GMT


My home phone line is acting funny, and I was wondering if any of you
CO experts might know what the problem is.  It acts exactly as if I
had three-way calling (which I don't), but no matter what number I
dial (on the secondary dial tone), I always get a fast-busy tone
instead of having my call put through.

In other words, if I am on one call, and I hang up for one or two
seconds, I get a dial tone as three short bursts initially, then
continuous.  Then I dial any number, and always get fast-busy.  Then,
I hang up for another one or two seconds and find that the first call
is still there (i.e., as if it were on hold).  This is odd since I do
not have a second line, three-way calling, or any kind of "hold"
service.  It only started doing this two weeks ago.

The only special service I have is Message Center (a phone mail
service).  It lets me know I have a message by changing my dial tone
to an unending series of long bursts.  This is clearly different from
the "holding" dial tone I describe above.  Also, the "holding" dial
tone phenomenon happens regardless of the Message Center status.

I reported this odd behavior, and the Pacific Bell repair person came
out, but could not tell what was wrong.  She told me that I'm on a new
DMS-100 switch.  Anyone out there know why a DMS-100 would behave this
way?  Is it a misconfigured line or a software bug?  Do I have any
special capabilities in this mode?

If you know any of the answers, please email me directly at "lachman@
netcom.com".  If I find out anything interesting I will post it to the
net.  Thanks,


Hans Lachman   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Matt Memolo)
Subject: AS/400, Novell,Token Ring, Windows 3.1
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Matt Memolo)
Organization: UF Engineering Computing Services, Distributed Systems Group
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 93 16:21:31 GMT


I'm trying to connect PC's to an IBM AS/400 over Token Ring using
PCSupport V2.1.0 and would like to retain connectivity via Novell and
do this under MS Windows v3.1. I do not believe this will be possible
but though perhaps someone would have tried it before.  My remaining
option is to put a gateway between the AS/400 to encapsulate the
traffic into ODI Novell packets.  Many thanks in advance; I can trade
info on Florida camping and south Florida restraunts.


[e-mail]     Matt Memolo

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

From: [e-mail] (Ivan Maldonado)
Subject: How Can I Reach AT&T EasyLink?
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Ivan Maldonado)
Organization: North Carolina State University, Raleigh
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 00:00:39 GMT


Anyone know how to reach folks hooked up to "AT&T Easylink", whatever
that is?  I'm trying to reach the username "idea" hooked up
to/through/under that network/gateway/thing.

Many thanks for any assistance provided.


Guillermo Ivan Maldonado        Internet: [e-mail]
Dept. of Nuclear Engineering          [e-mail]
North Carolina State University  NCSU Box # 7909   Raleigh. NC 27695-7909


[Moderator's Note: Easylink was the Western Union email system until
it got bought out by AT&T. Now it is a branch of ATT Mail. We touched
on this a couple weeks ago, but I forget the syntax. Was it something
like '[e-mail]' or '[e-mail]'?   PAT

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

From: [e-mail] (Heiko W.Rupp)
Subject: Papers on Fibre Wire Using Solitons
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 10:52:51 +0100
Organization: The Home of the Pilhuhn


Hi,

I'am in search of some literature about solitons in optical data
distribution in general and about the news fibre wire connecting USA
and Europe in special.

I think having seen, that this cable has been installed by AT&T and
Deutsche Bundespost. The cable uses solitary waves, so it needs only
few (or no) repeaters.

I set the followup to poster, as I normally don't read these groups.


Thanks in advance.

Heiko W.Rupp  Gerwigstr.5  7500 Kh'e 1  [e-mail]  [phone]

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

Date: Tue, 26 Jan 93 08:26:11 EST
From: [e-mail] (J.D. Delancy)
Subject: Prodigy <> Internet Gateway Almost Finished


tbanham@cybernet writes:

> I just got a note from Prodigy that advised me to look for Internet
> mail access in January,

Must be close.  I sent a note to a friend that has a Prodigy ID.  It
got to the INETGATE.PRODIGY.COM before it bounced on error code 530
(configuration problems).  Apparently the coding to handoff internet
mail from the gateway to the Prodigy users still has to be finished.

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

Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 12:25:58 +0000
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Discovering Your Own Phone Number in the UK


Within the United Kingdom there have traditionally been a variety of
numbers (usually 17x) you can call to find out the number of the line
from which you are calling. Like in the U.S., these numbers varied
depending on locality.

A BT engineer showed me how to dial 175 to get my own number and I
believe BT has now standardized on this. In my own area code it only
works with lines supporting "Star Services" (the BT name for the
package providing call waiting, three-way calling, etc.), but I have
heard that in other areas it works on any line connected to a digital
exchange (yes there are STILL a small handful of Strowgers here!)

If you call 175 you get (sometimes) a minute or so's silence designed
to deter the casual or wrong-number caller. Then a voice tells you
your area code + number, then "start test".

Flash the switchhook (actually you have to hold it down for nearly a
second otherwise nothing happens) - you then get some information
about the earthing (grounding) on your line, plus a request to selct
next test. You can then dial 1 for a DTMF dialpad test (it expects you
to key 123456789*0# and then tells you if it heard the tones OK), or 3
and it will give you what it calls a "coin pulse test" designed for
payphones.

Anything else says you dialed wrongly, EXCEPT if you dial 4 which says
"not from this line you can't!". If anybody knows what this does (or
the other several undocumented Star Services codes) I'd like to know.


Joe Harrison
Yes, the disclaimer; I'm on behalf of me not my employer.

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

Date: Tue, 26 Jan 93 8:31:56 EST
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject: 301-303, Not in 410


I accidentally completed a call yesterday to the 301-303 prefix.  (A
call to 800-477-4704, still in use as C&P help line for 301/410 split,
also has 303 in the shrunken 301 area.) I am now concerned about the
archives, since they list 303 as a Columbia prefix in 410.  Phone
books I checked in Maryland last night list 303 as Berwyn (i.e., a
Washington-metro-area prefix), which could be pseudo-foreign exchange
service from Columbia.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #44
*****************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa15690;
          27 Jan 93 3:53 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA10091
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 27 Jan 1993 01:34:35 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA24908
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 27 Jan 1993 01:33:43 -0600
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 01:33:43 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #46

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 27 Jan 93 01:33:40 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 46

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Holiday Overseas Callbacks From Bell Canada Operators (Dave Leibold)
    Ericsson GE Slashes Prices on Two Wireless Data Products (Geoff Goodfellow)
    Telephone Line Bridge Info Needed (Dan Cook, Ross Escondido)
    How To Fix Genuine 900 Errors (Brad S. Hicks)
    So That's Why You Oppose Phreakers! (Robert Virzi)
    "Advanced Switching" at SWBT (Chris Petrilli)
    Does Anyone...? (Paul M. Wexelblat)
    Billing Systems (Lars Kalsen)
    Call Forwarding From One Line ([e-mail])
    Remote Test Unit (Timothy E. White)
    Cellular Roaming Handbook (Mike Bray)
    Cellular One/NY Re-bills Roaming Charges (Mike Bray)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 00:00:29 -0500
From: [e-mail] (Dave Leibold)
Subject: Holiday Overseas Callbacks From Bell Canada Operators


 From Bell News (Bell Canada - Ontario edition) 11th January 1993]

Operators give special assistance for overseas calls.

Bell operators in the 416 area offered special assistance to callers
trying to make holiday connections with friends and relatives in
non-dialable parts of the world.

Starting four days before Christmas, between the peak-demand hours of
8 a.m. and 11 p.m., operators called back customers once they had made
a connection with the overseas party.

That special service saved callers hours of repeated tries to
operators, hoping they could instantly obtain an a available circuit.

Having placed their request, customers were assured by operators that
their calls would be placed, and that they would be informed when the
connection was made.

"Initial response has been great. We'll be testing the special service
for six months in the 416 area code," explained Nazir Lalani, section
manager, Operator Services. "If it continues to be successful, it will
be expanded to other area codes in Bell Ontario territory."


Dave Leibold - via FidoNet node 1:250/98
INTERNET: [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: This used to be the custom here in the USA many
years ago, when all overseas calls to Europe/Africa/the Middle East
were routed through operators at the old international center at White
Plains, NY. You'd ask the long distance operator for an international
operator and be connected to White Plains. After giving the operator
the details, she'd have you disconnect and wait for a call-back which
could be in less than a minute, or sometimes several hours, depending
on where you were calling and the time of day, etc.  I seem to recall
a call to Cairo, Egypt in the late 1950's, and the AT&T operator
saying it would be several hours before the call could go through
because 'we have to book the call with the international operator in
Paris; the telecom administration in France only lets AT&T use the
circuit (*the* circuit?) to Cairo for an hour in the morning and two
hours in the afternoon ... and I think we have one or two calls ahead
of yours waiting ..."  And to this day, 35 years later, where are many
of the still non-direct-dialable international points from the USA?
Quite a few are in northern and central Africa; countries which used
to be French colonies.

For British colonies it was the same difference only London controlled
who got to call where and when. The overseas operator in Montreal,
Quebec controlled the circuits to the far northern wilderness in
Ontario and Quebec, with calls frequently going by AM radio from a
site in Val-D'or, Quebec. White Plains told Montreal, Montreal told
Val-D'or and the lady at Val-D'or would go on the radio calling
alternatly in French and English, "Miquelon, Miquelon, this is
Val-D'or with a call on Channel 2 ..." and after a couple minutes of
this she would report, "they are not answering, White Plains; you know
I told you before they only promise to listen to the radio in the
morning at ten o'clock." Sometimes Montreal would not even bother to
ring Val-D'or, admonishing White Plains that "we are not supposed to
call her after 10 PM unless it is an emergency.  The radio station and
telephone exchange is in her home and she goes to bed at ten. We give
her a wake up call at six each morning ..."

 ... eventually the call to Cairo would go through; after a period of
time the phone would ring and as soon as it was answered an operator
would ask us to hold on a second ... then from across the ocean a
man's voice speaking English with a French accent would be heard:
"Hello White Plains, I've got Cairo for you now ... Cairo, this is
Paris with a call from the States, they want, umm, oh, uh, White
Plains, wait a minute, he rang off on me, I'll try to raise him again
but you know dear, you've only got seven minutes, the cable closes
down to American Telly at 2100 Greenwich; won't open again until 1100
Greenwich tomorrow ...  um, oh, Cairo, wait a minute! Don't cut me
off! Put the States onto <number> ... " *That* was an international
call years ago.  PAT]

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

Date: Wed, 27 Jan 93 00:02:25 -0800
From: [e-mail] (Geoff Goodfellow)
Subject: Ericcson GE Slashes Prices on Two Wireless Data Products


PARAMUS, NJ (JAN. 25) BUSINESS WIRE - Ericsson GE has reduced the
retail price of two of its key wireless data communications products -
the Mobidem(R) Portable Wireless Modem and the Viking Express Wireless
E-Mail Package, which includes a Mobidem, Hewlett-Packard 95LX palmtop
computer and wireless elecronic mail utility.

Effective immediatley, the price of the Mobidem is now $775 from
$1,395 while the complete Viking Express package drops to $995 from
its original price of $1,995.

"This agressive price reduction allows the everyday business traveler
to benefit immediately from wireless data communications," says Ake
Persson, vice president of Ericsson GE Mobile Communications. "There
is no excuse now not to have one.  It is as essential as a briefcase."

The Mobidem provides two-way wireless data communications connectivity
for palmtop, notebook, and laptop computers.  Utilizing Mobitex
wireless data networks operated in the United States by RAM Mobile
Data, a joint venture of RAM Broadcasting and BellSouth Enterprises,
the Mobidem supports automatic nationwide roaming for PC users that
travel around town or across the country.

The Mobidem is a one-pound, rechargeable wireless data modem that
communicates with the Mobitex network.  It can be easily connected to
any PC that has an RS-232 serial port, and it features and LCD display
that shows radio signal strength and number of messages stored.

The Viking Express package couples a Mobidem with an HP 95LX palmtop
computer and a DOS-based E-mail utility called RadioMail Remote from
RadioMail Corp. of Menlo Park, Calif.

Mobitex is a public mobile data network that uses packet-switched
wireless technology and provides automatic nationwide roaming. Packet
switching allows messages to be transmitted or received in a few
seconds, eliminating the problems associated with intermittent fading
or unexpected disconnections.

Mobitex networks are operating in the United States, Canada, the
United Kingdom, Sweden, Finland and Norway.

Based in Paramus, N.J., Ericsson GE designs, manufactures, and markets
cellular telephones, land mobile radio products and systems, and
Mobitex wireless data communications products and systems for global
markets.  Ericsson GE also markets cellular systems in North American.

For more information about the Mobidem or Viking Express, call
Ericsson GE at 800/223-6336.  In addition, RAM has a nationwide
corporate sales force to work with corporate accounts.  For the number
of the nearest RAM regional represenative, MIS directors or corporate
purchasing managers can call RAM Mobile Data at 201/343-9400.

CONTACT:  Ericsson, New York
   Kathy Egan, 212/685-4030 or
   MCI: Alexander Communications, Atlanta
    Susan McCord, 404/325-7555
                  404/325-8041 (fax)

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

Date: Tue, 26 Jan 93 13:47:19 -0800
From: rossix!amber.dnet![e-mail] (Dan Cook, Ross Escondido)
Subject: Telephone Line Bridge Info Needed


I recently created a small electronic circuit which allows me to use a
pair of telephone lines to 'forward calls.'  What I do is call the
first line, get bridged to the second, then dialout from there.
(Dialtone on the second line is not accessable until the correct four
digit DTMF password has been entered.  I also put a toll restrictor on
the line -- just in case.)

I use this arrangement to reduce the cost of some automated modem
calls from a large variable amount for toll calls ($150-$200) to a
small fixed amount for two strategically placed unmeasured residential
phone lines ($32) each month.

Unfortunately, the method I have used to bridge the lines (600ohm
impeadance 1:1 line coupling transformer) really cuts down on the
received signal level at the far end.  My modem shows a receive signal
level of -19db for direct calls and -33db for bridged calls!  The
signal-to-noise ratio also suffers.  This signal loss (or perhaps lack
of boost) often makes high speed modem connects an iffy proposition.

Questions:

1.  There must be a better, yet still relatively simple way to bridge
telephone lines.  Perhaps I just need to add a bidirectional amplifier
of some sort?  Any suggestions?

2.  Failing a good homebrew solution, anyone know where I can get an
inexpensive commercially made telephone line bridge?  Preferably with
just the bridging function, but even pointers to remotely similar
parts/products will be appreciated.


Dan

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

From: mc/G=Brad/S=Hicks/OU=[e-mail]
Date: 26 Jan 93 19:14:22 GMT
Subject: How To Fix Genuine 900 Errors?


Last week, a close friend of mine got a stern warning from the Credit
Collection Center, P.O. Box 610894, Miami, FL 33261-0894, +1 305 945
8441, insisting that:

 1. She placed a call to [phone], which cost $49.95.
 2. She had been billed for this through SWBT.
 3. She instructed SWBT to remove the charge, and they did.
 4. Therefore, Connections, USA, the owner of that 1-900 number, has
    instructed CCC to collect this debt.

She keeps a close watch on her credit record, because her dearest
dream is to own rental property and knows that it's going to be an
uphill struggle for somebody with her income, so the threat to her
credit record is no small thing to her.  Nor is there any question of
her paying the $49.95, even if she had it, because she disputes every
one of statements 1-3.

She only moved to St. Louis last July and has only had this phone
number since then.  Unfortunately, she did not keep her phone bills,
but she is 100% certain that she has seen them all, none of them had a
bill for this number on them, and she has never called SWBT to demand
the removal of a charge.  A Sprint operator (Sprint appears to be
Connections, USA's 900 provider) volunteered the information that
according to his records, [phone] has not been in use for over
a year.  If this is true then it is physically impossible for her to
have placed the call from her number to that number.

What is really making her angry is that the Sprint operator and CCC
both insist that the only way for her to untangle this is to phone
Connections, USA, on her nickle during business hours (while she's at
work, of course, and can't make such calls) and persuade them to drop
the charge.  Otherwise the non-payment notice will be sent to all
credit agencies, and the onus is on her to find them all and append
her explanation.

There MUST be a better way to handle this, and one that doesn't
involve hundreds of dollars in legal fees.  If anybody knows, it's you
all.  Please reply via e-mail; if Pat asks, I'll summarize for the
Digest.

If there isn't a better way to handle this, then what has the country
come to when a firm can bill you at random for service you never
received, and know that they can punish you arbitrarily if you don't
pay, and that there is no way to fight this that isn't cheaper than
paying them?  It smells of Danegeld to me, and that makes me as angry
as she is.


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

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

Date: Tue, 26 Jan 93 12:45:19 -0500
From: [e-mail]  (Robert Virzi at GTE Labs)
Subject: So That's Why You Oppose Phreakers!


 ... stuff about NETel overcharging deleted ...

> [Moderator's Note: I had a phone turned on about twenty years ago at a
> place where I stayed occassionally and although the service got turned
> on, the paperwork never made it to accounting for the purpose of
> setting up a billing account. Since the line had unmeasured metro
> service (a type of service we had back then) there were never any
> extra units generated and no reason to ever issue a bill. It went on
> like that for a year. I was careful to never make any long distance
> calls from that line or do anything which would start paperwork going.
> Then one day, some $$#%&# phreak billed a third number phraud call to
> that line. From a telco unknown to me comes the billing tape; it hits
> the accounting department and of course the charges promptly fall out
> and go to suspense, there being 'no such number' to bill them to on
> this end where Accounting was concerned. In the adjustments/suspense
> investigative process, someone at telco actually dials my number and
> discovers it turned on .... hmmm, they say, and they ask the CO to
> send the paperwork all over again. The next billing cycle, I get a
> bill for *12 months to date* of service, plus the installation charge
> which never had been billed, plus next month's service in advance, and
> of course, plus the (still unknown to telco) phraud LD charge. I got
> the phraud charge removed, but was hardly in a position to argue with
> them about the service I had been using for the past year. :(   PAT]

Interesting that one person's fraud can uncover another's, isn't it!
I have to admit I read this with quite a bit of amusement given PAT's
consistently hard line against phreakers/hackers/etc.  I suppose in
one's youth, one may have a different perspective, eh?  Or perhaps
this explains the position, a long held grudge.  Many :-), for the
humor impaired.

What next, Higdon admitting to overcharging a telco in *his* youth?

Again, many, many, :-).  Thanks for the chuckle, Pat.


Bob Virzi    [e-mail]     [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Chris Petrilli)
Subject: "Advaced Switching" at SWBT
Date: 26 Jan 1993 19:37:21 GMT
Organization: Department of Redundency Department


As part of a project I'm working on, I needed to get some cost
estimates from SWBT (South Swestern Bell Telephone) on what it would
cost to run digital lines within the City of Austin.  When I finally
got a hold of the business office that handled the services I needed
and told the lady what I needed I was shocked at the fact that:

    1) She had no clue what T3/DS3 service was, and said that SWBT
didn't provide it and she had no way of pricing it.  She later
recended the comment when she talked to a "technical support
representative".

    2) Told me that I was "very lucky" that I was in the 83X
exchange because, and I quote: "We've just installed the most advanced
switch around."  When I asked if she was refering to a NorthernTelecom
DMS series, or perhaps the 5ESS series, she said "Um ... no, we're
using a ESS1A".

I don't know about everyone else, but while the 1A is a nice switch
and all, it doesn't quite qualified for "most advanced switch" even
with 100 adjuct boxes on it.

I was also SHOCKED at the cost of running a T1 line from the 83X
exchange (North Austin) to the AT&T POP (downtown) which is roughly 15
miles.  The cost was MORE than the cost from AT&T for a T1 line from
their Austin POP to Dallas.  Somehow I don't think this is reasonable.


Chris Petrilli       [e-mail]
I don't even speak for myself.

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

From: [e-mail] (Paul M. Wexelblat)
Subject: Does Anyone...?
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Univ. of Lowell CS Dept.
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 20:34:35 GMT


Does anyone know of an answering machine that captures CLI info?  (It
is clearly possible, since the boxes that display the number can
gobble the ASCII without "picking up" the line, an answering machine
should be able to do it too.)

[OTOH, if somebody makes a fortune on this idea I'd like a 5%
inventors fee ...]


Wex

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

From: [e-mail] (Lars Kalsen)
Subject: Billing Systems
Organization: DKnet
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 21:50:19 GMT


Hi,

I am interested in references to a book or article where Billing
Systems are discussed in brief, or a comparison is made.

If you have any suggestion - please E-mail me the reference.


Lars Kalsen, MIS-Manager
SONOFON, Skelagervej 1, 9000 Aalborg, Denmark
[phone] (tel), [phone] (fax), E-Mail : [e-mail]

SONOFON is the private operator in Denmark on
the new European digital cellular GSM-Network

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

From: [e-mail]
Organization: Queen's University at Kingston
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 17:20:37 EST
Subject: Call Forwarding From One Line


Hi,

  After talking on my home phone I would like to transfer that call to
another phone number. Is there any way I can do this, other then
buying a PBX and getting a second line.

Thanks in advance.


Jay    [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: If you intend to stay on the line with the third
party, just use three-way callling. If not, you might try using a
service like 'Starline' (IBT's name for it), a sort of 'home centrex'
type service which allows calls to be transferred to another phone
outside your premises and you to disconnect.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Timothy E White)
Subject: Remote Test Unit
Date: 26 Jan 1993 18:00:38 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA)


New York Telephone Central District has begun a service improvement
program utilizing Micro Computer System's 105A Remote Test Unit.  This
equipment, which is primarily a 77 Analyzer with enhanced features, is
mounted in the central office of the NNXs to be tested.

The 105A RTU is capable of testing all working and non/working pairs
originating from the CO.  The working POTS lines are accessed through
the test train of the switch.  The non-working pairs are accessed at
the MDF with an optional 100 pair portable shoe switch.  Single pair
access is available through our MLT 1 dialup or by means of the single
pair shoe clip at the MDF.  Remote switches and subscriber loops on
the F2 side of pair gain devices can be tested with an optional 107A
RTU located at the remote location.

The unit is programmable and can do sequential NLT and LDT scans
unattended.  Demand test can be performed virtually simultaneously
with the scan tests and all test results can be printed to screen,
disk or printer.  In addition all tests can be saved in a number of
different formats.  Communication with the equipment is performed
through a dumb terminal, a test station or a PC with MODEM.

I would like to hear from any groups or individuals that have had
experience with this equipment.  I would especially welcome detailed
comments on any successes (or failures) utilizing the 105.

(These comments and observations are my own and I represent no one
other than myself).


Thank you.

Tim White     In upstate New York, wishing it was New Mexico.

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

Date: Tue, 26 Jan 93 14:38:16 EST
From: [e-mail] (Mike Bray)
Subject: Cellular Roaming Handbook


There was a post a short while ago about a cellular roaming guide.

The one I have is called (the) _Official_Cellular_Roaming_Handbook_
and is published by:
                      Cellular Directions, Inc.
                      PO Box 66843
                      St. Petersburg Beach FL  33736

I bought the new (at the time) 10th edition for $14.95 (plus $2 for
mailing), but the order card in the front of the book suggests that
there will be an 11th edition for Winter '93.

Their phone number is [phone] and their FAX is [phone]
and they take VISA, MC, etc, etc.

As stated in the other posting, this book details every cellular
system in the country with SID, coverage maps, roaming costs, customer
service numbers, roamer access numbers, and a big section in the back
about reciprocal roaming agreements.  It also contains information for
Mexico, the Caribbean Islands, Australia, and New Zealand.

Some of the coverage maps are 3+ years old, but in general this book
is a must for anyone that roams!


Mike Bray     [e-mail]   (or)   ...!apple!camphq!mike

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

Date: Tue, 26 Jan 93 14:38:16 EST
From: [e-mail] (Mike Bray)
Subject: Cellular One/NY Re-bills Roaming Charges


While roaming in the San Francisco area last June, I had the
opportunity to try Cellular One's NACN (North-Anerican-Cellular-
Nonsense).  At that time it didn't hardly work, and the folks at
Cellular One/SF all gave me conflicting reports about "you have to
make at least one call" or "just turn your phone on" etc, etc.  At
that time, the term Nonsense was justified.

But during my last trip to that area in October, they seem to have
corrected all their problems and the NACN now works quite nicely.
(Except if you have voicemail, right Douglas?)

And of course when I get to a new area, I call them and ask them what
their roaming rates and policies, are, etc.  And I also took my
_Official_Cellular_Roaming_Handbook_ too.

But when we got our phone bills from Cellular One/NY, we find that the
roaming charges are NOT what the carriers themselves say they are!  It
seems that for certain NACN systems, but not all of them, Cellular
One/NY re-bills the other systems' $2.00/day + .50/minute as
nothing/day + .99/minute!

When I called Cellular One/NY to complain about this, they just say
"this is the way we do it" and that's all I can get them to say.  I
can't find anything about this practice in any of Cellular One/NY's
paperwork and they can't seem to explain it either.

Has anyone else had this done to them?


Mike Bray     [e-mail]   (or)   ...!apple!camphq!mike

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #46
*****************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa24171;
          27 Jan 93 7:21 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA00720
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 27 Jan 1993 05:07:31 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA09753
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 27 Jan 1993 05:06:07 -0600
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 05:06:07 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #47

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 27 Jan 93 05:06:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 47

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Sears Kills Catalog After 95 Years (Paul Robinson)
    Overseas Directory Assistance (sic) (Alan Munn)
    CONNECT Table of Contents (Patricia Snyder-Rayl)
    A RISK Question (Paul M. Wexelblat)
    Pac Bell to go All Digital (R. Kevin Oberman)
    AT&T Reaches Out to the Arts (Dave Leibold)
    Who You Gonna Call? Phonebusters! (Dave Leibold)
    Cable TV Standards (Sean E. Williams)
    MCI Voicelink (Greg Volk)
    Answering Machine Exclusion: Schematic (Jon Sreekanth)
    Request For Information: Telecom in Australia (Wen-hu Liang)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993  18:19:36 EST
Subject: Sears Kills Catalog After 95 Years


What is probably one of Pat Townson's biggest neighbors is closing its
doors today.

Sears Roebuck & Company's Mail Order Catalog Division is closing after
more than 95 years.  It was the use of telecommunications that built
the business and it was the failure to use telecommunications that
killed it.

"Wait," you might say, "more than 95 years means it was operating back
in the 1890s.  How could they be using 'telecommunications' then?  And
how does it affect them now?"

Think about it for a moment.  'Telecommunications' is the method of
communicating over long distance.  When we use it it normally refers
to things like telephones, satellites, cable TV and Internet E-Mail.
But Telecommunications also includes the methods by which other forms
of communications are transported.

Where the mail can reach, or where trains can go, you can communicate
or you can ship goods.  And that is what created Mr. Sears' business:
the ability of the trains to reach out into 'the middle of nowhere'.
Also, the supposedly 'new' idea of 'easy credit' where someone could
buy something on time payments.

Now look at the Sears Catalog office that closed, and see why:

  - The company that pioneered a means to reach customers in the
middle of nowhere, now had no easy way for customers to reach it.
Until last year, incredibly enough, SEARS CATALOG DID NOT HAVE AN 800
NUMBER.  There are companies that do 1/1000 of the business Sears does
who do have one.  But not the largest mail order company in the
country.

  - The company that pioneered allowing people to order on credit or
return goods which were unsatisfactory, would not take any plastic
except its own.  Even JCPenney takes Visa and Mastercard, and JCP even
takes Sears' Discover card, too.

Sears failed to keep up with technology, and as a result, the company
that was created by 'high technology' was killed by failure to stay
with the technology needed to keep it alive.  Larger companies get fat
and slow, they usually need the technology to compete with the little
people a lot more than the small companies who have to use the
technology just to stay alive.

"Telecommunications" gave birth to Sears Catalog.  And it was
telecommunications that pulled the plug.

(And bad management helped grease the skids, too.)


Paul Robinson -- [e-mail]
These opinions are mine alone.


[Moderator's Note: The demise of the Catalog was in all the papers
here today. That's another 4000 people to be unemployed here. It also
appears the R.R. Donnelley Company, printers of the catalog for the
past 80 plus years will be out of business as well, since the Catalog
was about 40 percent of their business. Sears began here in the late
1800's, but they closed their downtown store many years ago about the
same time downtown Chicago and State Street died. Their big block-long
six story building at State and Van Buren Sts. has sat vacant for ten
years now I guess. In its heyday earlier this century, Sears had its
international headquarters in Chicago in a building on the (then) very
white and very Jewish west side, on Homan Avenue. In the 1920's, they
employed about half the west side neighborhood in some capacity or
another. Some of you may recall that Jacob Franks, father of the
fourteen year old Bobby Franks who was murdered by Leopold and Loeb
was a vice-president at Sears. In his generosity, Mr. Sears before his
death left a huge amount of money to the Young Men's Christian Assoc-
iation of Metropolitan Chicago. Because of prudent investments, the
Sears YMCA still has most of its endowment. Sitting across the street
from the ancient and abandoned former Sears HQ on Arthington Street
and Homan Avenue in what is now one of the worst ghetto areas in
Chicago, the Sears YMCA provides tutoring and recreational programs
for black children and teenagers. I am reminded of the time when IBT
cut over a stepper CO to ESS about 1974. Sears Catalog and Central
Credit facility shared a five-position cord board which had very heavy
traffic all the time on 312-WABash-4600. My office number then was
WEbster-9-4600. When IBT made the cut, some damn-fool got 922 and 939
mixed up in the tables ... for two days I lived with constant wrong
numbers (a couple hundred calls each day) until I convinced IBT to
correct the error.  Sears never even missed the calls, I'm sure. PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Alan Munn)
Subject: Overseas Directory Assistance (sic)
Organization: University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 03:39:54 GMT


Is it possible to connect directly to directory assistance in other
countries?

  We recently had a rather frustrating experience trying to find a
number in Brazil through MCI.  The MCI operator spoke no Portuguese
and had a pretty strong regional American accent.  Needless to say the
operator claimed that there was no one of that name in the 'small'
city we were calling (14 million people).  When I asked to speak
directly to the Brazilian operator she refused.  I then talked to an
MCI supervisor who said we couldn't speak directly to the operator,
but that he had "an even better solution" -- a Portuguese speaking MCI
operator (who did speak pretty reasonable (European) Portugeuse).
This helped somewhat but finally he ended up letting us speak to the
Brazilian operator at which point we got the number.

Can one find out how to dial the operator directly?  If I were
overseas could I just dial the North American xxx-555-1212 number as
if it were a regular long distance call to get directory assistance
here?  Why wouldn't MCI (although I assume this is common practice)
let us talk directly to the operator?


Alan Munn                     <[e-mail]>
Dept. of Linguistics, CB# 3155 UNC Chapel Hill NC 27599


[Moderator's Note: Yes and no. No, you are not supposed to dial
international DA direct (no, people in other countries cannot dial
555-1212 in this country -- I don't think), and yes, it can be done in
a few cases if you know the number the operator dials (it is not a
standard 555-1212, but 011-xxx-555-1212 will work in a few places).
You pay the cost of the overseas call. It seems to work for 671 (Guam)
and 670 (Saipan), as well as 852 (Hong Kong) but I am not going to run
my bill up checking out every possible place. 684 (American Samoa)
also goes through.

If you think MCI operators are bad, you should hear some of the help
AT&T has hired in the past few years at the IOC. I am sorry to say
this, but sometimes I am embarassed for them when they try to talk to
an overseas operator to obtain a number. Especially annoying is when
they split the connection, leaving me on a dead line while I can only
hope they are asking for what I want instead of something else. At
least when the connection is left in place during the call, I can make
a correction if needed instead of waiting for the AT&T operator to
come back five minutes later and say nothing was located. When calling
some countries, be prepared to wait through five minutes of ringing
before they even answer the line, unless you get that infernal
'Telee-kom Services, we're trying to extend your call, please stand
by,' message with three bars of music which repeats itself every ten
seconds for the five minutes instead.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Patricia Snyder-Rayl)
Subject: CONNECT Table of Contents
Organization: GREX Public Access Unix [phone]
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 05:44:18 GMT


                        CONNECT Table of Contents
                            May/June '93 Issue

CONNECT is a new bi-monthly magazine focusing on telecommunications
from a user's perspective. Coverage includes the major commercial
online services, Internet/Usenet and bulletin board systems. The first
issue of CONNECT (May/June '93 cover date) will be available in
mid-March.

Here is a list of the feature articles and columns that appear in this
premiere issue:

FEATURES

Telecomputing and the U.S. Constitution by Mark Leccese
     This article explores the current STEVE JACKSON GAMES v. THE UNITED
     STATES court case and its potential impact on BBS users and sysops
     across the country.

History of FIDOnet by Kathleen Creighton
     An interview with Tom Jennings, creator of FIDOnet, who discusses
     how FIDOnet came into being, where it is now, and where it's going
     in the future.

The Weather Underground by Ilana Stern
     How you can get current weather data and maps online, with a detailed
     look at the University of Michigan's Weather Underground.

Intro to Packet Radio by Andy Funk
     This introduction to Packet Radio shows how you can get involved in
     one of the fastest growing hobbies in telecommunications...phone line
     and modem not necessary!

Getting Online with a High Speed Modem by Dan Romanchik
     Some valuable tips for anyone moving up from 2400 bps or slower to
     a new high speed modem.

Children and Telecommunications by Phil Shapiro
     Children can learn a lot and gain new friends online. This article
     gives tips on getting children involved in telecommunications.


COLUMNS

Connecting with CompuServe
     Columnist Jim Ness gives us the "Grand Tour" of CompuServe, touching
     on everything from 9600 baud access to recent changes in the message
     base software.

Eye on America Online
     Columnist Julia Wilkinson gives an overview of America Online, one of
     the "newest" national online services with a slick graphical user
     interface.

GEnie's Treasures
     Veteran GEnie "treasure hunter" Jim Mallory is your guide to the
     many hidden (and not-so-hidden) treasures waiting for you on GEnie.

Telecomputing the Delphi Way
     Columnist Dick Evans shows us what Delphi has to offer, including the
     recently added Internet FTP and Telnet capabilities.

The Internet Gateway
     What is the Internet and what does it have to offer? Columnist Miles
     Kehoe gives us an overview of Internet, along with a few e-mail tips.

Clear To Send (CTS)
     A review of COMMO, the popular multi-tasking terminal package from
     shareware programmer Fred Drucker. Columnist Victor Volkman tells us
     why the software has created such a COMMOtion in the IBM telecom
     market.

Dial M for Macintosh
     Ross Scott Rubin, CONNECT's Macintosh columnist, takes a look at
     MacIntercomm, the new multi-tasking terminal package from Mercury
     Systems.

Staying Connected for about a Pound
     Palmtops can be an excellent way to stay connected when you're on the
     go. Columnist Marty Mankins shows you how to take advantage of this
     fast-growing market.

                             ---------

For more information about CONNECT, please contact Pegasus Press at 3487
Braeburn Circle, Ann Arbor, MI 48108 or phone [phone] voice. Or
e-mail us at:
    CIS: 70007,4640
    GEnie: UNICORNPUB
    Delphi: UNICORNPUB
    Internet: [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Paul M. Wexelblat)
Subject: A RISK Question
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Univ. of Lowell CS Dept.
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 20:40:23 GMT


I know this isn't the RISKS Digest, but...

I have a line that rings in two places, home and office.  The home and
office are in different towns (separate fire/police), but the same
telephone exchange.

When 911 gets installed, what are the possibilities for what gets
displayed who gets the call what is the likelyhood that they can do it
right (both customer drops come out of the same CO, so they have a
prayer of getting it right.)

The RISK, is obvoiusly that the same Fire Department goes to the wrong
address (10 miles away).


Wex

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Pac Bell to go All Digital
Date: 26 Jan 93 15:34:38 GMT


An article in this morning's (1/26) {Tri-Valley Herald} reports that
Pac Bell plans to upgrade ALL telephone switches (14 million lines) to
digital switches by 1997. The billion dollar plan attributed to
rapidly growing competition from other carriers.

Just three years ago Pac Bell was in the technical backwaters. I live
in one of the fastest growing areas in the state and still was on an
old crossbar. They had little plan for ISDN or any other digital
service. Then came competition!

I am now on a DMS-100. The local office also provides ISDN from a new
5ESS with SS7 widely (if not universally) implemented both within the
service area and between Pac Bell and at least AT&T. It still catches
my attention when I place a long distance call and the line rings
instantly without apparent delays or any switching sounds.

Simply amazing what a little competition can do.


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

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

Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 03:38:24 -0500
From: [e-mail] (Dave Leibold)
Subject: AT&T Reaches Out to the Arts


AT&T has a reputation for supporting arts, especially during these
risky recessionary times. AT&T Foundation recently pitched in $50,000
to support the Canadian Opera Company's productions of the operas
Bluebeard's Castle and Erwartung. The COC will also be doing this
double feature at the Brooklyn Academy of Music (an institution in
which AT&T has some long-standing ties).

AT&T is reportedly the largest sponsor of American non-profit
performing arts. This latest sponsorship of Canadian arts comes at a
time when AT&T's presence in Canada is growing (ie. the part-ownership
of Unitel Communications).

ref: {Toronto Star}, Eye on Entertainment


Dave Leibold - via FidoNet node 1:250/98
INTERNET: [e-mail]


[Moderator's Note: AT&T has always been generous to service organizations
and charities as well.  In the 1960's when AT&T and the Bells were one,
they gave a lot of financial assistance to the civil rights movement.
This being the 25th anniversary year of the asassination of Dr. M.L. King,
I am reminded that when he came to visit us (the trustees of the
Chicago Temple invited him to speak once a year, sometimes twice), his
honorarium was always paid back to us by AT&T and the program for the
occassion would note, "Dr. and Mrs. King's personal expenses during
their visit have been met with a gift from Illinois Bell Telephone Co."
AT&T also endowed the telephone exhibit at the Museum of Science and
Industry here for perhaps thirty years.  PAT]

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

Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 03:10:24 -0500
From: [e-mail] (Dave Leibold)
Subject: Who You Gonna Call? Phonebusters!


{The Toronto Star} reported on Project Phonebuster, an undertaking by
the Ontario Provincial Police, RCMP and the federal Ministry of
Consumer and Corporate Affairs. The Phonebusters had the task of
stomping on bogus boiler rooms that called unsuspecting citizens to
offer phony prize winnings or overpriced merchandise. Credit card
scams are also done via unscrupulous telemarketing.

The police estimates indicate approximately 40 such phraudulent
operations are running in Canada, ripping off CAD$20 million each
year. Average loss per victim (and there could be 16 000 victims in
the province of Ontario alone) is $500, and may become the most
widespread phraud ever committed in Canada.

Meanwhile, the legitimate telemarketers are making progress with plans
to improve their integrity. The Canadian Direct Marketing Association
(CDMA) offers a "do not call" list for those who do not want to be
called from boiler rooms, and hopefully this list can be made
mandatory for all boiler rooms whether or not they are CDMA members.


Dave Leibold - via FidoNet node 1:250/98
INTERNET: [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (S.E. Williams)
Subject: Cable TV Standards
Date: Tue, 27 Jan 1993 19:39:23 -0500 (EST)


I know that cable television isn't discussed with much regularity in
this forum, but as it is a form of telecommunications I believe my
posting here is valid.

I was wondering if the content of cable TV channels is regulated.  I'd
specifically like to know about the censorship of language, violence,
and pornography.  Certain stations (MTV, for example) will not show
nudity or allow vulgar language.  Is this a result of federal
regulation, or is it an MTV policy?  How about CNN?

Of course, it seems that services such as HBO or Cinemax can show what
they like.  Maybe it's a difference of pay services vs "free" cable
services?  Please CC: any responses to me, as I may not see it in the
Digest.


Sean E. Williams

sean e. williams, ([e-mail]), is a student of imaging
and photographic technology in the college of imaging arts & sciences
at the rochester institute of technology in beautiful rochester, new
york.  (he's also taking a few telecommunications courses...)  You can
call him at 716-475-4396.

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

From: [e-mail] (Greg Volk)
Subject: MCI Voicelink
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix @ U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 93 04:55:33 GMT


Is anyone here familar with a program titled MCI Voicelink? I do not
know much about it, other than the fact that it runs under UNIX. I've
heard descriptions ranging from "a long distance billing system" to "a
voicemail program." The name makes it soudn like a voicemail program,
but I'm still not sure.

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

Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 02:06:51 -0500
From: [e-mail] (Jon Sreekanth)
Subject: Answering Machine Exclusion: Schematic


Hi Pat:

This is either for publication, or FAQ or what-have-you. I typed it up
in response to someone's question, so maybe others will find it
useful.

----

This is the schematic I traced for an answering machine stopper
gadget: it cuts off the answering machine in case any line is picked
up. Some answering machines have this feature built-in; the older or
inexpensive ones don't. The gadget is called Message Stopper (R), by
Design Tech International Inc., Springfield, VA. Several other mfrs
make this kind of gadget, so this is just one I happened to buy.
Cost, roughly $10.

The gadget is in the same form factor as a wall-plug-in Y-splitter.
That is, it plugs into the wall RJ11 outlet, and has two RJ11 outlets
on it, one marked TEL, the other marked ANS. There are two LED's, the
green one on top of the ANS outlet, the red one on top of the TEL
outlet.

The two outer wires of the three RJ11's are wired in parallel. The
schematic for the center two wires is :


         .--------------  phone
      .-----------------
      |  |
C1   ----|
C2   -|  |
      |  |
      |  |
      |  '-----------------  answering machine
      |
      +--|<--+--|<--->|----
      |      |    two zeners
      +-->|--+
         two leds

     Top led is green, bottom is red.

It turns out the leds are basically idiot lights. The outside design
makes it look like the green should light up when the ANS is offhook,
and the red when TEL is offhook, but actually, depending on the line
polarity, only one will glow, and only when the ANS outlet is offhook.
If a load is connected on the ANS outlet, both leds will glow when
ring voltage comes through.

I could not read the zener voltage off the diodes, but I measured 11V
across one of them when operating.

The theory of operation is straightforward. All telephone extensions
in the house are in parallel with each other, and with any device
connected on the TEL outlet. If any of these devices is offhook, the
phone line voltage is expected to drop below 12V or so, at which point
the zeners isolate the ANS outlet from the line.

It's a fairly simplistic design, and will not work in all situations,
but it mostly works.


Regards,

Jon Sreekanth

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


[Moderator's Note: I shall put this as a file in the archives, which
are accessible using anonymous ftp lcs.mit.edu.  Thanks for sending it
along to the Digest.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Wen-hu Liang)
Subject: Request For Information -- Telecom in Australia
Date: 27 Jan 93 06:57:46 GMT
Organization: University of Pittsburgh


Hi there,

This is Vincent Wen-Hu Liang looking for some help regarding my
research on the development of telecommunication in Australia,
including the history, industry structure, status of infrastructure,
services and other general information.  Is it possible to get any
year-book published by government department or telecommunication
incorporation?  How?  My report will due by April.  As a matter of
fact, there isn't much time left.  I hope someone can provide me any
information of my research topic or contact point, like address, fax
or e-mail.  Appreciate your attention and, of course, response.


Vincent
Graduate student of Telecommunication, U. of Pittsburgh, USA
E-mail : [e-mail]   Fax : [phone]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #47
*****************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa06781;
          27 Jan 93 13:10 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA01811
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 27 Jan 1993 10:12:39 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA03151
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 27 Jan 1993 10:12:05 -0600
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 10:12:05 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #48

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 27 Jan 93 10:12:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 48

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: "Secret" Phone Codes (A. Alan Toscano)
    Re: "Secret" Phone Codes (Ken Weaverling)
    Re: "Secret" Phone Codes (Rick Duggan)
    Re: "Secret" Phone Codes (Carl Moore)
    Re: Subscribable Mailing Lists on Internet? (Peter M. Weiss)
    Re: Subscribable Mailing Lists on Internet? (Richard McCombs)
    Re: Integretel Forcing Charges Through (Winston Lawrence)
    Re: University Telephone System (and Integretel in General) (Chas Mattair)
    Re: University Telephone System (and Integretel in General) (Udi Manber)
    Re: Strange Intercept Message (Stephen Diercouff)
    Re: Strange Intercept Message (John R. Levine)
    Re: 10XXX UnBlocking (Martin Harriss)
    Re: 313 Split Not Being Well Publicized (John Higdon)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Re: "Secret" Phone Codes
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 93 13:29:27 CST
Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail] (A Alan Toscano)


In TELECOM Digest Volume 13, Issue 45, [e-mail] (Monte
Freeman), a reader in the 404 Number Plan Area, writes about his
strange experionces with calls to 404 988-9664, with and without a
prepended 10732- and asks:

> Strange results from 404 land. Anyone got any ideas here?

It's my understanding that the 732 Carrier Identificaiton Code
facilitates switched access to AT&T's Subscriber Defined Network
Service (SDN) and also its Virtual Telecommunication Network Service
(VTNS).

Under SDN/VTNS, each customer designs its own dialing plan, providing
a "virtual private network." Access to SDNs are normally over
dedicated lines, but small branch locations of a corporation might
"PIC" their outgoing lines to 732, (or prefix seven-digit outgoing
calls with 10732 1 700) in order to facilitate switched access to
their SDN/VTN. As the dialing plan of one SDN will likely vary from
that of another, the network must identify the caller, in order to
know which SDN/VTNS dialing plan to use in routing a call. Thus ANI
plays an important role in implementation of SDN and VTNS switched
access.

Normally, if you prefix a call with 10732 and are *NOT* an SDN/VTNS
customer, you'll be told "You have reached a private network. You must
be authorized to access this network..." As noted previously in the
Digest, an exception is 10732 1 404 988-9664, which normally recites
ANI information, presumably to assist AT&T in setting up these
networks.

(Most AT&T customers' lines are "PIC'd" to 288 and not 732, thus the
need to include the 10732- prefix to override the PIC default.)

LEC payphones normally force all "1+" calls to the "288" network
regardless of any 10XXX code dialed (COCOTs generally block "10XXX-1+"
calls altogether) and "10732-0+" calls are treated like "10288-0+"
calls. Therefore, it's not generally possible to reach this ANI
announcement from an LEC payphone. (NYTel payphones are apparently an
exception.) This is no loss to AT&T, however, since payphones aren't
often included in private networks!

"1+" calls to 404 988-9664 carried over AT&T's normal "288" network
and over competitors' networks, reportedly ring without answer. Only
if the call is placed "1+" over the "732" network is ANI recited. It
happens that 404-988 is Smyrna, GA - one of the SDN support sites. I
suppose 404 988-9664 rings "open" on a line at AT&T's facilities
there, and has special significance only on the "732" network. I also
expect that AT&T will change this number if it continues to receive
the increasingly frequent mention in the Digest that it has received
lately!

Disclaimer: I work for a VTNS customer with dedicated access, and have
limited knowledge of 10732- switched access. Therefore, much of this
is conjecture. I am not an AT&T employee.


A Alan Toscano -- Houston, TX -- <[e-mail]> -- <attmail!atoscano>

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

From: Ken Weaverling <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: "Secret" Phone Codes
Date: 26 Jan 1993 10:05:31 -0500
Organization: Delaware Technical & Community College


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Stuart
Tener) writes:

> A friend of mine tried this number, and said it works from 215!  Only
> thing is he said that it gave an "8" at the end of the number?!?

Ah, you haven't been paying attention. This is in preparation for
North America to switch to 8 digit phone numbers with existing numbers
having an 8 added to them.

   !!! NOT !!!


Weave's 10/90 recipe for insanity: Take one programmer, divide into
portions: 10% programming consisting of equal parts in systems and
applications plus admin duties broken down into 20% for Unix, 5%
PRIMOS, 10% hardware and network, 35% DOS/Windows, 10% news, 5%
postmaster, and 5% babysitting IRC kiddies.

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

From: [e-mail] (Rick Duggan)
Subject: Re: "Secret" Phone Codes
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Rick Duggan)
Organization: College of Computing
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 15:44:17 GMT


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

> [e-mail] (Tompkins) writes:

>> In one of those discussions, about a year ago, a number was posted
>> that purported to work nationally: 10732-1-404-988-9664.

> Well, it doesn't work from 404. Here's the results of my poking around:

I got it to work from 404.  First, I tried the above directly.  When
that didn't work, I decided to dial just 988-9664.  That just rang
about 10 times before I gave up.  Finally, I went with 10732-988-9664.
Third time's the charm, I suppose.  It functioned as advertised, down
to the extra '8' at the end.  Now, does anyone know if a bunch of
comp.dcom.telecom readers are going to have some $10 charge (or some
other strange amount) on our next phone bills?  They obviously know my
phone number :-).


rick

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

Date: Wed, 27 Jan 93 10:13:22 EST
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: "Secret" Phone Codes


> In one of those discussions, about a year ago, a number was posted
> that purported to work nationally: 10732-1-404-988-9664.  10732 is a

I just tried it from a pay phone in area 410 (using 10732-0 and
10288-0).  Both of them got the AT&T thank-you message followed by no
answer.

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

Organization: Penn State University
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 09:55:31 EST
From: Peter M. Weiss <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Subscribable Mailing Lists on Internet?


In article <[e-mail]>, Paul Robinson <tdarcos@
access.digex.com> says:

> Someone else may have the list of Internet based subscribable lists, I
> know there is one I just don't know who makes it.  I will CC this
> message to TELECOM Digest and allow the readers there to give some
> insight.

An excellent document is available about searching the Lists-of-Lists
electronically, and is itself accessible via electronic mail by
sending a note to: listserv@NDSUVM1 (bitnet) or @vm1.nodak.edu with a
simple body-of-text message of:

GET LISTSOF LISTS

This document (153 lines) is authored by Marty Hoag and contains
valuable advice (and LISTSERV Database Search scripts) on how to do
automated searching.


Pete Weiss - Penn State U, co-owner LDBASE-L

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

Subject: Re: Subscribable Mailing Lists on Internet?
From: [e-mail] (Richard McCombs KB5SNF)
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 93 01:54:07 CST
Organization: The Red Headed League; Lawton, OK, USA


In comp.dcom.telecom, [e-mail] writes:

> Someone else may have the list of Internet based subscribable lists, I
> know there is one I just don't know who makes it.  I will CC this
> message to TELECOM Digest and allow the readers there to give some
> insight.

Send a message to [e-mail]  include the following text
in the body of the message:

    request: info
    topic: interest-groups

The subject is ignored this will send you the List of Lists which is
872K; for this reason, I haven't actually requested it.

To get the help file for this info-server, send a message to
[e-mail]. The Subject field does not matter and may be
omitted. Place the following text in the body of the message:

    request: info
        topic: help

I have done this, and you should probably do this first.

There is much shorter list posted crossposted to news.lists,news.
announce.newusers,news.answers.  If you don't have access to Usenet it
can be requested by email, to find out how send a message to
[e-mail] with the following text in the body:

path <your-return-mail-path-here>
help
quit


Internet: [e-mail]
If I bounce (the maps have errors that I have no control over) then use
[e-mail] BITNET: bo836%cleveland.freenet.edu@cunyvm

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

Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 09:10:17 -0500
From: Winston Lawrence <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Integratel Forcing Charges Through


[e-mail] (Thomas Brown) wrote that..

> Our room was recently billed for $90 worth of collect calls from
> Integratel despite the fact that Lehigh University supposedly traps
> collect calls to student rooms.

To which Patrick responded in part with:

.... (stuff deleted)

> But let's face it; you, or someone with access to the phone in your
> room did agree to accept collect charges, in all probability from an
> 'adult service', since that is the kind of thing Integratel's clients
> deal in for the most part. It might have been from a COCOT, but $90
> seems a bit steep for a regular long distance call. It seems a bit
> steep for the other kind also, but who am I to decide what gets a
> person off? :)

      Patrick, you may be not realize how easy it is to be billed for
a collect call without realizing it. There is a radio show in New York
called 'Off The Hook' (WBAI 10:00pm wednesday nights) which deals with
telephone phone companies, hackers (and crackers too).  They covered
Integratel about a month ago. Basically someone can request a collect
call via Integratel's system. The number is dialed (lets say yours
Patrick) and a recording says this is a collect call if you do not
want to accept the charges hang-up now. If you do NOT hang up guess
what? You just accepted a very expensive collect call.  If you missed
the first two seconds when you pick up the call (not hard when you
expected a human being not a machine voice), if your answering
machine, or modem picked up, or even a child, now, just by answering
your phone you will accept a bill for whatever they choose to bill you
for. Note that there is no way to even ask WHAT the charges may be if
you did hear the message about it being a collect call.

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

Date: Tue, 26 Jan 93 10:07:11 CST
From: [e-mail] (Charles Mattair)
Subject: Re: University Telephone System (and Integretel in General)
Organization: Synercom Technology, Inc., Houston, TX


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Udi
Manber) writes:

> [PAT writes]:

> [Moderator's Note: You say 'the main purpose of such schemes is to
> defraud someone ...'  Who, may I ask, is attempting to defraud whom?
> 800 numbers being forwarded is one thing, but the willful acceptance
> of a collect call when you were notified by the operator that so and
> so was calling collect and the charge would be so much per minute is
> quite another.

Pat,

Billing collect calls without authorization appears to be a fairly
prevalent problem.  My daughter had an ATT Call Me (sm) with the old
style number (713 498 xxxx pppp).  After getting tired of $2.50 (or
more) local payphone calls, I changed the card to one with the new
style number which AOSs cannot bill against (If I can't talk her into
using a SWB phone, force her ;-) ).

Hah ... some of the AOSs, not to be denied, just silently converted
the call to collect.  I didn't have collect/third party blocking at
the time so I don't know if this would have affected the billing.

I never succeeded in arguing the phone company out of any of the
collect charges.

PS: Once she got her own number and card and phone bill, she started
paying attention when I grumbled about AOS ripoffs.


Charles Mattair                [e-mail]
Any opinions offered are my own and do not reflect those of my employer.
Gates and Walton are the perfect reasons for a wealth tax.

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

Date: Tue, 26 Jan 93 12:31:01 -0800
From: [e-mail] (Udi Manber)
Subject: Re: University Telephone System (and Integretel in General)


> [Moderator's Note: You say 'the main purpose of such schemes is to
> defraud someone ...'  Who, may I ask, is attempting to defraud whom?

Students trying to defraud their universities by calling from the dorm
or from any other public phones that are not fully blocked, sleaze
operators convincing children to call back or accept calls, 800
numbers that are supposed to warn you about the charges but never do,
the list goes on and on. (These are just examples told to me by the
utility commission.)  I am sure you know more about that than I do.
Are you trying to say that there is no phone fraud?

> But if you choose to deal with their clients then you should plan
> on paying their clients.

And what if, like me, you never chose to deal with any of them (or
even knew they existed), but can't get them off your back?

> Everyone uses something to circumvent the blocking of something else
> when it suits their requirements. Why should sex-by-phone providers be
> any different?

"Everyone cheats, steals, and beats their kids, so why do you blame
me?" is not a great argument.

You missed my point.  These schemes, especially the 800-number scheme
which I was hit with, pose an unacceptable risk to many unsuspecting
victims, and allow easy fraud.  You think that when you block your
phone you're protected, but you're not.  You need to be an expert to
be really protected.  It could very well be that fraud is not wide
spread -- yet.  Maybe (probably) most of the complaints against
Integretel are from people trying to weasel out of calls they made.
Maybe Integretel knows how to cover their behind (I am sure they do),
and maybe I am paranoid, but IMHO we should *minimize* fraud
opportunities as much as we can, rather than turn a blind eye to them
until they hit us personally.

In any case, I spent too much time on that.  It's time to move on.


Udi Manber

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

From: [e-mail] (Stephen Diercouff)
Subject: Re: Strange Intercept Message
Organization: tfm Associates, Ltd.
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 04:24:03 GMT


[e-mail] writes:

> A friend of mine accidently dialed an 800 number, and received a
> strange repeating intercept message.  I haven't even a clue as to the
> language, but my guess is the message is attempting to say that the
> number you have dialed is not in service.  The number is 800-952-5388.

The intercept is, "Kein Anschluss unter dieser Nummer", which, if I
remember my German means, "No connection for this number".


Stephen Diercouff, tfm Associates, Ltd., Bellingham WA  voice: [phone]
Internet:  [e-mail]                                    fax: [phone]
UUCP    :  uunet!nwnexus!tfm!sgd
Snail   :  P.O. Box 5084/Bellingham WA 98227-5084

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

Subject: Re: Strange Intercept Message
Organization: I.E.C.C.
Date: 26 Jan 93 15:16:01 EST (Tue)
From: [e-mail] (John R. Levine)


> The number is 800-952-5388.

It says "Kein Anschluss unter diese Nummer," this number is not
connected.


Regards,

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

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

From: [e-mail] (Martin Harriss)
Subject: Re: 10XXX UnBlocking
Reply-To: bdsgate![e-mail] (Martin Harriss)
Organization: Beechwood Data Systems
Date: Wed, 26 Jan 93 03:31:59 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> Barton F. Bruce <Barton.
[e-mail]> writes:

> AT&T has been offering substantial $ rebates for expenses incurred by
> hotels and such while unblocking their PBXes to handle 10XXX traffic.

 [stuff deleted]
> AT&T said the NET&T order code and pricing are: RBVXC, $11/line
> install, $0.00/mo!!, but cautioned me that it was on MY head to
> determine if whatever NET&T is offering is what my customers need.

> The usual NET&T sales response is that no one has heard of it, but
> since AT&T had provided the info that it was only a few days old, the
> NET&T sales types are off checking on it at least.

I don't think it's RBVXC, I think it's RTVXC.  RTVXC is the Universal
Service Order Code (USOC) that NYNEX uses (or at least that New York
Tel uses) to describe one particular blocking option.  From memory,
RTVXC blocks 1-900, 976, 1-700, 540, 550, and possibly others that I
don't remember.

But maybe you're talking about something different, in connection with
10XXX, and there really is an RBVXC? Seems like quite a coincedence,
though.


Martin Harriss     uunet!bdsgate!martin

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

Date: Tue, 26 Jan 93 10:11 PST
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: 313 Split Not Being Well Publicized


[e-mail] (H. Peter Anvin N9ITP) writes:

>> Permissive dialing
>> starts December 1993, and ends (with mandatory use of 810) August 10,
>> 1994.

> That's a long permissive dialing period.

Hah! Got than one beat by a country mile. Somewhere back in 1959 or
1960, 408 was split off from 415. I happened to notice this because of
my practice of reading the phone book for fun (makes great "library"
reading, if you know what I mean). Anyway, callers from out of state
could use 415 or 408 for south bay numbers interchangably for several
years.

But here is the best part. It was possible to omit the area code if
you happened to be calling within the metro Bay Area, even if your
call crossed area code boundaries until 1982. In other words, up until
eleven years ago, San Francisco was a seven digit call from San
Jose -- even though the NPA had been split more than TWENTY YEARS
previously!


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

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #48
*****************************










Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa22217;
          29 Jan 93 19:36 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA00870
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 29 Jan 1993 16:56:30 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA02044
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 29 Jan 1993 16:56:04 -0600
Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1993 16:56:04 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #49

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 28 Jan 93 23:30:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 49

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: The Future of Wired vs Wireless Services (Immo Huneke)
    Re: 1-800-CALL-ATT vs. LEC intra-LATA LD (Scott D. Brenner)
    Re: How Can I Reach AT&T EasyLink? (A. Alan Toscano)
    Re: Overseas Directory Assistance (Michelle R. Thibault)
    Re: A RISK Question (Daniel Burstein)
    Re: 702-333-8444 (was Strange International "Chat Line") (Daniel Burstein)
    Re: You Didn't Accept a Collect Call, But You'll be Billed Anyway (Higdon)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: The Future of Wired vs Wireless Services
Date: 28 Jan 93 15:41:27 GMT
Organization: Logica Space & Communications


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Mark) wrote:

> This system brings closer the concept of Personal Communication
> Numbers (PCNs) so you can one day be contacted anywhere in the world,
> just by anyone dialling your permanent number. The only problems I can
> see immediately are those involved with the amount of frequencies, RFI
> and the ease of monitoring.
>
> Sounds like a nice system.

Yes, it does sound like a nice idea, doesn't it?

Yet when a similar service (Rabbit) was launched in the UK in 1992,
the take-up was only 10% of predictions. For 200 pounds sterling you
get a home base station and a portable _digital_ phone (zero hiss)
with a range of around 150 yards. Public base stations are dotted
around the capital and many other parts of the UK. The cost of calls
is the same as your domestic phone when you're using your own base
station, and the same as a public payphone when you're out and about.

Only around 5000 Rabbits were sold before Christmas. I suspect that one of
the problems might be that the base station is useless without the handset
 - so married couples or families are unable to use their portable
phone while the head of household is away at work.


Immo Huneke, S/W Engineer               [e-mail]
Logica Space and Communications Ltd.    [e-mail]
Stephenson House, 67-87 Hampstead Road  Tel: [phone] x1315
London NW1 2PL, England                 Fax: [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (scott.d.brenner)
Subject: Re: 1-800-CALL-ATT vs. LEC intra-LATA LD
Organization: AT&T
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 18:10:09 GMT


In article <[e-mail]| [e-mail] (Mike
McNally) writes:

> I just c alled my voice mailbox to check voice mail (it's in 415, I'm
> in 408) and as I listened to the "Thank you for using Pacific Bell"
> recording I though of the recent thread concerning intra-LATA long
> distance.  On a whim, I decided to try 1-800-CALL-ATT to see if I
> could force ATT to carry the call instead.  (PacBell won't let 10288
> work for such calls; you get a recording.)  It worked.

> [Moderator's Note: I've noticed that when an intra-LATA call is placed
> here via AT&T because they were more or less forced into handling it
> due to it being on their calling card (or via Easy Reach, etc) the
> billing for same will come on the AT&T portion of the Illinois Bell
> bill, with a statement saying 'call handled on behalf of Illinois Bell
> by AT&T'. It is almost as though they are saying, "we cannot legally
> handle this call as AT&T, but we can act as agents for Illinois Bell
> and handle it for them."  I think AT&T functions like a 'reseller' or
> open-ended (no defined customer base) aggregator for the local telcos,
> and pays the telcos for calls which are 'rightfully' the telco's to
> handle.  In many cases, they may just let the local telco handle the
> whole thing but at AT&T rates.  I suspect the same arrangement is in
> effect in everywhere with the telco of record for that territory.  PAT]

I recently had a similar thing happen.  I needed to call home from a
payphone and I had no change.  Although the payphone and my home are
in different exchanges, they're in the same LATA and only about ten
miles apart.  I used my AT&T Universal Card by dialing 0 and the seven
digits of my home number; at the "bong," I entered my ten digit
Universal calling card number and the PIN.  The call went through.  I
forgot that AT&T and the LECs recently implemented their own calling
card numbering systems (and validation databases).  I figured that NJ
Bell would carry the call, and it would appear on the "local" portion
of my phone bill as an intra-LATA calling card call.

I just got the Universal card bill, and the call showed up as an
ordinary Universal card call!  Pat's explanation above may explain how
AT&T carried my call, but how did it even get out to AT&T's network?
I only dialed 0+NXX-XXXX.  Why didn't NJ Bell grab it and tell me that
my Universal Card number was invalid for their network?  Or do they
(and other LECs) just have arrangements like Pat suggests where
they'll let AT&T carry the call in return for payment by AT&T?

I should know this stuff better, but I work in a non-network-related
part of AT&T.  I want to understand how this works.  It would
certainly be to my benefit if I can force intra-LATA calling card
calls to be carried by my company instead of the LEC.


Scott D. Brenner      AT&T Consumer Communications Services
[e-mail]              Basking Ridge, New Jersey

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

Subject: Re: How Can I Reach AT&T EasyLink?
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 93 13:18:57 CST
Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail] (A Alan Toscano)


In TELECOM Digest Volume 13, Issue 44, [e-mail] (Ivan
Maldonado) asks:

> Anyone know how to reach folks hooked up to "AT&T Easylink", whatever
> that is?  I'm trying to reach the username "idea" hooked up
> to/through/under that network/gateway/thing.

And, our Moderator responds with some admitted guesses as to the
required syntax. Judging from Ivan's question, and Patrick's response,
what we're seeing here, again, is the frequent confusion over just
what is meant by "EasyLink."

LET'S SEE ...

Several years back, Western Union developed an email service, and
called it EasyLink Instant Mail Service. It was one of the offerings
of its Business Services unit. That unit was acquired in December of
1990, by AT&T, which merged it with its own Global Messaging Services
unit (original provider of AT&T Mail, AT&T Enhanced FAX, AT&T EDI, and
AT&T Learning Network services), and decided to call the resulting
business unit "AT&T EasyLink Services."  Because the former Western
Union email product was, and is, often referred to as "EasyLink
Service" (note singular vs plural), confusion reigns.

REGARDLESS OF WHAT YOU DEFINE AS "EASYLINK" ...

Mailboxes on the former Western Union service, (which is often called
simply "IMS,") are identified by eight-digit numbers which begin with
"62." (These numbers are called EasyLink Numbers, or ELNs.)

Mailboxes, and Off-Net Directory Entries on AT&T Mail and other GMS
platform services, have *alpha* or *alphanumeric* usernames a la Unix.

(Incidently, an IMS mailbox may, in addition to its ELN, also have an
optional Off-Net Directory Entry on AT&T Mail. To the outside would it
would look like, and be addressed as though, it were an AT&T Mail
mailbox.)

SO, GENERALLY ...

 From the Internet, you may address email to alphabetic or alphanumeric
usernames as:
     [e-mail]

Eight-digit numeric IDs which begin with "62" (ELNs) may be addressed
as:
     [e-mail]

HOWEVER ...

Email to "gatewayed" mailboxes on other systems which connect to AT&T
Mail, by way of Unix or X.400 gateways, require other address formats,
which vary widely by gateway, and are beyond the scope of this
article. Also, addressing mail back to the Internet is an entirely
different, and far more complicated, matter, and I recommend that
EasyLink Services' customers desiring information about any of these
formats contact the appropriate Customer Support Center:

     EasyLink IMS: 800 HELP-ESL (or, [phone])
     AT&T Mail: 800 MAIL-672 (or, [phone])

FINALLY, GETTING BACK TO THE ORIGINAL QUESTION ...

The username, which Ivan desires to write to, is 'idea', so, in as
much as this is an alphabetic ID, he would address his message to:

     [e-mail]

Disclaimer: I am *not* an AT&T employee. Rather, I'm just an AT&T
customer with mailboxes on both EasyLink IMS and AT&T Mail, as well as
on the Internet.


A Alan Toscano -- Houston, TX -- <[e-mail]> -- <attmail!atoscano>

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

From: [e-mail] (Michelle R. Thibault)
Subject: Re: Overseas Directory Assistance
Organization: Norut Research Group, Norway
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 15:17:21 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Alan
Munn) wri tes:

> Is it possible to connect directly to directory assistance in other
> countries?

> Can one find out how to dial the operator directly?

> [Moderator's Note: Yes and no. No, you are not supposed to dial
> international DA direct (no, people in other countries cannot dial
> 555-1212 in this country -- I don't think), and yes, it can be done in
> ...]

I agree.  You have to know the number the operator dials.  I've called
Norway directory assistance from the US by simply using the country
code for Norway and then the number I'd dial if I was in Norway.  So,
011-47-0180 worked just fine.  I had U.S. Sprint, BTW.

As for calling from Norway to the US 555-1212 number to get DA, it
doesn't work.  I recently ended up calling the US Sprint operator (via
their "Norway access number") to get a number in Texas that the
Norwegian DA couldn't find for me.  BTW, it was interesting to
discover that _she_ didn't try to call a US operator to do DA, she
just looked it up herself!  -- Does the US distribute directory
information on-line somehow?  (I was looking for a pretty vague
reference, so it's not unusual that she couldn't locate it.)  Sprint
was *very* nice about it -- I was trying to locate a store that I
couldn't remember the name of in a small town and the Sprint operator
both put me through to DA, told them I was calling internationally
when they weren't trying very hard and then put me through to the
number when they finally found it. ;-)  A pleasant experience all
around.  I generally like the US Sprint operators.  I don't remember
them ever giving me any problem with talking to the international
operator directly when I've needed to.


Michelle

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

From: [e-mail] (Daniel Burstein)
Subject: Re: A RISK Question
Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix, NYC
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 19:40:32 GMT


In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Paul M.
Wexelblat) writes:

> I know this isn't the RISKS Digest, but...

> I have a line that rings in two places, home and office.  The home and
> office are in different towns (separate fire/police), but the same
> telephone exchange.

> When 911 gets installed, what are the possibilities for what gets
> displayed who gets the call what is the likelyhood that they can do it
> right (both customer drops come out of the same CO, so they have a
> prayer of getting it right.)

> The RISK, is obvoiusly that the same Fire Department goes to the wrong
> address (10 miles away).

(bearing in mind that you may have some wierd arrangment ... but in
general) ...

In 99.9999% of the cases, the way this double line setup is arranged
is that ONE of the locations is considered the "primary" site, with
billing and electronic records considered to be at THAT location.  The
second ring location is considered to be an "off premise extension"
("OPX" in lingo).

Think of location #2 as simply being a second phone set, but instead
of being in the next room, it's attached to a VERY LONG extension cord
which reaches into the next county.

So, if you call from either set, chances are it WILL register as the
primary location.  This impacts on "911" service in two ways.

  1) with basic 911, the call is routed to the emergency center based
on your physical location. (this place, in lingo, is called the "PSAP"
 - for "Public Safety Answering Point").  If both your phones are in
the same county, they are probably served by the same PSAP, but you
ought to make sure.

  2) with Enhanced-911, the calling number and ADDRESS are
automagically displayed on the operator's screen.  In your case, this
would almost definitely give the main location.  So you've GOT TO
EMPHASIZE to anyone using the phone that they HAVE to tell the
operator the real location.  A real RISK with 911 systems is that the
operators rely on the telco info, and don't even ask the address.

  (In a proper setting, they would have the address on screen, AND ask
for confirmation.  but...etc.  etc...)

  3) depending on the setup of your e-911 system, you MAY be able to
have the database flash teh operator that this is a dual address, or a
questionable, or something like that.  This is often available because
large business PBX's, or for that matter cellular phones, do NOTgive a
reliable number or address location.

  (for example, ACME pothole manufacturers may have a main office, and
then five satellite locations, all served by a pbx located at the main
office...)

Good luck, and I hope you never need 911.


[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Daniel Burstein)
Subject: Re: 702-333-8444 (was Strange International "Chat Line" Service)
Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix, NYC
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 13:21:23 GMT


In <[e-mail]> awry![e-mail] (Tom
Ace) writes:

> Yesterday, I had success calling 702 333 8444 when preceded by 10333;
> our Moderator had these comments:

> [Moderator's Note: Perhaps due to the outage, Sprint was automatically
> transferring some of their overflow traffic to AT&T. It happens.  PAT]
  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

In NYC, under LOTS of pressure from the CIty as well as businesses and
the Feds, there is actually an official and publicly reported
agreement that the carriers will do this.  Pressure came about
courtesy of the major AT&T outages a few years ago, one of which
knocked out nationwide service courtesy of a software glitch in
upgrading the system, the other which knocked out approx 50% of NYC
ATT long distance service when a switching center died because they
had put it on backup power (to reduce the load on Con Ed, the
elctrical utility), and didn't realize the batteries were
discharging ...

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

Date: Thu, 28 Jan 93 11:15 PST
From: [e-mail] (John Higdon)
Reply-To: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
Subject: Re: You Didn't Accept a Collect Call, But You'll be Billed Anyway?


On Jan 24 at  3:04, TELECOM Moderator writes:

> [Moderator's Note: Another of our regular contributors could tell a
> similar story about having been in business *as a corporation* for a
> period of time and going out of business, only to have AT&T come to
> him personally for the unpaid phone charges later on, insisting that
> he was responsible for the corporation he formerly was associated
> with.

Yup! When it came time to shut down the old sales and service firm, it
appeared that there was not quite enough money to go around. After the
Federal, state, and local taxes were paid in full, there were a few
bills left that went begging. So we turned the whole mess over to a
bankruptcy attorney, who was to handle the chapter stuff for the
corporation.

About six months later (the bankruptcy was never filed for various
reasons), I got a call from a collection agency representing AT&T. His
demand was for a $1,000 bill that was left owing for a nationwide WATS
line. By this time I had become quite rehearsed: "This is a bill owed
by a corporation which has a bankruptcy pending. Please contact
[bankruptcy attorney] for further information." At this time, we had
still intended to file.

But Mr. Collector would have none of that. He informed me that my name
was on the account and that I was PERSONALLY liable. Since I make it a
practice to NEVER sign any personal guarantees, I asked for a copy of
the document backing his claim. "You know very well that AT&T does not
have to have such a document!", he asserted. Then he went through all
the usual threats of ruining my personal credit and pursuing legal
action.

Ah, legal action! He pushed the magic button. First, I reminded him
why corporations are formed in the first place. Then he was told that
I am represented by counsel. "This is between you and AT&T, you don't
need to try to get other people involved." So I let him have both
barrels: "I did not personally order the service; a secretary did.
Even if I had done so myself as president of the corporation, it would
have been on the corporation's behalf and not on my own. You may sue
the corporation; you may even take a shot at me personally. But I
never want to hear from you again."

Then I slammed the phone down. He called right back. "I am only trying
to be reasonable", he whined. Then he offered to let me pay a portion
of the bill. No dice. (If one pays any portion of an obligation of a
corporation or other entity, it is viable evidence that the person has
assumed responsibility for that entity.) I slammed the phone down
again. His calls over the next several days were picked up by my
machine until he made his fatal error. He left a call back number (in
Chicago -- are all the slimebag collectors in Chicago?) which I handed
over to my attorney and let her call him back.

That was the end of it.


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

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #49
*****************************





^A^A^A^A
Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa11385;
          29 Jan 93 14:26 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA28034
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 29 Jan 1993 11:42:41 -0600
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA26680
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 29 Jan 1993 11:42:00 -0600
Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1993 11:42:00 -0600
From: TELECOM Moderator <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V13 #50

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 29 Jan 93 11:42:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 50

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    Mitel Value Ripoff Policy (Barton F. Bruce)
    Neural/Fuzzy Applications Course (Patrick K. Simpson)
    Steve Jackson Games - Day 1 (Paco Xander Nathan)
    Wiring of Handset (Tony Fisher)
    Asynchronous Transfer Method (Leslie Westman)
    PC Libraries for Remote Control (David Madigan)
    Bitfax - How to Turn Off "Wait For Dial Tone" Flag ([e-mail])
    Rochester Telephone to Offer Customer Name and Address Service (C. E. Reid)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1993 09:24:59 -0500 (EST)
From: Barton F. Bruce <[e-mail]>
Subject: Mitel Value Ripoff Policy
Organization: Cambridge Computer Associates, Inc.


I was at an auction Wednesday, and a Mitel SX200D was sold.  The
dealer that sold it was there and insisted the auctioneer could NOT
sell the software as it was merely licensed.

As the crowd moved past the switch after it had been bid on, the
dealer apparently took the encryption module and left with it.

The company closing their business had stipulated that the phones were
for sale but the system had to be left running through the end of the
following business day, and the new buyer was agreeable, and the sale
will not be consumated until that time, I suspect.

The receptionist came out saying her PBX was dead. What the dealer had
done was soon obvious. He had taken a part from a legal machine BEFORE
its sale was final, and crippled it so no calls were being received at
a still functioning business. This gives Mitel Elite dealers a nice
image.

I later called different people at Mitel to see what was happening,
and if Mitel customers have NO RECOVERABLE VALUE in software they
license from Mitel.

I have not yet gotten a final answer. It seems they want to license
the Generic's use so it is totally clear they OWN the software, and
that those making pirate PALs can be prosecuted. Protecting them
selves that way is OK with me, if that is all they are doing.

I asked if the dealer was supposed to return the chip to Mitel.
Apparently some do, others don't, and presumably the latter get resold
for the dealer's benefit, NOT Mitel's and not either customer's.

I want to know if Mitel's license is transferable to a new customer or
not. DEC lets you transfer your operating system license for a $300
processing fee. If the Mitel license is not transferable, are not many
folks carrying it on their books as an asset and should not be?

Is Mitel's real intent to protect themselves or is it to charge the
second owner of the switch yet another full license fee?

Is this dealer doing the wrong thing? Did Mitel's lawyers implement
harsher terms than Mitel intended? Or is Mitel as arrogant as some
other vendors that are clueless as to why they lose market share as
consumers revolt against this sort of abuse?

Anyone know for certain what is happening? I expect an answer from
someone within Mitel, but maybe someone here knows.

When the supply house ships the Panasonic 336, the software in IN IT.
Training to be a certified Panasonic 336 TECH is ~$150 - the price of
the manuals. The full blown top of the line Panasonic LCD/Speakerphone/
whatever is $100 less than Mitels, and the Panasonic one can do
off-hook call announce. Mitel - wakeup!


[Moderator's Note: I am surprised the owner(s) of the company did not
call the police and have the dealer arrested for theft of company
property as soon as he pulled out that part. Assuming the company had
met all its obligations to Mitel and/or the dealer earlier, in
addition to the criminal complaint against the dealer a civil
suit against both Mitel and the dealer would seem to be indicated.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (patrick k. simpson)
Subject: Neural/Fuzzy Applications Course
Date: 29 Jan 93 16:07:35 GMT


                          COURSE ANNOUNCMENT

           APPLICATIONS OF NEURAL NETWORKS AND FUZZY SYSTEMS

Date:
    April 13-15, 1993
    8:30 am - 4:00 pm

Location:
    Catamaran Resort Hotel
    3999 Mission Blvd.
    San Diego, CA
    Ph. 619/488-1081

Registration:
    Tuition $990.00
    Applied Technology Institute
    12960 Linden Church Road
    P.O. Box 1172
    Clarksville, MD 21029
    Phone [phone]
    Fax [phone]

Summary:

Applications of Neural Networks and Fuzzy Systems will immerse the
student in the most recent results in neural networks and fuzzy
systems to applications in some of the most difficult problems in
computing today.  Application areas will be explored in detail,
including sonar, radar, communications, signal processing,
diagnostics, sensor and data fusion, forecasting, prediction,
modelling, and control.  The applications include an extensive
description of the work conducted in both Europe and Japan, as well as
a full spectrum of the state-of-the-art in these rapidly growing
fields.

"Applications of Neural Networks and Fuzzy Systems" serves those
individuals who want to know what neural networks and fuzzy systems
are and how they can be applied.  This course distributes information
that explains what products and services are currently available
accompanied by the instructors recommendations and experience. Each
course distributes a book that provides a broad overview of neural
networks and their applications, survey papers that provide descibe
specific applications areas, and demonstation software (including
source code).  In-class demonstrations place the student as close to
real-world applications as possible without actually going into the
laboratory.

The text, "Artificial Neural Systems: Foundations, Paradigms,
Applications and Implementations," written by the instructor, will be
provided to all students.

Instructor:

Patrick K. Simpson is a Principal Engineer at ORINCON Corporation, a
small-business dedicated to the application of intelligent systems to
difficult defense-related problems.  Mr. Simpson is an active member
of the IEEE, having served on the organization committees of several
international neural network and fuzzy system conferences as well as
holding several executive positions on the IEEE Neural Networks
Council.  Mr. Simpson was the Program Chairman of the first IEEE
Conference on Neural Networks for Ocean Engineering, a lecturer for
the NATO Lecture Series dedicated to the application of neural
networks to guidance and control and a member of Who's Who in Science
and Engineering. Mr. Simpson has written several papers on theory and
application of neural networks and fuzzy systems as well as the book
"Artificial Neural Systems: Foundations, Paradigms, Applications and
Implementations."

COURSE OUTLINE:

Applications of Neural Networks and Fuzzy Systems is broken into three
parts that span three intensive, but enjoyable, days. Neural networks
and fuzzy systems are first individually described. In the third part,
hybrid fuzzy neural systems are described and applications are
presented.

Part One:  Neural Networks.

* A broad overview of neural networks.  What are neural networks:
  Why are they so appealing:  What can they do?  What can't they do?

* Neural Network Paradigms.  The fundamental components and
  nomenclature.

* Neural Network Design Methodology.  A sequence of design steps is
  developed that will allow an engineer or scientist to easily apply
  neural networks.

* Neural Network Complexity Analysis.  Trade-Offs are examined, such
  as:  size vs. speed, training time vs. run-time, and generalization
  vs. memorization.

* Sonar Applications.  Application areas include:  beamforming,
  noise cancellation, feature extraction, detection, and classification.

* Communication Applications.  Application areas include:  adaptive
  equalization, network control, data compression, error correction, and
  multi-user detection.

* Radar Applications.  Applications include clutter rejection, signal
  classification, deinterleaving, and emmitter identification.

* Diagnostic Applications.  Historical diagnostic vs. model-based
  diagnostics.

* Forecasting, Prediction, and Modelling.  Applications and
  techniques will include chaotic time-series prediction,
  forecasting environmental phenomena, and financial market prediction
  (stocks, commodities, etc.).

* Sensor and Data Fusion.  Different methods of fusion.  Applications to
  surveillance, control, and diagnotistics.

* Software and Hardware Review.  A review of the currently available
  software and hardware that includes manufacturer's demo disks and
  ordering information.  A complete listing of shareware software
  will be provided.

Part Two:  Fuzzy Systems.

* Introduction to Fuzzy Systems.  Answers to some fundamental
  questions, like:  What is a fuzzy system:  How is fuzzy different
  from probabilistic?  Why use a fuzzy system?

* Fuzzy Control Systems.  Applications will be described, including:
  auto-focusing cameras and aircraft control.

* Fuzzy Expert Systems.  Applications to commercial appliances, data
  fusion, and decision aides.

* Software and Hardware Review.  A review of currently available
  software and hardware that includes manufacturer's demo disks and
  ordering information.

Part Three:  Fuzzy Neural Systems.

* Methods of synergistically combining neural networks and fuzzy
  systems.  Neural networks and fuzzy systems can be effectively combined
  to provide a more competent system.

* Fuzzy Neural Control.  Several exmples are provided that demonstrate a
  natural bridge between the two technologies.

* Fuzzy Neural Pattern Clustering and Classificatoin.  The state-of-the-art
  in pattern recognition lies in the synergism of these two technologies.  A
  detailed description of several approaches will be provided.


For Immediate Registration Phone [phone] or Mail Check or
Purchase Order to Applied Technology Institute, 12960 Linden Church Road,
P.O. Box 1172, Clarksville, MD 21029 Fax [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Paco Xander Nathan)
Subject: Steve Jackson Games - Day 1
Organization: Houston Chronicle
Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1993 06:45:47 GMT


[Moderator's Note: This is the first report in a series which will
continue in the Digest on a day by day basis. Issues later today will
report on days two and three; these are the reports I have now, and
as further reports reach us they will be printed.  PAT]


Steve Jackson Games/Secret Service Lawsuit -- Day One

By JOE ABERNATHY
Copyright 1993, Houston Chronicle

    AUSTIN -- Plaintiff's attorneys wrested two embarrassing
admissions from the United States Secret Service on the opening day of
a federal civil lawsuit designed to establish the bounds of
constitutional protections for electronic publishing and electronic
mail.

    In the first, Special Agent Timothy Foley of Chicago admitted
that crucial statements were erroneous in an affidavit he used to
conduct several search-and-seizure operations in a March 1990
crackdown on computer crime.

    The case, brought by Steve Jackson Games, an Austin firm, is
being tried before United States District Judge Sam Sparks. Carefully
nurtured over the course of three years by a group of electronic civil
rights activists -- at a cost of more than $200,000 -- the case has
been eagerly anticipated as a possible damper on what is seen as
computer crime hysteria among federal police.

     Plaintiffs hope to prove that the printed word exists just as
surely on the computer screen as it does on a sheet of paper. The
complaint also seeks to establish the right of computer users to
congregate electronically on bulletin board systems -- such as one
called Illuminati that was taken from Steve Jackson Games -- and to
exchange private electronic mail on such BBSs.

    "This lawsuit is just to stand up and say, at the end of the
20th Century, that publishing occurs as much on computers as on the
printed page," said Jim George, of the Austin firm George, Donaldson &
Ford, Jackson's law firm.

    That issue came into sharp focus during George's questioning
of Foley regarding the seizure of the PC on which Illuminati ran, and
another computer on which was stored the word processing document
containing a pending Steve Jackson Games book release, GURPS
Cyberpunk.

    "At the Secret Service computer crime school, were you, as the
agent in charge of this investigation, made aware of special rules for
searching a publishing company?" George asked Foley. He was referring
to the Privacy Protection Act, which states that police may not seize
a work in progress from a publisher. It does not specify what physical
form such a work must take.

    "No, sir, I was not," Foley responded.

    "Did you just miss class the day that was taught?" George
asked.

    "No, sir. The United States Secret Service does not teach its
agents about special rules regarding search and seizure at publishing
companies," Foley said.

    "Let the record clearly show that to be the case," George
said.

    Earlier, Foley admitted on the witness stand that his original
affidavit seeking a judge's approval to raid Steve Jackson Games
contained a fundamental error.

    During the March 1990 raid -- one of several dozen staged that
day around the country in an investigation that the Secret Service
called Operation Sun Devil at the time -- agents were seeking copies
of a document taken as a hacker trophy from BellSouth. Subsequently
republished in an electronic magazine called Phrack, thousands of
copies of the document were stored on bulletin board systems around
the nation.

    Neither Jackson nor his company were suspected of wrongdoing,
and no charges have ever been filed against anyone targeted in several
Austin raids. The alleged membership of Steve Jackson employee Loyd
Blankenship in the Legion of Doom hacker's group -- which was believed
responsible for the break-in -- led agents to raid the Austin game
publisher at the same time that Blankenship's Austin home was raided.

    Yet the only two paragraphs in the 42-paragraph indictment
that established a connection between Blankenship's alleged illegal
activities and Steve Jackson Games were shown to have been erroneously
arrived at, when George produced a statement by Bellcore expert Henry
Kluepfel disputing statements attributed to him in Foley's affidavit.

    "Is it true that Mr. Kluepfel logged onto (Illuminati)?"
George questioned.

    "No, sir," Foley responded.

    "But you state that in your affidavit," George said.

    "That was a misattribution," Foley said.

    "So you had no knowledge that anything was sent to my client?"

    "No sir, not directly," Foley said.

    "Indirectly?" George asked.

    "No sir."

    The Justice Department, in papers filed with the court,
contends that only traditional journalistic organizations enjoy the
protections of the Privacy Protection Act. It further contends that
users of electronic mail have no reasonable expectation of privacy.

    The trial was to resume at 8:30 a.m. It is expected to
conclude on Thursday or Friday.


[Moderator's Note: More details from the trial in later issues of the
Digest today.   PAT]

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

Date: Fri, 29 Jan 93 18:21:10
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Wiring of Handset
Organization: Department of Computer Science, University of York, England


I have a Nokia "Mobira" cellular telephone handset, type CU 60 T
4624700 (just the h/set, not the box it plugs in to).  It's broken.
It connects to the box with the gubbins in it through an eight-core
cable with a BT-style plug on the end.

Can anyone tell me what the eight wires are for?


Tony Fisher
Dept. of Computer Science, The University of York, York YO1 5DD, U.K.
Tel. [phone] or 432722
Internet: [e-mail]
Janet:      [e-mail]
UUCP:      [e-mail] (..!uunet!mcsun!reading!minster!fisher)

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

From: [e-mail] (Leslie Westman)
Subject: Asynchronous Transfer Method
Date: 29 Jan 93 08:59:21 GMT
Organization: 1926CCSG Robins AFB


I am posting this but I have infrequent, undependable news access at
best.  Please reply via e-mail to: [e-mail]

I'm doing a paper on ATM, asynchronous transfer method.  I am not
familiar with data communications and I'd appreciate any info or
opinions you have to share (please mark them as info or opinions so I
keep mmy facts straight), as well as pointers on where to look for
info on my topic.  Names of DataComm journals and other relevant
publications would be greatly appreciated.

If there is interest in a compilation of what I receive, or my
finished paper, please e-mail that to me too, and I'll get it posted
to the news.

I know that people asking favors shouldn't be demanding, but I am
under a tight time constraint (three weeks) so please e-mail me now if
you can help.

Thanks!


Leslie  [e-mail]
and living in Bonaire, Georgia!   (yep, it's a huge place...)

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

From: [e-mail] (David Madigan)
Subject: PC Libraries for Remote Control
Date: 29 Jan 1993 10:16:33 GMT
Organization: Univ of Wash , Stat Dept.


I'm looking for software libraries (ideally DLL's with source code)
for a remote control application for use on MS Windows PC's.  In
particular, we want to transmit keyboard inputs and mouse information
toa distant PC and receive the resulting graphics display information
(VGA) from the distant PC.


David Madigan    [e-mail]

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

Date: Fri, 29 Jan 93 14:12:21 EST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Bitfax - How to Turn of "Wait For Dial Tone" Flag
Organization: AT&T


I have bitfax software on a send/rec modem.

How do I switch off wait for dial tone flag?

The problem I have is the phone line this PC is connected to cannot
dial out.  I want the recieving end PC to make the call and my end PC
to blindly send the fax. When I try to do this my PC gives "NO DIAL
TONE" error.

How do I force it to "blind dial" without caring for a dial tone ?

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

Date: 29 Jan 1993 05:23:59 -0400 (EDT)
From: Curtis E. Reid <[e-mail]>
Subject: Rochester Telephone to Offer Customer Name and Address Service


A recent legal notice of tariff filings was announced in Rochester,
NY's newspaper _Democrat_&_Chronicle_ on December 15, 1993 that:

Effective February 19, 1993:

- Customer Name and Address (CNA) Service will allow customers to call
a designated telephone number to obtain a subscriber's name and
address.  The customer enters the subscriber's telephone number
through a touchtone phone, and the CNA service will give the
associated name and address of the subscriber.  The charge for this
service will be $.46 per request.

I called the RTC and asked whether the CNA will give out the name and
address for unlisted numbers.  I was told it would not.


Curtis E. Reid                [e-mail]
Rochester Institute of Technology/NTID    [e-mail] (DECUS)
P.O. Box 9887                716.475.6089 TDD/TT 475.6895 Voice
Rochester, NY 14623-0887  U.S.A.    716.475.6500 Fax (Business Use Only)

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

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #50
*****************************